Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Conservapedia:Contact Us

2026-11-08T02:02:29Z

Daniel1212:

{{See also|Conservapedia:DMCA Agent}}
==Need help editing page title==
I created a new page about Austin Ruse but for some reason the title says "Create a new page", can someone edit it to just "Austin Ruse" ?

https://www.conservapedia.com/Create_a_new_page {{unsigned|Drewzkie}}

:Done. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|(Mark 8:36)]]''''' Thursday, 12:00, January 19, 2023 (EST)

==I made a new page on concern troll==

https://conservapedia.com/Concern_troll

I'm hoping someone with better formatting experience and slightly more information can add to it..

==The black Israelite page is incredibly under-done==

there's only two paragraphs on that page and even Wikipedia has much more information.. I suggest a collaboration on this site to really fill it out in respect to the black Supremacy that they promot

==Why was this page deleted?==

https://www.conservapedia.com/Christopher_krebs

Chris krebs is an important figure.. the removal log says that it had insufficient information but the last time I was there it was a fully written article with all the proper citations.. bing searches can prove that with the cache text

==Captcha is faulty==

When editing an article you can go to the editor and then click publish however the captcha does not appear until first clicking publish.. which adds a few extra unnecessary ste

==Getting into search results==

I developed a userscript to replace googles Wikipedia results with conservapedia

Would anyone be interested? Its completed. And it works

:Sounds fabulous! Please tell us more about it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 12:12, 12 December 2020 (EST)

:: Basically the way it works is it literally just changes the Google search results.. If you type in a topic that would normally have a Wikipedia entry at the top it will change it to the text found on conservapedia as well as taking you to conservapedia if you click it.. I've tested it and it works as long as there is a conservapedia page with the same name as the Wikipedia one.. If not it will just default to Wikipedia..
I'm currently working to find some developers to improve it and see if it's possible to plant search results for conservapedia pages that don't exist on Wikipedia.. but so far it already works really well. Ive uploaded it here https://gofile.io/d/Q63V6k
And you can download it and open it in a text editor to see that it's legitt

==Getting into search results==

I was wondering if there's any way to develop a chrome extension or a user script or something that can replace Wikipedia information in Google search with conservapedia?

Wikipedia is obviously unreliable and it would be nice to have conservapedia results insteadd {{unsigned|Mikephshdj}}

:An extension should be able to do this, but you would probably need to make it from scratch. It sounds like you are talking about modifying the search result page itself, so that might be bit difficult, though. The search engine will still be returning WP results, so I think you would need your addon to check independently for a CP page on the same topic, then do post processing on that page to overlay that CP result on top of the WP result. A somewhat "lazier" option would be to do DNS replacement/interception in the addon, and simply redirect wikipedia.org URIs to conservapedia URIs. The search results would look the same, but when a WP link is clicked, you would end up on CP instead. Of course, if CP doesn't have a page by the same exact name as WP, that wouldn't work. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 15:09, 12 December 2020 (EST)

:: The second option you gave probably wouldn't work because obviously you want the results to have the correct text.. But the first option would work.. I actually found somebody and they developed a user script.. it works pretty well.. I don't know if an administrator would be interested in advertising it on conservapedia because if they did it would enable users to create better search results..

==Mobile Site Editing Not Working Properly==
When I try to edit a page on the mobile site, as soon as I tap on a line all the text goes white and I have to try to guess where words are. I constantly have to turn off editing so I can see where sentences and things are, and then turn it back on so I can actually edit them. Is this supposed to happen, or is it a glitch of some kind. [[User:Eholkins|Eholkins]]

:Well that sounds very problematic! No, that is not supposed to happen. It seems to work properly for me, although I typically switch out of mobile view and just scroll around on the standard view instead, just by preference (I know, it sounds crazy, but with good eyes and a large screen, it works). Have you tried a different browser on your phone, such as Firefox? --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 18:43, 4 June 2019 (EDT)

==Congressman John Fleming==
How can I update his photo? Thanks. Nathan posted that I need to contact an administrator to upload a photo. How do I contact an administrator? [[User:Dustygram|Dustygram]]

:I'll upload it for you now. Please look for it in "Recent changes" (link on right side).--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 20:41, 20 May 2017 (EDT)
::Andy Schlafly, I can't find "Recent changes" and a link. Where is this? On the article page? [[User:Dustygram|Dustygram]] ([[User talk:Dustygram|talk]]) 22:34, 22 May 2017 (EDT)
:::The link is on the upper-lefthand corner of the screen, right below the CP logo. However, I have the link to the image here: [[:File:John Flemming.jpg]]. Doing it once should not be a problem, but please post something at the bottom of such a page next time. Thanks for contributing! --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:36, 22 May 2017 (EDT)
::::Thanks 1990'sguy for uploading a more recent official portrait. Now, how can I replace the old one with the new one?--[[User:Dustygram|Dustygram]] ([[User talk:Dustygram|talk]]) 12:31, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
:::::This is a very late reply, but I just noticed this never got answered. If you are still looking for an answer, just go to the article, and replace the name of the old image with the name of the new one. For future reference, image uploads can be formally requested here: [[Conservapedia:Image upload requests]]. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 18:48, 4 June 2019 (EDT)

== Taking AP Biology ==
Hello, I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask this, but... I am a student in public high school, and am taking AP Biology. I have just learned that Evolution is an entire '''chapter''' in the course. Would it be moral for me to learn evolution without believing it just to pass the test? Or should I drop the course? (This would be very time consuming and difficult)- David {{unsigned|DavidKondner}}
::Nothing immoral about learning about evolution at all. Go for it and you will be pleasantly surprised to learn what evolution is actually like. After all, the majority of people have major misconceptions on what it is which leads to their denial of it. Learning about something from those who support it is always best for learning the truth about the subject, don't limit your understanding of things to just those against it. [[User:Riddles|Riddles]] 23:30, 14 October 2009 (EDT)

I think Riddle is a very smart man and you should listen to what he has to say. No, you don't need to believe in evolutionism, but how are we suppose to become one peaceful humanity without learning about one another. [[user:horenvalle]] 14:01, October 16 2009 (EDT)

:::Learn a falsehood and pretend it's true, and more falsehoods, confusion, depression and errors will follow. Realize that atheists must believe in evolution despite its falsehood and you'll immediately see why they push, and push, and push it in public schools.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:56, 14 October 2009 (EDT)

::::"Know the enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles you will never peril. [[Sun Tzu]]"
::::If there's ''only'' a chapter on evolution in your course, I'd be amazed. Any non-creationist course on [[biology]] is likely to be [[evolution]]-centric. After all, if one won't accept special [[creation]], it's the only game in town! Just keep in mind the difference between science (testable, repeatable) and just-so stories ("This feature arose because ..."). Here are a couple of links you might find useful and encouraging:
::::*[http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2004/0920classroom.asp ‘Creation evangelism’ in the public school classroom]
::::*[http://creation.com/how-do-i-do-my-assignment-about-evolution How do I do my assignment about evolution?]
::::You also might want to invest in a copy of Evolution Exposed, a book that breaks down the evolutionary assumptions and explanations, explicit and implicit, and provides both brief answers and directions to finding more information on line.
::::In short, you need to know what the evolutionists teach, even if you know it's wrong. ~ ''[[User:Mdotley|Webster]]'' ([[User talk:Mdotley|talk]]) 15:53, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

::better learn the material. College consists of a lot of required courses you have to take but don't have to believe. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 01:05, 27 September 2009 (EDT)

:::All the examples of such requirements consist of learning and reciting anti-Christian beliefs. I'm not aware of any colleges or AP tests that require learning a Christian belief to obtain basic credits.

:::Try homeschooling David, or try a college that does not require recitation of evolutionary beliefs.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 01:12, 27 September 2009 (EDT)

Thank you all for your wonderful suggestions! In the end I decided to take the course and found out it wasn’t nearly as bad as a thought it would be. I expressed my concerns to my teacher beforehand and he was very understanding. Before we started the unit he was very clear to the class that evolution was a theory and we were under no obligation whatsoever to believe evolution, however he still expects us to know the material for the AP exam. It’s amazing how similar some of God’s creatures can be and I can almost see how a Godless Atheist might believe they once shared a common ancestor. All in all, the course has been an enlightening experience and, for the most part, has given me greater respect and appreciation for God’s creatures and life in general. --[[User:Davidkon|Davidkon]] 14:59, 3 February 2010 (EST)

:Davidkon, we have no way to confirm your experience, but even if true it is not typically for public school science teachers, most of whom can be very liberal and very dogmatic about the theory of evolution. Also, I find it odd that "he still expects us to know the material for the AP exam." AP exams are like extra credit, for an extra charge, and are rarely a requirement of any public school class.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:21, 3 February 2010 (EST)

As I’ve said before, my AP Bio class is relatively harmless, but my AP government class is sure getting out of hand! The entire class is one big batch of liberal propaganda about how social reform is “necessary” and how that the current conservative platform on homosexuality is one of “intolerance and bigotry”, and that’s a direct quote from the textbook! There are countless other biases that I have to deal with on a daily basis. On top of that when I asked my teacher about concerns the course is liberally biased, she told me “David, I’m sorry to tell you this, but ''reality'' has a liberal bias.” Can you believe that!?!--[[User:Davidkon|Davidkon]] 22:22, 2 March 2010 (EST)

== Unable to edit? ==
I would like to post the following to the Jesse Helms article after "Foreign Policy" but am locked out. I don't know why. {{unsigned|BertSchlossberg}}
: Editing is often turned off overnight (U.S. time), which may have been your problem, although that means that you shouldn't have been able to post here, so unless it was turned back on in the meantime, I can't explain it. Would you like to try it again? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:47, 19 December 2007 (EST)

:: Right. The [[Jesse Helms]] entry is not locked.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:06, 19 December 2007 (EST)

==When only part of an article is accepted==
I recently posted an entry, [[F-105 Thunderchief]], and included a references section and a category, but in the final article, neither section shows up, although they are clearly present when the "Edit" button is clicked. Just now, this happened again with another entry I tried to make. What gives? Does the site only accept so much information in a new entry? --[[User:Frey|Frey]] 17:58, 27 February 2008 (EST)
:You had a bad <nowiki><ref></nowiki> tag which I have fixed. [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 18:02, 27 February 2008 (EST)
::I did? Oopsie. And thanks.--[[User:Frey|Frey]] 18:09, 27 February 2008 (EST)

==KAL 007 article on Main page==
I would like to propose having the article [[Korean Airlines Flight 007]] as a featured article on the Main page. Thanks.[[User:BertSchlossberg|BertSchlossberg]] 15:32, 1 March 2008 (EST)
(finally got it right!)

: I'd like to review it in detail and hear what others think about it. On its surface, without yet studying it, it appears to be a major work. Congratulations!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:58, 1 March 2008 (EST)
:: There's a [[Conservapedia:Featured articles|page]] for listing proposed featured articles. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 17:52, 1 March 2008 (EST)

==To Kill The Child/Leaving Beirut==
I just wrote an exteremly long and extensive article about these two songs. Then, when I went to save the page, it said that it did not save it because there was a quote in their to explain about the song that contained a profanity. What gives? I thought that this website was supposed to educate people, yet people cannot be educated if they cannot know what the article is talking about and what the proof is. {{unsigned|Std}}
: We have a profanity filter for good reason, but sometimes exceptions need to be made. You haven't supplied enough information for us to judge if this warrants an exception. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:47, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

::What exactly are the exeptions that would get me the warrent?
::How do you upload an image?{{unsigned|Std}} on 10 April 2008, 21:26

:::You have to ask an administrator. There was a problem with people uploading obscene materials. [[User:HenryS|HenryS]] 00:42, 11 April 2008 (EDT)
:::An exception would be warranted if, for example, the word caught by the filter was not objectionable in the context. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:57, 11 April 2008 (EDT)

== Article on Larry McDonald ==
Can anyone do an article on Cong. [[Larry McDonald]], a passenger aboard KAL 007? —[[User:BertSchlossberg|BertSchlossberg]] 07:01, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

==Proposal==
I wrote some time ago about making plans to build Conservapedia into a force to be reckoned with. This site has the potential to become a powerful tool, but still has a ways to go, I think. As an example, I just did a search on [http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=NDZiMjkwMDczZWI5ODdjOWYxZTIzZGIyNzEyMjE0ODI= ACORN], a group funded by leftist billionaire [[George Soros]] that is becoming a very serious threat to the integrity of local elections. All I found was a one-line page about the oak tree. Of course the solution to this is to simply create the page myself. But I don't think this solves the larger issue; to my knowledge, there isn't a program of incentives inviting conservatives to contribute high-quality information and research articles on our opposition. How do we do this?

For one, I take it that Conservapedia gets some heavy traffic. Heavy traffic = $$$ in potential advertising revenue. Use that money to attract the right people to help build Conservapedia into a powerhouse of information. This could include rewards for college students, or hired admins (background checked with references and resume, of course). Perhaps contact county or state Republican/conservative groups, show what you've done, and propose a team effort to get more people to contribute articles to the web site.

In short, there's a million ways that this project can grow, and it is more important to me that the conservative cause succeeds than to keep these ideas to myself. My hope is that someone reading this will take hold of them... [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 17:35, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

:If conservapedia isn't interested I would recommend infogalactic

== IP address unblock request ==
My IP address at home appears to have been blocked. Could someone please unblock me? [[User:FOIA|FOIA]] 15:16, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

==Bobby R. Himes==
I have a photo for the new article [[Bobby R. Himes]]. Can I get permission to upload it?[[User: Bhathorn|Bhathorn]] 18:24, 29 August 2008 (EDT)
: If the picture is on-line (and available for Conservapedia to use, of course), post the address here or click [[Special:Emailuser/Philip_J._Rayment|here]] to e-mail me the link and I can upload it to Conservapedia for you. If it's on your computer, e-mail me via that link anyway and I will reply with my e-mail address for you to e-mail me the picture, so I can then upload it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:59, 29 August 2008 (EDT)

==Banning policy?==
Hello, I represent a website interested in your work. However recently a member of ours, JMcClane used your website and edited a page on Obama because it stated he was a Muslim, which it has been proven he isn't, he has been banned for 5 years, care to comment? It was a JPatt who did the banning, would he like to comment too?
:JMcClane removed a large amount of material in that article and replaced it with this:
::''"Obama is regularly mistaken as Islamic due to his second name, in fact he is not Muslim though stands for equality between religions. He is in fact Christian, though rumours were spread by Conservative spin Doctors hoping to turn the public against him."''
:And who is JMcClane to you? Care to comment on that? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 14:16, 12 October 2008 (EDT)

:Beyond the fact that you didn't answer my question mate, we're part of the same website who are interested in the current election in America, you might have heard of it. He became involved in this site and this happened, so I reiterate, gonna answer the question properly?
::I did answer your question, "mate", and you're not going to act like you run ''this place''; you will answer mine now. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 14:33, 12 October 2008 (EDT)

:As I said, we're part of the same website. I'm sorry about the mate comments, I'm just friendly like that. You've said you banned him cause of the edit, but isn't it kind of harsh as it is proven he's not Muslim so the entire article was pointless. That's all I'd like to know. And 5 years does seem steep.

Which website do you represent? Why are you interested in Conservapedia? Our banning policy is carefully calibrated and appropriate to the demands of the various situations. And sign your posts with four tildes, please; we are not interested in anonymous 'contributions'. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 17:10, 17 October 2008 (EDT)

==Google misdirection==
In Google Search, the entry for ""Alger Hiss - Conservapedia" was changed today from "http://www.conservapedia.com/Alger_Hiss" to misdirect to the nonexistent Web page "http://www.conservativeencyclopedia.com/wiki/Alger_Hiss." Is there a way to ask Google to restore the correct link? [[User:FOIA|FOIA]] 13:19, 4 February 2009 (EST)

*Thanks for noticing and reporting this, FOIA, but nothing needs to be done. When we had the hard drive failure, and temporarily re-directed, the search engine bots picked that up. Now that things are restored, the bots will report back to all the search engines, and in due time will be directing properly. The Google (and all other engines) are smart enough to compare and repair. Or so they say. Administrator Conservative might have more insight into this, and I have linked him to this page. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 14:23, 4 February 2009 (EST)
** For what its worth, Google is pretty much 100% automated. They almost never manually intervene in their search results, and that's generally due to a court or otherwise governmental order. [[User:ArthurA|ArthurA]] 14:38, 4 February 2009 (EST)
*** You mean that they generally ''only'' intervene due to court or governmental orders, correct? [[User:Npov2|Npov2]] 00:56, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

== Copyright? ==
I'd like to comment that [[:File:Kathleen Sebelius.jpg]] should probably be tagged as “fair use” rather than as “public domain.” Also, I think the description of the {{tl|commons}} template, both in [[Help:List of Templates]] and in the template body itself, is slightly misleading: items in Wikimedia Commons are not necessarily in the public domain. Thank you. [[User:Npov2|Npov2]] 00:56, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Why does the Conservapedia page on the 1951 movie, "The Thing From Another World" say that, "The film is now in the public domain."? Was there a problem with the copyright, or its renewal?

In suspense,

William Clark

tmcgeeclark@yahoo.com

== Google Gadget? ==
I understand that [[google]] has problems, but has there ever been thought to developing a "Google Gadget" with a conservapedia news feed?[[User:Mrguido45|Mrguido45]] 20:59, 9 June 2009 (EDT)

========

I dont know about a gadget but i did develop a userscript that replaces Wikipedia with conservapedia in search results

It can be found here

https://gofile.io/d/Q63V6k

== Evolution feature on the Main Page ==
The section of the main page devoted to the Evolution article states that, "In 2006, the prestigious science journal Science reported concerning the United States: "The percentage of people in the country who accept the idea of evolution has declined from 45 in 1985 to 40 in 2005. Meanwhile the fraction of Americans unsure about evolution has soared from 7 per cent in 1985 to 21 per cent last year." The study was conducted with 2000 Americans (approximately), selected by pseudo-random digit dialing over the telephone. the study found that the portion of people unsure about evolution has increased in a statistically significant manner. The second finding of the study was that the proportion of people who believe in evolution and creationism have not changed in any statistically significant way (i.e.: That the p-value of the 1985 and 2005 data sets is greater than 0.05 - simply put, that there is not enough detectable difference between the respondents in 1985 and 2005 to make any kind of statement about it). Essentially, the study cited on the main page didn't actually prove that the public belief in evolution is declining. I would request a change to that article to remove the irrelevant citation about a decrease in evolutionary thinking among Americans. [[User: Praboud|Praboud]] 19:52, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

== Referred to as a Methodist ==
Hi, I am not sure if this is the right location to ask this, but at the bottom of my user page there is a category section that says "Category: Methodist Conservapedians". I didn't place that there and it isn't available for editing out when I look at the editable content for my user page. I only bring this up because I am not a Methodist and I do not wish to mislead anyone into thinking I am. I do not know who added me to this category or why, or somehow if I accidentally did this myself. If possible, may I be added to the "Agnostic conservapedians" category instead? Thank you. -- [[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 8:42, 20 June 2009 [EDT]

:It appears to be because of your userbox "This user believes in the United States Constitution." When I tried putting it on my user page, the Methodist category automatically appeared there as well. --[[User:OscarJ|OscarJ]] 09:02, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

::Fixed. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 11:20, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

== I might be wrong... ==
But I do see quite a bit of bias on Conservapedia. If this is supposed to be "The Trustworthy Encyclopedia" then shouldn't bias be removed? I think that some of the articles are great and others are blatantly biased based upon the authors moral views. I know that some of the topics go against the beliefs of the people who run this site but it isn't a great way to run things. Tolerance of others and their beliefs, no matter what we think of them, is what Conservapedia should be about. Just my opinion and nothing more.

:Just your '''unsupported''' opinion and nothing more, you might have said.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:35, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

::I could have, but I figured that people would pick that up from "'''I might be wrong...'''". I never had any beliefs that my opinions were supported here, as I had to make an effort to "vocalize" them. Generally people on and off of the internet don't support my opinions.

:::What I meant was that you made a claim of bias without providing any examples to support your claim.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:02, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

::::Ah. [[http://www.conservapedia.com/Che_Guevara]] "Ernesto "Che" Guevara" "became a cultural icon for" "'''dumb white teenagers'''." [[http://www.conservapedia.com/Communism]] "Communism is an atheistic political system" Although extremely hilarious, I think that those articles are somewhat biased and detract from Conservapedia's accountability. I have not seen Wikipedia style hijackings yet though.

:::::Conservapedia is definitely biased. Its even in the name

Which is unfortunate because it would be great if it wasn't and we could make the case to certain search engines like DuckDuckGo to replace Wikipedia with it.. It has a great amount of information that you won't find on Wikipedia you're very dedicated user base.. unfortunately the bias does prevent it from ever serving as a true mainstream alternativ

For a more moderate alternative theres always infogalactic

But they don't really have much of a user base that keeps their articles up to datee

==Tau ceti to Tau Ceti==
I created an article called [[Tau ceti]], but it should be [[Tau Ceti]], is there anyway the name can be reset as the latter? Thank you. -- [[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 16:00, 24 June 2009 [EDT]

:Yes, there [[Tau Ceti|'''is''']]. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 16:17, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

:: Thanks! -- [[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 16:22, 24 June 2009 [EDT]

: In MediaWiki the proper way to do it is by a "move" operation, which preserves the editing and talk history. This feature is not currently enabled in Conservapedia for regular users. Ask an administrator to do it. — [[User:Philcooper81|Philcooper81]][[User_talk:Philcooper81|T]] 16:31, 26 February 2013 (EST)

==Alger Hiss==
I just tried to link to The Encyclopedia of Ukraine at and got this message:

::Spam protection filter

::The page you wanted to save was blocked by the spam filter. This is probably caused by a link to a blacklisted external site.

The spam filter apparently mistook part of the URL for an obscenity.

Is there any way to fix this? Thanks![[User:FOIA|FOIA]] 21:40, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

*You can give the URL without making it a link, so that people can copy and paste the link into their own browser, but I am not inclined to unblock any part of that corner of the world, for pretty obvious reasons. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 21:44, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

==Kapteyn's star to Kapteyn's Star==
The article I created called [[Kapteyn's star]] was created with a lower case s for star, it should be upper case, could someone with the rights change the title to [[Kapteyn's Star]]? Thank you. -- [[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 15:00, 8 July 2009 [EDT]

== Double Redirects ==
All three of the current [[Special:doubleredirects|double redirects]] are protected. Could a Sysop fix them, please? Thanks. ~ ''[[User:Mdotley|Webster]]'' ([[User talk:Mdotley|talk]]) 22:18, 17 September 2009 (EDT)

==I'm having a bit of trouble with some linking==
I'm trying to get the "Weather Report" and "Return to Forever" articles to link to jazz fusion. Instead, it's linking me to another jazz fusion article that I accidentally created and was recently deleted. Any help is much appreciated. [[User:Jdelong11|Jdelong11]]

: Did my change fix this?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:55, 28 December 2009 (EST)

==Username change==
Is it possible to change one's username? I haven't decided what I want the new one to be but will let you know when I have.--[[User:TedM|TedM]] 13:30, 27 September 2009 (EDT)

If this is possible, I would also be interested in doing so, since I have been recently denuked, and it would be disingenuous to continue with this username. [[User:Navy Nuke|Navy Nuke]]

:Sure, just provide your requested new name here and I'll change it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 08:35, 1 December 2009 (EST)

I'd to change my username to JonathanDP81. I'm standardizing my username across all my websites. [[User:JonathanDP|JonathanDP]] 10:47, 19 June 2010 (EDT)

==User additions to this site==
Hi, I'm new here and I'm interested in adding some content to Conservapedia, namely in respect to firearm laws. Just a cursory glace makes me think that users can only edit existing topics? Am I wrong?
--[[User:LibGunslinger|LibGunslinger]] 11:28, Dec 10 2009
:You can add new pages if you so desire.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:32, 10 December 2009 (EST)

==Nova==
I believe this is right place to ask this, so here I am. I want to write an article on the astronomical phenomenon known as a "Nova", however all search on this site for that word is already directed towards "NOVA", a stub on the PBS series of that name. Should I rebuild that article to focus on the astronomical phenomena as that is what the base definition of a nova means? Or start a whole new article, such as "nova_(star)"? Thanks. --[[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 13:18, 28 December 2009 (EST)

: I'll move "NOVA" to "NOVA (PBS)", and you can then have "Nova". Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:56, 28 December 2009 (EST)

::I turned the NOVA page into a disambiguation page that now points to both [[NOVA_(PBS)]] and [[Nova_(star)]], is this good? May want to make it Nova instead of NOVA though. --[[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 17:29, 28 December 2009 (EST)

:::It's fine as you did it. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:53, 28 December 2009 (EST)

==Writing Plan==
User Ed Poor requested a writing plan from me. How exactly do I submit it to him?
Thank you. --[[User:JohnLee|JohnLee]] 16:53, 11 October 2010 (EDT)

: Anyone can post to his talk page: [[User talk:Ed Poor]]. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:00, 11 October 2010 (EDT)

==Editing complaint==
Someone started a debate page without posting any comments, so I decided to start the discussion. I spent about half an hour writing the post, clicked on save, and was redirected to a page informing me that I didn't have permission to edit it (Probably because it was the first post). And I was unable to go back and copy/paste what I'd written to post it later. Can someone please fix this so that if you click on a page to edit that you can't edit, it tells you straight away and doesn't simply waste your time. Thanks. - JamesCA, 31 July 2011
:And something similar. I recently tried to edit a page because some of the information was out of date, and did not find out until after I tried to save it, that it was locked for only administrators to edit. - [[User:JamesCA|JamesCA]] 19:02, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

::Both of the above comments surprise me, and the software should not lose information as you described. The browser being used may have an effect on this also.

::I thought that locked pages (which I think are a very small percentage of entries here) announced themselves as such when there is an attempt to edit them. The browser should not discard information regardless.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:11, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

:::It looks like you lock up editing at night. Is it possible that these folks were just caught by the deadline? --[[User:DrDean|DrDean]] 20:03, 29 August 2011 (EDT)
::::That is possible, I just tried editing the same page, and it worked. Also, because of my different timezone, I sometimes find that while looking through Conservapedia articles, the edit tag suddenly disappears, because the deadline suddenly comes in. Is there a way to check how long until the deadline? I'll check to make sure the information actually is lost when I get a chance. And does the deadline cut off at the same time every night? And also, who can start new pages (including debate pages)? Thanks - [[User:JamesCA|JamesCA]] 21:56, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

==Christianity and Politics==
I'm wondering what is your take (creators of conservapedia) on the mixing of Christianity and politics? I ask because as a young Christian I'm a little confused about how much focus I should give for politics alongside my faith. Other opinions I've read disregard politics completely within a Christian life, as if Christians in general should simply accept and respect whatever form of government rules over them regardless of the corruption or misguided policies such governments may contribute to the falling of the nation. Please clarify this conundrum for me as I feel uncertain if politics should be in any part of my life. God bless. --[[User:gravis57|gravis57]] 12:32PM, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
:Do you mean with regards to being active in politics, or how much your religious beliefs should influence your political opinions? One suggestion, try coming up with and arguing using non-religious points to support views that stem from religious beliefs. It'll enable you to more effectively argue against those who believe that the Bible alone is not enough to justify moral opinions. It'll also give you a wider range of arguments you can call on when discussing religion, politics or morality, and will enable you to more easily come up with counterpoints to arguments that you've never come across before. For example, if you're arguing against gay marriage, try using points such as family values, and the effect it would have on the institution of marriage, instead of using (only) quotes from Leviticus and Deuteronomy, and points based around what God says. - JamesCA (not a creator of conservapedia), August 9 2011

:Not exactly. I'm asking as a Christian to another Christian(s) as to how much politics should be a part of my life, or if they should even be apart of it at all. I mean while the founders of this great nation used God's principles to create a system of government that ensured rights, liberty, and freedom--is it wrong or vain to wish to inform, protect, or care about my country when Christ called us to spread his Word and not (unless I'm mistaken) deal with lesser matters in regard to such (political) things. This is where I'm confused about whether I should become even somewhat active within politics or simply disregard it entirely to focus on Christianity. - gravis57, August 8, 2011

:It's not wrong, and it's not vain, to wish to inform, protect or care about your country. It's part of serving one's country, part of helping people. There are many varied ways that you can help and serve people, and God. Christ called us not just to spread his Word, but to serve. 'For the son of God came not to be served, but to serve.' Can you serve God by becoming involved in politics? Maybe. Could you help people by becoming involved in politics, and by getting Congress to give them what they need? Or would it be better for you to serve another way? If you did become involved in politics, would it make it more difficult for you to serve God? I guess my general point is this: you can still serve God and the people by becoming involved in politics, but whether or not that is the best place for you to serve is a different matter. I'm starting to think that I might not be able to give you as good of an answer as you're looking for. Hopefully someone else will see this and help answer your question. Note about dates: different time zones is causing the inconsistent dates. - JamesCA, August 9 2011

==Request for disambiguation==
Hi there. I was hoping to work on the page [[poetry]] as well as other pages about poetic forms. However, as it exists right now, there is only the page [[form]] which talks about musical form. I'd like to include a form page about poetry, is there any way someone can disambiguate it into 2 articles, form (music), form (poetry) for me? Or is it preferred that I just start a new section within the existing form page? Much love --[[User:RLorain|RLorain]] 16:27, 27 August 2011 (EDT)

==Question regarding Debate==
Someone posted a new debate semi-recently, [[Debate:Should the United States of America really be counted as a country?]] It was tagged for speedy deletion as it was silly and a non-debate. After a bit, I decided to answer the question, explaining what is necessary for something to be considered a country, and that the US clearly falls into the current definitions. My answer was then copy/pasted onto a new page for the theory of what constitutes a country, and the speedy-deletion tag was removed. No one else has posted on the page, and as the debate is quite silly, is it appropriate for me to delete the page? (And if it is, but I can't, can someone else do it, thanks). - [[User:JamesCA|JamesCA]] 03:21, 14 October 2011 (EDT)

==Greetings and couple questions==
I just signed up a couple of days ago or so, so please bare with me as I learn the ropes!
By way of background, I love God and truth and science (like physics, math, electronics, computer programming, etc.) I'm very conservative.
I do have three questions!
First, question: Is edit turned off at night? I work full-time during the day often don't get home till late and sometimes the edit links are gone, But right now, they are on and it's late so maybe it's hit or miss!

Second, is the owner's goal of this site to be a full spectrum source of family friendly information (like with articles on math, science, electronics, etc.) or is it supposed to be more geared toward moral issues or issues specific to conservatism? If full-spectrum, I will be glad to contribute scientific information as time permits.

Third, is the owner's goal to have articles relating to moral issues to carry a conservative slant, or is the goal to be as factual and unbiased as possible?

My tendency is toward truth whether it's comfortable for me or not -- rather than slanted either way.
However I fully respect the site owner's right to run his private property as he wishes and I wouldn't want to upset anybody (or waste my time) making edits that weren't pleasing to the owner.
Thanks & have a great day! [[User:Jesseg|Jesseg]] 01:57, 8 February 2013 (EST)

:Jesseq, three answers...
::1. Editing is sometimes turned off at night at owner's discretion, but productive newbies are granted night-editing privileges.
::2. The goal of the site is a full, online encyclopedia covering as many subjects as possible, with the intent that the content be family-friendly. So, you can pretty much contribute in any subject.
::3. Moral issues can carry a conservative slant, but I believe that these issues should also be in a "right vs wrong" slant as well. We sometimes tell what the liberal side believes in, but we also will tell why that side is wrong at times.
:So, pick a subject, commence editing, check your sources, and do the very best you can. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 02:25, 8 February 2013 (EST)
How do I put those nice little tabs that show your opinions on my user page? I know almost nothing about computers, so help me out here.
[[User:SGrosman|SGrosman]] 15:22, 30 March 2013 (EDT)

==Partnership with Conservapedia==
Hello. I am Superdadsuper, an Administrator and Bureaucrat on [http://bible.wikia.com/wiki/ Biblicalapedia] a biblical-history wiki. This is a very short message but I was wondering if it were possible to have some kind of partnership. We can discuss in more detail when I get a response
Thanks,
Superdadsuper, Biblicalapedia Administrator and Bureaucrat
:Sent message to owner and sysops. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 11:44, 10 December 2014 (EST)

==Delete request==
Hi there, could you please delete this page [[Jeremy Shum]]. Thank you [[User:Matthewbible|Matthewbible]] ([[User talk:Matthewbible|talk]]) 10:14, 25 January 2017 (EST)
:Done.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:52, 20 May 2017 (EDT)

==Unable to edit==
I tried to add a website to the list of conservative humor sites, but my edit never shows, even though I clicked "Save".
anyway the site is: http://thepeoplescube.com/
You can add it if you see this.

==Unknown stalker==
Need assistance; someone is following me on conservapedia and leaving vulgar remarks. The culprit removed a page of text, but I was apparently able to put it back in place. The stalker then again removed the article [[George B. Campbell]].[[User:BHathorn|BHathorn]] ([[User talk:BHathorn|talk]])

== Username change to Winston Smith. ==

Hello, would it possible to change my name from my current one to a new one called Winston Smith? Thanks.
:Just create a winstonsmith account. If there is a way to rename a username via the Wikimedia software, we don't know how to do it.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:40, 21 March 2018 (EDT)
::The user that wrote the request created that account only a few hours ago and only made two edits, both of them being requests to change the username. It's ridiculous to create a new account and immediately ask for a name change without doing anything else. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:41, 21 March 2018 (EDT)

==Please change title of article==
From [[Leroy Shafer]] to Manzell Shafer.[[User:BHathorn|BHathorn]] ([[User talk:BHathorn|talk]]) 13:38, 2 May 2018 (EDT)

:Done! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 15:20, 2 May 2018 (EDT)

::Hallo. Please also change the title of the article at present called "Karen White alias Stephen Wood alias David Thompson alias". The final word is an error. I don't know how to edit the title or move it to another fresh page. Apologies [[User:GraceDalrymple|GraceDalrymple]] ([[User talk:GraceDalrymple|talk]])

== Username change to Publius. ==
Hey, guys! Am I able to change my username to "Publius?" -- [[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 14:41, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
:You have to create a new account.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:08, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
::Wait. I thought Andy was able to approve new usernames and change it. Well, at least back in 2009, he was. -- [[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 15:20, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
:::If you are correct, you could go to Andy's talk page. But why bother him with a request like this? So much easier to create an account called publius1 or publius2, publius472, etc. etc.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:35, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
::::Andy has that power, but he rarely uses it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:52, 9 June 2018 (EDT)

== FUNimation page deleted labled as advertisement when it wasn't. ==
One of the admins deleted the page even though it was against their libral practices like other pages on this wiki. I think it was probably mistaken as advertisement due to lack of sources. I want the page back and I want to improve the page including adding sources. I was following how the page on The Walt Disney Company was created. I think FUNimation needs a page here and was mistakenly deleted. I wanted to tell the admin that deleted it mistaking it for advertisement with my account [[User:Conservaboy|Conservaboy]] but I can't edit for some reason so I made an alt account until that can be fixed. By the way, both account links are red because I haven't put info on them yet and I will do that on my current alt account. -- [[User:Naan|Naan]] 8:19, 13 March 2020 [PT]
:The admin who deleted that page and blocked your account is [[User:Karajou]]. You will need to speak with him on this matter. It was probably seen as an advertising attempt because it is a paid service, and lacked in citations and overall notability. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 11:40, 13 March 2020 (EDT)
::Thanks. I will tell him and I will point out that it was mistaken as an advertisement attempt instead of an actual page and that I forgot to put citations and that I will do that once the page is restored or recreated and add some more information on their shady business practictes that made people upset including removing the cancel function on their service FUNimation now and blamed it on a glitch and provide a link to a YouTube video that proves that they have left wing agenda in their dubs. I'm now back on my original account. -- [[User:Conservaboy|Conservaboy]] 10:43, 13 March 2020 [PT]

==[[Ehsan Sehgal]]==
I came here from Wikipedia to ask whether this site allow anyone to use Conservapedia to shamelessly self promote their-self? This guy has been curating his bio both on Wikipedia and Conservapedia for the past one decade yet remained under the radar. Other than self promotional material, I also found most of the information on his Conservapedia bio is made up and is fabricated. His Wikipedia bio was deleted this week and I'm curious what do you guys think of this Conservapedia bio? --[[User:Saqib|Saqib]] ([[User talk:Saqib|talk]]) 15:44, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

:Hi Saqib, we generally do oppose self-promotion articles. The article was imported by [[User:JusticeOfJustice]], who said they are the original author of the text. I will look into it a bit further. Thanks for the heads-up! --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 15:53, 18 May 2020 (EDT)
::@David, JusticeOfJustice is actually Ehsan Sehgal himself. On Wikipedia, his username was Justice007. See this deletion: [thread https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ehsan_Sehgal_(4th_nomination)]. --[[User:Saqib|Saqib]] ([[User talk:Saqib|talk]]) 16:04, 18 May 2020 (EDT)
:::Mr. Sehgal is very sick. There is no point in upsetting him by deleting the article before he dies. I locked the article.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:01, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
::::Yup. I can see [https://web.facebook.com/photo?fbid=10221662477326238&set=pcb.10221662485886452 that]. --[[User:Saqib|Saqib]] ([[User talk:Saqib|talk]]) 16:23, 20 May 2020 (EDT)

== CAPTCHA Questions ==
Hello. I have trouble answering some of the CAPTCHA questions relating to the New Testament, because I am Jewish. Is there a way that I can select certain CAPTCHA questions to be removed for my account? [[User:Ethan Parmet|Ethan Parmet]] ([[User talk:Ethan Parmet|talk]]) 16:07, 26 May 2020 (EDT)
: Ask [[User:Aschlafly]] to remove the CAPTCHA from your account. Tell him [[User: Conservative]] recommend him doing so. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:42, 26 May 2020 (EDT)

== Conservapedia in other languages ==
Are there any possibility to create other language versions of Conservapedia for active conservative communities around the world (for example, German, Polish, Russian, Hungarian)? Of course, some of them already have their own wikis, like traditio.wiki, but there are no interwiki links between projects. Such projects also lack base for homeschooling, thus being completely useless for parents with conservative views.
If engine of the Conservapedia could give us the possibility to link to existing wikis in other languages or create the very new language versions, it would be perfect for the development and spreading of the conservative thought worldwide.
[[User:Lakonur|Lakonur]]

:Hmm, interesting idea. Perhaps [[CP]] can be modified so that there's an option to change the displayed language for this online encyclopedia? —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>'''LT'''</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Monday, 18:27, 2 November 2020 (EST)

I'm really interested in this idea. I want to create a conservapedia project in Spanish (from Spain). Contact with me please.--[[User:Alvaro|Alvaro]] ([[User talk:Alvaro|talk]]) 18:01, 16 March 2021 (EDT)

==Irrelevant post==
Whats up with Evolution and the wiki in general?
Pretty sure evolution shouldnt be treated like that, it doesnt violate religious beliefs and has been proven over and over again. Just a suggestion-maybe be a bit less anti-evolution, you ever heard of tolerance? There's a reason why this wiki is inactive. Your only audience essentially consists of RationalWiki editors spying on the wiki. Do you ever address opposition or do you just spam banhammers? I dont speak out against someone or anything usually, but this is the exception. So much conservative bias on this wiki that it isnt even FUNNY. You suppress any and all people who have SLIGHTLY different beliefs than you. You should be ashamed, you are acting just like a cowardly dictator. Heh, not many of your cronies are left anyways. {{unsigned|Syncronyzer07}}
:Two things: first, evolution has been proven wrong too many times to count, and we are going to print such evidence on this website. Try doing that in Wikipedia, and you'll have your edits reverted immediately and then blocked from the site. Which leads to second: don't come here and scream to us about tolerance and how we should be accommodating to all of those beliefs you think we suppress at the drop of a hat. We see in the news every single day how it is YOUR SIDE OF THE FENCE that routinely suppresses thoughts and opinions they don't like. So don't lecture us. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 13:13, 19 February 2021 (EST)
First of all, YOUR first argument is irrelevant, its funny how every person like you says that. Second, Wikipedia says that Evolution is a scientific theory, which means that it is something that has CONSISTENTLY been verified by scientists. Very funny-well, how do you know that i'm a Liberal? Do I hear conservative bias? Anyways, even if you are right, and the liberals are part of some worldwide conspiracy, well, dont you think that Conservatives would do the same thing? Just some food for thought. You are a hypocrite. YOU dont lecture me, Karajou-theres a reason why i put it at the very top.--[[User:Syncronyzer07|Syncronyzer07]] ([[User talk:Syncronyzer07|talk]]) 13:51, 19 February 2021 (EST)
:Its irrelevant if you say so. And your point about Wikipedia is actually pointless, as it is written by amateurs with little to no credentials on the subjects they are talking about, while writing about a ''theory'' that they say is a ''fact'', and you come here using their bias on the subject to insist we have a bias against it here. And yes, I'm going to lecture you. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 14:05, 19 February 2021 (EST)
::And it's so very obvious you're a liberal. We always get the occasional rant from the clown who just has to come here and whine about our bias how much we restrict his freedom of speech...and usually from the very first posting he makes. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 14:10, 19 February 2021 (EST)
Seriously? Are you joking right now? I've been on this site on alt accounts for longer than you think. Enjoy. https://www.livescience.com/474-controversy-evolution-works.html--[[User:Syncronyzer07|Syncronyzer07]] ([[User talk:Syncronyzer07|talk]]) 14:12, 19 February 2021 (EST)
:::And its obvious that you are not here to engage in anything remotely resembling a meaningful discussion. Enjoy! [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 14:25, 19 February 2021 (EST)
==Editing complaint==
Recently, I tried to create a article but I failed to do. When I click on 'publish', then it takes me to CAPTCHA. Then after finishing 'CAPTCHA' correctly, the page is again reloaded or sometimes I am redirected to another page. My changes aren't being saved. Please somebody help me. [[User:Prinon|Prinon]] ([[User talk:Prinon|talk]]) 10:09, 11 April 2021 (EDT)
:The article in question that you posted was copied word-for-word from Wikipedia; that is not generally approved of here unless you were the original author of the article there, and even then it would need some revision to conform to Conservapedia's [[Conservapedia:Editing article and talk pages|manual of style]]. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 10:53, 11 April 2021 (EDT)

==Access==
HI can I have access to upload images and delete page
--[[User:HamzhaSaleem|HamzhaSaleem]] ([[User talk:HamzhaSaleem|talk]]) 15:16, June 27, 2021 (EDT)

==Media==
How do i upload media? I am only here to write articles about Belgium and the Belgian monarchy during the era of the Belgian Colonial Empire (1844-1960), so majority of the pictures that i use are in the Public domain. Kind regards. [[User:Belgium|Belgium]] ([[User talk:Belgium|talk]]) 20:57, October 2, 2021 (EDT)

== Move page name? ==

I created the article "[[False climate change predictions]]", but want to change the name to "Failed climate change predictions". Can someone do this for me? Thanks. [[User:Ethan Parmet|Ethan Parmet]] ([[User talk:Ethan Parmet|talk]]) 17:31, October 2, 2022 (EDT)

== Could you please address the hate content regarding homosexuality? ==
Not only is it highly offensive to many homosexuals, it may be classified as hate speech in many places, thus making it illegal. [[User:ChenXiansheng|ChenXiansheng]] ([[User talk:ChenXiansheng|talk]]) 06:25, May 25, 2023 (EDT)
:Free speech is the bedrock of the United States constitutional republic and is guaranteed by the [[First Amendment|First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution]] as is freedom of the press and freedom of petition, assembly and religion. The Bible is definitively against homosexuality and indicates that it is a damnable sin (See: [[Homosexuality and the Bible]] and [[Homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]).

:Furthermore, just because leftists/liberals hate religious/social conservatives' views on homosexuality (such as [[homosexuality and choice|homosexuality is a bad choice]] and [[Overcoming homosexuality|that homosexuality can be overcome]]) and also hate it when these conservatives mention all the [[Homosexuality and health|negative health effects of homosexuality]] and negative social effects of homosexuality such as below replacement levels of fertility (which puts additional strain on a nation's pension systems) and increased violence (See: [[Homosexual Couples and Domestic Violence]] and [[Homosexuality and Murders]]), it does not make those views hateful.

:Lastly, the above facts don't care about leftists/liberals feelings! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:06, May 25, 2023 (EDT)

::So in other words, ChenXiansheng, the truth about (and criticism of) homosexuality is ''not'' "hate content" and you won't get your wish to try to further impose a LPOV on those articles. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 00:04, May 26, 2023 (EDT)

== Closing Username ==
I'm the stepdaughter of the former user of this username. Although my stepdad made it through recent surgery, he suffered serious complications, and therefore will no longer be able to participate on it. As such, please terminate his account. Thank you. [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 22:08, September 16, 2023 (EDT)
:Sorry to hear that; I will keep him in my prayers. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Sunday, 22:10, September 16, 2023 (EDT)

=== Likely front page material: Was Michigan Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed’s Wikipedia page whitewashed of controversies by mystery editor before election? - https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/did-abdul-el-sayed-get-his-wikipedia-page-edited-to-soften-controversial-sentences-before-michigan-senate-election-larry-sanger-responds/articleshow/135640021.cms ````

The Bible versus the Qur'an

2025-02-22T14:09:19Z

Daniel1212: /* Charges of textual corruption */

The most predominant formal religions of the world and the largest socio-political ideology in the world, using broad criteria, are [[Christianity]] and [[Islam]] respectively,<ref>http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.htm</ref><ref>based upon critical doctrinal conformity, these numbers would be much smaller, such as in Christianity: http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/15-christianity-is-no-longer-americans-default-faith</ref> with the [[Bible]] and the [[Koran]] being their respective primary authoritative books.

While [[Muhammad]] is evidenced as believing that the Bible was inspired and given by [[God]], and the relatively brief Koran depends upon the Bible in its allusions to it, abundant critical differences exist between the two books, perhaps due to Muhammad's alleged illiteracy and dependence upon similarly biblically illiterate and confused sources.

The Islamic solution to this has typically been to assert the Bible was "altered" after Muhammad's time. However the wealth of manuscripts, including those who antedate the giving of the Koran, disallow that attempt and indicate that it is the Koran that is itself corrupt.

==Distinctions between the Bible and the Koran==
At less than 80,000 words, (figures vary: 77,701 in Arabic by one source,<ref>http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Uk/uk.religion.islam/2005-09/msg01868.html</ref> 77,439 by ‘Ata bin Yasar<ref>http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/bravo_r4bc.htm</ref>) the Koran is much smaller than the Bible, (602,585 words in the Old Testament; 180,552 in the New = 783,037,<ref>http://muthbible.org/resources/bible/biblestatistics.php</ref> with the total words in just the verses in the [[KJV]] being counted at 788,258.<ref>http://www.biblebelievers.com/believers-org/kjv-stats.htm</ref>) The Qur'an is also far more restrictive in in its scope of communication,<ref>[http://www.bible.ca/islam/library/Gilchrist/Vol1/4a.html The Qu'ran: ''The Scripture of Islam; A. THE COMPOSITION AND CHARACTER OF THE QUR'AN'']</ref><ref>http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/bravo_r4bc.htm</ref> lacking the manner of extensive historical narratives of the Bible, and the context it provides for its commands, as well as genealogical records which helps provide historical chronology. In addition, absent from the Koran are extended doctrinal discourses on salvation, such as are especially seen in the New Testament. This results in difficultly formulating broad [[systematic theology]] out of the Koran by itself, and its allusions to Biblical characters and events evidences that it requires knowledge of the Bible, which as the prior revelation, it must agree with.

==Muhammad's referencing and contradictions of the Bible==
Early Islam<ref>http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-bible-not-corrupted-early-muslims.htm</ref> and Muhammad himself is seen to uphold the Scriptures<ref>http://isaalmasih.net/bible-isa/kitab-true.html</ref> that existed then as divinely inspired, both the Torah, (Sura 2:87) and the Psalms, (4:163) and the Gospels, (Suras 3:3; 5:46) such as in stating,
<blockquote>How come they unto thee for judgment when they have the Torah, wherein Allah hath delivered judgment (for them)? Yet even after that they turn away. Such (folk) are not believers. (Sura 5:43; Pickthall)</blockquote>
<blockquote>And We sent after them in their footsteps Isa [Jesus], son of Marium, verifying what was before him of the Taurat [Torah] and We gave him the Injeel [Gospel] in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was before it of Taurat and a guidance and an admonition for those who guard (against evil). (Sura 5:46; Shakir) </blockquote>
<blockquote>
Say: "O People of the Book! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord, (Sura 5:68; Y. Ali) </blockquote>
<blockquote>If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in no wise of those in doubt. (Sura 10:94, Y. Ali)</blockquote>
<blockquote>
And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam). (Sura 29:46; Y. Ali)
</blockquote>

Sura 6:34 also states that "there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah." (Y. Ali)

However, the Koran critically contradicts the Bible,<ref>[http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/ answering-islam.org; ''Contradictions in the Qur'an; Verses contradicting the earlier revelations'']</ref> especially as concerns the person and work of [[Jesus Christ]], as it flatly denies His death and resurrection, as well as His divine nature, both of which are held by Christians to be abundantly testified to.<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.net/JESUS.Vs.Muhammad.html#2 ''MUHAMMAD VERSUS JESUS CHRIST; Death and Resurrection proclaimed'']</ref><ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/DEITYofCHRIST.html ''The DEITY of CHRIST'']</ref>

==Charges of textual corruption==
Islamic apologists recognize these contradictions, and respond by invoking Surah 2:78-79 which speaks of "illiterates, who know not the Book....who write the Book with their own hands" as "evidence" that the Bible was "tampered with".

Christian apologists respond to these charges by pointing out that the Koran itself affirms the integrity of The Book, thus if corruption occurred then it would be in contradiction to the Koran itself, and its doctrine of the preservation of Divine revelation.<ref>[http://www.thebereans.net/arm-muslims.shtml Refuting the Muslims Polemics]</ref> And that the amount of alterations required to explain the Koranic deviations from Biblical text would require a significant amount of changes to the Old Testament and virtually a complete rewriting of the New, yet for such a project there is no manuscript evidence, but the contrary exists for its preservation from such changes.

An abundance of New Testament manuscripts which predate the Koran yet exist,<ref>http://www.spotlights.org/Bible22.htm</ref> including the Codex Sinaiticus (c. 350 AD), with Aland numbering a total of 230 extant New Testament manuscript portions which pre-date 600 AD (192 Greek New Testament manuscripts, 5 Greek lectionaries containing scripture, and 33 translations of the Greek New Testament).<ref>Kurt and Barbara Aland, 1987:82-83</ref><ref>http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/bibmanu.htm</ref>

Archaeological evidence also evidences that manuscripts from the first century could last well over a hundreds of years, and that retired and discarded manuscripts were not altered.<ref>[http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/eva358021.shtml How Long Were Biblical Manuscripts in Use?]</ref> The doctrinal conflation of early manuscripts with later ones manifests that no such manner of alterations or rewriting such as Islam asserts took place,<ref>http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/bibleorigin.html</ref><ref>http://www.carm.org/questions/about-bible/manuscript-evidence-superior-new-testament-reliability</ref> and even the variations among manuscripts (mainly in spelling or sentence structure and other thing which do not change doctrine) help to confirm the reliability of the Biblical texts more than the Islamic choice to burn versions which have variant readings.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20210906151614/https://www.unchangingword.com/manuscript-evidence/ "Is there much Evidence for the Bible's Reliability?"]</ref>

In addition, what further disallows the Islamic theory is that none of the thousands of all extant Biblical manuscripts even from before the time of Muhammad agree with the Koranic contradictions of Scripture.

It is also postulated that if Muhammad could not read, as Islam states, then he would have relied upon the word of others (travelers, etc.) who were overall likely to be significantly Biblically illiterate.<ref>http://www.letusreason.org/Islam5.htm</ref> This would explain how Muhammed could claim that the Christian Trinity consisted of God, Jesus and Mary,<ref>[http://answering-islam.org/Why-not/13trinity.html Jochen Katz, ''My Questions to Muslims''; Answering Islam]</ref> (Sura 5:116-117) in addition to speaking numerous contradictions of the Bible.

In response, Muslim apologists also seek to make a case against a reliable Bible based upon the lack of a universal canon among all Christian churches, or early incomplete manuscripts, or additions to them (''the Epistle of Barnabas'', and portions of ''The Shepherd of Hermas'' to Codex Sinaiticus), as well a relatively small degree of actual (beyond spelling, etc.) textual disagreement<ref>http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Saifullah/bravo_dave.htm</ref> among some of the thousands of existing manuscripts. However, none of these aspects provides a solution to the Islamic problem, as none of the manuscripts substantiate the Koranic deviations, nor does the small percentage (contrary to typical Islamic exaggeration) of actual variants among manuscripts support the manner of massive changes which the Islamic solution requires. Moreover, the Koran, for which there is no manuscript evidence for over 100 years after it was said to be given,<ref>http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/qurmanu.htm</ref> evidences its own problematic texts,<ref>http://www.carm.org/religious-movements/islam/contradictions-quran</ref> even though it is a far smaller (in size and scope) book, and one that was written after durable writing materials came into use, and then underwent a purification process in which variant manuscripts were burned.<ref>[http://www.beholdthebeast.com/textual_history_of_the_koran.htm TEXTUAL HISTORY OF THE KORAN]</ref> One researcher concludes,

:Manuscript, as well as documentary and archaeological evidence indicates that much of what the Koran maintains does not coincide with the historical data at our disposal which comes from that period.<ref>http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/conclu.htm</ref>

Thus it is seen that the manner of corruption of biblical text which Islam charges is that of the Koran, not the Bible which authority it is much based upon, and Muhammad must be charged as being one who attempted to corrupt the Bible.

While Muslims also typically claim that the text of the Koran is identical to that received by Muhammad, Christian researchers contend that there is overwhelming evidence that it is not.<ref>[http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Text/ Textual answering-islam.org; ''Variants of the Qur'an'']</ref>

Although the Koran manuscripts exhibit a notable stability in the text across many centuries, evidence supports the conclusion that considerably greater diversity existed among the earlier texts of the Koran than is reflected in the extant manuscripts studied thereafter. As is widely accepted, in the late 7th century, the Caliph Uthman, being disturbed by the diversity in the text of the Koran, organized a standardization of the Koranic manuscripts, destroying texts considered deviant, and thus cutting off access to possibly more original forms of the text of the Koran. Further steps were taken in successive centuries to fix the text and its recitation.<ref>http://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/textual-criticism-the-new-testament-and-the-quran</ref> The result of textual examination of Koranic manuscripts leads Keith E. Small, Phd. author of ''Textual Criticism and Qur’an Manuscripts'', to conclude,
{{cquote|Though Muslims may take pride in the fidelity of the preservation of this text, it does not reproduce precisely what was originally considered to be the Qur'an' in the early seventh century. Because of the standardizations of the text in 653-705/33-86 AH and 936/324 AH, together with the constant pressure throughout Islamic history to have one text match their dogma, many texts which had equally good claims to containing authentic readings were suppressed and destroyed.

And, because of the emphasis on oral transmission and the vagaries of Arabic as it developed, the written text was constantly vocalized in new ways which did not preserve the original vocalization. The original vocalization must have been lost very early on if it did indeed exist.

While bearing testimony to the careful preservation of one particular consonantal text, the history of the transmission of the text of the Koran is at least as much a testament to the destruction of Koran material as it is to its preservation. It is also testimony to the fact that there never was one original text of the Koran.<ref>Keith E. Small, ''Textual Criticism and Qur’an Manuscripts,'' (Lanham/Boulder/New York/Toronto/Plymouth: Lexington Books, 2012), p. 180</ref><ref>http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2011/07/textual-criticism-and-quran-manuscripts.html?showComment=1311441744807#c7543567119217355174</ref>}}

==Gospel of Barnabas==
As no extant Biblical manuscript, from before the time of Muhammed or after him, agrees with the Koranic contradictions, many Muslim apologists look to the [[Gospel of Barnabas]] for support. However, this radically different account is judged by both Christian and secular academics (and even some Muslims such as Abbas el-Akkad) to be a late work and pseudepigraphical. With its obvious anachronisms and historical errors (like sailing to Nazareth) and utter lack of early manuscript evidence and irreconcilable differences between it and any ancient manuscripts, it is manifest to be a fourteenth century attempt to read Islamic doctrine into the Bible, which clearly refutes it.<ref>http://www.muslimhope.com/ForgeryOfTheGospelOfBarnabas.htm</ref><ref>http://answering-islam.org/Barnabas/saleeb.html</ref><ref>http://www.answering-islam.org/Green/barnabas.htm</ref><ref>http://www.ichthus.info/CaseForChrist/Archeology/intro.html</ref>

==Principal areas of disagreement==
The primary issues in which the Koran radically fails to conflate with the Bible are in regard to the person and work of Christ, as well as the nature of the people of God, and the means by which their mission is carried out.<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/JESUS.Vs.Muhammad.html MUHAMMAD VERSUS JESUS CHRIST]</ref><ref>http://www.answering-islam.org/Nehls/Ask/disagree.html</ref>

While the Bible systematically reveals the [[Messiah]] as being the Divine Son of God, the Koran flatly denies this, but relegates Christ to being a most perfect messenger of God. While the Bible predicts and clearly records and abundantly references the death and resurrection of Christ,<ref>Isa. 53:10-12; Dan. 9:24; Dan. 9:26; Mat. 12:40; 16:21; 20:28; 27:2-10,40,63; Mar. 15:1,16-20; 17:23; Luk. 22:26-27; 23:1-5; 24:7,26-27; Jn. 2:19; 3:14; 8:28-38; Act. 3:13-16; 1Co. 15:3-7; 2Co. 5:21; Gal. 3:13; Phi. 2:5-8; 1Ti. 3:4-6; 2:14; Heb. 5:8; 1Pt. 1:19; 2:24; 3:18,22</ref> that He sacrificially shed His blood and died on the cross in order to make the perfect atonement for man's forgiveness, and rose to life and later ascended to the right hand of the Father, the Koran dismisses this, and offers a brief claim that a "substitute" took His place.(Sura 4:157) As the entire message of the New Testament centers around Jesus Christ being the unique son of God - a title which itself conveyed Deity at that time (Jn. 5:18; 19:7) - who died and rose again and now reigns as the present savior and future judge of mankind, then the Bible and the Koran are most irreconcilable on these points.

In addition, in the New Testament the nature of the people of God is essentially that of a spiritual entity, into which "body" all believers are baptized upon believing, (1 Cor. 12:13) and are translated into the spiritual kingdom of Christ. As such, the means of warfare for the New Testament church was "not carnal", that is, by the sword of men, but spiritual: "By pureness, by knowledge, by longsuffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned, By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left." (2 Cor 6:6-7) In contrast, Islam works out of the model of a seventh century physical theocracy, which thus uses physical means of oppression toward those without as well as within, in order to defeat its enemies and enlarge its borders. Due to both the nature of the Koran, and Muhammad's example, and evidence from the ''Hadityh'', many believe that "radical" Islam is more historically authentic and representative of the modern Islamic world than the "moderate" variety.<ref>http://www.muslimhope.com/WarInIslam.htm.</ref>

Muslims respond to such by repeating atheism's claims of irreconcilable contradictions within the Bible,<ref>http://debate.org.uk/topics/apolog/contrads.htm</ref> which Christians respond to by providing clarifications and explanations, while also documenting various other contradictions between the Bible and the Koran, as well as within the latter, and between the latter and other authorities.<ref>http://answering-islam.org/God/character.html</ref><ref>[http://answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra Contradictions in the Qur'an]</ref>

==Co-existence==
While there exists within [[liberal Christianity]] those who seek to harmonize the two religions,<ref>,http://geoconger.wordpress.com/2007/06/07/us-priest-says-islam-christianity-united-cen-60807-p1/</ref> as well as a form of liberal [[Islam]] which seeks to minimize differences, such results in a denial of truth, as well as freedom of religion in the long term. Patrick Sookhdeo, the director of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity, warned that the Western Church’s growing tendency to blur theological differences and not uphold the absolute truth is contributing to the threat of Islam to the Western World. Sookhdeo, a former Muslim and adviser to British, American and NATO military officials on jihadist ideology, and director of the Barnabas Fund which works with the persecuted church, stated,

:When faced with the uniqueness of Christ we become inclusive. He loves everybody so we talk about love, and hell and damnation goes out the window, said Sookhdeo. It becomes too embarrassing. So our church has conformed itself according to society.

:If the U.S. church goes the way of Europe and embraces liberalism in its theology then it will embrace liberalism in its life,... And if it embraces liberalism in its life then the church will die, and not only will the church die, but society around it will also die.<ref>[http://www.christiantoday.com/article/sookhdeo.liberal.christianity.intensifying.threat.from.radical.islam/16767.htm christiantoday.com] Saturday, February 9, 2008</ref>

The past institutionalization of the church and Islamization of most of Asia Minor, where the seven churches of Revelation were located, are seen by some as examples of dangers now being faced.

==See also==
*[[Islam]]
*[[Bible]]
*[[Koran]]
*[[Jihad]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

==External links==
*[http://www.answering-islam.org Answering-Islam.org]
*[http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/home.htm Debate.org.UK, Topics]
*[http://muslim-canada.org/ch2hamid.html#official The Preservation of the Original Teachings of Islam.]
[[Category:Bible]]
[[Category:Christianity]]
[[Category:Islam]]

Theodicy

2023-10-28T12:44:43Z

Daniel1212: /* Proposals */

'''Theodicy''' is a branch of [[theology]] that defends [[God]]'s goodness and justice in response to the [[problem of evil]].

The word was supposedly coined by the German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716), and is derived from two Greek words (theos, God, and dike, justice).

The premise which Theodicy is based upon is that God is [[omnipotence|omnipotent]], [[omniscience|omniscient]], and [[omnibenevolence|omnibenevolent]], with the question being how can God be the author of [[evil]], or allow evil and suffering to exist?

==Proposals==
In response, various proposals have been made, such as,

God could have,

*1.Made us (and angels) with no moral standard or sense or deprived us of the moral ability to respond to or choose good [morally insensible, even as with clouds].

*2. Granted us free moral agency, but never have given us anything to choose between [negation of moral choices, and no devil or God to chose between].

*3. Left man only with recourse to finite competing sources as his god, as being the sure and stedfast ultimate law-giver, and the ultimate object of spiritual affection and allegiance and source of security, and supreme judge of what is good [cultic theistic and atheistic governments].

*4. Called man to make the Creator their god, but rather than His reality being effectually believed due to a seeking heart in the light of substantial evidence and thus appreciated, a seeking made His reality so manifest as to leave no other choice, by compelling obedience thru overt positive irrefutable supernatural acts, such as by God supernaturally appearing and communicating to everyone [effective negation of volitional choose] ''(akin o what the angels of God experience, yet 1/3 choose to rebel anyway. Likewise, did most of the Hebrews who through Moses saw irrefutable supernatural evidences, effectually acting like as unbelievers.''

*5. Akin to #4 provided the ability to choose, and alternatives to choose btwn, but immediately punished unbelief and disobedience, relative to the degree of offence, thus being a perpetual classic concentration camp world.

*6. Allowed created beings a negative alternative to faithfulness to the creator, and the ability to choose evil, but immediately reversed any negative effects of man’s disobedience and not penalized such [effective negation of consequences of choices].

*7. Allowed us to do bad, but restricted us to a place where it would harm no one but ourselves [isolated negation of judicial and eternal consequences of choices].

*8. Allowed the whole world to become one giant North Korea, or let man terminally destroy himself by misusing his God-given ability to make choices, to break the good laws God gave them for their own good, misusing and abusing the good things God gave man, thereby greatly corrupting the earth. [Unhindered freedom, negation of mercy]

*9. Allowed us to choose between good and evil, and to affect others by it, but not ultimately reward or punish sin accordingly [negation of judicial and eternal consequences, positive or negative].

*10. Given us the ability to choose, and alternatives to chose between, and to face and overcome evil or be overcome by it, with the ability to effect others and things by our choices, and to exercise some reward or punishment in this life for morality, and ultimately reward or punishment all accordingly [pure justice].

*11. Instead of just letting all mankind go his merry miserable way to Hell, provided for the salvation of sinners at His own expense, sparing not His own dear Son who died and rose for them as mankind's scapegoat and savior (thank God). While restraining evil to some degree, yet making the evil that man does to work out for what is ultimately Good, with justice toward those who reject the Light (the Christ), having sinned away their day of grace, yet with mercy, and grace towards those who want what is Good above all else, seeking and choosing the One who is supremely Good,

*12. In accordance with $11 the Creator could have and did choose to manifest Himself in the flesh, and by Him to provide man a means of escaping the ultimate retribution of Divine justice, and instead receive unmerited eternal favor, at God's own expense and credit, appropriated by a repentant obedient faith in the risen Lord Jesus, in addition to the loss or gaining of certain rewards based on one's quality of work as a child of God. And eternally punish, to varying degrees relative to iniquity and accountability, those whose response to God's revelation manifested they want evil (John 3:16-18; 1 Co. 3; Rev. 20) [justice maintained while mercy and grace given].

==Arminian response==

Christian responses include the [[Arminian]] position that argues that evil is a consequence of God giving man freedom to choose, and that, if choice means anything, man must have something to choose from, this being turning away from the good to do the opposite. As angels or man have chosen to do evil, this results in suffering. While God knows what man will do, that is not the same as ordaining or decreeing it.

==Calvinist response==

The [[Calvinist]] position is that of "determinism", which holds that man has a more limited extent of free will than in the Arminian position, and that God has determined all things that will ever come to pass, as the ''[[Westminster Confession of Faith]]'' states. (3:1 5:2, 4) The Confession essentially states that God in His sovereignty is the first cause of all things, though many of the things which occur are through the "free" actions of man, which God influences. As one authority wrote, God "does not arrange things or control history apart from second causes...", and He uses such as instruments, so as to make all things work together to accomplish His plan, which is for the good of those who love Him. (Rom. 8:28)<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/theology/theodicy.html W. Gary Crampton, ''A Biblical Theodicy''</ref>

Some object to the further conclusions of Calvinism related to this.<ref>http://www.gospeltruth.net/foster_on_cal/otc_2.htm</ref> While Armianism believes God has the right and the ability to ultimately determine all things, it seeks to reconcile the actions of God concerning the basis for the [[predestination]] of the lost with God's own statements about justice, (Dt. 24:16; etc.) while the Calvinist tends to appeal to God's sovereign right to do as He pleases, as Scripture does, (Rom. 11:20) in which not all things are revealed. (Dt. 29:29)

==Non-Christian==
Non-Christian attempts to resolve this problem range from denying at least one of the omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence of God, to denying the reality of evil, to making God consist of a dual nature. However, the Bible upholds that God is both almighty and all-knowing, and of a consistent character, and that evil does exist as a reality, and is in opposition to the character of God.

==Anti-theist response==
Typically in the West, it is by railing against the God of the Bible under the premise that He is negligent in allowing evil (due to enabling men to make choices, and thus effect consequences) and evil-doers, while condemning Him when He does send judgments upon generationally wicked societies, based upon the premise that such judgments should not have killed animals and innocent children (which were actually saved from becoming like their culture. And by condemning God for allowing any of the innocent to suffer, as if the choices of man should not have such consequences.

Which means that the accusing anti-theist is effectively presuming [[omniscience]] in sitting in judgment upon a Being who alone knows what every effect of every thought and action (or non-action) will be - including His own - and reveals, not only in this life but for eternity.

And who can and will make all work out for Good, with justice as well as mercy, (Romans 8:28) based upon what they choose. With those who, by God's grace, wanted God and what He represents, (John 3:19-21; Acts 10:36-47) and thus come in repentance and faith to the very Son of God, Jesus Christ, for salvation, on His account, by His sinless shed blood, (Col. 1:14; 1 Peter 3:18) to the glory of God.

== See also ==

*[[Atheism and the Problem of Evil|Atheism and the problem of evil]]

*[[Atheism and the Euthyphro Dilemma]]

*[[Atheism and morality]]

*[[Atheism and ethics]]

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Theology]]

Theodicy

2023-10-28T12:42:48Z

Daniel1212: /* Proposals */

'''Theodicy''' is a branch of [[theology]] that defends [[God]]'s goodness and justice in response to the [[problem of evil]].

The word was supposedly coined by the German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716), and is derived from two Greek words (theos, God, and dike, justice).

The premise which Theodicy is based upon is that God is [[omnipotence|omnipotent]], [[omniscience|omniscient]], and [[omnibenevolence|omnibenevolent]], with the question being how can God be the author of [[evil]], or allow evil and suffering to exist?

==Proposals==
In response, various proposals have been made, such as,

God could have,

*1.Made us (and angels) with no moral standard or sense or deprived us of the moral ability to respond to or choose good [morally insensible, even as with clouds].

*2. Granted us free moral agency, but never have given us anything to choose between [negation of moral choices, and no devil or God to chose between].

*3. Left man only with recourse to finite competing sources as his god, as being the sure and stedfast ultimate law-giver, and the ultimate object of spiritual affection and allegiance and source of security, and supreme judge of what is good [cultic theistic and atheistic governments].

*4. Called man to make the Creator their god, but rather than His reality being effectually believed due to a seeking heart in the light of substantial evidence and thus appreciated, a seeking made His reality so manifest as to leave no other choice, by compelling obedience thru overt positive irrefutable supernatural acts, such as by God supernaturally appearing and communicating to everyone [effective negation of volitional choose] ''(akin o what the angels of God experience, yet 1/3 choose to rebel anyway. Likewise, did most of the Hebrews who through Moses saw irrefutable supernatural evidences, effectually acting like as unbelievers.''

*5. Akin to #4 provided the ability to choose, and alternatives to choose btwn, but immediately punished unbelief and disobedience, relative to the degree of offence, thus being a perpetual classic concentration camp world.

*6. Allowed created beings a negative alternative to faithfulness to the creator, and the ability to choose evil, but immediately reversed any negative effects of man’s disobedience and not penalized such [effective negation of consequences of choices].

*7. Allowed us to do bad, but restricted us to a place where it would harm no one but ourselves [isolated negation of judicial and eternal consequences of choices].

*8. Allowed the whole world to become one giant North Korea, or let man terminally destroy himself by misusing his God-given ability to make choices, to break the good laws God gave them for their own good, misusing and abusing the good things God gave man, thereby greatly corrupting the earth. [Unhindered freedom, negation of mercy]

*9. Allowed us to choose between good and evil, and to affect others by it, but not ultimately reward or punish sin accordingly [negation of judicial and eternal consequences, positive or negative].

*10. Given us the ability to choose, and alternatives to chose between, and to face and overcome evil or be overcome by it, with the ability to effect others and things by our choices, and to exercise some reward or punishment in this life for morality, and ultimately reward or punishment all accordingly [pure justice].

*11. Instead of just letting all mankind go his merry miserable way to Hell, provided for the salvation of sinners at His own expense, sparing not His own dear Son who died and rose for them as mankind's scapegoat and savior (thank God). While restraining evil to some degree, yet making the evil that man does to work out for what is ultimately Good, with justice toward those who reject the Light (the Christ), having sinned away their day of grace, yet with mercy, and grace towards those who want what is Good above all else, seeking and choosing the One who is supremely Good,

*11. In accordance with $11 the Creator could have and did choose to manifest Himself in the flesh, and by Him to provide man a means of escaping the ultimate retribution of Divine justice, and instead receive unmerited eternal favor, at God's own expense and credit, appropriated by a repentant obedient faith in the risen Lord Jesus, in addition to the loss or gaining of certain rewards based on one's quality of work as a child of God. And eternally punish, to varying degrees relative to iniquity and accountability, those whose response to God's revelation manifested they want evil (John 3:16-18; 1 Co. 3; Rev. 20) [justice maintained while mercy and grace given].

==Arminian response==

Christian responses include the [[Arminian]] position that argues that evil is a consequence of God giving man freedom to choose, and that, if choice means anything, man must have something to choose from, this being turning away from the good to do the opposite. As angels or man have chosen to do evil, this results in suffering. While God knows what man will do, that is not the same as ordaining or decreeing it.

==Calvinist response==

The [[Calvinist]] position is that of "determinism", which holds that man has a more limited extent of free will than in the Arminian position, and that God has determined all things that will ever come to pass, as the ''[[Westminster Confession of Faith]]'' states. (3:1 5:2, 4) The Confession essentially states that God in His sovereignty is the first cause of all things, though many of the things which occur are through the "free" actions of man, which God influences. As one authority wrote, God "does not arrange things or control history apart from second causes...", and He uses such as instruments, so as to make all things work together to accomplish His plan, which is for the good of those who love Him. (Rom. 8:28)<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/theology/theodicy.html W. Gary Crampton, ''A Biblical Theodicy''</ref>

Some object to the further conclusions of Calvinism related to this.<ref>http://www.gospeltruth.net/foster_on_cal/otc_2.htm</ref> While Armianism believes God has the right and the ability to ultimately determine all things, it seeks to reconcile the actions of God concerning the basis for the [[predestination]] of the lost with God's own statements about justice, (Dt. 24:16; etc.) while the Calvinist tends to appeal to God's sovereign right to do as He pleases, as Scripture does, (Rom. 11:20) in which not all things are revealed. (Dt. 29:29)

==Non-Christian==
Non-Christian attempts to resolve this problem range from denying at least one of the omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence of God, to denying the reality of evil, to making God consist of a dual nature. However, the Bible upholds that God is both almighty and all-knowing, and of a consistent character, and that evil does exist as a reality, and is in opposition to the character of God.

==Anti-theist response==
Typically in the West, it is by railing against the God of the Bible under the premise that He is negligent in allowing evil (due to enabling men to make choices, and thus effect consequences) and evil-doers, while condemning Him when He does send judgments upon generationally wicked societies, based upon the premise that such judgments should not have killed animals and innocent children (which were actually saved from becoming like their culture. And by condemning God for allowing any of the innocent to suffer, as if the choices of man should not have such consequences.

Which means that the accusing anti-theist is effectively presuming [[omniscience]] in sitting in judgment upon a Being who alone knows what every effect of every thought and action (or non-action) will be - including His own - and reveals, not only in this life but for eternity.

And who can and will make all work out for Good, with justice as well as mercy, (Romans 8:28) based upon what they choose. With those who, by God's grace, wanted God and what He represents, (John 3:19-21; Acts 10:36-47) and thus come in repentance and faith to the very Son of God, Jesus Christ, for salvation, on His account, by His sinless shed blood, (Col. 1:14; 1 Peter 3:18) to the glory of God.

== See also ==

*[[Atheism and the Problem of Evil|Atheism and the problem of evil]]

*[[Atheism and the Euthyphro Dilemma]]

*[[Atheism and morality]]

*[[Atheism and ethics]]

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Theology]]

Theodicy

2023-10-26T12:08:43Z

Daniel1212: /* Proposals */

'''Theodicy''' is a branch of [[theology]] that defends [[God]]'s goodness and justice in response to the [[problem of evil]].

The word was supposedly coined by the German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716), and is derived from two Greek words (theos, God, and dike, justice).

The premise which Theodicy is based upon is that God is [[omnipotence|omnipotent]], [[omniscience|omniscient]], and [[omnibenevolence|omnibenevolent]], with the question being how can God be the author of [[evil]], or allow evil and suffering to exist?

==Proposals==
In response, various proposals have been made, such as,

God could have,

*1.Made us (and angels) with no moral standard or sense or deprived us of the moral ability to respond to or choose good [morally insensible, even as with clouds].

*2. Granted us free moral agency, but never have given us anything to choose between [negation of moral choices, and no devil or God to chose between].

*3. Left man only with recourse to finite competing sources as his god, as being the sure and stedfast ultimate law-giver, and the ultimate object of spiritual affection and allegiance and source of security, and supreme judge of what is good [cultic theistic and atheistic governments].

*4. Called man to make the Creator their god, but rather than His reality being effectually believed due to a seeking heart in the light of substantial evidence and thus appreciated, a seeking made His reality so manifest as to leave no other choice, by compelling obedience thru overt positive irrefutable supernatural acts, such as by God supernaturally appearing and communicating to everyone [effective negation of volitional choose] ''(akin o what the angels of God experience, yet 1/3 choose to rebel anyway. Likewise, did most of the Hebrews who through Moses saw irrefutable supernatural evidences, effectually acting like as unbelievers.''

*5. Akin to #4m provided the ability to choose, and alternatives to choose btwn, but immediately punished unbelief and disobedience, relative to the degree of offence, thus being a perpetual classic concentration camp world.

*6. Allowed created beings a negative alternative to faithfulness to the creator, and the ability to choose evil, but immediately reversed any negative effects of man’s disobedience and not penalized such [effective negation of consequences of choices].

*7. Allowed us to do bad, but restricted us to a place where it would harm no one but ourselves [isolated negation of judicial and eternal consequences of choices].

*8. Allowed the whole world to become one giant North Korea, or let man terminally destroy himself by misusing his God-given ability to make choices, to break the good laws God gave them for their own good, misusing and abusing the good things God gave man, thereby greatly corrupting the earth. [Unhindered freedom, negation of mercy]

*9. Allowed us to choose between good and evil, and to affect others by it, but not ultimately reward or punish sin accordingly [negation of judicial and eternal consequences, positive or negative].

*10. Given us the ability to choose, and alternatives to chose between, and to face and overcome evil or be overcome by it, with the ability to effect others and things by our choices, and to exercise some reward or punishment in this life for morality, and ultimately reward or punishment all accordingly [pure justice].

*11. Instead of just letting all mankind go his merry miserable way to Hell, provided for the salvation of sinners at His own expense, sparing not His own dear Son who died and rose for them as mankind's scapegoat and savior (thank God). While restraining evil to some degree, yet making the evil that man does to work out for what is ultimately Good, with justice toward those who reject the Light (the Christ), having sinned away their day of grace, yet with mercy, and grace towards those who want what is Good above all else, seeking and choosing the One who is supremely Good,

*11. In accordance with $11 the Creator could have and did choose to manifest Himself in the flesh, and by Him to provide man a means of escaping the ultimate retribution of Divine justice, and instead receive unmerited eternal favor, at God's own expense and credit, appropriated by a repentant obedient faith in the risen Lord Jesus, in addition to the loss or gaining of certain rewards based on one's quality of work as a child of God. And eternally punish, to varying degrees relative to iniquity and accountability, those whose response to God's revelation manifested they want evil (John 3:16-18; 1 Co. 3; Rev. 20) [justice maintained while mercy and grace given].

==Arminian response==

Christian responses include the [[Arminian]] position that argues that evil is a consequence of God giving man freedom to choose, and that, if choice means anything, man must have something to choose from, this being turning away from the good to do the opposite. As angels or man have chosen to do evil, this results in suffering. While God knows what man will do, that is not the same as ordaining or decreeing it.

==Calvinist response==

The [[Calvinist]] position is that of "determinism", which holds that man has a more limited extent of free will than in the Arminian position, and that God has determined all things that will ever come to pass, as the ''[[Westminster Confession of Faith]]'' states. (3:1 5:2, 4) The Confession essentially states that God in His sovereignty is the first cause of all things, though many of the things which occur are through the "free" actions of man, which God influences. As one authority wrote, God "does not arrange things or control history apart from second causes...", and He uses such as instruments, so as to make all things work together to accomplish His plan, which is for the good of those who love Him. (Rom. 8:28)<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/theology/theodicy.html W. Gary Crampton, ''A Biblical Theodicy''</ref>

Some object to the further conclusions of Calvinism related to this.<ref>http://www.gospeltruth.net/foster_on_cal/otc_2.htm</ref> While Armianism believes God has the right and the ability to ultimately determine all things, it seeks to reconcile the actions of God concerning the basis for the [[predestination]] of the lost with God's own statements about justice, (Dt. 24:16; etc.) while the Calvinist tends to appeal to God's sovereign right to do as He pleases, as Scripture does, (Rom. 11:20) in which not all things are revealed. (Dt. 29:29)

==Non-Christian==
Non-Christian attempts to resolve this problem range from denying at least one of the omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence of God, to denying the reality of evil, to making God consist of a dual nature. However, the Bible upholds that God is both almighty and all-knowing, and of a consistent character, and that evil does exist as a reality, and is in opposition to the character of God.

==Anti-theist response==
Typically in the West, it is by railing against the God of the Bible under the premise that He is negligent in allowing evil (due to enabling men to make choices, and thus effect consequences) and evil-doers, while condemning Him when He does send judgments upon generationally wicked societies, based upon the premise that such judgments should not have killed animals and innocent children (which were actually saved from becoming like their culture. And by condemning God for allowing any of the innocent to suffer, as if the choices of man should not have such consequences.

Which means that the accusing anti-theist is effectively presuming [[omniscience]] in sitting in judgment upon a Being who alone knows what every effect of every thought and action (or non-action) will be - including His own - and reveals, not only in this life but for eternity.

And who can and will make all work out for Good, with justice as well as mercy, (Romans 8:28) based upon what they choose. With those who, by God's grace, wanted God and what He represents, (John 3:19-21; Acts 10:36-47) and thus come in repentance and faith to the very Son of God, Jesus Christ, for salvation, on His account, by His sinless shed blood, (Col. 1:14; 1 Peter 3:18) to the glory of God.

== See also ==

*[[Atheism and the Problem of Evil|Atheism and the problem of evil]]

*[[Atheism and the Euthyphro Dilemma]]

*[[Atheism and morality]]

*[[Atheism and ethics]]

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Theology]]

Theodicy

2023-10-26T12:06:53Z

Daniel1212: /* Proposals */ Edited and expanded

'''Theodicy''' is a branch of [[theology]] that defends [[God]]'s goodness and justice in response to the [[problem of evil]].

The word was supposedly coined by the German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716), and is derived from two Greek words (theos, God, and dike, justice).

The premise which Theodicy is based upon is that God is [[omnipotence|omnipotent]], [[omniscience|omniscient]], and [[omnibenevolence|omnibenevolent]], with the question being how can God be the author of [[evil]], or allow evil and suffering to exist?

==Proposals==
In response, various proposals have been made, such as,

God could have,

*1.Made us (and angels) with no moral standard or sense or deprived us of the moral ability to respond to or choose good [morally insensible, even as with clouds].

*2. Granted us free moral agency, but never have given us anything to choose between [negation of moral choices, and no devil or God to chose between].

*3. Left man only with recourse to finite competing sources as his god, as being the sure and stedfast ultimate law-giver, and the ultimate object of spiritual affection and allegiance and source of security, and supreme judge of what is good [cultic theistic and atheistic governments].

*4. Called man to make the Creator their god, but rather than His reality being effectually believed due to a seeking heart in the light of substantial evidence and thus appreciated, a seeking made His reality so manifest as to leave no other choice, by compelling obedience thru overt positive irrefutable supernatural acts, such as by God supernaturally appearing and communicating to everyone [effective negation of volitional choose] ''(akin o what the angels of God experience, yet 1/3 choose to rebel anyway. Likewise, did most of the Hebrews who through Moses saw irrefutable supernatural evidences, effectually acting like as unbelievers.''

*5. Akin to #4m provided the ability to choose, and alternatives to choose btwn, but immediately punished unbelief and disobedience, relative to the degree of offence, thus being a perpetual classic concentration camp world.

*6. Allowed created beings a negative alternative to faithfulness to the creator, and the ability to choose evil, but immediately reversed any negative effects of man’s disobedience and not penalized such [effective negation of consequences of choices].

*7. Allowed us to do bad, but restricted us to a place where it would harm no one but ourselves [isolated negation of judicial and eternal consequences of choices].

*8. Allowed the whole world to become one giant North Korea, or let man terminally destroy himself by misusing his God-given ability to make choices, to break the good laws God gave them for their own good, misusing and abusing the good things God gave man, thereby greatly corrupting the earth. [Unhindered freedom, negation of mercy]

*9. Allowed us to choose between good and evil, and to affect others by it, but not ultimately reward or punish sin accordingly [negation of judicial and eternal consequences, positive or negative].

*10. Given us the ability to choose, and alternatives to chose between, and to face and overcome evil or be overcome by it, with the ability to effect others and things by our choices, and to exercise some reward or punishment in this life for morality, and ultimately reward or punishment all accordingly [pure justice].

*11. Instead of just letting all mankind go his merry miserable way to Hell, provided for the salvation of sinners at His own expense, sparing not His own dear Son who died and rose for them as mankind's scapegoat and savior (thank God). While restraining evil to some degree, yet making the evil that man does to work out for what is ultimately Good, with justice toward those who reject the Light (the Christ), having sinned away their day of grace,
yet with mercy, and grace towards those who want what is Good above all else, seeking and choosing the One who is supremely Good,

*11. In accordance with 11 the Creator could have and did choose to manifest Himself in the flesh, and by Him to provide man a means of escaping the ultimate retribution of Divine justice, and instead receive unmerited eternal favor, at God's own expense and credit, appropriated by a repentant obedient faith in the risen Lord Jesus, in addition to the loss or gaining of certain rewards based on one's quality of work as a child of God. And eternally punish, to varying degrees relative to iniquity and accountability, those whose response to God's revelation manifested they want evil (John 3:16-18; 1 Co. 3; Rev. 20) [justice maintained while mercy and grace given].

==Arminian response==

Christian responses include the [[Arminian]] position that argues that evil is a consequence of God giving man freedom to choose, and that, if choice means anything, man must have something to choose from, this being turning away from the good to do the opposite. As angels or man have chosen to do evil, this results in suffering. While God knows what man will do, that is not the same as ordaining or decreeing it.

==Calvinist response==

The [[Calvinist]] position is that of "determinism", which holds that man has a more limited extent of free will than in the Arminian position, and that God has determined all things that will ever come to pass, as the ''[[Westminster Confession of Faith]]'' states. (3:1 5:2, 4) The Confession essentially states that God in His sovereignty is the first cause of all things, though many of the things which occur are through the "free" actions of man, which God influences. As one authority wrote, God "does not arrange things or control history apart from second causes...", and He uses such as instruments, so as to make all things work together to accomplish His plan, which is for the good of those who love Him. (Rom. 8:28)<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/theology/theodicy.html W. Gary Crampton, ''A Biblical Theodicy''</ref>

Some object to the further conclusions of Calvinism related to this.<ref>http://www.gospeltruth.net/foster_on_cal/otc_2.htm</ref> While Armianism believes God has the right and the ability to ultimately determine all things, it seeks to reconcile the actions of God concerning the basis for the [[predestination]] of the lost with God's own statements about justice, (Dt. 24:16; etc.) while the Calvinist tends to appeal to God's sovereign right to do as He pleases, as Scripture does, (Rom. 11:20) in which not all things are revealed. (Dt. 29:29)

==Non-Christian==
Non-Christian attempts to resolve this problem range from denying at least one of the omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence of God, to denying the reality of evil, to making God consist of a dual nature. However, the Bible upholds that God is both almighty and all-knowing, and of a consistent character, and that evil does exist as a reality, and is in opposition to the character of God.

==Anti-theist response==
Typically in the West, it is by railing against the God of the Bible under the premise that He is negligent in allowing evil (due to enabling men to make choices, and thus effect consequences) and evil-doers, while condemning Him when He does send judgments upon generationally wicked societies, based upon the premise that such judgments should not have killed animals and innocent children (which were actually saved from becoming like their culture. And by condemning God for allowing any of the innocent to suffer, as if the choices of man should not have such consequences.

Which means that the accusing anti-theist is effectively presuming [[omniscience]] in sitting in judgment upon a Being who alone knows what every effect of every thought and action (or non-action) will be - including His own - and reveals, not only in this life but for eternity.

And who can and will make all work out for Good, with justice as well as mercy, (Romans 8:28) based upon what they choose. With those who, by God's grace, wanted God and what He represents, (John 3:19-21; Acts 10:36-47) and thus come in repentance and faith to the very Son of God, Jesus Christ, for salvation, on His account, by His sinless shed blood, (Col. 1:14; 1 Peter 3:18) to the glory of God.

== See also ==

*[[Atheism and the Problem of Evil|Atheism and the problem of evil]]

*[[Atheism and the Euthyphro Dilemma]]

*[[Atheism and morality]]

*[[Atheism and ethics]]

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Theology]]

Theodicy

2023-10-19T10:50:00Z

Daniel1212: /* Non-Christian */

'''Theodicy''' is a branch of [[theology]] that defends [[God]]'s goodness and justice in response to the [[problem of evil]].

The word was supposedly coined by the German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716), and is derived from two Greek words (theos, God, and dike, justice).

The premise which Theodicy is based upon is that God is [[omnipotence|omnipotent]], [[omniscience|omniscient]], and [[omnibenevolence|omnibenevolent]], with the question being how can God be the author of [[evil]], or allow evil and suffering to exist?

==Proposals==
In response, various proposals have been made, such as,

God could have,

*1. Made us (and angels) with no ability to make choices, and operating as programmed without deviation, without having any ability to respond to and choose between good or evil, therefore not effecting any negative consequences due to moral choices. [robotic, impotent]

*2. Granted us the ability to make choices, but never have given us anything to choose between [no moral standard, no meaningful moral agency].

*3. Left man only with recourse to finite competing sources as his ultimate moral authority, and object of spiritual affection and allegiance, and source of security [atheism and atheistic governments].

*4. Called man to make the Creator their ultimate object of spiritual affection and allegiance and source of security as being what is right and what is best for man, versus finite created beings or things being one's "god," and provided moral revelation and influences. Yet always have moved us to do good, and never have allowed us to choose evil (even if as by making believing in God and choosing good so utterly compelling — like God appearing daily and always doing miracles on demand, and preventing any seeming evidence to the contrary - so that no man could attempt to make excuses for not believing in Him [effective negation of any freedom to choose]).

*5. Allowed created beings a negative alternative to faithfulness to the creator, and the ability to choose evil, but immediately reversed any effects and not penalized such [negation of consequences of choices].

*6. Allowed us to do bad, but restricted us to a place where it would harm no one but ourselves [isolated consequences to choices].

*7. Allowed us to choose between good and evil - thereby revealing what they want - and to affect others by it, but not ultimately reward or punish us accordingly [negation of judicial and eternal consequences, positive or negative].

*8. Given us the ability to choose, and alternatives to chose between and to face and overcome evil or be overcome by it, with the ability to affect others and things by our choices, and to exercise some reward or punishment in this life for morality, and ultimately reward or punish all accordingly [pure justice].

*9. Restrained evil to some degree, while making the evil that man does to work out for what is Good, with justice yet with mercy, and grace, towards those who want good, and who thus the One who is supremely Good.

*10. In accordance with 8, the Creator could have chosen to manifest Himself in the flesh, and by Him to provide man a means of escaping the ultimate retribution of Divine justice, and instead receive unmerited eternal favor, at God's own expense and credit, appropriated by a repentant obedient faith, in addition to the loss or gaining of certain rewards based on one's quality of work as a child of God. And eternally punish, to varying degrees relative to iniquity and accountability, those whose response to God's revelation manifested they want evil, [justice maintained while mercy and grace given].

==Arminian response==

Christian responses include the [[Arminian]] position that argues that evil is a consequence of God giving man freedom to choose, and that, if choice means anything, man must have something to choose from, this being turning away from the good to do the opposite. As angels or man have chosen to do evil, this results in suffering. While God knows what man will do, that is not the same as ordaining or decreeing it.

==Calvinist response==

The [[Calvinist]] position is that of "determinism", which holds that man has a more limited extent of free will than in the Arminian position, and that God has determined all things that will ever come to pass, as the ''[[Westminster Confession of Faith]]'' states. (3:1 5:2, 4) The Confession essentially states that God in His sovereignty is the first cause of all things, though many of the things which occur are through the "free" actions of man, which God influences. As one authority wrote, God "does not arrange things or control history apart from second causes...", and He uses such as instruments, so as to make all things work together to accomplish His plan, which is for the good of those who love Him. (Rom. 8:28)<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/theology/theodicy.html W. Gary Crampton, ''A Biblical Theodicy''</ref>

Some object to the further conclusions of Calvinism related to this.<ref>http://www.gospeltruth.net/foster_on_cal/otc_2.htm</ref> While Armianism believes God has the right and the ability to ultimately determine all things, it seeks to reconcile the actions of God concerning the basis for the [[predestination]] of the lost with God's own statements about justice, (Dt. 24:16; etc.) while the Calvinist tends to appeal to God's sovereign right to do as He pleases, as Scripture does, (Rom. 11:20) in which not all things are revealed. (Dt. 29:29)

==Non-Christian==
Non-Christian attempts to resolve this problem range from denying at least one of the omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence of God, to denying the reality of evil, to making God consist of a dual nature. However, the Bible upholds that God is both almighty and all-knowing, and of a consistent character, and that evil does exist as a reality, and is in opposition to the character of God.

==Anti-theist response==
Typically in the West, it is by railing against the God of the Bible under the premise that He is negligent in allowing evil (due to enabling men to make choices, and thus effect consequences) and evil-doers, while condemning Him when He does send judgments upon generationally wicked societies, based upon the premise that such judgments should not have killed animals and innocent children (which were actually saved from becoming like their culture. And by condemning God for allowing any of the innocent to suffer, as if the choices of man should not have such consequences.

Which means that the accusing anti-theist is effectively presuming [[omniscience]] in sitting in judgment upon a Being who alone knows what every effect of every thought and action (or non-action) will be - including His own - and reveals, not only in this life but for eternity.

And who can and will make all work out for Good, with justice as well as mercy, (Romans 8:28) based upon what they choose. With those who, by God's grace, wanted God and what He represents, (John 3:19-21; Acts 10:36-47) and thus come in repentance and faith to the very Son of God, Jesus Christ, for salvation, on His account, by His sinless shed blood, (Col. 1:14; 1 Peter 3:18) to the glory of God.

== See also ==

*[[Atheism and the Problem of Evil|Atheism and the problem of evil]]

*[[Atheism and the Euthyphro Dilemma]]

*[[Atheism and morality]]

*[[Atheism and ethics]]

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Theology]]

Theodicy

2023-10-19T03:11:57Z

Daniel1212: Slight revision

'''Theodicy''' is a branch of [[theology]] that defends [[God]]'s goodness and justice in response to the [[problem of evil]].

The word was supposedly coined by the German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716), and is derived from two Greek words (theos, God, and dike, justice).

The premise which Theodicy is based upon is that God is [[omnipotence|omnipotent]], [[omniscience|omniscient]], and [[omnibenevolence|omnibenevolent]], with the question being how can God be the author of [[evil]], or allow evil and suffering to exist?

==Proposals==
In response, various proposals have been made, such as,

God could have,

*1. Made us (and angels) with no ability to make choices, and operating as programmed without deviation, without having any ability to respond to and choose between good or evil, therefore not effecting any negative consequences due to moral choices. [robotic, impotent]

*2. Granted us the ability to make choices, but never have given us anything to choose between [no moral standard, no meaningful moral agency].

*3. Left man only with recourse to finite competing sources as his ultimate moral authority, and object of spiritual affection and allegiance, and source of security [atheism and atheistic governments].

*4. Called man to make the Creator their ultimate object of spiritual affection and allegiance and source of security as being what is right and what is best for man, versus finite created beings or things being one's "god," and provided moral revelation and influences. Yet always have moved us to do good, and never have allowed us to choose evil (even if as by making believing in God and choosing good so utterly compelling — like God appearing daily and always doing miracles on demand, and preventing any seeming evidence to the contrary - so that no man could attempt to make excuses for not believing in Him [effective negation of any freedom to choose]).

*5. Allowed created beings a negative alternative to faithfulness to the creator, and the ability to choose evil, but immediately reversed any effects and not penalized such [negation of consequences of choices].

*6. Allowed us to do bad, but restricted us to a place where it would harm no one but ourselves [isolated consequences to choices].

*7. Allowed us to choose between good and evil - thereby revealing what they want - and to affect others by it, but not ultimately reward or punish us accordingly [negation of judicial and eternal consequences, positive or negative].

*8. Given us the ability to choose, and alternatives to chose between and to face and overcome evil or be overcome by it, with the ability to affect others and things by our choices, and to exercise some reward or punishment in this life for morality, and ultimately reward or punish all accordingly [pure justice].

*9. Restrained evil to some degree, while making the evil that man does to work out for what is Good, with justice yet with mercy, and grace, towards those who want good, and who thus the One who is supremely Good.

*10. In accordance with 8, the Creator could have chosen to manifest Himself in the flesh, and by Him to provide man a means of escaping the ultimate retribution of Divine justice, and instead receive unmerited eternal favor, at God's own expense and credit, appropriated by a repentant obedient faith, in addition to the loss or gaining of certain rewards based on one's quality of work as a child of God. And eternally punish, to varying degrees relative to iniquity and accountability, those whose response to God's revelation manifested they want evil, [justice maintained while mercy and grace given].

==Arminian response==

Christian responses include the [[Arminian]] position that argues that evil is a consequence of God giving man freedom to choose, and that, if choice means anything, man must have something to choose from, this being turning away from the good to do the opposite. As angels or man have chosen to do evil, this results in suffering. While God knows what man will do, that is not the same as ordaining or decreeing it.

==Calvinist response==

The [[Calvinist]] position is that of "determinism", which holds that man has a more limited extent of free will than in the Arminian position, and that God has determined all things that will ever come to pass, as the ''[[Westminster Confession of Faith]]'' states. (3:1 5:2, 4) The Confession essentially states that God in His sovereignty is the first cause of all things, though many of the things which occur are through the "free" actions of man, which God influences. As one authority wrote, God "does not arrange things or control history apart from second causes...", and He uses such as instruments, so as to make all things work together to accomplish His plan, which is for the good of those who love Him. (Rom. 8:28)<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/theology/theodicy.html W. Gary Crampton, ''A Biblical Theodicy''</ref>

Some object to the further conclusions of Calvinism related to this.<ref>http://www.gospeltruth.net/foster_on_cal/otc_2.htm</ref> While Armianism believes God has the right and the ability to ultimately determine all things, it seeks to reconcile the actions of God concerning the basis for the [[predestination]] of the lost with God's own statements about justice, (Dt. 24:16; etc.) while the Calvinist tends to appeal to God's sovereign right to do as He pleases, as Scripture does, (Rom. 11:20) in which not all things are revealed. (Dt. 29:29)

==Non-Christian==
Non-Christian attempts to resolve this problem range from denying at least one of the omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence of God, to denying the reality of evil, to making God consist of a dual nature. However, the Bible upholds that God is both almighty and all-knowing, and of a consistent character, and that evil does exist as a reality, and is in opposition to the character of God.

== See also ==

*[[Atheism and the Problem of Evil|Atheism and the problem of evil]]

*[[Atheism and the Euthyphro Dilemma]]

*[[Atheism and morality]]

*[[Atheism and ethics]]

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Theology]]

Conservapedia:AFD Essay:Russian war crimes in Ukraine

2023-10-09T16:10:02Z

Daniel1212: /* Vote (yet again!) */

<center>This is concerning the essay: [[Essay: Russian war crimes in Ukraine]]. Please remember this discussion is about an issue regarding CP content, not a person or registered user. Keep your comments civil. ''No [[ad hominem]] attacks! This mean you!'' Thank you.</center>

*'''Delete or Move to new title.''' [[Innocent until proven guilty]]. We Americans are not going to throw our constitutional values away to promote [[xenophobia]] against an entire nation and people. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 03:44, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::*You lost the vote before fair and square.

::*And as DavidB4 says: You don't get to control essays. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])

:::*It's not decided by vote, and it can be nominated a second time.

:::*The title of this Essay is unjust and promotes hate and bigotry against 150 million Russian people.

:::*Even Wikipedia has enough sense not to jeopardize their reputation promoting xenophobic content. They do have a Mainspace article entitled, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_in_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine War crimes in the Russian invasion of Ukraine], while not pointing a finger at any one specific party in its title.

:::*Would we permit an [[Essay:Jewish war crimes in Palestine]]? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 03:55, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::No you are not going to waste people's time by having vote after vote. The last vote was recent. Stop wasting people's time. If you want people to respect your time, you have to reciprocate. {{unsigned|User:Conservative}}

:::*There are people today who feel shame for being born German. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']]

__TOC__
{{warning collapse|reason=Misc. trolling rants|content=:::::::"We Americans are not going to throw our constitutional values away" Correct. We aren't throwing aside democracy here on Conservapedia to appease your silly Communist-ridden effort to install a dictatorship of the Putinazis. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 14:40, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

==Unrelated personal rants==
{{Personal remark removed}} [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 03:58, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
This is just {{personal remark removed}} related to Colonel Douglas MacGregor agreeing with me on China and its navy and not agreeing with {{Personal remark removed}} like Macgregor and wanted to make him CP's conservative of the year in 2022. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:01, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::"it's not decided by vote" Imagine that, calling for dismantling democracy after the community wholly disagrees with {{personal remark removed}}. AFDs always were meant to be decided by a community vote. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 08:31, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::"{{personal remark removed}} —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 08:37, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

This is just{{personal remark removed}} related to Colonel Douglas MacGregor agreeing with me on China and its navy and not agreeing with{{personal remark removed}} like Macgregor and wanted to make him CP's conservative of the year in 2022. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:01, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::I got Karajou to move towards creating content. You should do the same. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:11, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::By the way, RobSmith says [[User_talk:LT#Nishant|I was the one who brought Karajou back]]. :) —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 08:27, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:You make no sense. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 04:08, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:The subject here is the Title of this Essay. It is not about any single person or editor. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 04:26, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::One call to Andy and you will look foolish again. Nobody wants this.

:::If you disagree, please go write an essay titled "Russian war crimes in Ukraine are nonexistent." I've never seen a person so drunk on such pointless whining as you are. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 13:33, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::RobSmith didn't get a single person to vote with him. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5ab8BOu4LE One Is The Loneliest Number - Three Dog Night (Lyrics)]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:50, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::Yeah, the rest of the site {{personal remark removed}} —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 13:51, October 3, 2023 (EDT)}}

::Does every essay have to have allegedly in front of it? How about [[Essay: Allegedly April 2022 was a pivotal moment in the future of global politics for decades to come]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:37, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::Was that a crime? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 06:55, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

==Vote (yet again!)==

*'''This is a time wasting revote.''' There needn't be another vote. We already voted on this matter.{{personal remark removed}} [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 07:46, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
*'''This is a time wasting revote.''' A certain someone who "revived" this AFD is a sore loser, period. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 08:22, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

*'''Settled Matter, we already voted, Keep.''' It's a settled matter imo. We already voted to keep. It provides important data for a reader to keep in mind while arriving at a final informed decision for themselves. [[User:NishantXavier|NishantXavier]][[User talk:NishantXavier|For Christ the King]] 08:52, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

*'''No revote / keep article:''' Russian troops have committed war crimes in Ukraine. This includes torture, rape & outright murder of both civilians and POWs in their custody. The evidence is unequivocal, with many individual soldiers and their units already identified for indictment. Tribunals will be held and extraditing those accused / found guilty in absentia will form a key part of any eventual normalisation of relations with Russia (cf. Milošević, Mladić & Karadžić re. war crimes in Bosnia). [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 12:50, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:*What evidence, where is it, and who's collecting it? This Essay only promotes xenophobia citing documented [[fake news]] sources. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 13:06, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::::My man, your boys have such a taste for war criming they've even taken to torturing & murdering their own on a reasonably regular basis. I can tolerate / mock the crazy talk about nonexistent Donbas "cauldrons" or your periodic guff re. the Poles being poised to invade western Ukraine, etc. On this particular issue, however, I really don't have it in me to engage fully with the {{Personal remark removed}} I'm content to wait & see if Andy has the minerals to properly clip your wings and, if that ever happens, I'll nuke your fan fiction from orbit. [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 13:54, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::::Can't answer the question. Okay. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 13:59, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::::::Meanwhile, you resort to censoring just about whatever{{Personal remark removed}}. Conservapedia lists among the political positions and practices of [[Liberal]]s: "Censorship of people, organizations, and beliefs they disagree with." —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 14:07, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::::::No. I just censor trolling material. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:16, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::::::::So {{Personal remark removed}} —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 14:27, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::::::::See: [[Essay: Are ignorance, stubbornness, and stupidity conservative values?]] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:31, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::::::::::Why even vote in the first place? Essays are essays. End of story. Like I said yesterday, those are allowed to carry controversial views. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 20:33, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:::::::::::::Okay, I understand that point. At what point do we say, "No, you can't" when somebody wants to publish "Essay:Police kill Blacks" "Essay:Ns like watermelon" "Essay:Js have big noses"? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 20:56, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:::::::::::::Now there's two ways we can go here: (1) Wait til something happens and another big scandal blows up, and the site comes into criticism again (like "Senate Hit List" a few years back); or (2) have editors go on record that, yes, there should be established community standards that people are agreeable to, and questions can be resolved in a civil manner.

:::::::::::::As to voting: Conservapedia has never had a majority rule rule, neither has it ever even had a discussion on "how many does it take to have a consensus". Instead, CP has always been a mob of Lone Wolves and anarchists, each one claiming to adhere to their own brand of [[conservatism]], which means I'm right and your wrong and you can't tell me what to do. The result is a snake pit of animosity between users, that no sane person in their right mind who signs up would want to get involved with.

:::::::::::::The vote is to establish a consensus: do we have any standards at all, or is the consensus view that conservativism means chaos, and anyone can publish whatever garbage they want to? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 21:39, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::::::::::::::"and anyone can publish whatever garbage they want to?" RobSmith, last year you allowed trolls to insert white supremacist propaganda into the mainspace, and even when I clearly explained to you why it was racist, you tried at least once to restore their edits as if they were qualified "researchers." I strongly question your judgment on this matter. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Wednesday, 21:55, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
*'''Keep article'''. Aren't we supposed to be a pro-American, Christian-oriented site? At least that's what I signed up for.[[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:48, October 4, 2023 (EDT)
*'''Keep article'''. The consensus view appears to be that criticising actions – even actions of conservatives – is a good thing for Conservapedia. If we don't point out mistakes made by conservatives, conservatives will never improve. And yes, Russians have committed war crimes. Just one example from Breitbart: [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/04/04/satellite-photos-show-mass-grave-in-ukraine-russia-denies-involvement/]. [[User:MayGodBless|MayGodBless]] ([[User talk:MayGodBless|talk]]) 11:05, October 4, 2023 (EDT)
*'''Keep article'''. An essay is just that, an essay. Leave it alone. Is this another case of the Left's strategy to use the systems of justice '''''as''''' the punishment (just as they are doing with Trump, J6 protestors, etc.)? --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 15:10, October 4, 2023 (EDT)
*'''Keep article.''' Daniel1212 12:04, October 9, 2023 (EDT)

{{warning collapse|reason=incivility|content=
::If this vote is at least partly a measure of ethical spine & testicular fortitude, then congrats for self-identifying as a simpering eunuch with crippling scoliosis. Step up or just stay gone if you're hell-bent on feeble, man. [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 19:27, October 4, 2023 (EDT)
}}
*'''Keep article, with conditions'''. In a war as brutal as this one, there is zero doubt that Russia and its allies will be committing war crimes, just as there is zero doubt that Ukriane and its allies will be committing war crimes. I have earlier opined that the central conflict bears a large resemblance to that which led up to the violent phase of the Indian Partition, and it is well documented that both sides committed horrific atrocities against each other in that war. That being said, this article ought to co-exist with an essay listing Ukrainian war crimes. Furthermore, neither this essay nor its proposed counterpart should be allowed to make blanket statements about Russia, Ukraine, or their respective societies, lest they be interpreted as endorsements of genocide. Any disputes of fact should be mediated by third parties, most notably Andy. Lastly, because this war is of such historical importance and Conservative is a veteran editor with years upon years of substantial contributions to this wiki, this essay, along with its proposed counterpart, should be one day be preserved as an artifact demonstrating how, in real time, conservatives and populists viewed the war and the overarching crises which made it possible.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:34, October 8, 2023 (EDT)
:*So the condition would be a '''Move''' to "alleged Russian war crimes"? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 23:39, October 8, 2023 (EDT)
::Furthermore, User:Conservative has already denied the historical importance of the war. See his nonsensical screed at [[Essay: The SPECIFIC MONTH OF APRIL 2022 was not a pivotal point in geopolitics that will affect geopolitics for 30 years]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 23:52, October 8, 2023 (EDT)
:::No RobSmith. It is the SPECIFIC MONTH OF APRIL 2020 that is the question. I built a very solid case and you didn't. Your Hail Mary pass of using a certain picture for your counter essay was rather lame as explained here: [[File talk:The war in Ukraine has become a turning point in the history of civilization.PNG]]. I suggest rereading my essay at: [[Essay: The SPECIFIC MONTH OF APRIL 2022 was not a pivotal point in geopolitics that will affect geopolitics for 30 years]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:09, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
::Already done. I have asked RobSmith to create a counter essay. He hasn't done it. Nor has he created an essay like Geopolitician suggests like [[Essay: Ukrainian war crimes in Ukraine]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:10, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
:::*You write it, and prove you're not a [[Russophobic]] [[nazisymp]] and bigot. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 23:52, October 8, 2023 (EDT)
:::::I don't have to prove anything. And I am sure your Russia cheerleading articles at CP already cover some Ukrainian war crimes so it would be redundant. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:14, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
And your multiple whines that I am Russophobic are rather lame - especially since I have Russian music that I listen to [https://www.conservapedia.com/User:Conservative/Music_from_around_the_world#Russian_and_Slavic_Music HERE] and [https://www.conservapedia.com/User:Conservative/Christian_songs_from_around_the_world#Russian_Christian_songs HERE] and [https://www.conservapedia.com/User:Conservative/Classical_and_related_music#Russian_classical_music HERE]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:18, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
:Well your nazi buddies gave weapons to [[Hamas]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 00:35, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
::Write an essay or article if you think the Ukrainians gave arms to Hamas and can support it with good evidence/arguments. Here you go: [[Ukrainian arms sales to Hamas]] or [[Essay: Ukrainian arms sales to Hamas]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:48, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
:::The evidence is plastered all over MPR in half dozen articles already. You know, as a geopolitical analyst, you don't seem much up to speed on what's happening on the planet. Or to even care much. You haven't got your [[MSM]]/[[neocon]]/[[Soros]]/[[Biden regime]] talking points yet. I saw the same thing in January 2020 when you fell for [[CCP]] talking points wholesale, and April 2022 when you swallowed the Nazi agitprop. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 01:04, October 9, 2023 (EDT)

::::So, while you're busy cutting off limbs with a hack saw and writing about Russia's falling oil profits, you seem to be missing points like this:
:::::''"most obvious is it would take all U.S. attention away from Ukraine, forcing them to focus on combating Iran and its regional powers, which would allow Russia to swiftly finish off an abandoned Ukraine.

:::::''"Secondly, and in aid to the first above, '''any conflict of this sort would send oil prices through the roof, which are already being estimated to go to $150 per barrel in the future. This would lead to Russia’s already-exorbitant fossil fuel profits to shoot through the roof''', not only stabilizing its own economy but helping to finance the Ukraine war.

:::::''"China of course could benefit in a similar way in having the U.S.’s attention diverted elsewhere, giving China breathing room to continue building up and consolidating its own regional strength while also depleting the U.S. and thus preventing it from ever funding/supplying Taiwan to substantial degrees.

::::C'mon, Mr. Expert. You missed your shot in April 2022 and wasted a year and a half trolling with nonsense. Get in on the ground floor this time. Let's see [[Essay:Hamas war crimes in Israel]], even though Hamas isn't party to any conventions that would make them war crimes. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 01:17, October 9, 2023 (EDT)

::::I mean, who are we gonna believe? You and Joe Biden or our own two lying eyes? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 01:23, October 9, 2023 (EDT)

:::::And since the US is going to remain the leading power for the foreseeable future, let's see it act now to liberate Crimea, defeat Russia, defend Taiwan and save Israel. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 02:29, October 9, 2023 (EDT)

==Stuff added later==
<big>'''Newsmax on Russian war crimes:'''</big>

*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FjRucS_5B8 This is a war crime what Putin is doing], Newsmax

*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sk1wzH7N0Tg Russian soldier pleads guilty to shocking crime in first Ukraine war crimes trial | Wake Up America], Newsmax [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:19, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:Oh, What about the Ukrainian justice system's prosecution of [[Gonzalo Lira]] for exercising [[free speech]]? Has Newsmax reported on that? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:27, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::Whataboutism. [[User:MayGodBless|MayGodBless]] ([[User talk:MayGodBless|talk]]) 11:05, October 4, 2023 (EDT)

Just added to the article:

"Washington Examiner on Russia's "adoption" of Ukrainian children"

"Breitbart: Russian charged with war crimes: Ukrainian kids can go home"

"Russia dishonored by army’s Ukraine war crimes, Washington Times, 2022" [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:35, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::(ec) So what do we have so far: [[Essay:Western media reporting on alleged Russian war crimes]]; alternatively, we can act like idiot liberals who believe any line of garbage in print. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:39, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::If you were sitting on a jury hearing these accusations, the first question asked is "Have seen or heard any news reporting about this incident?"; but since [[presumption of innocence]] and a [[fair trial]] are out the window as [[conservative values]] according to a CP Admin and Essay author, why not pile on [[propaganda]] and [[bigotry]]? That's the logic here. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:43, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
[[File:Ukrainian nazis.PNG|right|400px|thumb|Viral tweet during the Zelensky regime.]]
:RobSmith three years ago: "The Communist Democrats are destroying the United States!" (well, they're neo-Marxists, not Communists, but that's a different story) RobSmith now: "the Communist heroes are saving us from Western neofascism!" —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 14:38, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

Conservapedia:AFD Essay:Russian war crimes in Ukraine

2023-10-09T16:08:13Z

Daniel1212: /* Vote (yet again!) */

<center>This is concerning the essay: [[Essay: Russian war crimes in Ukraine]]. Please remember this discussion is about an issue regarding CP content, not a person or registered user. Keep your comments civil. ''No [[ad hominem]] attacks! This mean you!'' Thank you.</center>

*'''Delete or Move to new title.''' [[Innocent until proven guilty]]. We Americans are not going to throw our constitutional values away to promote [[xenophobia]] against an entire nation and people. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 03:44, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::*You lost the vote before fair and square.

::*And as DavidB4 says: You don't get to control essays. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])

:::*It's not decided by vote, and it can be nominated a second time.

:::*The title of this Essay is unjust and promotes hate and bigotry against 150 million Russian people.

:::*Even Wikipedia has enough sense not to jeopardize their reputation promoting xenophobic content. They do have a Mainspace article entitled, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_in_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine War crimes in the Russian invasion of Ukraine], while not pointing a finger at any one specific party in its title.

:::*Would we permit an [[Essay:Jewish war crimes in Palestine]]? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 03:55, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::No you are not going to waste people's time by having vote after vote. The last vote was recent. Stop wasting people's time. If you want people to respect your time, you have to reciprocate. {{unsigned|User:Conservative}}

:::*There are people today who feel shame for being born German. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']]

__TOC__
{{warning collapse|reason=Misc. trolling rants|content=:::::::"We Americans are not going to throw our constitutional values away" Correct. We aren't throwing aside democracy here on Conservapedia to appease your silly Communist-ridden effort to install a dictatorship of the Putinazis. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 14:40, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

==Unrelated personal rants==
{{Personal remark removed}} [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 03:58, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
This is just {{personal remark removed}} related to Colonel Douglas MacGregor agreeing with me on China and its navy and not agreeing with {{Personal remark removed}} like Macgregor and wanted to make him CP's conservative of the year in 2022. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:01, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::"it's not decided by vote" Imagine that, calling for dismantling democracy after the community wholly disagrees with {{personal remark removed}}. AFDs always were meant to be decided by a community vote. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 08:31, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::"{{personal remark removed}} —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 08:37, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

This is just{{personal remark removed}} related to Colonel Douglas MacGregor agreeing with me on China and its navy and not agreeing with{{personal remark removed}} like Macgregor and wanted to make him CP's conservative of the year in 2022. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:01, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::I got Karajou to move towards creating content. You should do the same. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:11, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::By the way, RobSmith says [[User_talk:LT#Nishant|I was the one who brought Karajou back]]. :) —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 08:27, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:You make no sense. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 04:08, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:The subject here is the Title of this Essay. It is not about any single person or editor. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 04:26, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::One call to Andy and you will look foolish again. Nobody wants this.

:::If you disagree, please go write an essay titled "Russian war crimes in Ukraine are nonexistent." I've never seen a person so drunk on such pointless whining as you are. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 13:33, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::RobSmith didn't get a single person to vote with him. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5ab8BOu4LE One Is The Loneliest Number - Three Dog Night (Lyrics)]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:50, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::Yeah, the rest of the site {{personal remark removed}} —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 13:51, October 3, 2023 (EDT)}}

::Does every essay have to have allegedly in front of it? How about [[Essay: Allegedly April 2022 was a pivotal moment in the future of global politics for decades to come]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:37, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::Was that a crime? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 06:55, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

==Vote (yet again!)==

*'''This is a time wasting revote.''' There needn't be another vote. We already voted on this matter.{{personal remark removed}} [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 07:46, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
*'''This is a time wasting revote.''' A certain someone who "revived" this AFD is a sore loser, period. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 08:22, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

*'''Settled Matter, we already voted, Keep.''' It's a settled matter imo. We already voted to keep. It provides important data for a reader to keep in mind while arriving at a final informed decision for themselves. [[User:NishantXavier|NishantXavier]][[User talk:NishantXavier|For Christ the King]] 08:52, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

*'''No revote / keep article:''' Russian troops have committed war crimes in Ukraine. This includes torture, rape & outright murder of both civilians and POWs in their custody. The evidence is unequivocal, with many individual soldiers and their units already identified for indictment. Tribunals will be held and extraditing those accused / found guilty in absentia will form a key part of any eventual normalisation of relations with Russia (cf. Milošević, Mladić & Karadžić re. war crimes in Bosnia). [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 12:50, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:*What evidence, where is it, and who's collecting it? This Essay only promotes xenophobia citing documented [[fake news]] sources. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 13:06, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::::My man, your boys have such a taste for war criming they've even taken to torturing & murdering their own on a reasonably regular basis. I can tolerate / mock the crazy talk about nonexistent Donbas "cauldrons" or your periodic guff re. the Poles being poised to invade western Ukraine, etc. On this particular issue, however, I really don't have it in me to engage fully with the {{Personal remark removed}} I'm content to wait & see if Andy has the minerals to properly clip your wings and, if that ever happens, I'll nuke your fan fiction from orbit. [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 13:54, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::::Can't answer the question. Okay. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 13:59, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::::::Meanwhile, you resort to censoring just about whatever{{Personal remark removed}}. Conservapedia lists among the political positions and practices of [[Liberal]]s: "Censorship of people, organizations, and beliefs they disagree with." —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 14:07, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::::::No. I just censor trolling material. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:16, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::::::::So {{Personal remark removed}} —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 14:27, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::::::::See: [[Essay: Are ignorance, stubbornness, and stupidity conservative values?]] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:31, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::::::::::Why even vote in the first place? Essays are essays. End of story. Like I said yesterday, those are allowed to carry controversial views. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 20:33, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:::::::::::::Okay, I understand that point. At what point do we say, "No, you can't" when somebody wants to publish "Essay:Police kill Blacks" "Essay:Ns like watermelon" "Essay:Js have big noses"? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 20:56, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:::::::::::::Now there's two ways we can go here: (1) Wait til something happens and another big scandal blows up, and the site comes into criticism again (like "Senate Hit List" a few years back); or (2) have editors go on record that, yes, there should be established community standards that people are agreeable to, and questions can be resolved in a civil manner.

:::::::::::::As to voting: Conservapedia has never had a majority rule rule, neither has it ever even had a discussion on "how many does it take to have a consensus". Instead, CP has always been a mob of Lone Wolves and anarchists, each one claiming to adhere to their own brand of [[conservatism]], which means I'm right and your wrong and you can't tell me what to do. The result is a snake pit of animosity between users, that no sane person in their right mind who signs up would want to get involved with.

:::::::::::::The vote is to establish a consensus: do we have any standards at all, or is the consensus view that conservativism means chaos, and anyone can publish whatever garbage they want to? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 21:39, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::::::::::::::"and anyone can publish whatever garbage they want to?" RobSmith, last year you allowed trolls to insert white supremacist propaganda into the mainspace, and even when I clearly explained to you why it was racist, you tried at least once to restore their edits as if they were qualified "researchers." I strongly question your judgment on this matter. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Wednesday, 21:55, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
*'''Keep article'''. Aren't we supposed to be a pro-American, Christian-oriented site? At least that's what I signed up for.[[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:48, October 4, 2023 (EDT)
*'''Keep article'''. The consensus view appears to be that criticising actions – even actions of conservatives – is a good thing for Conservapedia. If we don't point out mistakes made by conservatives, conservatives will never improve. And yes, Russians have committed war crimes. Just one example from Breitbart: [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/04/04/satellite-photos-show-mass-grave-in-ukraine-russia-denies-involvement/]. [[User:MayGodBless|MayGodBless]] ([[User talk:MayGodBless|talk]]) 11:05, October 4, 2023 (EDT)
*'''Keep article'''. An essay is just that, an essay. Leave it alone. Is this another case of the Left's strategy to use the systems of justice '''''as''''' the punishment (just as they are doing with Trump, J6 protestors, etc.)? --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 15:10, October 4, 2023 (EDT)
'''Keep article.''' Daniel1212 12:04, October 9, 2023 (EDT)

{{warning collapse|reason=incivility|content=
::If this vote is at least partly a measure of ethical spine & testicular fortitude, then congrats for self-identifying as a simpering eunuch with crippling scoliosis. Step up or just stay gone if you're hell-bent on feeble, man. [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 19:27, October 4, 2023 (EDT)
}}
*'''Keep article, with conditions'''. In a war as brutal as this one, there is zero doubt that Russia and its allies will be committing war crimes, just as there is zero doubt that Ukriane and its allies will be committing war crimes. I have earlier opined that the central conflict bears a large resemblance to that which led up to the violent phase of the Indian Partition, and it is well documented that both sides committed horrific atrocities against each other in that war. That being said, this article ought to co-exist with an essay listing Ukrainian war crimes. Furthermore, neither this essay nor its proposed counterpart should be allowed to make blanket statements about Russia, Ukraine, or their respective societies, lest they be interpreted as endorsements of genocide. Any disputes of fact should be mediated by third parties, most notably Andy. Lastly, because this war is of such historical importance and Conservative is a veteran editor with years upon years of substantial contributions to this wiki, this essay, along with its proposed counterpart, should be one day be preserved as an artifact demonstrating how, in real time, conservatives and populists viewed the war and the overarching crises which made it possible.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:34, October 8, 2023 (EDT)
:*So the condition would be a '''Move''' to "alleged Russian war crimes"? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 23:39, October 8, 2023 (EDT)
::Furthermore, User:Conservative has already denied the historical importance of the war. See his nonsensical screed at [[Essay: The SPECIFIC MONTH OF APRIL 2022 was not a pivotal point in geopolitics that will affect geopolitics for 30 years]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 23:52, October 8, 2023 (EDT)
:::No RobSmith. It is the SPECIFIC MONTH OF APRIL 2020 that is the question. I built a very solid case and you didn't. Your Hail Mary pass of using a certain picture for your counter essay was rather lame as explained here: [[File talk:The war in Ukraine has become a turning point in the history of civilization.PNG]]. I suggest rereading my essay at: [[Essay: The SPECIFIC MONTH OF APRIL 2022 was not a pivotal point in geopolitics that will affect geopolitics for 30 years]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:09, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
::Already done. I have asked RobSmith to create a counter essay. He hasn't done it. Nor has he created an essay like Geopolitician suggests like [[Essay: Ukrainian war crimes in Ukraine]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:10, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
:::*You write it, and prove you're not a [[Russophobic]] [[nazisymp]] and bigot. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 23:52, October 8, 2023 (EDT)
:::::I don't have to prove anything. And I am sure your Russia cheerleading articles at CP already cover some Ukrainian war crimes so it would be redundant. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:14, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
And your multiple whines that I am Russophobic are rather lame - especially since I have Russian music that I listen to [https://www.conservapedia.com/User:Conservative/Music_from_around_the_world#Russian_and_Slavic_Music HERE] and [https://www.conservapedia.com/User:Conservative/Christian_songs_from_around_the_world#Russian_Christian_songs HERE] and [https://www.conservapedia.com/User:Conservative/Classical_and_related_music#Russian_classical_music HERE]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:18, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
:Well your nazi buddies gave weapons to [[Hamas]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 00:35, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
::Write an essay or article if you think the Ukrainians gave arms to Hamas and can support it with good evidence/arguments. Here you go: [[Ukrainian arms sales to Hamas]] or [[Essay: Ukrainian arms sales to Hamas]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:48, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
:::The evidence is plastered all over MPR in half dozen articles already. You know, as a geopolitical analyst, you don't seem much up to speed on what's happening on the planet. Or to even care much. You haven't got your [[MSM]]/[[neocon]]/[[Soros]]/[[Biden regime]] talking points yet. I saw the same thing in January 2020 when you fell for [[CCP]] talking points wholesale, and April 2022 when you swallowed the Nazi agitprop. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 01:04, October 9, 2023 (EDT)

::::So, while you're busy cutting off limbs with a hack saw and writing about Russia's falling oil profits, you seem to be missing points like this:
:::::''"most obvious is it would take all U.S. attention away from Ukraine, forcing them to focus on combating Iran and its regional powers, which would allow Russia to swiftly finish off an abandoned Ukraine.

:::::''"Secondly, and in aid to the first above, '''any conflict of this sort would send oil prices through the roof, which are already being estimated to go to $150 per barrel in the future. This would lead to Russia’s already-exorbitant fossil fuel profits to shoot through the roof''', not only stabilizing its own economy but helping to finance the Ukraine war.

:::::''"China of course could benefit in a similar way in having the U.S.’s attention diverted elsewhere, giving China breathing room to continue building up and consolidating its own regional strength while also depleting the U.S. and thus preventing it from ever funding/supplying Taiwan to substantial degrees.

::::C'mon, Mr. Expert. You missed your shot in April 2022 and wasted a year and a half trolling with nonsense. Get in on the ground floor this time. Let's see [[Essay:Hamas war crimes in Israel]], even though Hamas isn't party to any conventions that would make them war crimes. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 01:17, October 9, 2023 (EDT)

::::I mean, who are we gonna believe? You and Joe Biden or our own two lying eyes? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 01:23, October 9, 2023 (EDT)

:::::And since the US is going to remain the leading power for the foreseeable future, let's see it act now to liberate Crimea, defeat Russia, defend Taiwan and save Israel. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 02:29, October 9, 2023 (EDT)

==Stuff added later==
<big>'''Newsmax on Russian war crimes:'''</big>

*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FjRucS_5B8 This is a war crime what Putin is doing], Newsmax

*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sk1wzH7N0Tg Russian soldier pleads guilty to shocking crime in first Ukraine war crimes trial | Wake Up America], Newsmax [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:19, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:Oh, What about the Ukrainian justice system's prosecution of [[Gonzalo Lira]] for exercising [[free speech]]? Has Newsmax reported on that? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:27, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::Whataboutism. [[User:MayGodBless|MayGodBless]] ([[User talk:MayGodBless|talk]]) 11:05, October 4, 2023 (EDT)

Just added to the article:

"Washington Examiner on Russia's "adoption" of Ukrainian children"

"Breitbart: Russian charged with war crimes: Ukrainian kids can go home"

"Russia dishonored by army’s Ukraine war crimes, Washington Times, 2022" [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:35, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::(ec) So what do we have so far: [[Essay:Western media reporting on alleged Russian war crimes]]; alternatively, we can act like idiot liberals who believe any line of garbage in print. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:39, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::If you were sitting on a jury hearing these accusations, the first question asked is "Have seen or heard any news reporting about this incident?"; but since [[presumption of innocence]] and a [[fair trial]] are out the window as [[conservative values]] according to a CP Admin and Essay author, why not pile on [[propaganda]] and [[bigotry]]? That's the logic here. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:43, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
[[File:Ukrainian nazis.PNG|right|400px|thumb|Viral tweet during the Zelensky regime.]]
:RobSmith three years ago: "The Communist Democrats are destroying the United States!" (well, they're neo-Marxists, not Communists, but that's a different story) RobSmith now: "the Communist heroes are saving us from Western neofascism!" —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 14:38, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

Conservapedia:AFD Essay:Russian war crimes in Ukraine

2023-10-09T16:04:32Z

Daniel1212: /* Vote (yet again!) */

<center>This is concerning the essay: [[Essay: Russian war crimes in Ukraine]]. Please remember this discussion is about an issue regarding CP content, not a person or registered user. Keep your comments civil. ''No [[ad hominem]] attacks! This mean you!'' Thank you.</center>

*'''Delete or Move to new title.''' [[Innocent until proven guilty]]. We Americans are not going to throw our constitutional values away to promote [[xenophobia]] against an entire nation and people. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 03:44, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::*You lost the vote before fair and square.

::*And as DavidB4 says: You don't get to control essays. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])

:::*It's not decided by vote, and it can be nominated a second time.

:::*The title of this Essay is unjust and promotes hate and bigotry against 150 million Russian people.

:::*Even Wikipedia has enough sense not to jeopardize their reputation promoting xenophobic content. They do have a Mainspace article entitled, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_in_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine War crimes in the Russian invasion of Ukraine], while not pointing a finger at any one specific party in its title.

:::*Would we permit an [[Essay:Jewish war crimes in Palestine]]? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 03:55, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::No you are not going to waste people's time by having vote after vote. The last vote was recent. Stop wasting people's time. If you want people to respect your time, you have to reciprocate. {{unsigned|User:Conservative}}

:::*There are people today who feel shame for being born German. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']]

__TOC__
{{warning collapse|reason=Misc. trolling rants|content=:::::::"We Americans are not going to throw our constitutional values away" Correct. We aren't throwing aside democracy here on Conservapedia to appease your silly Communist-ridden effort to install a dictatorship of the Putinazis. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 14:40, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

==Unrelated personal rants==
{{Personal remark removed}} [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 03:58, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
This is just {{personal remark removed}} related to Colonel Douglas MacGregor agreeing with me on China and its navy and not agreeing with {{Personal remark removed}} like Macgregor and wanted to make him CP's conservative of the year in 2022. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:01, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::"it's not decided by vote" Imagine that, calling for dismantling democracy after the community wholly disagrees with {{personal remark removed}}. AFDs always were meant to be decided by a community vote. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 08:31, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::"{{personal remark removed}} —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 08:37, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

This is just{{personal remark removed}} related to Colonel Douglas MacGregor agreeing with me on China and its navy and not agreeing with{{personal remark removed}} like Macgregor and wanted to make him CP's conservative of the year in 2022. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:01, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::I got Karajou to move towards creating content. You should do the same. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:11, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::By the way, RobSmith says [[User_talk:LT#Nishant|I was the one who brought Karajou back]]. :) —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 08:27, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:You make no sense. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 04:08, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:The subject here is the Title of this Essay. It is not about any single person or editor. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 04:26, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::One call to Andy and you will look foolish again. Nobody wants this.

:::If you disagree, please go write an essay titled "Russian war crimes in Ukraine are nonexistent." I've never seen a person so drunk on such pointless whining as you are. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 13:33, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::RobSmith didn't get a single person to vote with him. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5ab8BOu4LE One Is The Loneliest Number - Three Dog Night (Lyrics)]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:50, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::Yeah, the rest of the site {{personal remark removed}} —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 13:51, October 3, 2023 (EDT)}}

::Does every essay have to have allegedly in front of it? How about [[Essay: Allegedly April 2022 was a pivotal moment in the future of global politics for decades to come]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:37, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::Was that a crime? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 06:55, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

==Vote (yet again!)==

*'''This is a time wasting revote.''' There needn't be another vote. We already voted on this matter.{{personal remark removed}} [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 07:46, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
*'''This is a time wasting revote.''' A certain someone who "revived" this AFD is a sore loser, period. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 08:22, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

*'''Settled Matter, we already voted, Keep.''' It's a settled matter imo. We already voted to keep. It provides important data for a reader to keep in mind while arriving at a final informed decision for themselves. [[User:NishantXavier|NishantXavier]][[User talk:NishantXavier|For Christ the King]] 08:52, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

*'''No revote / keep article:''' Russian troops have committed war crimes in Ukraine. This includes torture, rape & outright murder of both civilians and POWs in their custody. The evidence is unequivocal, with many individual soldiers and their units already identified for indictment. Tribunals will be held and extraditing those accused / found guilty in absentia will form a key part of any eventual normalisation of relations with Russia (cf. Milošević, Mladić & Karadžić re. war crimes in Bosnia). [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 12:50, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:*What evidence, where is it, and who's collecting it? This Essay only promotes xenophobia citing documented [[fake news]] sources. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 13:06, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::::My man, your boys have such a taste for war criming they've even taken to torturing & murdering their own on a reasonably regular basis. I can tolerate / mock the crazy talk about nonexistent Donbas "cauldrons" or your periodic guff re. the Poles being poised to invade western Ukraine, etc. On this particular issue, however, I really don't have it in me to engage fully with the {{Personal remark removed}} I'm content to wait & see if Andy has the minerals to properly clip your wings and, if that ever happens, I'll nuke your fan fiction from orbit. [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 13:54, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::::Can't answer the question. Okay. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 13:59, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::::::Meanwhile, you resort to censoring just about whatever{{Personal remark removed}}. Conservapedia lists among the political positions and practices of [[Liberal]]s: "Censorship of people, organizations, and beliefs they disagree with." —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 14:07, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::::::No. I just censor trolling material. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:16, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::::::::So {{Personal remark removed}} —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 14:27, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
:::::::::::See: [[Essay: Are ignorance, stubbornness, and stupidity conservative values?]] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:31, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::::::::::::Why even vote in the first place? Essays are essays. End of story. Like I said yesterday, those are allowed to carry controversial views. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 20:33, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:::::::::::::Okay, I understand that point. At what point do we say, "No, you can't" when somebody wants to publish "Essay:Police kill Blacks" "Essay:Ns like watermelon" "Essay:Js have big noses"? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 20:56, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:::::::::::::Now there's two ways we can go here: (1) Wait til something happens and another big scandal blows up, and the site comes into criticism again (like "Senate Hit List" a few years back); or (2) have editors go on record that, yes, there should be established community standards that people are agreeable to, and questions can be resolved in a civil manner.

:::::::::::::As to voting: Conservapedia has never had a majority rule rule, neither has it ever even had a discussion on "how many does it take to have a consensus". Instead, CP has always been a mob of Lone Wolves and anarchists, each one claiming to adhere to their own brand of [[conservatism]], which means I'm right and your wrong and you can't tell me what to do. The result is a snake pit of animosity between users, that no sane person in their right mind who signs up would want to get involved with.

:::::::::::::The vote is to establish a consensus: do we have any standards at all, or is the consensus view that conservativism means chaos, and anyone can publish whatever garbage they want to? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 21:39, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::::::::::::::"and anyone can publish whatever garbage they want to?" RobSmith, last year you allowed trolls to insert white supremacist propaganda into the mainspace, and even when I clearly explained to you why it was racist, you tried at least once to restore their edits as if they were qualified "researchers." I strongly question your judgment on this matter. —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Wednesday, 21:55, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
*'''Keep article'''. Aren't we supposed to be a pro-American, Christian-oriented site? At least that's what I signed up for.[[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:48, October 4, 2023 (EDT)
*'''Keep article'''. The consensus view appears to be that criticising actions – even actions of conservatives – is a good thing for Conservapedia. If we don't point out mistakes made by conservatives, conservatives will never improve. And yes, Russians have committed war crimes. Just one example from Breitbart: [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/04/04/satellite-photos-show-mass-grave-in-ukraine-russia-denies-involvement/]. [[User:MayGodBless|MayGodBless]] ([[User talk:MayGodBless|talk]]) 11:05, October 4, 2023 (EDT)
*'''Keep article'''. An essay is just that, an essay. Leave it alone. Is this another case of the Left's strategy to use the systems of justice '''''as''''' the punishment (just as they are doing with Trump, J6 protestors, etc.)? --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 15:10, October 4, 2023 (EDT)
{{warning collapse|reason=incivility|content=
::If this vote is at least partly a measure of ethical spine & testicular fortitude, then congrats for self-identifying as a simpering eunuch with crippling scoliosis. Step up or just stay gone if you're hell-bent on feeble, man. [[User:ConwayIII|ConwayIII]] ([[User talk:ConwayIII|talk]]) 19:27, October 4, 2023 (EDT)
}}
*'''Keep article, with conditions'''. In a war as brutal as this one, there is zero doubt that Russia and its allies will be committing war crimes, just as there is zero doubt that Ukriane and its allies will be committing war crimes. I have earlier opined that the central conflict bears a large resemblance to that which led up to the violent phase of the Indian Partition, and it is well documented that both sides committed horrific atrocities against each other in that war. That being said, this article ought to co-exist with an essay listing Ukrainian war crimes. Furthermore, neither this essay nor its proposed counterpart should be allowed to make blanket statements about Russia, Ukraine, or their respective societies, lest they be interpreted as endorsements of genocide. Any disputes of fact should be mediated by third parties, most notably Andy. Lastly, because this war is of such historical importance and Conservative is a veteran editor with years upon years of substantial contributions to this wiki, this essay, along with its proposed counterpart, should be one day be preserved as an artifact demonstrating how, in real time, conservatives and populists viewed the war and the overarching crises which made it possible.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:34, October 8, 2023 (EDT)
:*So the condition would be a '''Move''' to "alleged Russian war crimes"? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 23:39, October 8, 2023 (EDT)
::Furthermore, User:Conservative has already denied the historical importance of the war. See his nonsensical screed at [[Essay: The SPECIFIC MONTH OF APRIL 2022 was not a pivotal point in geopolitics that will affect geopolitics for 30 years]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 23:52, October 8, 2023 (EDT)
:::No RobSmith. It is the SPECIFIC MONTH OF APRIL 2020 that is the question. I built a very solid case and you didn't. Your Hail Mary pass of using a certain picture for your counter essay was rather lame as explained here: [[File talk:The war in Ukraine has become a turning point in the history of civilization.PNG]]. I suggest rereading my essay at: [[Essay: The SPECIFIC MONTH OF APRIL 2022 was not a pivotal point in geopolitics that will affect geopolitics for 30 years]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:09, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
::Already done. I have asked RobSmith to create a counter essay. He hasn't done it. Nor has he created an essay like Geopolitician suggests like [[Essay: Ukrainian war crimes in Ukraine]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:10, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
:::*You write it, and prove you're not a [[Russophobic]] [[nazisymp]] and bigot. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 23:52, October 8, 2023 (EDT)
:::::I don't have to prove anything. And I am sure your Russia cheerleading articles at CP already cover some Ukrainian war crimes so it would be redundant. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:14, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
And your multiple whines that I am Russophobic are rather lame - especially since I have Russian music that I listen to [https://www.conservapedia.com/User:Conservative/Music_from_around_the_world#Russian_and_Slavic_Music HERE] and [https://www.conservapedia.com/User:Conservative/Christian_songs_from_around_the_world#Russian_Christian_songs HERE] and [https://www.conservapedia.com/User:Conservative/Classical_and_related_music#Russian_classical_music HERE]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:18, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
:Well your nazi buddies gave weapons to [[Hamas]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 00:35, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
::Write an essay or article if you think the Ukrainians gave arms to Hamas and can support it with good evidence/arguments. Here you go: [[Ukrainian arms sales to Hamas]] or [[Essay: Ukrainian arms sales to Hamas]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:48, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
:::The evidence is plastered all over MPR in half dozen articles already. You know, as a geopolitical analyst, you don't seem much up to speed on what's happening on the planet. Or to even care much. You haven't got your [[MSM]]/[[neocon]]/[[Soros]]/[[Biden regime]] talking points yet. I saw the same thing in January 2020 when you fell for [[CCP]] talking points wholesale, and April 2022 when you swallowed the Nazi agitprop. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 01:04, October 9, 2023 (EDT)

::::So, while you're busy cutting off limbs with a hack saw and writing about Russia's falling oil profits, you seem to be missing points like this:
:::::''"most obvious is it would take all U.S. attention away from Ukraine, forcing them to focus on combating Iran and its regional powers, which would allow Russia to swiftly finish off an abandoned Ukraine.

:::::''"Secondly, and in aid to the first above, '''any conflict of this sort would send oil prices through the roof, which are already being estimated to go to $150 per barrel in the future. This would lead to Russia’s already-exorbitant fossil fuel profits to shoot through the roof''', not only stabilizing its own economy but helping to finance the Ukraine war.

:::::''"China of course could benefit in a similar way in having the U.S.’s attention diverted elsewhere, giving China breathing room to continue building up and consolidating its own regional strength while also depleting the U.S. and thus preventing it from ever funding/supplying Taiwan to substantial degrees.

::::C'mon, Mr. Expert. You missed your shot in April 2022 and wasted a year and a half trolling with nonsense. Get in on the ground floor this time. Let's see [[Essay:Hamas war crimes in Israel]], even though Hamas isn't party to any conventions that would make them war crimes. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 01:17, October 9, 2023 (EDT)

::::I mean, who are we gonna believe? You and Joe Biden or our own two lying eyes? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 01:23, October 9, 2023 (EDT)

:::::And since the US is going to remain the leading power for the foreseeable future, let's see it act now to liberate Crimea, defeat Russia, defend Taiwan and save Israel. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 02:29, October 9, 2023 (EDT)
::::::Keep article. Daniel1212 12:04, October 9, 2023 (EDT)

==Stuff added later==
<big>'''Newsmax on Russian war crimes:'''</big>

*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FjRucS_5B8 This is a war crime what Putin is doing], Newsmax

*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sk1wzH7N0Tg Russian soldier pleads guilty to shocking crime in first Ukraine war crimes trial | Wake Up America], Newsmax [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:19, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

:Oh, What about the Ukrainian justice system's prosecution of [[Gonzalo Lira]] for exercising [[free speech]]? Has Newsmax reported on that? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:27, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

::Whataboutism. [[User:MayGodBless|MayGodBless]] ([[User talk:MayGodBless|talk]]) 11:05, October 4, 2023 (EDT)

Just added to the article:

"Washington Examiner on Russia's "adoption" of Ukrainian children"

"Breitbart: Russian charged with war crimes: Ukrainian kids can go home"

"Russia dishonored by army’s Ukraine war crimes, Washington Times, 2022" [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:35, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::(ec) So what do we have so far: [[Essay:Western media reporting on alleged Russian war crimes]]; alternatively, we can act like idiot liberals who believe any line of garbage in print. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:39, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
::If you were sitting on a jury hearing these accusations, the first question asked is "Have seen or heard any news reporting about this incident?"; but since [[presumption of innocence]] and a [[fair trial]] are out the window as [[conservative values]] according to a CP Admin and Essay author, why not pile on [[propaganda]] and [[bigotry]]? That's the logic here. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']] 14:43, October 3, 2023 (EDT)
[[File:Ukrainian nazis.PNG|right|400px|thumb|Viral tweet during the Zelensky regime.]]
:RobSmith three years ago: "The Communist Democrats are destroying the United States!" (well, they're neo-Marxists, not Communists, but that's a different story) RobSmith now: "the Communist heroes are saving us from Western neofascism!" —[[User:LT|<code>'''LT'''</code>]] '''''[[User talk:LT|Rev. 22:13]]''''' Tuesday, 14:38, October 3, 2023 (EDT)

Talk:Homosexual Agenda

2023-01-03T16:31:14Z

Daniel1212:

Scalia mentioned that in a dissenting opinion, which isn't binding law. --[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 00:59, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

== Vic Eliason passage should be removed ==

I write this because I have met VE here in Wisconsin and believe he'd be uncomfortable with the logic of including this information in this particular article. The passage: "Vic Eliason of Crosstalk America rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies." Nobody believes that homosexuality is contagious, like a virus, and the probability is 0% that "all Americans" would turn homosexual. I doubt that any homosexual, including activist leaders, would think it would be possible at all or even desirable. There is as little temptation for a heterosexual to want homosexual sex as there is for homosexuals to want heterosexual sex. Also, the comment about the US being more vulnerable to attack because the country doesn't procreate also makes no sense, given that the likelihood of that happening for this reason is 0%. Three other potential problems. 1) The passage is completely undocumented. 2) The link for biographical information for VE is to Wikipedia. Couldn't someone here write an article about him for CP? He has been, after all, a leading figure in Christian radio for 40+ years. 3) Besides being unrelated to the topic of the article and having 0% possibility of describing a real situation, the passage detracts from the credibility of the article and CP. This passage should be removed.

== WOV's got a point ==

Not only that, but this entire article is biased tripe. It presents the "homosexual agenda" from a one-sided perspective, and is filled with hate commentary. '''I recommend the entire thing for deletion.'''

Scalia's remark is regretful and a blemish on the pages of the U.S. Reporter, up there with Scott v. Sanford. But let's not expand it still further.

I have cleaned up biased and vitriolic language as best as I can, but this entry deserves deletion.

Seconded. If this is a homosexual agenda, then what homosexual wrote it? This is nothing but political game-playing: Identify a group as ''The Enemy'' and then brand them haters and abusers of family, children, and country. It makes dehumanising them so much easier. - Suricou

: I didn't see anything "hateful" in it. The Scalia reference was not intended to be about what is binding law, obviously. There was nothing binding about his phrase. I'll note that it was in dissent.

: The edits to this article were completely inappropriate, turning it into a liberal puff piece. Wikipedia exists for that. Actually, your edits made this even more liberal than Wikipedia's article on the same topic!

: The hour is very late and I need to lock this page to guard against vandalism or conversion to a liberal message. I can unlock tomorrow. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 02:11, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: Presenting both points doesn't make it a liberal puff piece! It presented only one perspective (Focus on the Family), and referred to the Shepard incident as OVERBLOWN. That's awful!! I consider my entry a moderate tack, but if you can think of an acceptable compromise that preserves an unbiased perspective, be my guest. It shocks me to see you go against your own commandments, though, about not including bias, and not importing a political perspective. I have tried to, and continue to try to, do the same.--[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 02:13, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:Instead of the http://www.citizenlink.org/CLFeatures/A000000562.cfm cite you may want to use this one [http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.htm] This cite goes straight (NPI) to a section of the book ''After the Ball''. -)[[User:Cracker|Cracker]][[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]] 02:24, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: Thanks. Will do tomorrow. Goodnight, Cracker!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 02:25, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

I would definitely change the "promote homosexuality in schools" to "promote acceptance of homosexuality in schools". Definitely sounds like they're trying to make me gay. --[[User:Splark|Splark]] 21:45, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

:I agree with the comments of [[User:AmesG|AmesG]] and [[User:Splark|Splark]]. The idea that one's ideological opponents have a specific "agenda" is an all-too common one, but such agendas are more often touted by those who oppose than by those who support a group. That a Supreme Court Justice referred to it, or that it's in some leaflet somewhere, isn't substantive evidence that it exists.. [[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 18:22, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

Aren't those five points of the "homosexual agenda" linked to more of a strategy than an "agenda"? And, aren't they the standard strategy for all interest groups? 1. Talk about your issue. 2. Show your group is harmed unless you get what you want. 3. Provide facts so people can justify agreeing with you. 4. Portray yourself and your point of view as right and moral. 5. Portray your opponents and their point of view as wrong and immoral. 6. Get corporate or other financial support. Every group and lobbying organization does that, and I don't know that singling out gays and the gay rights movement as doing that is really informative.--[[User:Epicurius|Epicurius]] 11:23, 15 March 2007 (ED

I will go on the record and say that yes, there is a homosexual agenda. As a homosexual myself, I'm pretty much in the middle of it. All we want is to be treated the same as any other tax-paying American. If my partner is injured, I would like to be able to have the same visitation and decision-making power as a husband/wife would. I would like to be able to transfer property when I die without having to jump through a million legal hoops. Many people claim that we want "special" rights. We really don't. We just want to be treated the same as everyone else.--[[User:Patthew|Patthew]] 12:01, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

I think this page is extremely biased. It presents only one side of the issue and is locked to prevent the other side from responding. Proof of a bias of another kind here.
-Gasmonkey

== Everything you post must be true and verifiable ==

This entry violates the first (and perhaps most important) Conservapedia commandment. There is no homosexual "agenda" -- no "they" who "wrote a book", no 10-point plan. It's the same kind of paranoid nonsense that's in the articles here on Joseph McCarthy and Alger Hiss (WP has far more accurate articles on both subjects, with the one on Hiss very clearly identifying areas of controversy), with conspiracy-theorist types quoting and sourcing one another. I propose this entire article for immediate deletion. [[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 10:56, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Agreed. The "Homosexual agenda" is no more factual than the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Delete, or recreate as an article about the popular (?) but false belief in this "agenda." [[User:Pkoad|Pkoad]] 00:21, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

:It refers to the [[gay rights]] activism, which may be a [[grassroots]] movement but which has multiple goals which are easily identified. The Liberal POV that such goals are non-existent is a kind of denialism.

:It will be good for the article to discuss this denial, in conjunction with [[gay rights]] critics who oppose the points which the denialists says no one advances. (Not worded right, but I think you get the gist.) See you all tomorrow. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 00:29, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

::There's no more gay agenda other than there was a "black agenda" before ''Brown'' came down. The gay agenda is equal treatment. Oh no, quick, ma, shut the doors! Equality's a-comin'!-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]

:::I'd say "keep it" so the world can really see how these strange nutkins think. But in the interest of humanity, decency, and honesty, it is a pack of paranoid, politico-religious agenda lies. Really, really strange nutjob lies. [[User:Human|Human]] 02:51, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

:'''Keep:'''Let's assume for one moment that the homosexual agenda is complete hogwash and homosexual activists don't believe in it: Isn't the fact that Conservative Christians do believe in it enough to keep the article so that the "opinions" of Christians about homosexual activists be here. The fact that many talk about it is clear evidence that this is a valid article--[[User:Djcreativity|Djcreativity]] 15:47, 9 May 2009 (EDT)
::Shouldn't we present information that is factual, and not misleading, though? If the intention of the article was to present Christian responses to gay rights activism, it should be presented as such. Given that ''After the Ball'' was published twenty years ago, presenting it as an active force in the gay rights movement (rather than as a foundation of the movement as a whole) is a bit disingenuous, don't you think? If we were talking about the Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam we could reference Malcom X and Louis Farrakhan, but to act as though their works were part of current politics and national discourse would be misguided at best, and flatly wrong, at worst. --[[User:Jfavor|Jfavor]] 00:40, 20 May 2009 (EDT)

== Opposing Christian Agenda ==

I can't work out what the point of the "Opposing Christian Agenda" section is. The sentences don't make sense, and the referenced page does not mention homosexuality or gay. I propose the section be deleted by someone with the privilege to edit the article. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 01:33, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

:I think it's not nearly explicit enough. More than anything else except perhaps abortion, the homosexual subversion of Christian values is illustrative of the influence of Satan upon liberals and other leftists, and his influence through them on our society. Should I rework the section to include such? --[[User:Nathan|Nathan]] 22:20, 11 February 2009 (EST)

== Improvements ==

Shouldn't ''Gayness'' in part 1. of the agenda be ''Gaiety''?
The term ''[[homosexual protectors]]'' in part three surely merits its own article. Is this the same as ''[[Homosexualist]]s''? [[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 07:11, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

:Any attempt to trivialize or confuse the issue will be frowned upon here. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 07:22, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

We should delete the cite at the bottom saying that homosexuality caused Nazism. That's a truly disturbing allegation.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 12:59, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

:Especially considering that the Nazis actually murdered thousands of homosexuals during World War II.--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 18:32, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
::Yes they did, but it was because of Hitler. NOT homosexuality. And waaay more Jews were killed than homosexuals, giving Jews a larger spotlight. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] I'm liberal, but I don't edit pages-just [[User talk:Clorox|talk page]]s. don't worry. 23:25, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

'''
I believe langauge needs to be corrected in the the first bullet of the list of homosexual goals. It currently states "Censoring sections of the bible condemning homosexuality." The source cited is an article about an offensive tee shirt being censored not the bible its self. There needs to be eaither a new source about Homosexuals attempting to change the bible or the wording must be changed to "preventing materials that denounce homosexuality from being displayed publicly."

Reference number "8" rrefers back to the Conservapedia site. In order to maintain integrity it must refer to an ouside source if one is not provided the reference and quote should be deleted. Currently it is a logical fallacy and is not up to encyclopedic standards. Someone not dyslexic (i.e. somone who isn't me.) should get on that.

== Very Informative ==
'''

Excellent portrayal of the truth. This is a nice breather from the left-wing saturated wikipedia.com. If you agree with the article, you should check out the highly accurate article on homophobia. Everyone knows that the creation of homophobia is a foundation of the gay agenda.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Homophobia

Wikipedia is subject to open edits that don't reqier an account. Are you suggesting that the monitors of wikipedia aka "everyone who can type" has a liberal bias?

== Is this real? ==

This article seems like a parody. I can't believe that... oh yeah, I'm at conservapedia. I can believe anything. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 12:44, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

As well as the mysterious reference to a "leading book in the homosexual movement", it refers to a book claiming that the Nazi Party supported homosexuality. Clearly this has to be satirical. Either that, or someone has a serious case of paranoia - all the sources, as well as being of dubious credabililty, point towards independent events but the whole point of the page is to talk about a shadowy conspiricy - a 'Secret Society' of homosexuals trying to gayify the world. I suggest deleting the whole page - and if it reappears in a similar form, delete and protect. - [[User:Suricou|Suricou]]

== Agendas ==
So since there are so many references on this wiki to the "homosexual agenda" can we also cite the "Conservative Agenda" or "Republican Agenda" or "Christian Agenda"? {{unsigned|prof0705}}
:I don't see why not, as long as they sourced and reasonably recognizable as phrases in common use. In fact, here, I would expect an article on [[conservative agenda]] to be very good. [[User:Human|Human]] 17:56, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

This article violates the [[Conservapedia:Commandments]] (number 2: cite sources and 5: personal opinion).
#It claims to quote Focus on the Family for the definition of The Homosexual Agenda without giving a specific reference, and FotF is only claimed to be quoting "a leading book in the homosexual movement" without even bothering to name the book or its author.
#The two bulleted points in "The Goals" (about 8-year-old boys and 12-to-14 year olds) are stating as fact the opinion of Craig Osten, a vice president at the Alliance Defense Fund.
#Several of the other references to that section are either citing journalist's or lawyer's opinions, not facts or any quote from the people who are alleged to hold the agenda under discussion.

I am prohibited from editing the page but I suggest that the Agenda is moved to the top, and the original source for it cited, rather than a vague second-hand reference. The judge's quote should then be indented as a block quote so it is more clearly identifiable as quoting the judge. The Goals and Opposing Christian Agenda should be cleaned up and cite proper sources not opinions, or be more clearly marked as only opinions of people who oppose the Homosexual Agenda. If Conservapedia could handle it, even a quote from someone who supports it would be good. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 06:06, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

:[[Conservapedia:Commandments]] (number 2: cite sources and 5: personal opinion) is superceded by [[Conservapedia:Locks and Blocks]]:
::''Sysop's and Bureaucrats are the Administrators of Conservapedia. Their instructions, as to Conservapedia policy and/or the appropriateness or inappropriateness of user actions, are to be followed. Failure to do so will result in the user being blocked.''
:Note: ''Their <nowiki>[</nowiki>[[Special:ListUsers/sysop sysops]]<nowiki>]</nowiki> instructions, as to Conservapedia policy [...] are to be followed'', which means if a sysop has decided it is so it is so. If you continue to argue you may get blocked.
:[[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 07:23, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

What about Hot man on man/woman on woman action? I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that homosexuals were pretty in favor of that.

== Is this really as big as people make it out to be? ==
While I personally do not like anyone being too open about their personal lives, especially concerning anything to do with sex, still when I hear about a "Homosexual Agenda" I can only think of another fear that other people once tried to infect people with: it was called "The Protocols of The Elders of Zion." I think some of you may understand my point... [[User:Jros83|Jros83]] 16:15, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

Yeah, I don't really understand why people even care if someone is homosexual or not. If you're not a homosexual yourself you're not gonna be involved with homosexuality so why even care? It doesn't affect you in that case. If someones is homosexual, then fine. Let them be. Has nothing to do with you. [[User:JohnKite|JohnKite]] 11:33, 28 January 2009 (EST)
:Do you not care about God, JohnKite? Do you not care about His society? Do you not acre about moral erosion, disease, and the future of humanity? Do you not care about what is right and what is wrong? [[User:MauriceB|MauriceB]] 11:35, 28 January 2009 (EST)

==Please remove the reference to Scott Lively's propaganda book==
This is propaganda. It seems you don't allow neutrality here. [[User:GayMan|GayMan]] 21:51, 28 June 2007 (EDT)
:I agree. Numbers 1-5 on there are kinda wrong, and number 6 tops it off as crap. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] 23:11, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

== Hey, now... ==
I'm LGBT and I'm certainly not aware of any sort of "agenda" being discussed. Perhaps this is just a typical case of right-wing paranoia? --[[User:Afi|Afi]] 18:07, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

You're not aware because you're not hive-minded. The agenda is memetic, therefore you're not all going to know about it. --[[User:Pious|Pious]] 18:21, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

==What the hell?==

The “homosexuality agenda" was created by Focus on the Family, which you say later in the article, ACTIVELY OPPOSES homosexuality. You wouldn’t let me post Jon Stewart quotes on the Bush page, so why is this kind of crap aloud here? [[User:Tesfan|Tesfan]] 11:43, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

This is exactly the sort of thing that inspires violence against homosexuals. Be more neutral.[[User:Alloco1|Alloco1]] 12:34, 27 September 2007 (EDT)
:Good luck pal, I've been saying that for months. And watch your language, they'll ban you for that here. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 12:46, 27 September 2007 (EDT)

==Politics and science==

Dr. Ronald Bayer, writing in Homosexuality And American Psychiatry: The Politics Of Diagnosis said the APA decision was a political one, not a scientific one: "The result [of the APA removal of homosexuality from the DSM] was not a conclusion based upon an approximation of the scientific truth as dictated by reason, but was instead an action demanded by the ideological temper of the times." [http://traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/Homosexuality101.pdf]
==Liberal Deceit==
I suggest we change the category from Deceit to Liberal Deceit because liberals universally support the gay agenda. --[[User:Konservativekanadian|Konservativekanadian]] 22:26, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
*Good idea! --[[User:TK|şŷŝoρ-₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Ṣρёаќǃ]] 23:08, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
::Bad idea. It's not deceit. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] 23:16, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
Again I find myself disturbed by the language of absolutes that have infested this site. There are liberal and homosexual philosophies mentioned in this site that some liberals and homosexuals don't have simply because they don't know about them- and it's certainly not a stretch of the imagination to say these people are generally ignorant. Are children in Africa who die young damned simply because a missionary doesn't exist where they live and they couldn't have possibly heard the good news about Christ? I think not. I believe they get another chance to. --[[User:Pious|Pious]] 18:26, 24 June 2011 (CDT)

==Sources?==

Are there any sources besides those accusing the gay agenda? There's no evidence of any organized "agenda", and all of the goals and such are provided by those opposing it. Best case, this is an article about a pundit talking point, and worst case it's a conspiracy theory masked as an encyclopedia article. Shouldn't it at least mention that there has never been any evidence of even a mildly organized or centralized gay agenda? The fact that it's permanently locked further undermines CP credibility. [[User:RWest|RWest]] 12:32, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Specific suggestion:
:Focus on the Family quotes below from a leading book in the homosexual movement which outlines the points of the homosexual agenda:
There is no source cited here. The source is "The Overhauling of Straight America," an article which appeared in the November 1987 issue of a gay magazine called ''The Guide''. [[User:Shii|Shii]] 22:44, 23 November 2007 (EST)

:: Thanks, I just added an online link to it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:04, 23 November 2007 (EST)

== Mottos? ==

The edit replacing "beliefs" with "mottos" was unjustified. There is a (baseless) belief system inherent in the homosexual agenda.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:41, 12 October 2008 (EDT)

== References: "small looks better" ==

Why? All the other articles I've seen have references at regular text size. What's particular about this article that it needs to have really tiny footnotes? [[User:Sideways|Sideways]] 17:24, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

==Homosexuality in Congress==

In a recent discussion with a friend of mine, we discussed what is here called the "homosexual agenda". In addition to the notion of whether "everyone has an agenda" (something I would consider adding to the Debate pool if anyone would like clarification of my terms/beliefs here, I brought up the notion of whether or not there exists a disproportionate number of homosexuals or, unfortunately, scandals regarding previously latent homosexual desires among otherwise Conservative men (Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Bob Allen, the Glenn Murphy scandal), and whether this constitutes the corrupting nature of power, or, as my friend (a somewhat eccentric, Ron Paul-supporter type) suggests, whether these men are "moles" (his term, not mine) representing a quote, "homo infiltration". To put it bluntly, imagine the Manchurian Candidate, but with sodomy.

I was wondering if anyone here (I imagine you have all put some effort into the research and sourcing for this article) had ever heard trustworthy sources, blogs, or essays dealing with such a belief. I obviously don't support the endorsement of wingnut theories, but if it is a more widespread belief among self-avowed Republicans and conservatives, then I think it bears mentioning. I wait to see if any such evidence exists. [[User:MICasey|MICasey]] 10:48, 9 September 2009 (EDT)

==Iran?==
This site considers Iran as an example for how to deal with homosexuals?? I hope this is a joke; otherwise, this is one of the sickest, most hateful websites I've ever seen. You claim to follow Jesus, and then condone executing homosexuals?? This must be an example of following the hard-ass God of the Old Testament.{{unsigned|User:Pete5383}}

:This site does not condone the murder of homosexuals by the state. It is a true statement on Iran and most Muslim countries are no different. So yes, they oppose the homosexual agenda but that doesn't correspond to the section which talks of political/cultural opposition. Instead, a foreign section needs created and the FACTS put in the proper place.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:37, 17 August 2010 (EDT)

==Merge from "pro-Gay"==

Thanks for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&curid=69968&diff=877518&oldid=877453&rcid=1187531 merging this point] from the "[[pro-gay]]" article. I sure wish I had '''bothered to look''' for the diff before undoing your careful work. *sigh* --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 16:44, 9 June 2011 (EDT)

==Homophobes==

Westboro is probably the only authentically "[[homophobic]]" group in the USA. They used to have a "God hates fags" website. No one takes them seriously, on either side of the ideological battle lines. They are the poster boys for [[hate speech]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:00, 2 October 2011 (EDT)

==Charity==

:Cut from lede:

:* Liberals generally give much less than conservatives to charity, but charity work by gays in particular is virtually non-existent.

:This needs references, if true. But I don't believe it - or maybe I just don't understand it. Isn't [[Gay Men's Health Crisis]] a [[charity]]? (Or is it merely a [[non-profit organization]] '''without''' a charitable purpose? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:44, 12 October 2011 (EDT)

Just happened to see this, and so here is some data:

On average, weekly churchgoers donate 3.8% of their income to charity, compared to 0.8% for those who never go. Independent Sector (charitable clearing house): Atheists won't save Europe by Don Feder; http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27937

Religious citizens who make $49,000 gave away about 3.5 times as much money as secular citizens with the same income. They also volunteered twice as often, are 57 percent more likely to help homeless persons, and two-thirds more likely to give blood at their workplace. Arthur C. Brooks' Who Really Cares. http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2008/001/8.11.html

In 2006, Americans gave 1.66% of their aggregate income to charity, with donations totaling US$182 billion. This rate of giving is more than double that of Canadians, who gave 0.76% of aggregate income (CA$8.4 billion in total) to charity in 2006. http://www.fraserinstitute.org/commerce.web/product_files/Generosity_Index_2008.pdf

See [http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Statistical_Correlations.html here] for a table of many comparison btwn states, and [http://247wallst.com/2011/12/15/americas-most-and-least-charitable-states/2/ here] for recent stats on giving per state.

$8.8 billion worth of goods and services that churches are giving overseas to developing (“Third World”) countries. This figures out to be nearly 40 percent of the foreign aid provided by the United States to the same region. U.S. foreign aid to those same countries is $23.5 billion. Carol Adelman of the Hudson Institute, from Notre Dame University study. http://www.onenewsnow.com/Church/Default.aspx?id=118566

Giving as a percentage of income was higher at the depth of the Great Depression in the 1930s (3.3 percent of per capita income in 1933) than after a half-century of unprecedented prosperity (2.5 percent in 2004) John Ronsvalle and Sylvia Ronsvalle, The State of Church Giving through 2004: Will We Will? 16th ed. (Champaign, Ill.: Empty Tomb, 2006). ^

The proportion of adults who tithe dropped by 62 percent in the past year. (2) Just 6 percent of born-again households tithed to their churches in 2002. (3) Tithing, when it occurs, is generally among Protestants: 5 percent of adults who attend Protestant churches tithed last year, compared to less than one-tenth of 1 percent among Catholics. (4) Among the groups most likely to tithe are people over 55, college graduates, Evangelicals, Republicans, conservatives, and residents of the South—but there was no segment among which at least 10 percent tithed. George Barna. News release by Barna Research Group, May 19, 2003. ^

Including religious, American households overall gave 3.5% of their income to charity, with approx. 33% going to to religious institutions. Utah was the state with the highest average per-capita charitable contributions, followed by Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee and Arkansas. Professor Arthur Brooks, 2005. http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2005/February/200502181639511CJsamohT5.593508e-02.html

A liberal researcher who was surprised at finding that showed conservatives being more giving, set out to do a more thorough analysis, only to confirm the findings: http://blog.geoiq.com/2009/01/07/dataset-of-the-day-who-is-more-generous-republicans-or-democrats/

Also, the top 10 most generous countries are:

1. United States
2. Ireland
3. Australia
4. New Zealand
5. United Kingdom
6. Netherlands
7. Canada
8. Sri Lanka
9. Thailand
10. Laos

The United States’ first place in the rankings marks a significant improvement from 2010, when it ranked fifth. Other countries making significant gains include Liberia, which went from 39 to 14, and Morocco, which leapt from 33 to 12. http://www.worldvision.org/news/new-report-ranks-most-generous-countries. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 22:27, 27 February 2012 (EST)

==Kirk and Madsen==
The WP page on Marshall Kirk [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Kirk#Health] has this but which i cannot find a source for:

"Marshall suffered from severe migraine headaches that were preceded by a strong desire to talk in a rapid monologue. He found that if he gave into these "babbling fits", the headache would be alleviated. He had other medical problems and suffered from bouts of depression that required electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) on three occasions. Because of the negative effects on his memory, he considered ECT to be the last alternative to avoid death. In part due to this medical history, his knowledge of pharmacology was usually greater than that of anyone who treated him. When he died, he was found alone in his apartment by two friends."

Also cannot find anything on Hunter Madsen (pen name "Erastes== Pill")[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 23:54, 24 February 2012 (EST)

==Article title==
Shouldn't this title be lower cased as [[Homosexual agenda]]? It's too bad we can't give it a title with more bite, something like, "The sodomites and their enablers." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 05:23, 17 January 2014 (EST)

== Please explain edit ==

Why, exactly, was [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&curid=69968&diff=1363708&oldid=1350140 this info removed] from the article? Regardless, it is a lot of info and well-sourced. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:03, 27 July 2017 (EDT)

== "Opposing Christian Agenda" section ==

I know this section is intended to reflect what homosexual activists say about Christians. However, I do have some concerns about it. 
Firstly, the use of "agenda" suggests that Christians are pushing some new or different thing secretly. They aren't, they are just staying the same, while the culture changes around them. Well, actually many churches are changing with the culture too, but that's a different discussion altogether. Regarding the bullets, 
point 1: I think I'll reword that, but it is a valid point. Salvation army (a christian org.) will at all costs avoid hiring unrepentant homosexuals, especially for such public-facing jobs. 
point 2: No argument there--this is fine 
point 3: They help to publish material with is contrary to the the propaganda from activists. Oh yes, and that information happens to be factual, unlike the stuff the liberals crank out. 
point 4: Christians have almost no control over this at all. Liberals own the media. 
point 5: Christians actually do very little lobbying compared to liberal activists. Additionally, unlike liberals, the christians operate on a firm moral code which prevents them from offering brides. Since lobbying is driven largely by bribes, the efforts of Christians have almost no teeth. (I still don't want them offering bribes though) 
point 6: "sinner" yes, but there is also "love the sinner, hate the sin" 

Again, I know this is supposed to be what homosexual activists say about Christians, but I think I'm going to make some edits to tone it down a bit. However, this section is altogether off-topic for this page anyway, so I would not be opposed to it being completely removed, or moved to another page. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 23:28, 1 February 2018 (EST)
:I didn't see your mainspace edit until now -- it's a little better. I originally wanted to delete the section, but (if there's a will to actually do it), I think it would be better to completely revamp that section to add examples of promoters of the homosexual/cultural Marxist agenda trying to marginalize, attack, and persecute Christians and Christian values. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:02, 3 February 2018 (EST)
::I [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&diff=1403183&oldid=1402879 removed] the section. Hopefully, I or someone else will find the time/resources to add a section about homosexual agenda efforts to marginalize Christian views. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:06, 7 February 2018 (EST)

== i talked about the transgender murders, LGBTQ+ suicides and lessons in the bible ==

I know many of you may think I'm being crazy right now but there is a much higher chance of being murdered if you are transgender. I have three sources that show this here:
https://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2015/may/13/garnet-coleman/garnet-coleman-said-transgender-person-has-1-12-ch/
http://time.com/3999348/transgender-murders-2015/
http://transstudent.org/transvis.pdf
and members of the LGBTQ+ community or people questioning their sexuality are more likely to commit suicide according to these sources:
https://www.thetrevorproject.org/resources/preventing-suicide/facts-about-suicide/#sm.0001rf6hd7khwehfzmm1yoh6yynxe
https://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/youth-programs.htm
https://www.nami.org/Find-Support/LGBTQ
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-lgbt-teen-suicide/lgbt-youth-at-higher-risk-for-suicide-attempts-idUSKCN1MI1SL

And it is websites like this that make people think that it is okay to bully your peers who are a part of the LGBTQ+ and when members of the LGBTQ+ community see it they remember how much oppression they face and how many people could harm, rape, or kill them because of what they identify as.

And how does the LGBTQ+ community affect you besides 'being against god's law'? Know what else is said to be against god's law in a way being rich. Remember the bible story about the rich man asking what he could do to join him in heaven?

Jesus said to give all his possession to the needy correct? All of them. Yet you are still here able to access and edit this website with your phones or computers while people starve and die of water poisoning in Africa.

And yes, I have not been as aware of those outcomes either, but Jesus said to make sure you are pure right and just as well as without sin before judging others. I ask you what is this page? Judging others.

unsigned post by [[User:What-up-yall|What-up-yall]] ([[User talk:What-up-yall|talk]]) 13:19, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:[https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2018/july/fascist-crackdown-canadian-christian-faces-jail-time-for-expressing-his-beliefs-at-gay-pride-event] [https://www.dailysignal.com/2017/06/27/new-law-canada-remove-kids-parents-reject-transgender-ideology/] [https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/08/california-law-threatens-jail-time-dissenters-transgender-dogma/] This is what the LGBTQRSTUV movement is doing to us, and there are many more examples. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 14:35, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

::Explaining to others that homosexuality/transgenderism are sinful and damaging behaviors (this is according to the Bible, not ourselves) cannot and shouldn't be compared to bullying -- two completely different things. Christians don't bully/mock homosexuals (actually, much of the bullying/slander comes from either secular people or liberals themselves), but they stand firmly by their view that those behaviors are morally wrong, just as alcoholism or vandalism are wrong.

::And yes, Shobson20 is completely correct that the "LGBTQ+ community" is assaulting theologically conservative Christians -- any Christian who believes marriage is between one man and one woman for life, or who believes there are only two genders will be mocked, harassed, and even prosecuted (Colorado baker, etc., etc.) -- see the [[Liberal bigotry]] article, for example. So, in response to your question "''how does the LGBTQ+ community affect you''", it is affecting Christians big time.

::Also, you misinterpreted the account of the rich young ruler -- the problem was not the inherent fact that he had a lot of money, but that those possessions were an idol to him, preventing him from surrendering to Jesus and following him. He was bound to those things and couldn't give them up to follow Christ. Nowhere, however, does it say that money or possessions are inherently bad -- the Bible says that the love of money is the root of many evils, but not money itself.[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+6%3A10&version=ESV] Also, some passages appear to promote good money management, with one of Jesus's parables being about a master who rewards the servants who make the biggest profit (see [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A14-30&version=ESV Matthew 25:14–30]). Also, see this: [https://www.gotquestions.org/poor-vs-rich.html] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:55, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:::Also, you're taking a single Bible passage about judging others way out of context -- many passages of the Bible call on believers to discern between right and wrong (for example, Matthew 7:6, 15-16; John 7:24). Per John 7:24, Christians should "judge correctly," and this means they should not throw out correct doctrine in the name of postmodern "tolerance." There are two good articles explaining what the Bible says about judging others in further detail: [https://www.gotquestions.org/do-not-judge.html][https://answersingenesis.org/bible-questions/does-the-bible-tell-christians-to-judge-not/] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:55, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
::::Whether you translate ''agape'' as "love" or "charity" (1 Cor. 13:13), it's easy to see why casual browsers can have a hard time finding much evidence of it around here.
::::And given the size of your editor base / audience vs. the millions of conservative Christians you're supposedly producing content for, that's something you might all do well to ponder. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:02, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::::So, what you're saying, JohnZ, is that we in this website must cave in to the left's way of thinking. Is that what you're saying, JohnZ? Is that what your version of "love" means? That we have to tolerate everyone, behavior included? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 17:31, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

::::::@JohnZ: Love is not synonymous (actually, it's an antonym) with failure to discern between what is morally right and wrong, and popularity is not an indicator of truth. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:12, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::::(edit conflict) Also, keep in mind that we don't oppose homosexuality or transgenderism because we simply dislike it or have some "subconscious hatred" or whatever -- we're simply repeating what the Bible says, as the ultimate source of authority. For example, [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1&version=ESV Romans 1:26-27] states that homosexuality not only is sinful behavior, but that it's also punishment for sinful behavior (remember, this is the New Testament--good bye to your notions that it's all just "Old Testament stuff"). Also, [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+6&version=ESV 1 Corinthians 6:9-10] lists homosexuality as an act that indicates that one is not saved. Also, see [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+1&version=ESV 1 Timothy 1:9-10]. There are other passages that deal with the topic of marriage (see Jesus's statement in [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+19&version=ESV Matthew 19:4-5], for example). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:12, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
=== JohnZ: Excerpt, picture and caption from Conservapedia's flagship [[homosexuality]] article ===

[[Image:FacProfilemontoya.jpg‎|right|150px|thumb|Dr. [[Alex D. Montoya]] wrote:"The [[Christianity|Christian]] needs to befriend and witness to the homosexual with such [[love]], [[compassion]], and [[wisdom]] that such will respond to the saving [[grace]] of [[God]]."[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj11h.pdf] ]]
{{clear}}
JohnZ, here is a quote from Conservapedia's flagship [[homosexuality]] article: "In his essay which examines the biblical passages regarding homosexuality, Pastor and Associate Professor of Pastoral Ministries at [[The Master's Seminary]] Dr. [[Alex D. Montoya]] states that 'The [[Christianity|Christian]] needs to befriend and witness to the homosexual with such [[love]], [[compassion]], and [[wisdom]] that such will respond to the saving [[grace]] of [[God]].'"[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj11h.pdf]

JohnZ, I hope this helps clarifies Conservapedia's views on homosexuals.

By the way, have you read the article: [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]]?[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:39, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:Aye, more stuff like that Montoya quote would probably be helpful. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:51, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
::Let me also share with you something a Pastor once said: "Marriage is by definition heterosexual. This is the definition of it...that doesn't mean we don't love our homosexual friends, we love them, we share Christ with them, but we do not affirm for them that what they have is by definition marriage, it is not. And it doesn't matter to me what the State eventually says." (This was before Obergefell v. Hodges, the second-worst act of legislating from the bench since Roe v. Wade.) Understand that the biblical definition of "love" is a DO, not a FEEL, that clarifies the often misunderstood verse of how God "loved Jacob but hated Isau" or how "the man that spares the rod hates his son, but the man who loves his son is careful to discipline him." [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 19:03, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::Yeah, that works, too. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 19:08, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

=== Pro-homosexuality activist: Put this in your victimhood pipe and smoke it!!! ===

Pro-homosexuality activist: Please see: [[Homosexuality and Murders]] and [[Homosexual Couples and Domestic Violence]]

I hope this helps clarify matters for you.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:21, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:I love it:

::when members of the LGBTQ+ community see it they remember how much oppression they face and how many people could harm, rape, or kill them because of what they identify as.

:In addition to what was said above, I thought homosexual identitarians were excited about their new found acceptance, proved by their ability to force people to regard their unions as marriage. That's even an out-and-out privilege, not a right. How could that be if they "face" so "much oppression"? Actually this sounds more like they're doubling down their grievance techniques because they're greedy for more privileges.

:And What-up-yall, how could they "face oppression...because of what they identify as"? You imposed your own identity on them by referring them as "the LGBTQ+ community" and became their self-proclaimed spokesman!

:How do you know any of those people want to belong with all the members or even every group in the same alphabet soup union you cooked up?

:All this is dazzle camouflage that keeps everything up in the air, the better to hide the guilt of male homosexuals spreading a fatal venereal disease over the course of the last third of the century, when it could have been stopped in one year, and all they had to do was practice abstinence.

:You didn't capitalize "God" but you capitalized at the beginning of sentences. I'm blocking you for a week, for being incivil. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 16:43, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

==Shock therapy==
A citation is needed for the statement that [[shock therapy]] is a "scientifically proven method of homosexual conversion". Thank you. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 02:47, June 29, 2021 (EDT)
==Cannot edit but here are two more links for substantiation==
While it seems that much any text from "After the Ball" has been expunged from the Internet, this page provides the text from "THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA" by Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill: http://library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm showing the psychological tactics that the section of the CP article quotes from, but with the only link to the actual text at length being from from Google books, which only provides very brief excerpts.

Note also that the cited link www.parentsofgaychildren.org is no longer available at this time and needs to direct to https://web.archive.org/web/20180319222723/http://parentsofgaychildren.org/. I could normally do so (as a primary editor to the psychological tactics section of the article, but for some unexplained reason I am no longer allowed to do so, perhaps since I have not logged in for some time. Also, attempts to access or publish requires two tries, as Service Unavailable is the first.Daniel1212 20:19, December 17, 2022 (EST)

:The page is unlocked for editing. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']] 20:28, December 17, 2022 (EST)
::Thanks but I see no references when I try to edit it, thus I cannot edit: parentsofgaychildren.org ''to'' https://web.archive.org/web/20180319222723/http://parentsofgaychildren.org). Maybe I could manually write an edit for the other link, but as of now it the page seems to be in a form of "safe mode." Sorry for not keeping up on things here. I do understand however, why this page would need to be locked, esp. this section (which I myself provided much to in the past, by God's grace, and have often linked to), since it is targeted, yet which page is due to the provocative pushing of LGBTQ propaganda. Daniel1212

==Admin HELP needed!!!==
After receiving no response to my post above on the inability to see or add any refs,as one of the main editors on this page I went ahead and did added the reference , expecting that the others I could not see would show up once saved. However, all is deleted except for the first section! I deleted nothing, and I tried Undo but it does not do so. So I copied the text in that section since I duplicated the tab before I tried to edit, and posted that, but once saved then no references are show. Please revert. Here is the recent archive version is that would help: https://web.archive.org/web/20221213223909/https://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual_Agenda Sorry for the mess, but something is wrong that you cannot edit correctly. Daniel1212 23:19, December 21, 2022 (EST)

:I'm not sure I understand the problem. I restored to the version before you started editing. Want to try again? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']] 23:26, December 21, 2022 (EST)

::Thank God you could restore it, since I could not. However, what I explained was that while I have edit access, when I open any section to do so, in particular Strategies and psychological tactics, then not footnotes are shown, meaning that anything such as this (from the page before opened up for editing:

::This includes the use of demonstrative protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way.[46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57] In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality.[58] Another strategy used by supporters of the homosexual agenda is to publicly deny that such an agenda exists.[59]

::Results in this when opened up for editing:
::This includes the use of demonstrative protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way. In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality. Another strategy used by supporters of the homosexual agenda is to publicly deny that such an agenda exists.

Thus all 13 footnotes are not shown when opened up for editing, and if I proceed to ad a ref then it results in the destructive data described under Admin Help needed. I suspect therefore that someone for some reason placed some sort of blocking on me [edit: yet I can see refs on other pages], or just on this page which is not simply unwarranted (as I am not any kind of vandal, but have been a main editor on the section at issue, and on some other articles in time past. User Conservative- if he is till here - can attest to this but it is also dangerous, as seen. Thus your help is appreciated. Daniel1212 12:41, December 23, 2022 (EST)
==Editing problem resolved==
Further investigation revealed that the same absence of references in edit mode also occurred in Wikipedia, thus pointing to the problem being on my end. Restarting Firefox with all extensions disabled resolved the issue, and thus I proceeded to restart normally and selectively disable a few extensions, and soon - but sadly - found the problematic one, for it was the Bible Previewer extension (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bible-previewer/?utm_source=addons.mozilla.org&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=search), which I really like, since it renders Bible references into visible popups! But somehow the coding for wikitext refs gets nuked. Since I also have that extension on the Chromium-based Vivaldi browser then the same issue occurred in that one. Thus I need to disable that extension on the browser I use for wiki editing, and will let the developer know of the issue.

Sorry for the confusion but thank God it is resolved. Daniel1212 09:48, December 30, 2022 (EST)

:I figgured something like that. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']] 13:05, December 30, 2022 (EST)

Homosexual Agenda

2022-12-30T15:48:45Z

Daniel1212: /* Strategies and psychological tactics */ added material from THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA

{{Homosexuality}}
The '''Homosexual Agenda''' is a self-centered set of beliefs and objectives designed to mandate approval of [[homosexuality]] and its ideology. The goals and means of this movement include indoctrinating students in [[public school]], restricting the free speech of opposition, obtaining [[special rights|special treatment]] for homosexuals, distorting [[Bible|Biblical]] teaching and science, and interfering with freedom of association. Advocates of the homosexual agenda seek special rights for [[homosexuals]] and self-described "LGBTQ people" that other people don't have, such as immunity from criticism (see [[hate speech]], [[hate crime]]s).<ref>Such special rights will necessarily [[zero-sum game|come at the expense]] of the rights of broader society.</ref> '''''The homosexual agenda is the biggest threat to the rights of [[free speech]] and [[religious freedom]] today.'''''<ref>Daniels, Fletch (September 10, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/the-lgbt-endgame-is-to-destroy-christianity The LGBT endgame is to destroy Christianity]. ''LifeSiteNews'' (from the ''American Thinker''). Retrieved September 10, 2019.</ref><ref>Duke, Selwyn (September 11, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/item/33387-lgbt-activists-hate-christianity-and-want-to-destroy-it LGBT Activists Hate Christianity — and Want to Destroy It]. ''The New American''. Retrieved September 11, 2019.</ref><ref>In 2020, more than 10% (90 out of 879) of the featured characters on scripted primetime television programs are openly [[LGBTQ]], an attempt by the pro-LGBTQ producers of those shows to deceitfully push the discredited claim that "10%" of the population is homosexual when, in fact, less than 2% of the population actually identify as such.</ref>

One of the top priorities of the Homosexual Agenda is to prohibit and outlaw [[conversion therapy]]. Activities like [[baseball]] and [[chess]] reduce homosexual proclivities, while other activities like figure skating for men and soccer for women seem to encourage homosexuality.
[[Leftists]] are pushing unconstitutional bans on conversion therapy, apparently unable to tolerate things they dislike. Their priorities include electing high-ranking officials who are openly homosexual, with the ultimate goal of electing a president who is in a [[same-sex marriage]], like the top [[Dem]] fundraising candidate [[Pete Buttigieg]] in 2020.

In a speech on December 10, 2013, to a pro-family rally in [[Jamaica]], a country that rejects same-sex "marriage", Brian Camenker of [[MassResistance]] outlined the step-by-step approach of the homosexual agenda:<ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen2/13d/jamaica-speech-121013/index.html "MassResistance helps Jamaica confront ‘gay’ agenda"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

*Legalize homosexuality
*Hold "gay pride" parades
*Accept child sex trafficking
*Demand non-discrimination laws
*Insist on homosexuals' adoption of children
*Push the homosexual agenda in schools<ref>{{cite web |title=Criticism of Transgender Agenda Will Get Virginia Students Expelled |author=Austin Ruse |date=10 Jun 2016 |url=https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/10/transgender-northern-virginia-students-can-now-expelled-criticizing-transgenderism/ |publisher=BREITBART |quote=The transgender change in school regulations was imposed last night during a dramatic board meeting where only 12 pro-trans witnesses were invited to testify. ... No opposing voices were allowed to be heard, parents were relegated to shouting opposition from the seats and some were ejected from the meeting.... Last year, they were promised a lengthy investigation and a full hearing. Instead, it was foisted upon them with less than 24 hours-notice. ... an Oregon law recently allowed a jury to award $60,000 t0 a transgender teacher because other teachers declined to use the teacher’s preferred pronoun, which is “they” rather than “him” or “her.” Deputies for President Barack Obama have backed similar rules for all K-12 schools, and New York City has established similar forced-speech rules.|accessdate=12 Jun 2016}}</ref>
*Legalize various alternate forms of partnership and call them "marriage" (i.e. man and man, woman and woman, man and multiple women)
*Demand public funding to deal with increased homosexual-related social problems
*Promote the [[gender confusion]] agenda
*Demand to be treated "equally"
*Impose a large-scale loss of free speech
*Ban counseling for kids confused by [[homosexual issues]]
*[[Drag queen]] story times to indoctrinate children
*Ban scientifically and religiously proven methods of homosexual conversion
*Attack churches
*Encourage [[abortion]]

[[Russia]] is a leader in rejecting the homosexual agenda.<ref>{{cite web |title=Is the Homosexual Agenda 'Unstoppable'? - Comparing America with Russia |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msLH6f6vyC4 |accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=RUSSIA VS. THE LGBT GLOBALISTS: A Climate of Hate and Fear |url=http://www.scottlively.net/2015/02/25/russia-vs-the-lgbt-globalists-a-climate-of-hate-and-fear-part-two/ |quote=This dangerous LGBT strategy has now gone global and the target is the Russian Federation. ... Core American values to Obama are publicly celebrated sodomy and doctor-assisted transsexual self-mutilation. ... The Russian anti-propaganda law, passed June 11, 2013, was the first truly effective international counter-measure since the “gay” agenda went global around the turn of the millennium. Typically, the “gays” characterized the law as hateful and an incitement to violence, but in doing so they revealed that propagandizing children is part of their agenda, since the law simply classifies “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relationships” as material that cannot be distributed among minors and commands the government to protect children from it. Just after the passage of this law Barack Obama did an about-face on the “reset” policy (in which Russia had been recognized as an equal partner in the world community) and instead began reviving cold-war rhetoric.|accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Pro-Russian Press Conference |date=22 February 2014 |url=http://www.scottlively.net/2014/02/22/pro-russian-press-conference/ |quote=We got lots of coverage from the event, and I believe we accomplished our objective which was to bring awareness to the world that the pro-family movement in the U.S., Canada, UK, and other “pro-gay” countries is happy to see the Russian Federation standing up for family values. We think this will encourage other nations to follow their example. |accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref> For example, Russia banned adoption by Americans as the Obama Administration aggressively pushed the homosexual agenda, and in June 2013 a house in the [[Russian]] parliament passed legislation to ban foreign adoption by gay couples or single parents who live in any [[same-sex marriage|gay marriage]] nation.<ref>[https://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-russia-ban-adoption-gay-couples-20130618,0,4633280.story "Russian lawmakers pass ban on adoption tied to gay foreign couples"]. ''Los Angeles Times''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

[[Barack Hussein Obama]], [[Hillary Clinton]], and essentially all [[Democratic Party|Democrat]] politicians now advocate the homosexual agenda, reflecting the growing financial power of the homosexual network. Obama's self-centered obsession with his own re-election, and fundraising for his campaign, has caused him to create a national political issue out of this, rather than deal with other issues like the economy. Many [[establishment]] Republicans and [[Cafeteria Christians]] also have bought into the homosexual agenda.

'''''Among all the [[liberal]] belief systems, the homosexual ideology is the most self-centered or selfish''''' – unlike the vast charity performed by thousands of churches in the U.S. alone, a homosexual charity can be considered an [[oxymoron]].

The late Supreme Court Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] referred to the "so-called homosexual agenda" in ''[[Lawrence v. Texas]]'', 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (dissenting opinion). Justice Scalia also predicted that this was the first step to legalizing homosexual civil unions. He was proven right with the outcome of ''[[Obergefell v. Hodges]]''. The goal of the latter decision was the societal affirmation of homosexuality rather than simple equality.<ref>Williams, Thomas D. (January 5, 2020). [https://www.breitbart.com/education/2020/01/05/usa-today-obergefell-was-never-about-freedom-to-marry/ USA Today: Obergefell Was Never About ‘Freedom to Marry’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved January 5, 2020.</ref>

Despite the fact that only 4.1% of the U.S. population identified as [[LGBT]], just over half a percentage point higher than four years prior,<ref>Gates, Gary J. (January 11, 2017). [https://www.gallup.com/poll/201731/lgbt-identification-rises.aspx In US, More Adults Identifying as LGBT]. ''Gallup''. Retrieved January 18, 2017.</ref> Americans '''''greatly overestimate the proportion of homosexuals''''' in the nation to be an average of 23%.<ref name="GreatlyOver">Newport, Frank (May 21, 2015). [https://www.gallup.com/poll/183383/americans-greatly-overestimate-percent-gay-lesbian.aspx Americans Greatly Overestimate Percent Gay, Lesbian in U.S.] ''Gallup''. Retrieved January 18, 2017. See also:
*Mainwaring, Doug (June 28, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/americans-vastly-overestimate-the-size-of-the-lgbt-population Americans vastly overestimate the size of the LGBT population]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved June 28, 2019.</ref> Interestingly, Republicans and conservatives gave estimates closest to the actual number.<ref name="GreatlyOver"/>

== The Homosexual Agenda ==
Joseph P. Gudel, in ''That Which is Unnatural''<ref>[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0108a.html "That Which is Unnatural" Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture] Part Two in a Two-Part Series on Homosexuality, from the Christian Research Journal, Winter 1993, page 8</ref> contended that the homosexual movement,

:has been militantly demanding not just the homosexuals' right to do whatever they wish to do behind closed doors, but, more importantly, that society fully accept their lifestyle as both healthy and normal, even demanding special rights and legislation as an "oppressed minority." Gudel quotes various sources evidencing this.

In a 1987 speech to the National Press Club in Washington, homosexual spokesperson Jeff Levi proclaimed,

:We are no longer seeking just a right to privacy and a protection from wrong. We also have a right — as heterosexual Americans already have — to see government and society affirm our lives.<ref>Jeff Levi, in William Dannemeyer, Shadow in the Land (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1989), 86.</ref>

In an article entitled "Gays on the March" in 1975, Time magazine quoted lesbian activist Barbara Gittings who stated:

:What the homosexual wants, and here he is neither willing to compromise nor morally required to compromise — is acceptance of homosexuality as a way of life fully on a par with heterosexuality." In response, Time opined, "It is one thing to remove legal discrimination against homosexuals. It is another to mandate approval....It is this goal of full acceptance, which no known society past or present has granted to homosexuals, that makes many Americans apprehensive.<ref>Gays on the March," Time, 8 Sept. 1975, 43</ref>

A primary goal of the homosexual agenda is to normalize the lifestyle in [[public schools]]. This occurred quickly and intensely after same-sex "marriage" was illegally imposed in Massachusetts, where homosexual relationships are taught to children as young as kindergartners, as recounted by the decision of ''[[Parker v. Hurley]]''.<ref>The ''Parker v. Hurley'' decision explained, "In January 2005, when Jacob Parker ("Jacob") was in kindergarten, he brought home a 'Diversity Book Bag.' This included a picture book, ''Who's in a Family?'', which depicted different families, including single-parent families, an extended family, interracial families, animal families, a family without children, and — to the concern of the Parkers — a family with two dads and a family with two moms. The book concludes by answering the question, 'Who's in a family?': 'The people who love you the most!' The book says nothing about marriage."</ref>

In a 1992 report by John Leo in U.S. News & World Report, he notes some books which were part of New York City's public school curriculum.

The first-grade book, ''Children of the Rainbow'', stated on page 145, which states that teachers must "be aware of varied family structures, including...gay or lesbian parents," and "children must be taught to acknowledge the positive aspects of each type of household." Another children book is Heather Has Two Mommies, which is about a lesbian couple having a child through artificial insemination. Another book, ''Gloria Goes to Gay Pride'', states, "Some women love women, some men love men, some women and men love each other. That's why we march in the parade, so everyone can have a choice."

Leo commented,

:A line is being crossed here; in fact, a brand new ethic is descending upon the city's public school system. The traditional civic virtue of tolerance (if gays want to live together, it's their own business) has been replaced with a new ethic requiring approval and endorsement (if gays want to live together, we must 'acknowledge the positive aspects' of their way of life).<ref>John Leo, "Heather Has a Message," U.S. News & World Report, 17 Aug. 1992, 16.</ref>

Dr. Judith A. Reisman in her extensive ''Crafting “Gay” Children'',<ref>http://www.defendthefamily.com/_docs/resources/6390601.pdf</ref> reports that Harvard homosexual Toby Morotta, PhD, stated that in the 1970s, members of the Gay Activists Alliance - who were trained in the “zapping" of any who rebuffed homosexuality.<ref>Toby Marotta: THE POLITICS OF HOMOSEXUALITY: HOW LESBIANS AND GAY MEN HAVE MADE THEMSELVES A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL FORCE IN MODERN AMERICA, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1981 at 319</ref> And that these formed the “Gay Academic Union,” (GAU) which was made up of faculty and students in major universities. She states that the GAU has long fought for domination of its worldview within the academic community, and professional journals commonly assigned GAU and other homosexual peer reviewers to research touching on homosexuality, generally resulting in a quick death to possible unfavorable findings.<ref>See extensive reports in regular NARTH Bulletins as well as Ray Johnson, “American Psychology: The Political Science, at 53-57.</ref>

This and the general agenda is seen to be overall implementing a marketing strategy explained in a book called ''After the Ball,'' by [[gay rights]] activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in the late 1980s, in which a six-point plan was set forth as to how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior in a decade-long time frame:
:"The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior." <ref name="Winn07252003">''After the Ball'' (1989), quoted from Winn, Pete (7-25-2003) [ ''Q&A: The Homosexual Agenda''] Citizenlink</ref> "Thus propagandistic advertising can depict all opponents of the gay movement as homophobic bigots who are 'not Christian' and the propaganda can further show them [[homosexuals]] as being criticized, hated and shunned..."<ref>After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's, by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen (Author) (p. 152-153)</ref>

[[Focus on the Family]] provides additional quotes from ''After the Ball'', outlining key points of the homosexual agenda:<ref name="Winn07252003"/><ref>Kirk, Marshall K. and Erastes Pill (11-1987) ''The Overhauling of Straight America'' Available at [http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/overhauling.htm ''STRATEGIES OF THE HOMOSEXUAL MOVEMENT: "The Overhauling of Straight America"'']</ref>

#"Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible." (They use late night air waves and special channels, as well as their right to peacefully assemble to do so.)
#"Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers."
#"Give homosexual protectors a just cause."
#"Make gays look good."
#"Make the victimizers look bad."
#"Get funds from corporate America."

[[United States Supreme Court]] Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] wrote:
{{cquote|Today's opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=02-102#dissent1 ''LAWRENCE et al. v. TEXAS''] at findlaw.com</ref>}}

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vic_Eliason Vic Eliason] of [http://www.crosstalkamerica.com Crosstalk America] rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies.

== Specific goals ==
The goals of the homosexual movement include:

#Ignoring Christian morals and discouraging religiously based laws.
#Attempting to convince the world that marriage should be defined secularly, instead of as one of the Lord's commandments.
#Ignore the clear message of the [[Bible]] that [[homosexuality]] is a sin and an abomination unto [[God]] because their First Amendment rights allow them to.
#Remind conservatives that there cannot be a "gay ([[homosexual attraction]]) gene", just like like there cannot be a "black gene" because complex things like these are caused by complex interactions between genes.
#Censoring evidence that the "gay gene" is a hoax. After all, it would have to be multiple genes interacting together.<ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08a/born_gay_hoax/smith_0329/index.html ''Lesbian activists at Smith College riot, shut down Ryan Sorba speech on "The Born Gay Hoax" as police watch. See exclusive videos.''] Mass Resistance</ref>
#Censoring speech against homosexuality by branding it to be "hate-speech"<ref>[http://www.silencingchristians.com Video:Silencing Christians]</ref><ref>[http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2009/06/homosexuality-its-crime-in-england-to.html "Marquette Warrior"]. ''mu-warrior.blogspot.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[http://www.ccfon.org/view.php?id=745 Bishops fight for right to criticize homosexual lifestyle, 25th May 2009]</ref>
#Censoring biblical statements condemning homosexuality<ref>White, Hilary (04-21-2006) [http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/apr/06042105.html ''Court Upholds School Ban on "Homosexuality is Shameful" T-Shirt''] LifeSiteNews.com</ref>
#Lobbying for equal employment rights.<ref>The Crimson Staff (10-13-2006) [http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=514950 ''A Box of Their Own?''] (opinion) The Crimson</ref><ref>http://www.afa.net, Homosexual Agenda Platforms from 1972 - 2000</ref>
#Expand hate crimes legislation to include sexual orientation, which would be equally wrong for heterosexuals to do.<ref>Pelosi, Nancy Office of (09-28-2004) [http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/Sept04/HateCrimes092804.html ''Pelosi: "Hate Crimes Prevention Legislation is Right Thing to Do, Long Overdue"''] From the office of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi</ref>
#Ending the military's and Boy Scouts' restrictions on homosexuality<ref>''Boy Scouts of Am. v. Dale'', 530 U.S. 640 (2000) (Boy Scouts); "Matlovich v. Secretary of the Air Force (591 F.2d 852, DC Circ. 1 978) (military)</ref>
#Stopping children as young as 5 years old from attending therapy to repair their sexual preference<ref>[http://www.thetaskforce.org/reports_and_research/youth_in_the_crosshairs National Gay and Lesbian Task Force:Youth in the Crosshairs]</ref>
#Teach tolerance of homosexuals in schools.
#In places like Massachusetts and California, where the homosexual lobby is the strongest, it starts as early as preschool. They tell seven- or eight-year-old boys, "If you only like boys, there's a chance you may be homosexual," or "If you only like girls, maybe you are lesbian." Children at that age also do not have the hormones to experience sexual attraction, so they cannot understand this yet.
#Demands protections from job discrimination.<ref>[http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/nondiscrimination/ENDA_main_page Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) | National Gay and Lesbian Task Force]</ref>
#Suing an online dating website for discrimination. This was because sexual orientation is a federally protected group, as such, this company was claimed to be "breaking" the law.<ref>Joshua Rhett Miller. [https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,454904,00.html "eHarmony to Provide Gay Dating Service After Lawsuit"]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>
#Undermining the [[Essay:Quantifying Mental Strength|resolve]] of [[Homosexuality and choice#Choice and Genetics|latent homosexuals]] so that their will becomes too weak to resist the temptations of homosexuality<ref>http://www.thetaskforce.org/activist_center/resources_and_tools/challenge_exgay</ref>
#Pushing for legalized adoption by homosexual individuals and couples<ref>http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/parenting_and_family</ref>
#Indoctrination of public school children to support the homosexual agenda
#Allowing boys into girls' restrooms and vice versa, without restriction.
#Forced feminization
#Defunding public transit systems

The state-by-state push for same-sex "marriage" can be viewed as a means to the above goals, or a goal in itself.<ref>[[Lewis v. Harris]]</ref> An example of this would be the recent New Hampshire law that makes same-sex civil unions "legal".<ref>[http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/06/01/new_hampshire_law_makes_same_sex_civil_unions_legal/ "New Hampshire law makes same-sex civil unions legal"]. ''boston.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Although notable gains toward achieving its goals continue to manifest, homosexual activists later began been expressing a high level of dissatisfaction with the [[Obama regime]]. Commenting on such, Massresistance.org, an organization which opposes the homosexual agenda in [[Massachusetts]], noted that Obama had,

*signed an order extending federal benefits to same-sex partners.
*pushed an extreme hate crimes bill in Congress.
*declared his intention to repeal the Defense of Marriage.
*pushed a pro-homosexual and transgender version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
*appointed homosexual activists to high level positions, including Harry Knox, of the homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign, and Kevin Jennings, founder of the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which educates kids in the public schools.
*declared February to be "Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month."
*demanded the State Department allow homosexual couples to use their married names (from marriages or civil unions) on US passports.<ref>update@massresistance.org 6/24/2009 11:56 PM</ref>

In Europe, countries such as the [[United Kingdom]] and [[France]] have adopted policies promoting gender confusion.<ref>Friedman, Victoria (February 15, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/02/15/france-mother-father-parent-uk-govt-lawyer-mother-not-gender-specific/ Men Can Be Mothers in UK, While French Schools Erase Terms ‘Father,’ ‘Mother’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved February 15, 2019.</ref>

=== Strategies and psychological tactics ===
Homosexual activists are often seen as engaging in [[homosexual logic|specious argumentation]], such as attempts to controvert the consistent teaching of the Bible on homosexual relations (see [[homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]), and using false analogies, in order to gain acceptance of homosexuality. One common argument used by homosexual activists seeks to compare their quest for equal rights to that of others.<ref>Miner, Homosexuality, Civil Rights, and the Church</ref> This argument is countered by the observation that blacks were able to peacefully argue that mankind should not be "judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character",<ref>[http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm, Speech by Martin Luther King Jr.]</ref> as the former yields no certain moral distinction. In contrast, homosexual activists seek acceptance of an immoral practice(s), and in addition, engage in certain coercive and manipulative means to do so. This includes the use of demonstrative protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way.<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/socialsciences/sellinghomosexuality.html</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.html "The homosexual propaganda campaign in America's media"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.amazon.com/After-Ball-America-Conquer-Hatred/dp/0452264987 "After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's (Plume): Marshall Kirk, Hunter Madsen: 9780452264984: Amazon.com: Books"]. ''amazon.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89526 "‘Gays’ put ‘terrorist’ label on Christians"]. ''WND''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08c/Prop8/church_attacks.html "Homosexuals begin campaign of terror over Prop 8 loss"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>http://rebuildtheparty.ning.com/video/exodus-protest-park-street</ref><ref>http://theway2k.vox.com/library/post/homosexuals-persecuting-christians-and-mormons.html</ref><ref>http://www.hamiltonsquare.net/articlesRiotsSep1993.htm</ref><ref>[https://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/may/08050205.html "Lesbian Break-in and Riot During College Speech on “Born-Gay Hoax” Forces Cancellation"]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95296 "‘How hate crimes laws forced me into exile’"]. ''WND''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>Muehlenberg, Bill, [http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/06/04/another-nail-in-the-christian-coffin/ Another Nail in the Christian Coffin], [[4 June]] [[2009]]</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09a/feder_0311/index.html "Gay activists stop free speech at UMass Amherst"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref> In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality.<ref>LZ Granderson, ''Commentary: Gay is not the new black'', Cable News Network,July 16, 2009</ref> Another strategy used by supporters of the homosexual agenda is to publicly deny that such an agenda exists.<ref>[http://onug.us/content/christians-america-and-gay-agenda "Christians, America, And The Gay Agenda"]. ''onug.us''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

While not all homosexuals agree with the use of deceptive psychological tactics, leading homosexual activists willfully employ them. The aforementioned book, [https://archive.org/details/AfterTheBallHowAmericaWillConquerItsFearHatredOfGaysInThe90s ''After The Ball How America Will Conquer Its Fear & Hatred Of Gays In The 90s''], is widely regarded as the handbook for the homosexual agenda, in which two homosexual Harvard-trained graduates, <ref>[http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,152180,00.html "Is The Gay Revolution a Flop?"]. ''time.com''. 24 June 2001. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref> Marshall Kirk (1957–2005), a researcher in neuropsychiatry, and Hunter Madsen (pen name ''Erastes Pill''), who was schooled in social marketing, advocated avoiding portraying homosexuals as aggressive challengers, but as "victims" instead, while making all those who opposed them to be "evil persecutors". As a means of the latter, they used ''jamming,'' in which Christians, traditionalists, or anyone else who opposes the gay agenda are publicly smeared. Their strategy was based on the premise that, "In any campaign to win over the public, Gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector. The purpose of victim imagery is to make straight people feel very uncomfortable."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20171112040138/http://www.parentsofgaychildren.org/uploads/After_the_Ball_-_outline_by_Richard_Cohen.pdf After the Ball: How America Will Conquer It’s Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90’s Outline compiled by Richard Cohen, MA]</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Kirk|first1=Marshall|last2=Madsen|first2=Hunter|title=After the ball : how America will conquer its fear and hatred of gays in the 90s|date=1989|publisher=Plume|location=New York|isbn=978-0452264984|page=183|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=+victims+in+need++of+protection|accessdate=2 February 2018}}</ref> Leftists also label Christians who support biblical marriage as "anti-gay," equating them with non-western Muslims who support stoning homosexuals.<ref>Mainwaring, Doug (April 3, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/jack-phillips-is-not-the-sultan-of-brunei-the-indiscriminate-weaponization-of-the-term-anti-gay Jack Phillips is not the Sultan of Brunei: The indiscriminate weaponization of the term ‘anti-gay’]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved April 4, 2019.</ref>

"Jamming" [[homo-hatred]] (disagreement with [[homosexual behavior]]s) was to be done by linking it to [[Nazi]] horror, advised Kirk and Madsen. Associate all who oppose homosexuality with images of Klansmen demanding that gays be slaughtered, hysterical backwoods preachers, menacing punks, and a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed. Thus, "propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths..."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20110603050349/http://www.renewamerica.com:80/columns/mbarber/080213 "Unmasking the "gay" agenda"]. ''renewamerica.com''. Retrieved on 2 Feb. 2018.</ref> " It can show them being criticized, hated, shunned. It can depict gays experiencing horrific suffering as the direct result of homohatred-suffering of which even most bigots would be ashamed to be the cause. It can, in short, link homohating bigotry with all sorts of attributes the bigot would be ashamed to possess, and with social consequences he would find unpleasant and scary... our effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof."<ref>http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.html The homosexual propaganda campaign in America's media</ref>

In the 1987 perverted psychological marketing manual 'The Overhauling of Straight America' (which they later expanded into "After the Ball"), Kirk and Madsen crafilty exhort,

<blockquote> The first order of business is desensitization of the American public concerning gays and gay rights. To desensitize the public is to help it view homosexuality with indifference instead of with keen emotion... as long as Joe Six-pack feels little pressure to perform likewise, and as long as the behavior in question presents little threat to his physical and financial security, he soon gets used to it and life goes on... the imagery of sex should be downplayed and gay rights should be reduced to an abstract social question as much as possible. First let the camel get his nose inside the tent-... Where we talk is important. The visual media, film and television, are plainly the most powerful image-makers in Western civilization... While public opinion is one primary source of mainstream values, religious authority is the other. When conservative churches condemn gays, there are only two things we can do to confound the homophobia of true believers. First, we can use talk to muddy the moral waters. This means publicizing support for gays by more moderate churches, raising theological objections of our own about conservative interpretations of biblical teachings, and exposing hatred and inconsistency. Second, we can undermine the moral authority of homophobic churches by portraying them as antiquated backwaters, badly out of step with the times and with the latest findings of psychology.... the mainstream should be told that gays are victims of fate, in the sense that most never had a choice to accept or reject their sexual preference.... A media campaign to promote the Gay Victim image should make use of symbols which reduce the mainstream's sense of threat, which lower it's guard, and which enhance the plausibility of victimization. </blockquote>"<ref>http://library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA, By Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill</ref>

Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, writes,
<blockquote>
There can be no doubt that Christianity represents the greatest obstacle to the normalization of homosexual behavior. It cannot be otherwise, because of the clear biblical teachings concerning the inherent sinfulness of homosexuality in all forms, and the normativity of heterosexual marriage. In order to counter this obstacle, Kirk and Madsen advised gays to "use talk to muddy the moral waters, that is, to undercut the rationalizations that 'justify' religious bigotry and to jam some of its psychic rewards." How can this be done? "This entails publicizing support by moderate churches and raising serious theological objections to conservative biblical teachings." [The latter of which attempts [[homosexuality and biblical interpretation]] examine and expose.]<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20070927163416/http://www.gender-news.com/other.php?id=19 ''After the Ball--Why the Homosexual Movement Has Won,''] Thursday, June 3rd, 2004</ref>
</blockquote>

Kirk and Madsen's open admission of their deceptive tactics is noted as most revealing: [O]ur effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof. "...the person's beliefs can be altered whether he is conscious of the attack or not"<ref>After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s, p. 152-153 (1989, Doubleday/Bantam)</ref> “The campaign we outline in this book, though complex, depends centrally upon a program of unabashed propaganda, firmly grounded in long-established principles of psychology and advertising.”<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=unabashed+propaganda%2C+firmly+grounded Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.xxvi]</ref><ref>[http://banap.net/ "[Behavior, and Not a Person]"]. ''banap.net''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Similarly, author Robert Bauman additionally records: "It makes no difference that the ads are lies... because were using them to ethically good effect, to counter negative stereotypes that are every bit as much lies, and far more wicked ones."<ref>The Gentleman from Maryland: The Conscience of a gay Conservative, by Robert Bauman, 1986, page 163.</ref>

The need for Kirk and Madsen to engage in such manipulation may be seen as being due to their sober realization of the deleterious nature of the homosexual lifestyle. This includes sodomy being responsible for 81% of new HIV cases aged 13 and older among men - despite only representing approximately 4% of the male population - and 92% of new HIV among youth (2020), and (historically) a greatly increased incidence of other infectious diseases and premature death, and despite decades of attempting to subdue homoerotic practices into being "safe." <ref>[https://peacebyjesuscom.blogspot.com/2019/10/negative-effects-of-homosexual.html Negative effects of homosexual relations (and heterosexual fornication)] Retrieved on November 24, 2021</ref>

“In short, the gay lifestyle - if such a chaos can, after all, legitimately be called a lifestyle - it just doesn’t work: it doesn’t serve the two functions for which all social framework evolve: to constrain people’s natural impulses to behave badly and to meet their natural needs. While it’s impossible to provide an exhaustive analytic list of all the root causes and aggravants of this failure, we can asseverate at least some of the major causes. Many have been dissected, above, as elements of the Ten Misbehaviors; it only remains to discuss the failure of the gay community to provide a viable alternative to the heterosexual family.”<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=exhaustive+analytic+list Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.363 ]</ref>

David Kupelian, author of ''[[The Marketing of Evil]],'' describes Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, stating,
<blockquote>
Kirk and Madsen were not the kind of drooling activists that would burst into churches and throw condoms in the air. They were smart guys – very smart. Kirk, a Harvard-educated researcher in neuropsychiatry, worked with the Johns Hopkins Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth and designed aptitude tests for adults with 200+ IQs. Madsen, with a doctorate in politics from Harvard, was an expert on public persuasion tactics and social marketing.<ref>[http://pearl-diving.blogspot.com/2009/01/sold-on-homosexuality-marketing-of-evil.html "Sold on Homosexuality – The Marketing of Evil"]. ''pearl-diving.blogspot.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>
</blockquote>

Marshall Kirk died in 2005 at the young age of 47.<ref>http://www.americanancestors.org/PageDetail.aspx?recordId=134544248</ref> The cause of death has not been publicly revealed.

Often cited as an early example of such tactics was the role of homosexual activists in persuading the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II). Dr. Ronald Bayer, though being himself a pro-homosexual psychiatrist, described this removal as being the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation, rather than any new scientific discoveries.<ref>[http://www.traditionalvalues.org/urban/eleven.php Exposed: The Myth That Psychiatry Has Proven That Homosexual Behavior Is Normal]</ref> In so doing, like slavery before it, the homosexual agenda is seen to threaten basic freedoms, principally the First Amendment.<ref>Adams, Guy (11-8-2008) [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mormon-stars-face-backlash-after-gay-marriage-ban-1003967.html ''Mormon stars face backlash after gay marriage ban''] The Independent</ref>

The charge of "[[homophobia]]" has been increasingly evidenced as being part of a means of intimidation used in pushing the Homosexual Agenda. Due to what homophobia has been made to denote, that of being a repressed homosexual, or possessing an irrational fear of being approached by homosexuals, or of being a "bigot" "persecuting" victims, the widespread use of the term "homophobic" attaches a powerful stigma to anyone who may even conscientiously oppose the practice of homosexuality, thus silencing many who might otherwise object to it.<ref>[http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/1995papers/socarides.html Thought Reform And The Psychology of Homosexual Advocacy, Charles W. Socarides, M.D.]</ref>

In relation to such oppression, psychologist Nicholas Cummings, former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), observed, "Homophobia as intimidation is one of the most pervasive techniques used to silence anyone who would disagree with the gay activist agenda." As an example of such fear within the APA, in addressing 100 fellow professionals Cummings related that while writing "Destructive Trends in Mental Health," with psychologist Rogers Wright, a number of fellow psychologists were invited to participate. However, these flatly turned them down, as they feared loss of tenure, loss of promotion, and other forms of professional retaliation. "We were bombarded by horror stories," Dr. Cummings said. "Their greatest fear was of the gay lobby, which is very strong in the APA.<ref>[Psychology Losing Scientific Credibility, Say APA Insiders http://www.narth.com/docs/insiders.html]</ref>

Noted homosexual activist and pornographer Clinton Fein, in his article, ''The Gay Agenda stated'': "Homophobic inclinations alone, even without any actions, should be criminal and punishable to the full extent of the law."

Erik Holland, author of ''The Nature of Homosexuality'', perceives that homosexuals have become so reckless in labeling others "homophobic" that "anyone who questions their labeling someone [is] a homophobe himself. Even quoting factual statistics about the connection between homosexuality and AIDS is allegedly homophobic." In addition, according to pro-homosexual author Vernon A. Wall, "even acceptance of homosexuality can be seen as a form of homophobia, because to talk about the acceptance of homosexuality is to imply that there is something about homosexuality that needs acceptance."<ref>[http://www.homosexinfo.org/Homophobia/HomePage "Homosexinfo - Homophobia - Homophobia: Fear of homosexuals?"]. ''homosexinfo.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

It may be speculated that if the liberal use of the term "homophobia" is not primarily a psychological tactic, then it indicates a psychological condition on the part of those who use the term in which they [[wishful thinking|wishfully]] or neurotically imagine that all those who oppose them are "fearful" of them, or of being one.

More recently, after 25 years of claiming she was not indoctrinating anyone with pro-homosexual beliefs, one activist honestly admitted to this being a lie. Canadian lesbian activist S. Bear Bergman, a female who identifies as a gender-confused "male", stated, "All that time I said I wasn't indoctrinating anyone with my beliefs about gay and lesbian and bi and trans and queer people? That was a lie.” Bergman recounted that she was instructed as a young gay activist to tell concerned parents that she was “just providing an alternate viewpoint” when accused of engaging in “indoctrination and recruiting,” and to use “soft” language when speaking about homosexuality. In her article on the notoriously liberal web site, the [[Huffington Post]], he went on to candidly confess that this indoctrination, "is absolutely my goal. I want to make your children like people like me and my family, even if that goes against the way you have interpreted the teachings of your religion." Bergman fantasized that in an ideal world he would have been "ushered into the world of queerness with care and tenderness by experienced homos" (akin to "camp counselors"), "and issued my leather jacket and my protest pins, my safer sex supplies..."

Bergman expressed that his goal was that of portraying to "impressionable young minds" the idea that "queers and transfolk are just as fine and lovely a kind of human as any other kind," and stated that he did not like the idea of sending her kid to schools where any kid could share with him their ideas about homosexuals. Thus Bergman, who believes that "books a kid hears at bedtime affect their sleep and also their dreams," is finalizing a series of children's books that all feature lesbian, homosexual, bisexual, gender-confused, or queer kids or families, with the goal that the young readers come to believe that people like him and his family are "absolutely great," that "lesbian, gay, bi, queer, and trans people -- that we exist, that we're perfectly fine and often really excellent." Bergman then concludes, "If that makes me an indoctrinator, I accept it. Let me be honest -- I am not even a little bit sorry."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.huffingtonpost.com/s-bear-bergman/i-have-come-to-indoctrinate-your-children-lgtbq_b_6795152.html|title=I have come to indoctrinate your children into my LGBTQ agenda (and I'm not a bit sorry)|last1=Bergman|first1=S. Bear|website=Huffington Post|accessdate=22 March 2015}}</ref>

Commenting on this frank article, Pete Baklinski of LifeSiteNews.com, states that, <blockquote>While Bergman paints a “friendly and cheerful” picture of the gay lifestyle, she fails to mention the serious health risks tied to homosexual behaviors....Research done in 2002 by Dr. John R. Diggs found that same-sex sexual behaviors expose gays, lesbians and bisexuals to “extreme risks of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), physical injuries, mental disorders and even a shortened life span.” Common sexual practices among gay men were found to lead to “numerous STDs and physical injuries, some of which are virtually unknown in the heterosexual population.” Gay and bisexual men were found to “lose up to 20 years of life expectancy.” The US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have warned on numerous occasions that HIV rates, already at epidemic proportions, are continuing to climb steadily among men who have ‘sex’ with men. The CDC has stated that gay and bisexual men continue to remain at the epicenter of what they call a “HIV/AIDS epidemic.”</blockquote>

To which Baklinski adds the spiritual consequences, citing one of the texts in the Bible which condemn homosexual relations:
{{Cquote|“For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error” (Letter to Romans 1:26).<ref>{{cite web|last1=Baklinski|first1=Pete|title=Gay activist: Of course our goal is to ‘indoctrinate children into LGBTQ agenda’|url=https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gay-activist-our-goal-is-to-indoctrinate-children-into-lgbtq-agenda|website=LifeSiteNews.com|accessdate=22 March 2015}}</ref> }}

For Christians believe God created man and women uniquely compatible and complimentary, and they alone are joined by God in marriage, with opposite genders being specified by both Genesis and personally by Jesus Christ. (Gn. 2:18-24; Mt. 19:4) The Bible only condemns homosexual relations - by design and decree, in principle and by precept - and never sanctions them wherever they are manifestly dealt with, and the injunctions against them are part of the transcendent and immutable moral law. (Lv. 18:22; Rm. 1:26,27)

However, Christians also understand that some of the first Christians were likely former homosexuals, (1Cor. 6:9-11) and believe that there is room at the cross for all who want the Lord Jesus over sin, and believe upon Him to save them who died for them, and rose again, and who thus are baptized and follow Him, to the glory of God.<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONS and the BIBLE]</ref>

===Influence in the academic world===
Professor Jerry Z. Muller described in an article titled ''First Things'' (Aug/Sept. 1993) how the homosexual lobby has gained widespread acceptance in the educational realm.
{{cquote|[Their] strategy has been remarkably successful. With a rapidity largely attributable in large part to a total lack of articulate resistance, homosexual ideology has gained an unquestioned and uncontested legitimacy in American academic life. Within the academy, as within nonacademic elite culture, the definition of opposite to homosexuality as "homophobia - a definition which implies that it is impossible to give good reasons for the cultural disapproval of homosexuality - is the best evidence of the success of this strategy.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=cbfVg_1qhe0C&pg=PP1&lpg=PP1&dq=David+W.+Virtue+scots+college&source=bl&ots=aDW7a615Gn&sig=Y1cLsx5sCQTgUUDJ88b5AKPRkNg&hl=en&ei=8skISpP1AcGktgfi2PzsCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPR14,M1 "Homosexuality"]. ''google.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>}}

====In the public schools====
{{See also|Homosexuality in Schools}}
[[File:Prairie Ridge High School LGBT+ Flag.jpg|thumb|200px|School in Chicago area (Prairie Ridge High School) with LGBT+ [[Rainbow#Rainbow flag|rainbow flag]]. Students in the same school who display the [[Confederate flag]] will face discipline.<ref name="NWHerald2017"/>]]
[[File:Prairie Ridge High School LGBT.jpg|thumb|200px|This Chicago-area school has "safe spaces" for students with homosexual attraction (sponsored by [[GLSEN]]).]]
Many public schools throughout the United States welcome the Homosexual Agenda, oftentimes through publicly-funded school programs created by [[GLSEN]].<ref name="Heyer2015">Heyer, Walt (June 8, 2015). [http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/06/15118/ Public School LGBT Programs Don't Just Trample Parental Rights. They Also Put Kids at Risk]. ''The Witherspoon Institute -- Public Discourse''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> Much of this was the work of the [[Obama Administration]].<ref name="Heyer2015"/> GLSEN celebrates the Homosexual Agenda through a "day of silence."<ref>Berry, Susan (April 11, 2015). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/11/day-of-silence-how-the-lgbt-agenda-is-hijacking-americas-youth/ Day of Silence: How the LGBT Agenda Is Hijacking America’s Youth]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> In 2016, [[California]] became the first state to legislate the teaching of the homosexual agenda in public schools to children as young as second grade.<ref>Berry, Susan (July 19, 2016). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/19/lgbt-history-california-first-to-teach/ California: 1st State To Teach LGBT Curriculum — to Second Graders]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> These California students are now banned from opting-out from this [[indoctrination]].<ref>Newman, Alex (January 4, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/27883-students-banned-from-opting-out-of-lgbt-education Students Banned From Opting Out of LGBT Education]. ''The New American''. Retrieved January 5, 2018.</ref> In February 2019, the Department of Education in the [[United Kingdom]] announced that public school children starting at the age of five would be required to learn about homosexual and transgender relationships, with parents being unable to withdraw their children from such classes.<ref>Tennant, Michael (February 27, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/31593-u-k-schools-to-indoctrinate-kids-as-young-as-five-in-lgbt-agenda U.K. Schools to Indoctrinate Kids as Young as Five in LGBT Agenda]. ''The New American''. Retrieved February 27, 2019. See also:
*McLean, Dorothy Cummings (March 25, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/christian-mom-sues-uk-primary-school-for-forcing-lgbt-pride-celebrations-on-kids Christian mom sues UK primary school for forcing LGBT Pride celebrations on kids]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved March 25, 2019.</ref>

At a recent sold-out California Teachers Association (CTA) conference in Palm Springs, Calif (October 2021), a leaked audio recording reveals two teachers mocking parents over their concerns about homosexual and transgender indoctrination at school, says a source who attended the event. “It was horrifying to listen to not just one teacher but really all of the teachers in all of these seminars, excoriating parents,” and that “The overarching theme of the classes that I attended were California teachers instructing other teachers on how to sneak in the LGBTQ+ curriculum in a manner that does not alert parents,” said the source, who also related how some teachers at the conference also suggested that parents who refuse to call their child by pronouns of the child’s choosing should be arrested and charged with child abuse. In the audio clip, one teacher advised other teachers who lead LGBTQ clubs to maintain an air of plausible deniability so they can play dumb if they are questioned by parents. “Because we are not official, we have no club rosters. We keep no records,” said the teacher, who is also an LGBTQ club leader. “In fact, sometimes we don’t really want to keep records because if parents get upset that their kids are coming? We’re like, ‘Yeah, I don’t know. Maybe they came?’. Another teacher suggesteed activist teachers disguise the nature of GSA clubs with an example being calling her LGBTQ club the “You Be You” club." Teachers also boasted about spying on students’ online searches and activity inn attempting to recruit sixth-grade students into these LGBTQ clubs whose membership rolls are kept from the eyes of parents. One of the teachers said, “We totally stalked what they were doing on Google.” As of 11/23/2021 the “UBU (You Be You)” club was suspended after information about the leaked audio was made public. <ref>Jones, Brad (November 23, 2021). https://www.theepochtimes.com/leaked-audio-reveals-how-california-teachers-recruit-kids-into-lgbtq-clubs_4114896.html Leaked Audio Reveals How California Teachers Recruit Kids Into LGBTQ Clubs]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved November 23, 2021.</ref>

In schools where the homosexual agenda is welcomed, students who fly the [[Confederate flag]] may expect to face disciplinary actions.<ref name="NWHerald2017">Prokop, Hannah (November 11, 2016). [http://www.nwherald.com/2016/11/09/prairie-ridge-high-school-suspends-student-for-wearing-confederate-flag-to-school/aelbmro/ Prairie Ridge High School suspends student for wearing Confederate flag to school]. ''Northwest Herald''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref><ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/apr/20/confederate-flags-not-rainbow-ones-banned-in-schoo/ Wyoming school district bans Confederate flags, allows gay-pride ones]. ''The Washington Times'' (from the ''Associated Press''). April 20, 2019. Retrieved April 20, 2019.</ref> In March 2019, an Ohio public school student was suspended for posting Bible verses next to homosexual flags.<ref>Gstalter, Morgan (March 13, 2019). [https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/433823-ohio-student-suspended-for-targeting-gay-straight-alliance-by Ohio student suspended for 'targeting' Gay-Straight Alliance by posting Bible verses in response to LGBT flags]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved March 13, 2019.</ref><ref>Kaplan, Talia (March 12, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/ohio-student-suspended-after-posting-bible-verses-around-school-i-wanted-to-spread-the-word-of-god Ohio student suspended after posting Bible verses around school: 'I wanted to spread the word of God']. ''Fox News''. Retrieved March 13, 2019.</ref>

===Immorality in society===
The “gay” activists welcome [[immorality]] in [[society]]. As no one wants to be called a [[hypocrite]], every act of sexual sin by society members serves the “gay” interest by lessening the public will to uphold public morality. That's why, wherever the acceptance of sexual sin is observed, it is likely there are “gay” activists involved.

==== The abortion industry ====
The best example of the Homosexual Agenda causing societal immorality is seen in their aggressive defense of the abortion industry. Obviously, homosexuals cannot have an “unwanted pregnancy,” yet in an extensive experience, the big part of “pro-choice” street activists at abortion clinics are homosexuals. This is so because they know that preserving the people's option to destroy unborn life is essential to maintaining so-called “[[sexual freedom]]” as a social norm. If women lost their choice to legally kill their unborn offspring, the resulting inevitable shift of emphasis from self-gratification to family responsibility in such a large section of the population would change the entire culture. When a woman gives in to fear and selfishness to kill the child in her womb, she will not feel that she can criticize other sinners. The choice to kill their unborn children morally compromises both men and women (making them unwilling to criticize choices to engage in other forms of immoral behavior), and ensures that the outcome of an unwanted child will not be a lasting deterrent to those who have chosen sexual “freedom” over family. This explains why homosexuals, who by definition cannot conceive children together, are among the most militant advocates of abortion on demand.

==== The pornography industry ====
The existence of a thriving pornography industry where “gays” are also notoriously prevalent serves the “gay” cause by morally corrupting the men who use it, making them less likely to oppose homosexuality on moral grounds and more likely to support public policies which legitimize sexual [[hedonism]]. “Gay” activists love sexual anarchy because they know that when a man falls in bondage to pornography he is less willing to oppose other sexual sins in society.

==== The entertainment industry ====
When young people enjoy music or films that glorify sexual lust, they feel more sympathy to the “gay” arguments.

The “gays” have it easy pushing sexual “freedom”, because every person, in their flesh, wants to indulge themselves in their own choices.
This is like children being offered only candy to eat. People want to eat only sweets until they get sick. Only with maturity do they know how to eat to stay healthy.

The “gay” movement has many allies in its campaign to aggrandize sexual immorality, but it is the only social movement in the history of the world whose primary purpose is to eliminate social restraints on [[sexual]] conduct. It is heavily funded, highly organized and strategically positioned to maximize its ability to change societies and cultures.<ref name="Lively2009">{{cite book |title=Redeeming the Rainbow: A Christian Response to the "Gay" Agenda |author=[[Scott Lively]] |publisher=Veritas Aeterna Press |place=Springfield, MA |year=2009 |edition=1 (Version 1.1)|chapter=1: Pro-family answers to common questions about homosexuality and "gay" agenda |pages=8, 60, 176|url=http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09b/Redeeming_rainbow}}</ref>

==Opponents of the Homosexual Agenda ==
Some well known individuals/groups in the [[United States]] who actively oppose the homosexual agenda are: [[MassResistance]], [[Focus on the Family]], [[Peter LaBarbera]]'s American's for Truth, the [[Traditional Values Coalition]] ([[Louis Sheldon]] is a chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition), and [[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]].

===Peter LaBarbera===
As noted earlier, [[Peter LaBarbera]] is the founder of [[Americans For Truth]] (AFT) which is a national organization in the United States devoted solely to confronting the homosexual agenda.<ref name="americansfortruth.com">[http://www.americansfortruth.com/about/ "About Americans for Truth About Homosexuality and AFTAH Founder Peter LaBarbera » Americans for Truth"]. ''americansfortruth.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Peter LaBarbera said the following regarding the need for the organization Americans for Truth:
{{cquote|Homosexual, [[bisexuality|bisexual]], and [[transsexual]] groups spend tens of millions of dollars every year to market and normalize their aberrant lifestyles, yet after all these years there is not a single, serious national group dedicated specifically to exposing and countering their agendas...

It’s time for Americans to unapologetically resist the demands of this lobby, and to counter the lies upon which it is built-the foremost being that certain people are inherently or ‘born’ homosexual and that this is a [[civil rights]] issue.<ref name="americansfortruth.com"/>}}

===Matt Barber===
[[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]] is one the more notable figures in regards to opposing the homosexual agenda. Matt Barber wrote the following regarding the homosexual agenda:
[[Image:Mbarber_b.jpg‎|right|thumb|175px|[[Matt Barber]]]]
{{cquote|Ironically, sexual [[relativism|relativists]] are anything but relative. They are quite affirmative in principle. But the principles they foist demand comprehensive acceptance of homosexual conduct — by force of law — through federal edicts such as “hate crimes” legislation, the so-called “Employment Non-Discrimination Act” (ENDA) and by imposing government sanctioned “same-sex marriage.” All such government mandates grant special protected “minority” status to those who define themselves by aberrant sexual preferences and changeable sexual behaviors. These laws put people with traditional values directly in the crosshairs of official government policy.

Throughout society, homosexual activists demand that homosexual behaviors not only be “tolerated,” but celebrated. (That’s what the euphemistic slogan “celebrate diversity” supposes). They have masked their true political agenda by hijacking the language of the genuine civil rights movement and through the crafty and disingenuous rhetoric of “tolerance” and “diversity.”

Anyone who believes the Biblical directive that human sexuality is a gift from [[God]], to be shared between man and wife within the bonds of marriage, is branded “homophobic,” “hateful” or “discriminatory.” They are to be silenced by all means possible.<ref>http://www.cwfa.org/articledisplay.asp?id=14696&department=CFI&categoryid=family</ref>}}

===Steffen Königer===
[[German]] politician Steffen Königer from the party [[Alternative for Germany]] (AfD) showed that it is possible to use [[irony]] when opposing the [[extremist]] gender agenda. In his address in the parliament of the [[Brandenburg]], the federated state of [[Germany]], he ridiculed homosexual lobbyists and gender ideologists by enlisting in his introduction, for about two minutes, all "gender and sexual varieties" he could find on the Internet. This way he brought to attention of the general public the absurdity of the proposal put forward by the German [[Green Party]] that demanded to introduce multiple "gender identities" in state documents. When the Parliamentary Speaker tried to stop him, he just replied that he is not finished yet and further adamantly continued in naming all alleged gender declinations. When he was finally done with his introduction, his actual reaction to the proposal took less than three seconds: ''"The AfD party rejects your proposal."''<ref>{{cite web |title=Un político alemán ridiculiza los postulados del LGBTI |url=https://youtu.be/GzIwvHUvFR0 |accessdate=23 Jun 2016 |language=German (English subtitles)}}</ref>

==Further reading==
*https://www.amazon.com/dp/B012YKIQ2M Counterfeiting the Rainbow by Beverly Rachel
*[http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html Homosexuality and the Nazi Party] by Scott Lively. Excellent discussion of the anti-Christian and homosexual origins of the Nazism.
*[http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/ Documentation of the links between homosexuals and the Nazis] by the Government of Israel.
*[http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/BPCollectionNews.asp?ID=131 2008 McDonald's and the Homosexual Agenda], Baptist Press
*[http://www.couplescompany.com/FEATURES/politics/2004/Selling%20Homosexuality.pdf Paul E. Rondeau, Selling homosexuality to America (PDF)] [http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/730694/posts Or html form]
*Shupe, Jamie (March 10, 2019). [https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/03/10/i-was-americas-first-non-binary-person-it-was-all-a-sham/ I Was America’s First ‘Nonbinary’ Person. It Was All a Sham.] ''The Daily Signal''. Retrieved April 15, 2019.

==See also==
*[[ACT-UP]]
*[[Anti-Defamation League]]
*[[Anthropological Revolution]]
*[[Essay:Sodomism]]
*[[Homosexual belief system]]
*[[Gay affirmative]]
*[[Gay rights]]
*[[Homophobia]]
*[[Hate speech]], [[Hate crime]]
*[[Homosexual logic]], used to justify and mandate the Homosexual Agenda
*[[Homosexuality]]
*[[Homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]
*[[Homosexualization]]
*[[Gleichschaltung#LGBTI Gleichschaltung|LGBTI Gleichschaltung]]
*[[San Francisco values]]
*[[Fashion industry values]]
*[[Hollywood values]]
*[[Slogans and the Homosexual Agenda]]
*[[Stonewall UK]]

== References ==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

{{liberalism}}
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Homosexuality]]
[[Category:Liberal Deceit]]
[[Category:Hollywood Values]]

Talk:Homosexual Agenda

2022-12-30T14:48:29Z

Daniel1212: /* Admin HELP needed!!! */

Scalia mentioned that in a dissenting opinion, which isn't binding law. --[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 00:59, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

== Vic Eliason passage should be removed ==

I write this because I have met VE here in Wisconsin and believe he'd be uncomfortable with the logic of including this information in this particular article. The passage: "Vic Eliason of Crosstalk America rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies." Nobody believes that homosexuality is contagious, like a virus, and the probability is 0% that "all Americans" would turn homosexual. I doubt that any homosexual, including activist leaders, would think it would be possible at all or even desirable. There is as little temptation for a heterosexual to want homosexual sex as there is for homosexuals to want heterosexual sex. Also, the comment about the US being more vulnerable to attack because the country doesn't procreate also makes no sense, given that the likelihood of that happening for this reason is 0%. Three other potential problems. 1) The passage is completely undocumented. 2) The link for biographical information for VE is to Wikipedia. Couldn't someone here write an article about him for CP? He has been, after all, a leading figure in Christian radio for 40+ years. 3) Besides being unrelated to the topic of the article and having 0% possibility of describing a real situation, the passage detracts from the credibility of the article and CP. This passage should be removed.

== WOV's got a point ==

Not only that, but this entire article is biased tripe. It presents the "homosexual agenda" from a one-sided perspective, and is filled with hate commentary. '''I recommend the entire thing for deletion.'''

Scalia's remark is regretful and a blemish on the pages of the U.S. Reporter, up there with Scott v. Sanford. But let's not expand it still further.

I have cleaned up biased and vitriolic language as best as I can, but this entry deserves deletion.

Seconded. If this is a homosexual agenda, then what homosexual wrote it? This is nothing but political game-playing: Identify a group as ''The Enemy'' and then brand them haters and abusers of family, children, and country. It makes dehumanising them so much easier. - Suricou

: I didn't see anything "hateful" in it. The Scalia reference was not intended to be about what is binding law, obviously. There was nothing binding about his phrase. I'll note that it was in dissent.

: The edits to this article were completely inappropriate, turning it into a liberal puff piece. Wikipedia exists for that. Actually, your edits made this even more liberal than Wikipedia's article on the same topic!

: The hour is very late and I need to lock this page to guard against vandalism or conversion to a liberal message. I can unlock tomorrow. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 02:11, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: Presenting both points doesn't make it a liberal puff piece! It presented only one perspective (Focus on the Family), and referred to the Shepard incident as OVERBLOWN. That's awful!! I consider my entry a moderate tack, but if you can think of an acceptable compromise that preserves an unbiased perspective, be my guest. It shocks me to see you go against your own commandments, though, about not including bias, and not importing a political perspective. I have tried to, and continue to try to, do the same.--[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 02:13, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:Instead of the http://www.citizenlink.org/CLFeatures/A000000562.cfm cite you may want to use this one [http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.htm] This cite goes straight (NPI) to a section of the book ''After the Ball''. -)[[User:Cracker|Cracker]][[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]] 02:24, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: Thanks. Will do tomorrow. Goodnight, Cracker!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 02:25, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

I would definitely change the "promote homosexuality in schools" to "promote acceptance of homosexuality in schools". Definitely sounds like they're trying to make me gay. --[[User:Splark|Splark]] 21:45, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

:I agree with the comments of [[User:AmesG|AmesG]] and [[User:Splark|Splark]]. The idea that one's ideological opponents have a specific "agenda" is an all-too common one, but such agendas are more often touted by those who oppose than by those who support a group. That a Supreme Court Justice referred to it, or that it's in some leaflet somewhere, isn't substantive evidence that it exists.. [[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 18:22, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

Aren't those five points of the "homosexual agenda" linked to more of a strategy than an "agenda"? And, aren't they the standard strategy for all interest groups? 1. Talk about your issue. 2. Show your group is harmed unless you get what you want. 3. Provide facts so people can justify agreeing with you. 4. Portray yourself and your point of view as right and moral. 5. Portray your opponents and their point of view as wrong and immoral. 6. Get corporate or other financial support. Every group and lobbying organization does that, and I don't know that singling out gays and the gay rights movement as doing that is really informative.--[[User:Epicurius|Epicurius]] 11:23, 15 March 2007 (ED

I will go on the record and say that yes, there is a homosexual agenda. As a homosexual myself, I'm pretty much in the middle of it. All we want is to be treated the same as any other tax-paying American. If my partner is injured, I would like to be able to have the same visitation and decision-making power as a husband/wife would. I would like to be able to transfer property when I die without having to jump through a million legal hoops. Many people claim that we want "special" rights. We really don't. We just want to be treated the same as everyone else.--[[User:Patthew|Patthew]] 12:01, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

I think this page is extremely biased. It presents only one side of the issue and is locked to prevent the other side from responding. Proof of a bias of another kind here.
-Gasmonkey

== Everything you post must be true and verifiable ==

This entry violates the first (and perhaps most important) Conservapedia commandment. There is no homosexual "agenda" -- no "they" who "wrote a book", no 10-point plan. It's the same kind of paranoid nonsense that's in the articles here on Joseph McCarthy and Alger Hiss (WP has far more accurate articles on both subjects, with the one on Hiss very clearly identifying areas of controversy), with conspiracy-theorist types quoting and sourcing one another. I propose this entire article for immediate deletion. [[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 10:56, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Agreed. The "Homosexual agenda" is no more factual than the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Delete, or recreate as an article about the popular (?) but false belief in this "agenda." [[User:Pkoad|Pkoad]] 00:21, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

:It refers to the [[gay rights]] activism, which may be a [[grassroots]] movement but which has multiple goals which are easily identified. The Liberal POV that such goals are non-existent is a kind of denialism.

:It will be good for the article to discuss this denial, in conjunction with [[gay rights]] critics who oppose the points which the denialists says no one advances. (Not worded right, but I think you get the gist.) See you all tomorrow. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 00:29, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

::There's no more gay agenda other than there was a "black agenda" before ''Brown'' came down. The gay agenda is equal treatment. Oh no, quick, ma, shut the doors! Equality's a-comin'!-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]

:::I'd say "keep it" so the world can really see how these strange nutkins think. But in the interest of humanity, decency, and honesty, it is a pack of paranoid, politico-religious agenda lies. Really, really strange nutjob lies. [[User:Human|Human]] 02:51, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

:'''Keep:'''Let's assume for one moment that the homosexual agenda is complete hogwash and homosexual activists don't believe in it: Isn't the fact that Conservative Christians do believe in it enough to keep the article so that the "opinions" of Christians about homosexual activists be here. The fact that many talk about it is clear evidence that this is a valid article--[[User:Djcreativity|Djcreativity]] 15:47, 9 May 2009 (EDT)
::Shouldn't we present information that is factual, and not misleading, though? If the intention of the article was to present Christian responses to gay rights activism, it should be presented as such. Given that ''After the Ball'' was published twenty years ago, presenting it as an active force in the gay rights movement (rather than as a foundation of the movement as a whole) is a bit disingenuous, don't you think? If we were talking about the Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam we could reference Malcom X and Louis Farrakhan, but to act as though their works were part of current politics and national discourse would be misguided at best, and flatly wrong, at worst. --[[User:Jfavor|Jfavor]] 00:40, 20 May 2009 (EDT)

== Opposing Christian Agenda ==

I can't work out what the point of the "Opposing Christian Agenda" section is. The sentences don't make sense, and the referenced page does not mention homosexuality or gay. I propose the section be deleted by someone with the privilege to edit the article. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 01:33, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

:I think it's not nearly explicit enough. More than anything else except perhaps abortion, the homosexual subversion of Christian values is illustrative of the influence of Satan upon liberals and other leftists, and his influence through them on our society. Should I rework the section to include such? --[[User:Nathan|Nathan]] 22:20, 11 February 2009 (EST)

== Improvements ==

Shouldn't ''Gayness'' in part 1. of the agenda be ''Gaiety''?
The term ''[[homosexual protectors]]'' in part three surely merits its own article. Is this the same as ''[[Homosexualist]]s''? [[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 07:11, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

:Any attempt to trivialize or confuse the issue will be frowned upon here. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 07:22, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

We should delete the cite at the bottom saying that homosexuality caused Nazism. That's a truly disturbing allegation.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 12:59, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

:Especially considering that the Nazis actually murdered thousands of homosexuals during World War II.--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 18:32, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
::Yes they did, but it was because of Hitler. NOT homosexuality. And waaay more Jews were killed than homosexuals, giving Jews a larger spotlight. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] I'm liberal, but I don't edit pages-just [[User talk:Clorox|talk page]]s. don't worry. 23:25, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

'''
I believe langauge needs to be corrected in the the first bullet of the list of homosexual goals. It currently states "Censoring sections of the bible condemning homosexuality." The source cited is an article about an offensive tee shirt being censored not the bible its self. There needs to be eaither a new source about Homosexuals attempting to change the bible or the wording must be changed to "preventing materials that denounce homosexuality from being displayed publicly."

Reference number "8" rrefers back to the Conservapedia site. In order to maintain integrity it must refer to an ouside source if one is not provided the reference and quote should be deleted. Currently it is a logical fallacy and is not up to encyclopedic standards. Someone not dyslexic (i.e. somone who isn't me.) should get on that.

== Very Informative ==
'''

Excellent portrayal of the truth. This is a nice breather from the left-wing saturated wikipedia.com. If you agree with the article, you should check out the highly accurate article on homophobia. Everyone knows that the creation of homophobia is a foundation of the gay agenda.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Homophobia

Wikipedia is subject to open edits that don't reqier an account. Are you suggesting that the monitors of wikipedia aka "everyone who can type" has a liberal bias?

== Is this real? ==

This article seems like a parody. I can't believe that... oh yeah, I'm at conservapedia. I can believe anything. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 12:44, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

As well as the mysterious reference to a "leading book in the homosexual movement", it refers to a book claiming that the Nazi Party supported homosexuality. Clearly this has to be satirical. Either that, or someone has a serious case of paranoia - all the sources, as well as being of dubious credabililty, point towards independent events but the whole point of the page is to talk about a shadowy conspiricy - a 'Secret Society' of homosexuals trying to gayify the world. I suggest deleting the whole page - and if it reappears in a similar form, delete and protect. - [[User:Suricou|Suricou]]

== Agendas ==
So since there are so many references on this wiki to the "homosexual agenda" can we also cite the "Conservative Agenda" or "Republican Agenda" or "Christian Agenda"? {{unsigned|prof0705}}
:I don't see why not, as long as they sourced and reasonably recognizable as phrases in common use. In fact, here, I would expect an article on [[conservative agenda]] to be very good. [[User:Human|Human]] 17:56, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

This article violates the [[Conservapedia:Commandments]] (number 2: cite sources and 5: personal opinion).
#It claims to quote Focus on the Family for the definition of The Homosexual Agenda without giving a specific reference, and FotF is only claimed to be quoting "a leading book in the homosexual movement" without even bothering to name the book or its author.
#The two bulleted points in "The Goals" (about 8-year-old boys and 12-to-14 year olds) are stating as fact the opinion of Craig Osten, a vice president at the Alliance Defense Fund.
#Several of the other references to that section are either citing journalist's or lawyer's opinions, not facts or any quote from the people who are alleged to hold the agenda under discussion.

I am prohibited from editing the page but I suggest that the Agenda is moved to the top, and the original source for it cited, rather than a vague second-hand reference. The judge's quote should then be indented as a block quote so it is more clearly identifiable as quoting the judge. The Goals and Opposing Christian Agenda should be cleaned up and cite proper sources not opinions, or be more clearly marked as only opinions of people who oppose the Homosexual Agenda. If Conservapedia could handle it, even a quote from someone who supports it would be good. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 06:06, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

:[[Conservapedia:Commandments]] (number 2: cite sources and 5: personal opinion) is superceded by [[Conservapedia:Locks and Blocks]]:
::''Sysop's and Bureaucrats are the Administrators of Conservapedia. Their instructions, as to Conservapedia policy and/or the appropriateness or inappropriateness of user actions, are to be followed. Failure to do so will result in the user being blocked.''
:Note: ''Their <nowiki>[</nowiki>[[Special:ListUsers/sysop sysops]]<nowiki>]</nowiki> instructions, as to Conservapedia policy [...] are to be followed'', which means if a sysop has decided it is so it is so. If you continue to argue you may get blocked.
:[[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 07:23, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

What about Hot man on man/woman on woman action? I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that homosexuals were pretty in favor of that.

== Is this really as big as people make it out to be? ==
While I personally do not like anyone being too open about their personal lives, especially concerning anything to do with sex, still when I hear about a "Homosexual Agenda" I can only think of another fear that other people once tried to infect people with: it was called "The Protocols of The Elders of Zion." I think some of you may understand my point... [[User:Jros83|Jros83]] 16:15, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

Yeah, I don't really understand why people even care if someone is homosexual or not. If you're not a homosexual yourself you're not gonna be involved with homosexuality so why even care? It doesn't affect you in that case. If someones is homosexual, then fine. Let them be. Has nothing to do with you. [[User:JohnKite|JohnKite]] 11:33, 28 January 2009 (EST)
:Do you not care about God, JohnKite? Do you not care about His society? Do you not acre about moral erosion, disease, and the future of humanity? Do you not care about what is right and what is wrong? [[User:MauriceB|MauriceB]] 11:35, 28 January 2009 (EST)

==Please remove the reference to Scott Lively's propaganda book==
This is propaganda. It seems you don't allow neutrality here. [[User:GayMan|GayMan]] 21:51, 28 June 2007 (EDT)
:I agree. Numbers 1-5 on there are kinda wrong, and number 6 tops it off as crap. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] 23:11, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

== Hey, now... ==
I'm LGBT and I'm certainly not aware of any sort of "agenda" being discussed. Perhaps this is just a typical case of right-wing paranoia? --[[User:Afi|Afi]] 18:07, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

You're not aware because you're not hive-minded. The agenda is memetic, therefore you're not all going to know about it. --[[User:Pious|Pious]] 18:21, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

==What the hell?==

The “homosexuality agenda" was created by Focus on the Family, which you say later in the article, ACTIVELY OPPOSES homosexuality. You wouldn’t let me post Jon Stewart quotes on the Bush page, so why is this kind of crap aloud here? [[User:Tesfan|Tesfan]] 11:43, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

This is exactly the sort of thing that inspires violence against homosexuals. Be more neutral.[[User:Alloco1|Alloco1]] 12:34, 27 September 2007 (EDT)
:Good luck pal, I've been saying that for months. And watch your language, they'll ban you for that here. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 12:46, 27 September 2007 (EDT)

==Politics and science==

Dr. Ronald Bayer, writing in Homosexuality And American Psychiatry: The Politics Of Diagnosis said the APA decision was a political one, not a scientific one: "The result [of the APA removal of homosexuality from the DSM] was not a conclusion based upon an approximation of the scientific truth as dictated by reason, but was instead an action demanded by the ideological temper of the times." [http://traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/Homosexuality101.pdf]
==Liberal Deceit==
I suggest we change the category from Deceit to Liberal Deceit because liberals universally support the gay agenda. --[[User:Konservativekanadian|Konservativekanadian]] 22:26, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
*Good idea! --[[User:TK|şŷŝoρ-₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Ṣρёаќǃ]] 23:08, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
::Bad idea. It's not deceit. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] 23:16, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
Again I find myself disturbed by the language of absolutes that have infested this site. There are liberal and homosexual philosophies mentioned in this site that some liberals and homosexuals don't have simply because they don't know about them- and it's certainly not a stretch of the imagination to say these people are generally ignorant. Are children in Africa who die young damned simply because a missionary doesn't exist where they live and they couldn't have possibly heard the good news about Christ? I think not. I believe they get another chance to. --[[User:Pious|Pious]] 18:26, 24 June 2011 (CDT)

==Sources?==

Are there any sources besides those accusing the gay agenda? There's no evidence of any organized "agenda", and all of the goals and such are provided by those opposing it. Best case, this is an article about a pundit talking point, and worst case it's a conspiracy theory masked as an encyclopedia article. Shouldn't it at least mention that there has never been any evidence of even a mildly organized or centralized gay agenda? The fact that it's permanently locked further undermines CP credibility. [[User:RWest|RWest]] 12:32, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Specific suggestion:
:Focus on the Family quotes below from a leading book in the homosexual movement which outlines the points of the homosexual agenda:
There is no source cited here. The source is "The Overhauling of Straight America," an article which appeared in the November 1987 issue of a gay magazine called ''The Guide''. [[User:Shii|Shii]] 22:44, 23 November 2007 (EST)

:: Thanks, I just added an online link to it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:04, 23 November 2007 (EST)

== Mottos? ==

The edit replacing "beliefs" with "mottos" was unjustified. There is a (baseless) belief system inherent in the homosexual agenda.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:41, 12 October 2008 (EDT)

== References: "small looks better" ==

Why? All the other articles I've seen have references at regular text size. What's particular about this article that it needs to have really tiny footnotes? [[User:Sideways|Sideways]] 17:24, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

==Homosexuality in Congress==

In a recent discussion with a friend of mine, we discussed what is here called the "homosexual agenda". In addition to the notion of whether "everyone has an agenda" (something I would consider adding to the Debate pool if anyone would like clarification of my terms/beliefs here, I brought up the notion of whether or not there exists a disproportionate number of homosexuals or, unfortunately, scandals regarding previously latent homosexual desires among otherwise Conservative men (Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Bob Allen, the Glenn Murphy scandal), and whether this constitutes the corrupting nature of power, or, as my friend (a somewhat eccentric, Ron Paul-supporter type) suggests, whether these men are "moles" (his term, not mine) representing a quote, "homo infiltration". To put it bluntly, imagine the Manchurian Candidate, but with sodomy.

I was wondering if anyone here (I imagine you have all put some effort into the research and sourcing for this article) had ever heard trustworthy sources, blogs, or essays dealing with such a belief. I obviously don't support the endorsement of wingnut theories, but if it is a more widespread belief among self-avowed Republicans and conservatives, then I think it bears mentioning. I wait to see if any such evidence exists. [[User:MICasey|MICasey]] 10:48, 9 September 2009 (EDT)

==Iran?==
This site considers Iran as an example for how to deal with homosexuals?? I hope this is a joke; otherwise, this is one of the sickest, most hateful websites I've ever seen. You claim to follow Jesus, and then condone executing homosexuals?? This must be an example of following the hard-ass God of the Old Testament.{{unsigned|User:Pete5383}}

:This site does not condone the murder of homosexuals by the state. It is a true statement on Iran and most Muslim countries are no different. So yes, they oppose the homosexual agenda but that doesn't correspond to the section which talks of political/cultural opposition. Instead, a foreign section needs created and the FACTS put in the proper place.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:37, 17 August 2010 (EDT)

==Merge from "pro-Gay"==

Thanks for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&curid=69968&diff=877518&oldid=877453&rcid=1187531 merging this point] from the "[[pro-gay]]" article. I sure wish I had '''bothered to look''' for the diff before undoing your careful work. *sigh* --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 16:44, 9 June 2011 (EDT)

==Homophobes==

Westboro is probably the only authentically "[[homophobic]]" group in the USA. They used to have a "God hates fags" website. No one takes them seriously, on either side of the ideological battle lines. They are the poster boys for [[hate speech]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:00, 2 October 2011 (EDT)

==Charity==

:Cut from lede:

:* Liberals generally give much less than conservatives to charity, but charity work by gays in particular is virtually non-existent.

:This needs references, if true. But I don't believe it - or maybe I just don't understand it. Isn't [[Gay Men's Health Crisis]] a [[charity]]? (Or is it merely a [[non-profit organization]] '''without''' a charitable purpose? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:44, 12 October 2011 (EDT)

Just happened to see this, and so here is some data:

On average, weekly churchgoers donate 3.8% of their income to charity, compared to 0.8% for those who never go. Independent Sector (charitable clearing house): Atheists won't save Europe by Don Feder; http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27937

Religious citizens who make $49,000 gave away about 3.5 times as much money as secular citizens with the same income. They also volunteered twice as often, are 57 percent more likely to help homeless persons, and two-thirds more likely to give blood at their workplace. Arthur C. Brooks' Who Really Cares. http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2008/001/8.11.html

In 2006, Americans gave 1.66% of their aggregate income to charity, with donations totaling US$182 billion. This rate of giving is more than double that of Canadians, who gave 0.76% of aggregate income (CA$8.4 billion in total) to charity in 2006. http://www.fraserinstitute.org/commerce.web/product_files/Generosity_Index_2008.pdf

See [http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Statistical_Correlations.html here] for a table of many comparison btwn states, and [http://247wallst.com/2011/12/15/americas-most-and-least-charitable-states/2/ here] for recent stats on giving per state.

$8.8 billion worth of goods and services that churches are giving overseas to developing (“Third World”) countries. This figures out to be nearly 40 percent of the foreign aid provided by the United States to the same region. U.S. foreign aid to those same countries is $23.5 billion. Carol Adelman of the Hudson Institute, from Notre Dame University study. http://www.onenewsnow.com/Church/Default.aspx?id=118566

Giving as a percentage of income was higher at the depth of the Great Depression in the 1930s (3.3 percent of per capita income in 1933) than after a half-century of unprecedented prosperity (2.5 percent in 2004) John Ronsvalle and Sylvia Ronsvalle, The State of Church Giving through 2004: Will We Will? 16th ed. (Champaign, Ill.: Empty Tomb, 2006). ^

The proportion of adults who tithe dropped by 62 percent in the past year. (2) Just 6 percent of born-again households tithed to their churches in 2002. (3) Tithing, when it occurs, is generally among Protestants: 5 percent of adults who attend Protestant churches tithed last year, compared to less than one-tenth of 1 percent among Catholics. (4) Among the groups most likely to tithe are people over 55, college graduates, Evangelicals, Republicans, conservatives, and residents of the South—but there was no segment among which at least 10 percent tithed. George Barna. News release by Barna Research Group, May 19, 2003. ^

Including religious, American households overall gave 3.5% of their income to charity, with approx. 33% going to to religious institutions. Utah was the state with the highest average per-capita charitable contributions, followed by Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee and Arkansas. Professor Arthur Brooks, 2005. http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2005/February/200502181639511CJsamohT5.593508e-02.html

A liberal researcher who was surprised at finding that showed conservatives being more giving, set out to do a more thorough analysis, only to confirm the findings: http://blog.geoiq.com/2009/01/07/dataset-of-the-day-who-is-more-generous-republicans-or-democrats/

Also, the top 10 most generous countries are:

1. United States
2. Ireland
3. Australia
4. New Zealand
5. United Kingdom
6. Netherlands
7. Canada
8. Sri Lanka
9. Thailand
10. Laos

The United States’ first place in the rankings marks a significant improvement from 2010, when it ranked fifth. Other countries making significant gains include Liberia, which went from 39 to 14, and Morocco, which leapt from 33 to 12. http://www.worldvision.org/news/new-report-ranks-most-generous-countries. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 22:27, 27 February 2012 (EST)

==Kirk and Madsen==
The WP page on Marshall Kirk [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Kirk#Health] has this but which i cannot find a source for:

"Marshall suffered from severe migraine headaches that were preceded by a strong desire to talk in a rapid monologue. He found that if he gave into these "babbling fits", the headache would be alleviated. He had other medical problems and suffered from bouts of depression that required electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) on three occasions. Because of the negative effects on his memory, he considered ECT to be the last alternative to avoid death. In part due to this medical history, his knowledge of pharmacology was usually greater than that of anyone who treated him. When he died, he was found alone in his apartment by two friends."

Also cannot find anything on Hunter Madsen (pen name "Erastes== Pill")[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 23:54, 24 February 2012 (EST)

==Article title==
Shouldn't this title be lower cased as [[Homosexual agenda]]? It's too bad we can't give it a title with more bite, something like, "The sodomites and their enablers." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 05:23, 17 January 2014 (EST)

== Please explain edit ==

Why, exactly, was [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&curid=69968&diff=1363708&oldid=1350140 this info removed] from the article? Regardless, it is a lot of info and well-sourced. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:03, 27 July 2017 (EDT)

== "Opposing Christian Agenda" section ==

I know this section is intended to reflect what homosexual activists say about Christians. However, I do have some concerns about it. 
Firstly, the use of "agenda" suggests that Christians are pushing some new or different thing secretly. They aren't, they are just staying the same, while the culture changes around them. Well, actually many churches are changing with the culture too, but that's a different discussion altogether. Regarding the bullets, 
point 1: I think I'll reword that, but it is a valid point. Salvation army (a christian org.) will at all costs avoid hiring unrepentant homosexuals, especially for such public-facing jobs. 
point 2: No argument there--this is fine 
point 3: They help to publish material with is contrary to the the propaganda from activists. Oh yes, and that information happens to be factual, unlike the stuff the liberals crank out. 
point 4: Christians have almost no control over this at all. Liberals own the media. 
point 5: Christians actually do very little lobbying compared to liberal activists. Additionally, unlike liberals, the christians operate on a firm moral code which prevents them from offering brides. Since lobbying is driven largely by bribes, the efforts of Christians have almost no teeth. (I still don't want them offering bribes though) 
point 6: "sinner" yes, but there is also "love the sinner, hate the sin" 

Again, I know this is supposed to be what homosexual activists say about Christians, but I think I'm going to make some edits to tone it down a bit. However, this section is altogether off-topic for this page anyway, so I would not be opposed to it being completely removed, or moved to another page. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 23:28, 1 February 2018 (EST)
:I didn't see your mainspace edit until now -- it's a little better. I originally wanted to delete the section, but (if there's a will to actually do it), I think it would be better to completely revamp that section to add examples of promoters of the homosexual/cultural Marxist agenda trying to marginalize, attack, and persecute Christians and Christian values. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:02, 3 February 2018 (EST)
::I [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&diff=1403183&oldid=1402879 removed] the section. Hopefully, I or someone else will find the time/resources to add a section about homosexual agenda efforts to marginalize Christian views. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:06, 7 February 2018 (EST)

== i talked about the transgender murders, LGBTQ+ suicides and lessons in the bible ==

I know many of you may think I'm being crazy right now but there is a much higher chance of being murdered if you are transgender. I have three sources that show this here:
https://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2015/may/13/garnet-coleman/garnet-coleman-said-transgender-person-has-1-12-ch/
http://time.com/3999348/transgender-murders-2015/
http://transstudent.org/transvis.pdf
and members of the LGBTQ+ community or people questioning their sexuality are more likely to commit suicide according to these sources:
https://www.thetrevorproject.org/resources/preventing-suicide/facts-about-suicide/#sm.0001rf6hd7khwehfzmm1yoh6yynxe
https://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/youth-programs.htm
https://www.nami.org/Find-Support/LGBTQ
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-lgbt-teen-suicide/lgbt-youth-at-higher-risk-for-suicide-attempts-idUSKCN1MI1SL

And it is websites like this that make people think that it is okay to bully your peers who are a part of the LGBTQ+ and when members of the LGBTQ+ community see it they remember how much oppression they face and how many people could harm, rape, or kill them because of what they identify as.

And how does the LGBTQ+ community affect you besides 'being against god's law'? Know what else is said to be against god's law in a way being rich. Remember the bible story about the rich man asking what he could do to join him in heaven?

Jesus said to give all his possession to the needy correct? All of them. Yet you are still here able to access and edit this website with your phones or computers while people starve and die of water poisoning in Africa.

And yes, I have not been as aware of those outcomes either, but Jesus said to make sure you are pure right and just as well as without sin before judging others. I ask you what is this page? Judging others.

unsigned post by [[User:What-up-yall|What-up-yall]] ([[User talk:What-up-yall|talk]]) 13:19, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:[https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2018/july/fascist-crackdown-canadian-christian-faces-jail-time-for-expressing-his-beliefs-at-gay-pride-event] [https://www.dailysignal.com/2017/06/27/new-law-canada-remove-kids-parents-reject-transgender-ideology/] [https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/08/california-law-threatens-jail-time-dissenters-transgender-dogma/] This is what the LGBTQRSTUV movement is doing to us, and there are many more examples. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 14:35, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

::Explaining to others that homosexuality/transgenderism are sinful and damaging behaviors (this is according to the Bible, not ourselves) cannot and shouldn't be compared to bullying -- two completely different things. Christians don't bully/mock homosexuals (actually, much of the bullying/slander comes from either secular people or liberals themselves), but they stand firmly by their view that those behaviors are morally wrong, just as alcoholism or vandalism are wrong.

::And yes, Shobson20 is completely correct that the "LGBTQ+ community" is assaulting theologically conservative Christians -- any Christian who believes marriage is between one man and one woman for life, or who believes there are only two genders will be mocked, harassed, and even prosecuted (Colorado baker, etc., etc.) -- see the [[Liberal bigotry]] article, for example. So, in response to your question "''how does the LGBTQ+ community affect you''", it is affecting Christians big time.

::Also, you misinterpreted the account of the rich young ruler -- the problem was not the inherent fact that he had a lot of money, but that those possessions were an idol to him, preventing him from surrendering to Jesus and following him. He was bound to those things and couldn't give them up to follow Christ. Nowhere, however, does it say that money or possessions are inherently bad -- the Bible says that the love of money is the root of many evils, but not money itself.[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+6%3A10&version=ESV] Also, some passages appear to promote good money management, with one of Jesus's parables being about a master who rewards the servants who make the biggest profit (see [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A14-30&version=ESV Matthew 25:14–30]). Also, see this: [https://www.gotquestions.org/poor-vs-rich.html] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:55, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:::Also, you're taking a single Bible passage about judging others way out of context -- many passages of the Bible call on believers to discern between right and wrong (for example, Matthew 7:6, 15-16; John 7:24). Per John 7:24, Christians should "judge correctly," and this means they should not throw out correct doctrine in the name of postmodern "tolerance." There are two good articles explaining what the Bible says about judging others in further detail: [https://www.gotquestions.org/do-not-judge.html][https://answersingenesis.org/bible-questions/does-the-bible-tell-christians-to-judge-not/] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:55, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
::::Whether you translate ''agape'' as "love" or "charity" (1 Cor. 13:13), it's easy to see why casual browsers can have a hard time finding much evidence of it around here.
::::And given the size of your editor base / audience vs. the millions of conservative Christians you're supposedly producing content for, that's something you might all do well to ponder. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:02, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::::So, what you're saying, JohnZ, is that we in this website must cave in to the left's way of thinking. Is that what you're saying, JohnZ? Is that what your version of "love" means? That we have to tolerate everyone, behavior included? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 17:31, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

::::::@JohnZ: Love is not synonymous (actually, it's an antonym) with failure to discern between what is morally right and wrong, and popularity is not an indicator of truth. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:12, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::::(edit conflict) Also, keep in mind that we don't oppose homosexuality or transgenderism because we simply dislike it or have some "subconscious hatred" or whatever -- we're simply repeating what the Bible says, as the ultimate source of authority. For example, [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1&version=ESV Romans 1:26-27] states that homosexuality not only is sinful behavior, but that it's also punishment for sinful behavior (remember, this is the New Testament--good bye to your notions that it's all just "Old Testament stuff"). Also, [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+6&version=ESV 1 Corinthians 6:9-10] lists homosexuality as an act that indicates that one is not saved. Also, see [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+1&version=ESV 1 Timothy 1:9-10]. There are other passages that deal with the topic of marriage (see Jesus's statement in [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+19&version=ESV Matthew 19:4-5], for example). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:12, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
=== JohnZ: Excerpt, picture and caption from Conservapedia's flagship [[homosexuality]] article ===

[[Image:FacProfilemontoya.jpg‎|right|150px|thumb|Dr. [[Alex D. Montoya]] wrote:"The [[Christianity|Christian]] needs to befriend and witness to the homosexual with such [[love]], [[compassion]], and [[wisdom]] that such will respond to the saving [[grace]] of [[God]]."[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj11h.pdf] ]]
{{clear}}
JohnZ, here is a quote from Conservapedia's flagship [[homosexuality]] article: "In his essay which examines the biblical passages regarding homosexuality, Pastor and Associate Professor of Pastoral Ministries at [[The Master's Seminary]] Dr. [[Alex D. Montoya]] states that 'The [[Christianity|Christian]] needs to befriend and witness to the homosexual with such [[love]], [[compassion]], and [[wisdom]] that such will respond to the saving [[grace]] of [[God]].'"[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj11h.pdf]

JohnZ, I hope this helps clarifies Conservapedia's views on homosexuals.

By the way, have you read the article: [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]]?[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:39, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:Aye, more stuff like that Montoya quote would probably be helpful. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:51, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
::Let me also share with you something a Pastor once said: "Marriage is by definition heterosexual. This is the definition of it...that doesn't mean we don't love our homosexual friends, we love them, we share Christ with them, but we do not affirm for them that what they have is by definition marriage, it is not. And it doesn't matter to me what the State eventually says." (This was before Obergefell v. Hodges, the second-worst act of legislating from the bench since Roe v. Wade.) Understand that the biblical definition of "love" is a DO, not a FEEL, that clarifies the often misunderstood verse of how God "loved Jacob but hated Isau" or how "the man that spares the rod hates his son, but the man who loves his son is careful to discipline him." [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 19:03, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::Yeah, that works, too. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 19:08, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

=== Pro-homosexuality activist: Put this in your victimhood pipe and smoke it!!! ===

Pro-homosexuality activist: Please see: [[Homosexuality and Murders]] and [[Homosexual Couples and Domestic Violence]]

I hope this helps clarify matters for you.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:21, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:I love it:

::when members of the LGBTQ+ community see it they remember how much oppression they face and how many people could harm, rape, or kill them because of what they identify as.

:In addition to what was said above, I thought homosexual identitarians were excited about their new found acceptance, proved by their ability to force people to regard their unions as marriage. That's even an out-and-out privilege, not a right. How could that be if they "face" so "much oppression"? Actually this sounds more like they're doubling down their grievance techniques because they're greedy for more privileges.

:And What-up-yall, how could they "face oppression...because of what they identify as"? You imposed your own identity on them by referring them as "the LGBTQ+ community" and became their self-proclaimed spokesman!

:How do you know any of those people want to belong with all the members or even every group in the same alphabet soup union you cooked up?

:All this is dazzle camouflage that keeps everything up in the air, the better to hide the guilt of male homosexuals spreading a fatal venereal disease over the course of the last third of the century, when it could have been stopped in one year, and all they had to do was practice abstinence.

:You didn't capitalize "God" but you capitalized at the beginning of sentences. I'm blocking you for a week, for being incivil. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 16:43, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

==Shock therapy==
A citation is needed for the statement that [[shock therapy]] is a "scientifically proven method of homosexual conversion". Thank you. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 02:47, June 29, 2021 (EDT)
==Cannot edit but here are two more links for substantiation==
While it seems that much any text from "After the Ball" has been expunged from the Internet, this page provides the text from "THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA" by Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill: http://library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm showing the psychological tactics that the section of the CP article quotes from, but with the only link to the actual text at length being from from Google books, which only provides very brief excerpts.

Note also that the cited link www.parentsofgaychildren.org is no longer available at this time and needs to direct to https://web.archive.org/web/20180319222723/http://parentsofgaychildren.org/. I could normally do so (as a primary editor to the psychological tactics section of the article, but for some unexplained reason I am no longer allowed to do so, perhaps since I have not logged in for some time. Also, attempts to access or publish requires two tries, as Service Unavailable is the first.Daniel1212 20:19, December 17, 2022 (EST)

:The page is unlocked for editing. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']] 20:28, December 17, 2022 (EST)
::Thanks but I see no references when I try to edit it, thus I cannot edit: parentsofgaychildren.org ''to'' https://web.archive.org/web/20180319222723/http://parentsofgaychildren.org). Maybe I could manually write an edit for the other link, but as of now it the page seems to be in a form of "safe mode." Sorry for not keeping up on things here. I do understand however, why this page would need to be locked, esp. this section (which I myself provided much to in the past, by God's grace, and have often linked to), since it is targeted, yet which page is due to the provocative pushing of LGBTQ propaganda. Daniel1212

==Admin HELP needed!!!==
After receiving no response to my post above on the inability to see or add any refs,as one of the main editors on this page I went ahead and did added the reference , expecting that the others I could not see would show up once saved. However, all is deleted except for the first section! I deleted nothing, and I tried Undo but it does not do so. So I copied the text in that section since I duplicated the tab before I tried to edit, and posted that, but once saved then no references are show. Please revert. Here is the recent archive version is that would help: https://web.archive.org/web/20221213223909/https://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual_Agenda Sorry for the mess, but something is wrong that you cannot edit correctly. Daniel1212 23:19, December 21, 2022 (EST)

:I'm not sure I understand the problem. I restored to the version before you started editing. Want to try again? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']] 23:26, December 21, 2022 (EST)

::Thank God you could restore it, since I could not. However, what I explained was that while I have edit access, when I open any section to do so, in particular Strategies and psychological tactics, then not footnotes are shown, meaning that anything such as this (from the page before opened up for editing:

::This includes the use of demonstrative protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way.[46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57] In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality.[58] Another strategy used by supporters of the homosexual agenda is to publicly deny that such an agenda exists.[59]

::Results in this when opened up for editing:
::This includes the use of demonstrative protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way. In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality. Another strategy used by supporters of the homosexual agenda is to publicly deny that such an agenda exists.

Thus all 13 footnotes are not shown when opened up for editing, and if I proceed to ad a ref then it results in the destructive data described under Admin Help needed. I suspect therefore that someone for some reason placed some sort of blocking on me [edit: yet I can see refs on other pages], or just on this page which is not simply unwarranted (as I am not any kind of vandal, but have been a main editor on the section at issue, and on some other articles in time past. User Conservative- if he is till here - can attest to this but it is also dangerous, as seen. Thus your help is appreciated. Daniel1212 12:41, December 23, 2022 (EST)
==Editing problem resolved==
Further investigation revealed that the same absence of references in edit mode also occurred in Wikipedia, thus pointing to the problem being on my end. Restarting Firefox with all extensions disabled resolved the issue, and thus I proceeded to restart normally and selectively disable a few extensions, and soon - but sadly - found the problematic one, for it was the[Bible Previewer extension (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bible-previewer/?utm_source=addons.mozilla.org&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=search), which I really like, since it renders Bible references into visible popups! But somehow the coding for wikitext refs gets nuked. Since I also have that extension on the Chromium-based Vivaldi browser then the same issue occurred in that one. Thus I need to disable that extension on the browser I use for wiki editing, and will let the developer know of the issue.

Sorry for the confusion but thank God it is resolved. Daniel1212 09:48, December 30, 2022 (EST)

Talk:Homosexual Agenda

2022-12-26T11:14:43Z

Daniel1212: /* Admin HELP needed!!! */

Talk:Homosexual Agenda

2022-12-23T17:41:14Z

Daniel1212: /* Admin HELP needed!!! */

Scalia mentioned that in a dissenting opinion, which isn't binding law. --[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 00:59, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

== Vic Eliason passage should be removed ==

I write this because I have met VE here in Wisconsin and believe he'd be uncomfortable with the logic of including this information in this particular article. The passage: "Vic Eliason of Crosstalk America rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies." Nobody believes that homosexuality is contagious, like a virus, and the probability is 0% that "all Americans" would turn homosexual. I doubt that any homosexual, including activist leaders, would think it would be possible at all or even desirable. There is as little temptation for a heterosexual to want homosexual sex as there is for homosexuals to want heterosexual sex. Also, the comment about the US being more vulnerable to attack because the country doesn't procreate also makes no sense, given that the likelihood of that happening for this reason is 0%. Three other potential problems. 1) The passage is completely undocumented. 2) The link for biographical information for VE is to Wikipedia. Couldn't someone here write an article about him for CP? He has been, after all, a leading figure in Christian radio for 40+ years. 3) Besides being unrelated to the topic of the article and having 0% possibility of describing a real situation, the passage detracts from the credibility of the article and CP. This passage should be removed.

== WOV's got a point ==

Not only that, but this entire article is biased tripe. It presents the "homosexual agenda" from a one-sided perspective, and is filled with hate commentary. '''I recommend the entire thing for deletion.'''

Scalia's remark is regretful and a blemish on the pages of the U.S. Reporter, up there with Scott v. Sanford. But let's not expand it still further.

I have cleaned up biased and vitriolic language as best as I can, but this entry deserves deletion.

Seconded. If this is a homosexual agenda, then what homosexual wrote it? This is nothing but political game-playing: Identify a group as ''The Enemy'' and then brand them haters and abusers of family, children, and country. It makes dehumanising them so much easier. - Suricou

: I didn't see anything "hateful" in it. The Scalia reference was not intended to be about what is binding law, obviously. There was nothing binding about his phrase. I'll note that it was in dissent.

: The edits to this article were completely inappropriate, turning it into a liberal puff piece. Wikipedia exists for that. Actually, your edits made this even more liberal than Wikipedia's article on the same topic!

: The hour is very late and I need to lock this page to guard against vandalism or conversion to a liberal message. I can unlock tomorrow. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 02:11, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: Presenting both points doesn't make it a liberal puff piece! It presented only one perspective (Focus on the Family), and referred to the Shepard incident as OVERBLOWN. That's awful!! I consider my entry a moderate tack, but if you can think of an acceptable compromise that preserves an unbiased perspective, be my guest. It shocks me to see you go against your own commandments, though, about not including bias, and not importing a political perspective. I have tried to, and continue to try to, do the same.--[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 02:13, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:Instead of the http://www.citizenlink.org/CLFeatures/A000000562.cfm cite you may want to use this one [http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.htm] This cite goes straight (NPI) to a section of the book ''After the Ball''. -)[[User:Cracker|Cracker]][[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]] 02:24, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: Thanks. Will do tomorrow. Goodnight, Cracker!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 02:25, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

I would definitely change the "promote homosexuality in schools" to "promote acceptance of homosexuality in schools". Definitely sounds like they're trying to make me gay. --[[User:Splark|Splark]] 21:45, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

:I agree with the comments of [[User:AmesG|AmesG]] and [[User:Splark|Splark]]. The idea that one's ideological opponents have a specific "agenda" is an all-too common one, but such agendas are more often touted by those who oppose than by those who support a group. That a Supreme Court Justice referred to it, or that it's in some leaflet somewhere, isn't substantive evidence that it exists.. [[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 18:22, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

Aren't those five points of the "homosexual agenda" linked to more of a strategy than an "agenda"? And, aren't they the standard strategy for all interest groups? 1. Talk about your issue. 2. Show your group is harmed unless you get what you want. 3. Provide facts so people can justify agreeing with you. 4. Portray yourself and your point of view as right and moral. 5. Portray your opponents and their point of view as wrong and immoral. 6. Get corporate or other financial support. Every group and lobbying organization does that, and I don't know that singling out gays and the gay rights movement as doing that is really informative.--[[User:Epicurius|Epicurius]] 11:23, 15 March 2007 (ED

I will go on the record and say that yes, there is a homosexual agenda. As a homosexual myself, I'm pretty much in the middle of it. All we want is to be treated the same as any other tax-paying American. If my partner is injured, I would like to be able to have the same visitation and decision-making power as a husband/wife would. I would like to be able to transfer property when I die without having to jump through a million legal hoops. Many people claim that we want "special" rights. We really don't. We just want to be treated the same as everyone else.--[[User:Patthew|Patthew]] 12:01, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

I think this page is extremely biased. It presents only one side of the issue and is locked to prevent the other side from responding. Proof of a bias of another kind here.
-Gasmonkey

== Everything you post must be true and verifiable ==

This entry violates the first (and perhaps most important) Conservapedia commandment. There is no homosexual "agenda" -- no "they" who "wrote a book", no 10-point plan. It's the same kind of paranoid nonsense that's in the articles here on Joseph McCarthy and Alger Hiss (WP has far more accurate articles on both subjects, with the one on Hiss very clearly identifying areas of controversy), with conspiracy-theorist types quoting and sourcing one another. I propose this entire article for immediate deletion. [[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 10:56, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Agreed. The "Homosexual agenda" is no more factual than the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Delete, or recreate as an article about the popular (?) but false belief in this "agenda." [[User:Pkoad|Pkoad]] 00:21, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

:It refers to the [[gay rights]] activism, which may be a [[grassroots]] movement but which has multiple goals which are easily identified. The Liberal POV that such goals are non-existent is a kind of denialism.

:It will be good for the article to discuss this denial, in conjunction with [[gay rights]] critics who oppose the points which the denialists says no one advances. (Not worded right, but I think you get the gist.) See you all tomorrow. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 00:29, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

::There's no more gay agenda other than there was a "black agenda" before ''Brown'' came down. The gay agenda is equal treatment. Oh no, quick, ma, shut the doors! Equality's a-comin'!-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]

:::I'd say "keep it" so the world can really see how these strange nutkins think. But in the interest of humanity, decency, and honesty, it is a pack of paranoid, politico-religious agenda lies. Really, really strange nutjob lies. [[User:Human|Human]] 02:51, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

:'''Keep:'''Let's assume for one moment that the homosexual agenda is complete hogwash and homosexual activists don't believe in it: Isn't the fact that Conservative Christians do believe in it enough to keep the article so that the "opinions" of Christians about homosexual activists be here. The fact that many talk about it is clear evidence that this is a valid article--[[User:Djcreativity|Djcreativity]] 15:47, 9 May 2009 (EDT)
::Shouldn't we present information that is factual, and not misleading, though? If the intention of the article was to present Christian responses to gay rights activism, it should be presented as such. Given that ''After the Ball'' was published twenty years ago, presenting it as an active force in the gay rights movement (rather than as a foundation of the movement as a whole) is a bit disingenuous, don't you think? If we were talking about the Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam we could reference Malcom X and Louis Farrakhan, but to act as though their works were part of current politics and national discourse would be misguided at best, and flatly wrong, at worst. --[[User:Jfavor|Jfavor]] 00:40, 20 May 2009 (EDT)

== Opposing Christian Agenda ==

I can't work out what the point of the "Opposing Christian Agenda" section is. The sentences don't make sense, and the referenced page does not mention homosexuality or gay. I propose the section be deleted by someone with the privilege to edit the article. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 01:33, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

:I think it's not nearly explicit enough. More than anything else except perhaps abortion, the homosexual subversion of Christian values is illustrative of the influence of Satan upon liberals and other leftists, and his influence through them on our society. Should I rework the section to include such? --[[User:Nathan|Nathan]] 22:20, 11 February 2009 (EST)

== Improvements ==

Shouldn't ''Gayness'' in part 1. of the agenda be ''Gaiety''?
The term ''[[homosexual protectors]]'' in part three surely merits its own article. Is this the same as ''[[Homosexualist]]s''? [[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 07:11, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

:Any attempt to trivialize or confuse the issue will be frowned upon here. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 07:22, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

We should delete the cite at the bottom saying that homosexuality caused Nazism. That's a truly disturbing allegation.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 12:59, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

:Especially considering that the Nazis actually murdered thousands of homosexuals during World War II.--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 18:32, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
::Yes they did, but it was because of Hitler. NOT homosexuality. And waaay more Jews were killed than homosexuals, giving Jews a larger spotlight. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] I'm liberal, but I don't edit pages-just [[User talk:Clorox|talk page]]s. don't worry. 23:25, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

'''
I believe langauge needs to be corrected in the the first bullet of the list of homosexual goals. It currently states "Censoring sections of the bible condemning homosexuality." The source cited is an article about an offensive tee shirt being censored not the bible its self. There needs to be eaither a new source about Homosexuals attempting to change the bible or the wording must be changed to "preventing materials that denounce homosexuality from being displayed publicly."

Reference number "8" rrefers back to the Conservapedia site. In order to maintain integrity it must refer to an ouside source if one is not provided the reference and quote should be deleted. Currently it is a logical fallacy and is not up to encyclopedic standards. Someone not dyslexic (i.e. somone who isn't me.) should get on that.

== Very Informative ==
'''

Excellent portrayal of the truth. This is a nice breather from the left-wing saturated wikipedia.com. If you agree with the article, you should check out the highly accurate article on homophobia. Everyone knows that the creation of homophobia is a foundation of the gay agenda.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Homophobia

Wikipedia is subject to open edits that don't reqier an account. Are you suggesting that the monitors of wikipedia aka "everyone who can type" has a liberal bias?

== Is this real? ==

This article seems like a parody. I can't believe that... oh yeah, I'm at conservapedia. I can believe anything. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 12:44, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

As well as the mysterious reference to a "leading book in the homosexual movement", it refers to a book claiming that the Nazi Party supported homosexuality. Clearly this has to be satirical. Either that, or someone has a serious case of paranoia - all the sources, as well as being of dubious credabililty, point towards independent events but the whole point of the page is to talk about a shadowy conspiricy - a 'Secret Society' of homosexuals trying to gayify the world. I suggest deleting the whole page - and if it reappears in a similar form, delete and protect. - [[User:Suricou|Suricou]]

== Agendas ==
So since there are so many references on this wiki to the "homosexual agenda" can we also cite the "Conservative Agenda" or "Republican Agenda" or "Christian Agenda"? {{unsigned|prof0705}}
:I don't see why not, as long as they sourced and reasonably recognizable as phrases in common use. In fact, here, I would expect an article on [[conservative agenda]] to be very good. [[User:Human|Human]] 17:56, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

This article violates the [[Conservapedia:Commandments]] (number 2: cite sources and 5: personal opinion).
#It claims to quote Focus on the Family for the definition of The Homosexual Agenda without giving a specific reference, and FotF is only claimed to be quoting "a leading book in the homosexual movement" without even bothering to name the book or its author.
#The two bulleted points in "The Goals" (about 8-year-old boys and 12-to-14 year olds) are stating as fact the opinion of Craig Osten, a vice president at the Alliance Defense Fund.
#Several of the other references to that section are either citing journalist's or lawyer's opinions, not facts or any quote from the people who are alleged to hold the agenda under discussion.

I am prohibited from editing the page but I suggest that the Agenda is moved to the top, and the original source for it cited, rather than a vague second-hand reference. The judge's quote should then be indented as a block quote so it is more clearly identifiable as quoting the judge. The Goals and Opposing Christian Agenda should be cleaned up and cite proper sources not opinions, or be more clearly marked as only opinions of people who oppose the Homosexual Agenda. If Conservapedia could handle it, even a quote from someone who supports it would be good. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 06:06, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

:[[Conservapedia:Commandments]] (number 2: cite sources and 5: personal opinion) is superceded by [[Conservapedia:Locks and Blocks]]:
::''Sysop's and Bureaucrats are the Administrators of Conservapedia. Their instructions, as to Conservapedia policy and/or the appropriateness or inappropriateness of user actions, are to be followed. Failure to do so will result in the user being blocked.''
:Note: ''Their <nowiki>[</nowiki>[[Special:ListUsers/sysop sysops]]<nowiki>]</nowiki> instructions, as to Conservapedia policy [...] are to be followed'', which means if a sysop has decided it is so it is so. If you continue to argue you may get blocked.
:[[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 07:23, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

What about Hot man on man/woman on woman action? I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that homosexuals were pretty in favor of that.

== Is this really as big as people make it out to be? ==
While I personally do not like anyone being too open about their personal lives, especially concerning anything to do with sex, still when I hear about a "Homosexual Agenda" I can only think of another fear that other people once tried to infect people with: it was called "The Protocols of The Elders of Zion." I think some of you may understand my point... [[User:Jros83|Jros83]] 16:15, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

Yeah, I don't really understand why people even care if someone is homosexual or not. If you're not a homosexual yourself you're not gonna be involved with homosexuality so why even care? It doesn't affect you in that case. If someones is homosexual, then fine. Let them be. Has nothing to do with you. [[User:JohnKite|JohnKite]] 11:33, 28 January 2009 (EST)
:Do you not care about God, JohnKite? Do you not care about His society? Do you not acre about moral erosion, disease, and the future of humanity? Do you not care about what is right and what is wrong? [[User:MauriceB|MauriceB]] 11:35, 28 January 2009 (EST)

==Please remove the reference to Scott Lively's propaganda book==
This is propaganda. It seems you don't allow neutrality here. [[User:GayMan|GayMan]] 21:51, 28 June 2007 (EDT)
:I agree. Numbers 1-5 on there are kinda wrong, and number 6 tops it off as crap. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] 23:11, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

== Hey, now... ==
I'm LGBT and I'm certainly not aware of any sort of "agenda" being discussed. Perhaps this is just a typical case of right-wing paranoia? --[[User:Afi|Afi]] 18:07, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

You're not aware because you're not hive-minded. The agenda is memetic, therefore you're not all going to know about it. --[[User:Pious|Pious]] 18:21, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

==What the hell?==

The “homosexuality agenda" was created by Focus on the Family, which you say later in the article, ACTIVELY OPPOSES homosexuality. You wouldn’t let me post Jon Stewart quotes on the Bush page, so why is this kind of crap aloud here? [[User:Tesfan|Tesfan]] 11:43, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

This is exactly the sort of thing that inspires violence against homosexuals. Be more neutral.[[User:Alloco1|Alloco1]] 12:34, 27 September 2007 (EDT)
:Good luck pal, I've been saying that for months. And watch your language, they'll ban you for that here. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 12:46, 27 September 2007 (EDT)

==Politics and science==

Dr. Ronald Bayer, writing in Homosexuality And American Psychiatry: The Politics Of Diagnosis said the APA decision was a political one, not a scientific one: "The result [of the APA removal of homosexuality from the DSM] was not a conclusion based upon an approximation of the scientific truth as dictated by reason, but was instead an action demanded by the ideological temper of the times." [http://traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/Homosexuality101.pdf]
==Liberal Deceit==
I suggest we change the category from Deceit to Liberal Deceit because liberals universally support the gay agenda. --[[User:Konservativekanadian|Konservativekanadian]] 22:26, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
*Good idea! --[[User:TK|şŷŝoρ-₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Ṣρёаќǃ]] 23:08, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
::Bad idea. It's not deceit. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] 23:16, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
Again I find myself disturbed by the language of absolutes that have infested this site. There are liberal and homosexual philosophies mentioned in this site that some liberals and homosexuals don't have simply because they don't know about them- and it's certainly not a stretch of the imagination to say these people are generally ignorant. Are children in Africa who die young damned simply because a missionary doesn't exist where they live and they couldn't have possibly heard the good news about Christ? I think not. I believe they get another chance to. --[[User:Pious|Pious]] 18:26, 24 June 2011 (CDT)

==Sources?==

Are there any sources besides those accusing the gay agenda? There's no evidence of any organized "agenda", and all of the goals and such are provided by those opposing it. Best case, this is an article about a pundit talking point, and worst case it's a conspiracy theory masked as an encyclopedia article. Shouldn't it at least mention that there has never been any evidence of even a mildly organized or centralized gay agenda? The fact that it's permanently locked further undermines CP credibility. [[User:RWest|RWest]] 12:32, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Specific suggestion:
:Focus on the Family quotes below from a leading book in the homosexual movement which outlines the points of the homosexual agenda:
There is no source cited here. The source is "The Overhauling of Straight America," an article which appeared in the November 1987 issue of a gay magazine called ''The Guide''. [[User:Shii|Shii]] 22:44, 23 November 2007 (EST)

:: Thanks, I just added an online link to it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:04, 23 November 2007 (EST)

== Mottos? ==

The edit replacing "beliefs" with "mottos" was unjustified. There is a (baseless) belief system inherent in the homosexual agenda.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:41, 12 October 2008 (EDT)

== References: "small looks better" ==

Why? All the other articles I've seen have references at regular text size. What's particular about this article that it needs to have really tiny footnotes? [[User:Sideways|Sideways]] 17:24, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

==Homosexuality in Congress==

In a recent discussion with a friend of mine, we discussed what is here called the "homosexual agenda". In addition to the notion of whether "everyone has an agenda" (something I would consider adding to the Debate pool if anyone would like clarification of my terms/beliefs here, I brought up the notion of whether or not there exists a disproportionate number of homosexuals or, unfortunately, scandals regarding previously latent homosexual desires among otherwise Conservative men (Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Bob Allen, the Glenn Murphy scandal), and whether this constitutes the corrupting nature of power, or, as my friend (a somewhat eccentric, Ron Paul-supporter type) suggests, whether these men are "moles" (his term, not mine) representing a quote, "homo infiltration". To put it bluntly, imagine the Manchurian Candidate, but with sodomy.

I was wondering if anyone here (I imagine you have all put some effort into the research and sourcing for this article) had ever heard trustworthy sources, blogs, or essays dealing with such a belief. I obviously don't support the endorsement of wingnut theories, but if it is a more widespread belief among self-avowed Republicans and conservatives, then I think it bears mentioning. I wait to see if any such evidence exists. [[User:MICasey|MICasey]] 10:48, 9 September 2009 (EDT)

==Iran?==
This site considers Iran as an example for how to deal with homosexuals?? I hope this is a joke; otherwise, this is one of the sickest, most hateful websites I've ever seen. You claim to follow Jesus, and then condone executing homosexuals?? This must be an example of following the hard-ass God of the Old Testament.{{unsigned|User:Pete5383}}

:This site does not condone the murder of homosexuals by the state. It is a true statement on Iran and most Muslim countries are no different. So yes, they oppose the homosexual agenda but that doesn't correspond to the section which talks of political/cultural opposition. Instead, a foreign section needs created and the FACTS put in the proper place.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:37, 17 August 2010 (EDT)

==Merge from "pro-Gay"==

Thanks for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&curid=69968&diff=877518&oldid=877453&rcid=1187531 merging this point] from the "[[pro-gay]]" article. I sure wish I had '''bothered to look''' for the diff before undoing your careful work. *sigh* --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 16:44, 9 June 2011 (EDT)

==Homophobes==

Westboro is probably the only authentically "[[homophobic]]" group in the USA. They used to have a "God hates fags" website. No one takes them seriously, on either side of the ideological battle lines. They are the poster boys for [[hate speech]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:00, 2 October 2011 (EDT)

==Charity==

:Cut from lede:

:* Liberals generally give much less than conservatives to charity, but charity work by gays in particular is virtually non-existent.

:This needs references, if true. But I don't believe it - or maybe I just don't understand it. Isn't [[Gay Men's Health Crisis]] a [[charity]]? (Or is it merely a [[non-profit organization]] '''without''' a charitable purpose? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:44, 12 October 2011 (EDT)

Just happened to see this, and so here is some data:

On average, weekly churchgoers donate 3.8% of their income to charity, compared to 0.8% for those who never go. Independent Sector (charitable clearing house): Atheists won't save Europe by Don Feder; http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27937

Religious citizens who make $49,000 gave away about 3.5 times as much money as secular citizens with the same income. They also volunteered twice as often, are 57 percent more likely to help homeless persons, and two-thirds more likely to give blood at their workplace. Arthur C. Brooks' Who Really Cares. http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2008/001/8.11.html

In 2006, Americans gave 1.66% of their aggregate income to charity, with donations totaling US$182 billion. This rate of giving is more than double that of Canadians, who gave 0.76% of aggregate income (CA$8.4 billion in total) to charity in 2006. http://www.fraserinstitute.org/commerce.web/product_files/Generosity_Index_2008.pdf

See [http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Statistical_Correlations.html here] for a table of many comparison btwn states, and [http://247wallst.com/2011/12/15/americas-most-and-least-charitable-states/2/ here] for recent stats on giving per state.

$8.8 billion worth of goods and services that churches are giving overseas to developing (“Third World”) countries. This figures out to be nearly 40 percent of the foreign aid provided by the United States to the same region. U.S. foreign aid to those same countries is $23.5 billion. Carol Adelman of the Hudson Institute, from Notre Dame University study. http://www.onenewsnow.com/Church/Default.aspx?id=118566

Giving as a percentage of income was higher at the depth of the Great Depression in the 1930s (3.3 percent of per capita income in 1933) than after a half-century of unprecedented prosperity (2.5 percent in 2004) John Ronsvalle and Sylvia Ronsvalle, The State of Church Giving through 2004: Will We Will? 16th ed. (Champaign, Ill.: Empty Tomb, 2006). ^

The proportion of adults who tithe dropped by 62 percent in the past year. (2) Just 6 percent of born-again households tithed to their churches in 2002. (3) Tithing, when it occurs, is generally among Protestants: 5 percent of adults who attend Protestant churches tithed last year, compared to less than one-tenth of 1 percent among Catholics. (4) Among the groups most likely to tithe are people over 55, college graduates, Evangelicals, Republicans, conservatives, and residents of the South—but there was no segment among which at least 10 percent tithed. George Barna. News release by Barna Research Group, May 19, 2003. ^

Including religious, American households overall gave 3.5% of their income to charity, with approx. 33% going to to religious institutions. Utah was the state with the highest average per-capita charitable contributions, followed by Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee and Arkansas. Professor Arthur Brooks, 2005. http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2005/February/200502181639511CJsamohT5.593508e-02.html

A liberal researcher who was surprised at finding that showed conservatives being more giving, set out to do a more thorough analysis, only to confirm the findings: http://blog.geoiq.com/2009/01/07/dataset-of-the-day-who-is-more-generous-republicans-or-democrats/

Also, the top 10 most generous countries are:

1. United States
2. Ireland
3. Australia
4. New Zealand
5. United Kingdom
6. Netherlands
7. Canada
8. Sri Lanka
9. Thailand
10. Laos

The United States’ first place in the rankings marks a significant improvement from 2010, when it ranked fifth. Other countries making significant gains include Liberia, which went from 39 to 14, and Morocco, which leapt from 33 to 12. http://www.worldvision.org/news/new-report-ranks-most-generous-countries. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 22:27, 27 February 2012 (EST)

==Kirk and Madsen==
The WP page on Marshall Kirk [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Kirk#Health] has this but which i cannot find a source for:

"Marshall suffered from severe migraine headaches that were preceded by a strong desire to talk in a rapid monologue. He found that if he gave into these "babbling fits", the headache would be alleviated. He had other medical problems and suffered from bouts of depression that required electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) on three occasions. Because of the negative effects on his memory, he considered ECT to be the last alternative to avoid death. In part due to this medical history, his knowledge of pharmacology was usually greater than that of anyone who treated him. When he died, he was found alone in his apartment by two friends."

Also cannot find anything on Hunter Madsen (pen name "Erastes== Pill")[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 23:54, 24 February 2012 (EST)

==Article title==
Shouldn't this title be lower cased as [[Homosexual agenda]]? It's too bad we can't give it a title with more bite, something like, "The sodomites and their enablers." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 05:23, 17 January 2014 (EST)

== Please explain edit ==

Why, exactly, was [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&curid=69968&diff=1363708&oldid=1350140 this info removed] from the article? Regardless, it is a lot of info and well-sourced. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:03, 27 July 2017 (EDT)

== "Opposing Christian Agenda" section ==

I know this section is intended to reflect what homosexual activists say about Christians. However, I do have some concerns about it. 
Firstly, the use of "agenda" suggests that Christians are pushing some new or different thing secretly. They aren't, they are just staying the same, while the culture changes around them. Well, actually many churches are changing with the culture too, but that's a different discussion altogether. Regarding the bullets, 
point 1: I think I'll reword that, but it is a valid point. Salvation army (a christian org.) will at all costs avoid hiring unrepentant homosexuals, especially for such public-facing jobs. 
point 2: No argument there--this is fine 
point 3: They help to publish material with is contrary to the the propaganda from activists. Oh yes, and that information happens to be factual, unlike the stuff the liberals crank out. 
point 4: Christians have almost no control over this at all. Liberals own the media. 
point 5: Christians actually do very little lobbying compared to liberal activists. Additionally, unlike liberals, the christians operate on a firm moral code which prevents them from offering brides. Since lobbying is driven largely by bribes, the efforts of Christians have almost no teeth. (I still don't want them offering bribes though) 
point 6: "sinner" yes, but there is also "love the sinner, hate the sin" 

Again, I know this is supposed to be what homosexual activists say about Christians, but I think I'm going to make some edits to tone it down a bit. However, this section is altogether off-topic for this page anyway, so I would not be opposed to it being completely removed, or moved to another page. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 23:28, 1 February 2018 (EST)
:I didn't see your mainspace edit until now -- it's a little better. I originally wanted to delete the section, but (if there's a will to actually do it), I think it would be better to completely revamp that section to add examples of promoters of the homosexual/cultural Marxist agenda trying to marginalize, attack, and persecute Christians and Christian values. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:02, 3 February 2018 (EST)
::I [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&diff=1403183&oldid=1402879 removed] the section. Hopefully, I or someone else will find the time/resources to add a section about homosexual agenda efforts to marginalize Christian views. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:06, 7 February 2018 (EST)

== i talked about the transgender murders, LGBTQ+ suicides and lessons in the bible ==

I know many of you may think I'm being crazy right now but there is a much higher chance of being murdered if you are transgender. I have three sources that show this here:
https://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2015/may/13/garnet-coleman/garnet-coleman-said-transgender-person-has-1-12-ch/
http://time.com/3999348/transgender-murders-2015/
http://transstudent.org/transvis.pdf
and members of the LGBTQ+ community or people questioning their sexuality are more likely to commit suicide according to these sources:
https://www.thetrevorproject.org/resources/preventing-suicide/facts-about-suicide/#sm.0001rf6hd7khwehfzmm1yoh6yynxe
https://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/youth-programs.htm
https://www.nami.org/Find-Support/LGBTQ
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-lgbt-teen-suicide/lgbt-youth-at-higher-risk-for-suicide-attempts-idUSKCN1MI1SL

And it is websites like this that make people think that it is okay to bully your peers who are a part of the LGBTQ+ and when members of the LGBTQ+ community see it they remember how much oppression they face and how many people could harm, rape, or kill them because of what they identify as.

And how does the LGBTQ+ community affect you besides 'being against god's law'? Know what else is said to be against god's law in a way being rich. Remember the bible story about the rich man asking what he could do to join him in heaven?

Jesus said to give all his possession to the needy correct? All of them. Yet you are still here able to access and edit this website with your phones or computers while people starve and die of water poisoning in Africa.

And yes, I have not been as aware of those outcomes either, but Jesus said to make sure you are pure right and just as well as without sin before judging others. I ask you what is this page? Judging others.

unsigned post by [[User:What-up-yall|What-up-yall]] ([[User talk:What-up-yall|talk]]) 13:19, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:[https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2018/july/fascist-crackdown-canadian-christian-faces-jail-time-for-expressing-his-beliefs-at-gay-pride-event] [https://www.dailysignal.com/2017/06/27/new-law-canada-remove-kids-parents-reject-transgender-ideology/] [https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/08/california-law-threatens-jail-time-dissenters-transgender-dogma/] This is what the LGBTQRSTUV movement is doing to us, and there are many more examples. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 14:35, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

::Explaining to others that homosexuality/transgenderism are sinful and damaging behaviors (this is according to the Bible, not ourselves) cannot and shouldn't be compared to bullying -- two completely different things. Christians don't bully/mock homosexuals (actually, much of the bullying/slander comes from either secular people or liberals themselves), but they stand firmly by their view that those behaviors are morally wrong, just as alcoholism or vandalism are wrong.

::And yes, Shobson20 is completely correct that the "LGBTQ+ community" is assaulting theologically conservative Christians -- any Christian who believes marriage is between one man and one woman for life, or who believes there are only two genders will be mocked, harassed, and even prosecuted (Colorado baker, etc., etc.) -- see the [[Liberal bigotry]] article, for example. So, in response to your question "''how does the LGBTQ+ community affect you''", it is affecting Christians big time.

::Also, you misinterpreted the account of the rich young ruler -- the problem was not the inherent fact that he had a lot of money, but that those possessions were an idol to him, preventing him from surrendering to Jesus and following him. He was bound to those things and couldn't give them up to follow Christ. Nowhere, however, does it say that money or possessions are inherently bad -- the Bible says that the love of money is the root of many evils, but not money itself.[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+6%3A10&version=ESV] Also, some passages appear to promote good money management, with one of Jesus's parables being about a master who rewards the servants who make the biggest profit (see [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A14-30&version=ESV Matthew 25:14–30]). Also, see this: [https://www.gotquestions.org/poor-vs-rich.html] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:55, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:::Also, you're taking a single Bible passage about judging others way out of context -- many passages of the Bible call on believers to discern between right and wrong (for example, Matthew 7:6, 15-16; John 7:24). Per John 7:24, Christians should "judge correctly," and this means they should not throw out correct doctrine in the name of postmodern "tolerance." There are two good articles explaining what the Bible says about judging others in further detail: [https://www.gotquestions.org/do-not-judge.html][https://answersingenesis.org/bible-questions/does-the-bible-tell-christians-to-judge-not/] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:55, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
::::Whether you translate ''agape'' as "love" or "charity" (1 Cor. 13:13), it's easy to see why casual browsers can have a hard time finding much evidence of it around here.
::::And given the size of your editor base / audience vs. the millions of conservative Christians you're supposedly producing content for, that's something you might all do well to ponder. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:02, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::::So, what you're saying, JohnZ, is that we in this website must cave in to the left's way of thinking. Is that what you're saying, JohnZ? Is that what your version of "love" means? That we have to tolerate everyone, behavior included? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 17:31, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

::::::@JohnZ: Love is not synonymous (actually, it's an antonym) with failure to discern between what is morally right and wrong, and popularity is not an indicator of truth. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:12, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::::(edit conflict) Also, keep in mind that we don't oppose homosexuality or transgenderism because we simply dislike it or have some "subconscious hatred" or whatever -- we're simply repeating what the Bible says, as the ultimate source of authority. For example, [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1&version=ESV Romans 1:26-27] states that homosexuality not only is sinful behavior, but that it's also punishment for sinful behavior (remember, this is the New Testament--good bye to your notions that it's all just "Old Testament stuff"). Also, [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+6&version=ESV 1 Corinthians 6:9-10] lists homosexuality as an act that indicates that one is not saved. Also, see [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+1&version=ESV 1 Timothy 1:9-10]. There are other passages that deal with the topic of marriage (see Jesus's statement in [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+19&version=ESV Matthew 19:4-5], for example). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:12, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
=== JohnZ: Excerpt, picture and caption from Conservapedia's flagship [[homosexuality]] article ===

[[Image:FacProfilemontoya.jpg‎|right|150px|thumb|Dr. [[Alex D. Montoya]] wrote:"The [[Christianity|Christian]] needs to befriend and witness to the homosexual with such [[love]], [[compassion]], and [[wisdom]] that such will respond to the saving [[grace]] of [[God]]."[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj11h.pdf] ]]
{{clear}}
JohnZ, here is a quote from Conservapedia's flagship [[homosexuality]] article: "In his essay which examines the biblical passages regarding homosexuality, Pastor and Associate Professor of Pastoral Ministries at [[The Master's Seminary]] Dr. [[Alex D. Montoya]] states that 'The [[Christianity|Christian]] needs to befriend and witness to the homosexual with such [[love]], [[compassion]], and [[wisdom]] that such will respond to the saving [[grace]] of [[God]].'"[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj11h.pdf]

JohnZ, I hope this helps clarifies Conservapedia's views on homosexuals.

By the way, have you read the article: [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]]?[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:39, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:Aye, more stuff like that Montoya quote would probably be helpful. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:51, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
::Let me also share with you something a Pastor once said: "Marriage is by definition heterosexual. This is the definition of it...that doesn't mean we don't love our homosexual friends, we love them, we share Christ with them, but we do not affirm for them that what they have is by definition marriage, it is not. And it doesn't matter to me what the State eventually says." (This was before Obergefell v. Hodges, the second-worst act of legislating from the bench since Roe v. Wade.) Understand that the biblical definition of "love" is a DO, not a FEEL, that clarifies the often misunderstood verse of how God "loved Jacob but hated Isau" or how "the man that spares the rod hates his son, but the man who loves his son is careful to discipline him." [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 19:03, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::Yeah, that works, too. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 19:08, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

=== Pro-homosexuality activist: Put this in your victimhood pipe and smoke it!!! ===

Pro-homosexuality activist: Please see: [[Homosexuality and Murders]] and [[Homosexual Couples and Domestic Violence]]

I hope this helps clarify matters for you.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:21, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:I love it:

::when members of the LGBTQ+ community see it they remember how much oppression they face and how many people could harm, rape, or kill them because of what they identify as.

:In addition to what was said above, I thought homosexual identitarians were excited about their new found acceptance, proved by their ability to force people to regard their unions as marriage. That's even an out-and-out privilege, not a right. How could that be if they "face" so "much oppression"? Actually this sounds more like they're doubling down their grievance techniques because they're greedy for more privileges.

:And What-up-yall, how could they "face oppression...because of what they identify as"? You imposed your own identity on them by referring them as "the LGBTQ+ community" and became their self-proclaimed spokesman!

:How do you know any of those people want to belong with all the members or even every group in the same alphabet soup union you cooked up?

:All this is dazzle camouflage that keeps everything up in the air, the better to hide the guilt of male homosexuals spreading a fatal venereal disease over the course of the last third of the century, when it could have been stopped in one year, and all they had to do was practice abstinence.

:You didn't capitalize "God" but you capitalized at the beginning of sentences. I'm blocking you for a week, for being incivil. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 16:43, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

==Shock therapy==
A citation is needed for the statement that [[shock therapy]] is a "scientifically proven method of homosexual conversion". Thank you. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 02:47, June 29, 2021 (EDT)
==Cannot edit but here are two more links for substantiation==
While it seems that much any text from "After the Ball" has been expunged from the Internet, this page provides the text from "THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA" by Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill: http://library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm showing the psychological tactics that the section of the CP article quotes from, but with the only link to the actual text at length being from from Google books, which only provides very brief excerpts.

Note also that the cited link www.parentsofgaychildren.org is no longer available at this time and needs to direct to https://web.archive.org/web/20180319222723/http://parentsofgaychildren.org/. I could normally do so (as a primary editor to the psychological tactics section of the article, but for some unexplained reason I am no longer allowed to do so, perhaps since I have not logged in for some time. Also, attempts to access or publish requires two tries, as Service Unavailable is the first.Daniel1212 20:19, December 17, 2022 (EST)

:The page is unlocked for editing. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']] 20:28, December 17, 2022 (EST)
::Thanks but I see no references when I try to edit it, thus I cannot edit: parentsofgaychildren.org ''to'' https://web.archive.org/web/20180319222723/http://parentsofgaychildren.org). Maybe I could manually write an edit for the other link, but as of now it the page seems to be in a form of "safe mode." Sorry for not keeping up on things here. I do understand however, why this page would need to be locked, esp. this section (which I myself provided much to in the past, by God's grace, and have often linked to), since it is targeted, yet which page is due to the provocative pushing of LGBTQ propaganda. Daniel1212

==Admin HELP needed!!!==
After receiving no response to my post above on the inability to see or add any refs,as one of the main editors on this page I went ahead and did added the reference , expecting that the others I could not see would show up once saved. However, all is deleted except for the first section! I deleted nothing, and I tried Undo but it does not do so. So I copied the text in that section since I duplicated the tab before I tried to edit, and posted that, but once saved then no references are show. Please revert. Here is the recent archive version is that would help: https://web.archive.org/web/20221213223909/https://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual_Agenda Sorry for the mess, but something is wrong that you cannot edit correctly. Daniel1212 23:19, December 21, 2022 (EST)

:I'm not sure I understand the problem. I restored to the version before you started editing. Want to try again? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']] 23:26, December 21, 2022 (EST)

::Thank God you could restore it, since I could not. However, what I explained was that while I have edit access, when I open any section to do so, in particular Strategies and psychological tactics, then not footnotes are shown, meaning that anything such as this (from the page before opened up for editing:

::This includes the use of demonstrative protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way.[46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57] In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality.[58] Another strategy used by supporters of the homosexual agenda is to publicly deny that such an agenda exists.[59]

::Results in this when opened up for editing:
::This includes the use of demonstrative protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way. In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality. Another strategy used by supporters of the homosexual agenda is to publicly deny that such an agenda exists.

Thus all 13 footnotes are not shown when opened up for editing, and if I proceed to ad a ref then it results in the destructive data described under Admin Help needed. I suspect therefore that someone for some reason placed some sort of blocking on me, which is not simply unwarranted (as I am not any kind of vandal, but have been a main editor on the section at issue, and on some other articles in time past. User Conservative- (if he is till here - can attest to this) but it is also dangerous, as seen. Thus your help is appreciated. Daniel1212 12:41, December 23, 2022 (EST)

Talk:Homosexual Agenda

2022-12-22T04:20:16Z

Daniel1212: /* =Admin HELP needed!!! */

Talk:Homosexual Agenda

2022-12-22T04:19:59Z

Daniel1212: /* Cannot edit but here are two more links for substantiation */

Scalia mentioned that in a dissenting opinion, which isn't binding law. --[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 00:59, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

== Vic Eliason passage should be removed ==

I write this because I have met VE here in Wisconsin and believe he'd be uncomfortable with the logic of including this information in this particular article. The passage: "Vic Eliason of Crosstalk America rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies." Nobody believes that homosexuality is contagious, like a virus, and the probability is 0% that "all Americans" would turn homosexual. I doubt that any homosexual, including activist leaders, would think it would be possible at all or even desirable. There is as little temptation for a heterosexual to want homosexual sex as there is for homosexuals to want heterosexual sex. Also, the comment about the US being more vulnerable to attack because the country doesn't procreate also makes no sense, given that the likelihood of that happening for this reason is 0%. Three other potential problems. 1) The passage is completely undocumented. 2) The link for biographical information for VE is to Wikipedia. Couldn't someone here write an article about him for CP? He has been, after all, a leading figure in Christian radio for 40+ years. 3) Besides being unrelated to the topic of the article and having 0% possibility of describing a real situation, the passage detracts from the credibility of the article and CP. This passage should be removed.

== WOV's got a point ==

Not only that, but this entire article is biased tripe. It presents the "homosexual agenda" from a one-sided perspective, and is filled with hate commentary. '''I recommend the entire thing for deletion.'''

Scalia's remark is regretful and a blemish on the pages of the U.S. Reporter, up there with Scott v. Sanford. But let's not expand it still further.

I have cleaned up biased and vitriolic language as best as I can, but this entry deserves deletion.

Seconded. If this is a homosexual agenda, then what homosexual wrote it? This is nothing but political game-playing: Identify a group as ''The Enemy'' and then brand them haters and abusers of family, children, and country. It makes dehumanising them so much easier. - Suricou

: I didn't see anything "hateful" in it. The Scalia reference was not intended to be about what is binding law, obviously. There was nothing binding about his phrase. I'll note that it was in dissent.

: The edits to this article were completely inappropriate, turning it into a liberal puff piece. Wikipedia exists for that. Actually, your edits made this even more liberal than Wikipedia's article on the same topic!

: The hour is very late and I need to lock this page to guard against vandalism or conversion to a liberal message. I can unlock tomorrow. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 02:11, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: Presenting both points doesn't make it a liberal puff piece! It presented only one perspective (Focus on the Family), and referred to the Shepard incident as OVERBLOWN. That's awful!! I consider my entry a moderate tack, but if you can think of an acceptable compromise that preserves an unbiased perspective, be my guest. It shocks me to see you go against your own commandments, though, about not including bias, and not importing a political perspective. I have tried to, and continue to try to, do the same.--[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 02:13, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:Instead of the http://www.citizenlink.org/CLFeatures/A000000562.cfm cite you may want to use this one [http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.htm] This cite goes straight (NPI) to a section of the book ''After the Ball''. -)[[User:Cracker|Cracker]][[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]] 02:24, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: Thanks. Will do tomorrow. Goodnight, Cracker!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 02:25, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

I would definitely change the "promote homosexuality in schools" to "promote acceptance of homosexuality in schools". Definitely sounds like they're trying to make me gay. --[[User:Splark|Splark]] 21:45, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

:I agree with the comments of [[User:AmesG|AmesG]] and [[User:Splark|Splark]]. The idea that one's ideological opponents have a specific "agenda" is an all-too common one, but such agendas are more often touted by those who oppose than by those who support a group. That a Supreme Court Justice referred to it, or that it's in some leaflet somewhere, isn't substantive evidence that it exists.. [[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 18:22, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

Aren't those five points of the "homosexual agenda" linked to more of a strategy than an "agenda"? And, aren't they the standard strategy for all interest groups? 1. Talk about your issue. 2. Show your group is harmed unless you get what you want. 3. Provide facts so people can justify agreeing with you. 4. Portray yourself and your point of view as right and moral. 5. Portray your opponents and their point of view as wrong and immoral. 6. Get corporate or other financial support. Every group and lobbying organization does that, and I don't know that singling out gays and the gay rights movement as doing that is really informative.--[[User:Epicurius|Epicurius]] 11:23, 15 March 2007 (ED

I will go on the record and say that yes, there is a homosexual agenda. As a homosexual myself, I'm pretty much in the middle of it. All we want is to be treated the same as any other tax-paying American. If my partner is injured, I would like to be able to have the same visitation and decision-making power as a husband/wife would. I would like to be able to transfer property when I die without having to jump through a million legal hoops. Many people claim that we want "special" rights. We really don't. We just want to be treated the same as everyone else.--[[User:Patthew|Patthew]] 12:01, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

I think this page is extremely biased. It presents only one side of the issue and is locked to prevent the other side from responding. Proof of a bias of another kind here.
-Gasmonkey

== Everything you post must be true and verifiable ==

This entry violates the first (and perhaps most important) Conservapedia commandment. There is no homosexual "agenda" -- no "they" who "wrote a book", no 10-point plan. It's the same kind of paranoid nonsense that's in the articles here on Joseph McCarthy and Alger Hiss (WP has far more accurate articles on both subjects, with the one on Hiss very clearly identifying areas of controversy), with conspiracy-theorist types quoting and sourcing one another. I propose this entire article for immediate deletion. [[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 10:56, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Agreed. The "Homosexual agenda" is no more factual than the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Delete, or recreate as an article about the popular (?) but false belief in this "agenda." [[User:Pkoad|Pkoad]] 00:21, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

:It refers to the [[gay rights]] activism, which may be a [[grassroots]] movement but which has multiple goals which are easily identified. The Liberal POV that such goals are non-existent is a kind of denialism.

:It will be good for the article to discuss this denial, in conjunction with [[gay rights]] critics who oppose the points which the denialists says no one advances. (Not worded right, but I think you get the gist.) See you all tomorrow. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 00:29, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

::There's no more gay agenda other than there was a "black agenda" before ''Brown'' came down. The gay agenda is equal treatment. Oh no, quick, ma, shut the doors! Equality's a-comin'!-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]

:::I'd say "keep it" so the world can really see how these strange nutkins think. But in the interest of humanity, decency, and honesty, it is a pack of paranoid, politico-religious agenda lies. Really, really strange nutjob lies. [[User:Human|Human]] 02:51, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

:'''Keep:'''Let's assume for one moment that the homosexual agenda is complete hogwash and homosexual activists don't believe in it: Isn't the fact that Conservative Christians do believe in it enough to keep the article so that the "opinions" of Christians about homosexual activists be here. The fact that many talk about it is clear evidence that this is a valid article--[[User:Djcreativity|Djcreativity]] 15:47, 9 May 2009 (EDT)
::Shouldn't we present information that is factual, and not misleading, though? If the intention of the article was to present Christian responses to gay rights activism, it should be presented as such. Given that ''After the Ball'' was published twenty years ago, presenting it as an active force in the gay rights movement (rather than as a foundation of the movement as a whole) is a bit disingenuous, don't you think? If we were talking about the Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam we could reference Malcom X and Louis Farrakhan, but to act as though their works were part of current politics and national discourse would be misguided at best, and flatly wrong, at worst. --[[User:Jfavor|Jfavor]] 00:40, 20 May 2009 (EDT)

== Opposing Christian Agenda ==

I can't work out what the point of the "Opposing Christian Agenda" section is. The sentences don't make sense, and the referenced page does not mention homosexuality or gay. I propose the section be deleted by someone with the privilege to edit the article. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 01:33, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

:I think it's not nearly explicit enough. More than anything else except perhaps abortion, the homosexual subversion of Christian values is illustrative of the influence of Satan upon liberals and other leftists, and his influence through them on our society. Should I rework the section to include such? --[[User:Nathan|Nathan]] 22:20, 11 February 2009 (EST)

== Improvements ==

Shouldn't ''Gayness'' in part 1. of the agenda be ''Gaiety''?
The term ''[[homosexual protectors]]'' in part three surely merits its own article. Is this the same as ''[[Homosexualist]]s''? [[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 07:11, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

:Any attempt to trivialize or confuse the issue will be frowned upon here. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 07:22, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

We should delete the cite at the bottom saying that homosexuality caused Nazism. That's a truly disturbing allegation.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 12:59, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

:Especially considering that the Nazis actually murdered thousands of homosexuals during World War II.--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 18:32, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
::Yes they did, but it was because of Hitler. NOT homosexuality. And waaay more Jews were killed than homosexuals, giving Jews a larger spotlight. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] I'm liberal, but I don't edit pages-just [[User talk:Clorox|talk page]]s. don't worry. 23:25, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

'''
I believe langauge needs to be corrected in the the first bullet of the list of homosexual goals. It currently states "Censoring sections of the bible condemning homosexuality." The source cited is an article about an offensive tee shirt being censored not the bible its self. There needs to be eaither a new source about Homosexuals attempting to change the bible or the wording must be changed to "preventing materials that denounce homosexuality from being displayed publicly."

Reference number "8" rrefers back to the Conservapedia site. In order to maintain integrity it must refer to an ouside source if one is not provided the reference and quote should be deleted. Currently it is a logical fallacy and is not up to encyclopedic standards. Someone not dyslexic (i.e. somone who isn't me.) should get on that.

== Very Informative ==
'''

Excellent portrayal of the truth. This is a nice breather from the left-wing saturated wikipedia.com. If you agree with the article, you should check out the highly accurate article on homophobia. Everyone knows that the creation of homophobia is a foundation of the gay agenda.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Homophobia

Wikipedia is subject to open edits that don't reqier an account. Are you suggesting that the monitors of wikipedia aka "everyone who can type" has a liberal bias?

== Is this real? ==

This article seems like a parody. I can't believe that... oh yeah, I'm at conservapedia. I can believe anything. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 12:44, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

As well as the mysterious reference to a "leading book in the homosexual movement", it refers to a book claiming that the Nazi Party supported homosexuality. Clearly this has to be satirical. Either that, or someone has a serious case of paranoia - all the sources, as well as being of dubious credabililty, point towards independent events but the whole point of the page is to talk about a shadowy conspiricy - a 'Secret Society' of homosexuals trying to gayify the world. I suggest deleting the whole page - and if it reappears in a similar form, delete and protect. - [[User:Suricou|Suricou]]

== Agendas ==
So since there are so many references on this wiki to the "homosexual agenda" can we also cite the "Conservative Agenda" or "Republican Agenda" or "Christian Agenda"? {{unsigned|prof0705}}
:I don't see why not, as long as they sourced and reasonably recognizable as phrases in common use. In fact, here, I would expect an article on [[conservative agenda]] to be very good. [[User:Human|Human]] 17:56, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

This article violates the [[Conservapedia:Commandments]] (number 2: cite sources and 5: personal opinion).
#It claims to quote Focus on the Family for the definition of The Homosexual Agenda without giving a specific reference, and FotF is only claimed to be quoting "a leading book in the homosexual movement" without even bothering to name the book or its author.
#The two bulleted points in "The Goals" (about 8-year-old boys and 12-to-14 year olds) are stating as fact the opinion of Craig Osten, a vice president at the Alliance Defense Fund.
#Several of the other references to that section are either citing journalist's or lawyer's opinions, not facts or any quote from the people who are alleged to hold the agenda under discussion.

I am prohibited from editing the page but I suggest that the Agenda is moved to the top, and the original source for it cited, rather than a vague second-hand reference. The judge's quote should then be indented as a block quote so it is more clearly identifiable as quoting the judge. The Goals and Opposing Christian Agenda should be cleaned up and cite proper sources not opinions, or be more clearly marked as only opinions of people who oppose the Homosexual Agenda. If Conservapedia could handle it, even a quote from someone who supports it would be good. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 06:06, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

:[[Conservapedia:Commandments]] (number 2: cite sources and 5: personal opinion) is superceded by [[Conservapedia:Locks and Blocks]]:
::''Sysop's and Bureaucrats are the Administrators of Conservapedia. Their instructions, as to Conservapedia policy and/or the appropriateness or inappropriateness of user actions, are to be followed. Failure to do so will result in the user being blocked.''
:Note: ''Their <nowiki>[</nowiki>[[Special:ListUsers/sysop sysops]]<nowiki>]</nowiki> instructions, as to Conservapedia policy [...] are to be followed'', which means if a sysop has decided it is so it is so. If you continue to argue you may get blocked.
:[[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 07:23, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

What about Hot man on man/woman on woman action? I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that homosexuals were pretty in favor of that.

== Is this really as big as people make it out to be? ==
While I personally do not like anyone being too open about their personal lives, especially concerning anything to do with sex, still when I hear about a "Homosexual Agenda" I can only think of another fear that other people once tried to infect people with: it was called "The Protocols of The Elders of Zion." I think some of you may understand my point... [[User:Jros83|Jros83]] 16:15, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

Yeah, I don't really understand why people even care if someone is homosexual or not. If you're not a homosexual yourself you're not gonna be involved with homosexuality so why even care? It doesn't affect you in that case. If someones is homosexual, then fine. Let them be. Has nothing to do with you. [[User:JohnKite|JohnKite]] 11:33, 28 January 2009 (EST)
:Do you not care about God, JohnKite? Do you not care about His society? Do you not acre about moral erosion, disease, and the future of humanity? Do you not care about what is right and what is wrong? [[User:MauriceB|MauriceB]] 11:35, 28 January 2009 (EST)

==Please remove the reference to Scott Lively's propaganda book==
This is propaganda. It seems you don't allow neutrality here. [[User:GayMan|GayMan]] 21:51, 28 June 2007 (EDT)
:I agree. Numbers 1-5 on there are kinda wrong, and number 6 tops it off as crap. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] 23:11, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

== Hey, now... ==
I'm LGBT and I'm certainly not aware of any sort of "agenda" being discussed. Perhaps this is just a typical case of right-wing paranoia? --[[User:Afi|Afi]] 18:07, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

You're not aware because you're not hive-minded. The agenda is memetic, therefore you're not all going to know about it. --[[User:Pious|Pious]] 18:21, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

==What the hell?==

The “homosexuality agenda" was created by Focus on the Family, which you say later in the article, ACTIVELY OPPOSES homosexuality. You wouldn’t let me post Jon Stewart quotes on the Bush page, so why is this kind of crap aloud here? [[User:Tesfan|Tesfan]] 11:43, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

This is exactly the sort of thing that inspires violence against homosexuals. Be more neutral.[[User:Alloco1|Alloco1]] 12:34, 27 September 2007 (EDT)
:Good luck pal, I've been saying that for months. And watch your language, they'll ban you for that here. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 12:46, 27 September 2007 (EDT)

==Politics and science==

Dr. Ronald Bayer, writing in Homosexuality And American Psychiatry: The Politics Of Diagnosis said the APA decision was a political one, not a scientific one: "The result [of the APA removal of homosexuality from the DSM] was not a conclusion based upon an approximation of the scientific truth as dictated by reason, but was instead an action demanded by the ideological temper of the times." [http://traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/Homosexuality101.pdf]
==Liberal Deceit==
I suggest we change the category from Deceit to Liberal Deceit because liberals universally support the gay agenda. --[[User:Konservativekanadian|Konservativekanadian]] 22:26, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
*Good idea! --[[User:TK|şŷŝoρ-₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Ṣρёаќǃ]] 23:08, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
::Bad idea. It's not deceit. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] 23:16, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
Again I find myself disturbed by the language of absolutes that have infested this site. There are liberal and homosexual philosophies mentioned in this site that some liberals and homosexuals don't have simply because they don't know about them- and it's certainly not a stretch of the imagination to say these people are generally ignorant. Are children in Africa who die young damned simply because a missionary doesn't exist where they live and they couldn't have possibly heard the good news about Christ? I think not. I believe they get another chance to. --[[User:Pious|Pious]] 18:26, 24 June 2011 (CDT)

==Sources?==

Are there any sources besides those accusing the gay agenda? There's no evidence of any organized "agenda", and all of the goals and such are provided by those opposing it. Best case, this is an article about a pundit talking point, and worst case it's a conspiracy theory masked as an encyclopedia article. Shouldn't it at least mention that there has never been any evidence of even a mildly organized or centralized gay agenda? The fact that it's permanently locked further undermines CP credibility. [[User:RWest|RWest]] 12:32, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Specific suggestion:
:Focus on the Family quotes below from a leading book in the homosexual movement which outlines the points of the homosexual agenda:
There is no source cited here. The source is "The Overhauling of Straight America," an article which appeared in the November 1987 issue of a gay magazine called ''The Guide''. [[User:Shii|Shii]] 22:44, 23 November 2007 (EST)

:: Thanks, I just added an online link to it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:04, 23 November 2007 (EST)

== Mottos? ==

The edit replacing "beliefs" with "mottos" was unjustified. There is a (baseless) belief system inherent in the homosexual agenda.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:41, 12 October 2008 (EDT)

== References: "small looks better" ==

Why? All the other articles I've seen have references at regular text size. What's particular about this article that it needs to have really tiny footnotes? [[User:Sideways|Sideways]] 17:24, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

==Homosexuality in Congress==

In a recent discussion with a friend of mine, we discussed what is here called the "homosexual agenda". In addition to the notion of whether "everyone has an agenda" (something I would consider adding to the Debate pool if anyone would like clarification of my terms/beliefs here, I brought up the notion of whether or not there exists a disproportionate number of homosexuals or, unfortunately, scandals regarding previously latent homosexual desires among otherwise Conservative men (Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Bob Allen, the Glenn Murphy scandal), and whether this constitutes the corrupting nature of power, or, as my friend (a somewhat eccentric, Ron Paul-supporter type) suggests, whether these men are "moles" (his term, not mine) representing a quote, "homo infiltration". To put it bluntly, imagine the Manchurian Candidate, but with sodomy.

I was wondering if anyone here (I imagine you have all put some effort into the research and sourcing for this article) had ever heard trustworthy sources, blogs, or essays dealing with such a belief. I obviously don't support the endorsement of wingnut theories, but if it is a more widespread belief among self-avowed Republicans and conservatives, then I think it bears mentioning. I wait to see if any such evidence exists. [[User:MICasey|MICasey]] 10:48, 9 September 2009 (EDT)

==Iran?==
This site considers Iran as an example for how to deal with homosexuals?? I hope this is a joke; otherwise, this is one of the sickest, most hateful websites I've ever seen. You claim to follow Jesus, and then condone executing homosexuals?? This must be an example of following the hard-ass God of the Old Testament.{{unsigned|User:Pete5383}}

:This site does not condone the murder of homosexuals by the state. It is a true statement on Iran and most Muslim countries are no different. So yes, they oppose the homosexual agenda but that doesn't correspond to the section which talks of political/cultural opposition. Instead, a foreign section needs created and the FACTS put in the proper place.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:37, 17 August 2010 (EDT)

==Merge from "pro-Gay"==

Thanks for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&curid=69968&diff=877518&oldid=877453&rcid=1187531 merging this point] from the "[[pro-gay]]" article. I sure wish I had '''bothered to look''' for the diff before undoing your careful work. *sigh* --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 16:44, 9 June 2011 (EDT)

==Homophobes==

Westboro is probably the only authentically "[[homophobic]]" group in the USA. They used to have a "God hates fags" website. No one takes them seriously, on either side of the ideological battle lines. They are the poster boys for [[hate speech]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:00, 2 October 2011 (EDT)

==Charity==

:Cut from lede:

:* Liberals generally give much less than conservatives to charity, but charity work by gays in particular is virtually non-existent.

:This needs references, if true. But I don't believe it - or maybe I just don't understand it. Isn't [[Gay Men's Health Crisis]] a [[charity]]? (Or is it merely a [[non-profit organization]] '''without''' a charitable purpose? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:44, 12 October 2011 (EDT)

Just happened to see this, and so here is some data:

On average, weekly churchgoers donate 3.8% of their income to charity, compared to 0.8% for those who never go. Independent Sector (charitable clearing house): Atheists won't save Europe by Don Feder; http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27937

Religious citizens who make $49,000 gave away about 3.5 times as much money as secular citizens with the same income. They also volunteered twice as often, are 57 percent more likely to help homeless persons, and two-thirds more likely to give blood at their workplace. Arthur C. Brooks' Who Really Cares. http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2008/001/8.11.html

In 2006, Americans gave 1.66% of their aggregate income to charity, with donations totaling US$182 billion. This rate of giving is more than double that of Canadians, who gave 0.76% of aggregate income (CA$8.4 billion in total) to charity in 2006. http://www.fraserinstitute.org/commerce.web/product_files/Generosity_Index_2008.pdf

See [http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Statistical_Correlations.html here] for a table of many comparison btwn states, and [http://247wallst.com/2011/12/15/americas-most-and-least-charitable-states/2/ here] for recent stats on giving per state.

$8.8 billion worth of goods and services that churches are giving overseas to developing (“Third World”) countries. This figures out to be nearly 40 percent of the foreign aid provided by the United States to the same region. U.S. foreign aid to those same countries is $23.5 billion. Carol Adelman of the Hudson Institute, from Notre Dame University study. http://www.onenewsnow.com/Church/Default.aspx?id=118566

Giving as a percentage of income was higher at the depth of the Great Depression in the 1930s (3.3 percent of per capita income in 1933) than after a half-century of unprecedented prosperity (2.5 percent in 2004) John Ronsvalle and Sylvia Ronsvalle, The State of Church Giving through 2004: Will We Will? 16th ed. (Champaign, Ill.: Empty Tomb, 2006). ^

The proportion of adults who tithe dropped by 62 percent in the past year. (2) Just 6 percent of born-again households tithed to their churches in 2002. (3) Tithing, when it occurs, is generally among Protestants: 5 percent of adults who attend Protestant churches tithed last year, compared to less than one-tenth of 1 percent among Catholics. (4) Among the groups most likely to tithe are people over 55, college graduates, Evangelicals, Republicans, conservatives, and residents of the South—but there was no segment among which at least 10 percent tithed. George Barna. News release by Barna Research Group, May 19, 2003. ^

Including religious, American households overall gave 3.5% of their income to charity, with approx. 33% going to to religious institutions. Utah was the state with the highest average per-capita charitable contributions, followed by Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee and Arkansas. Professor Arthur Brooks, 2005. http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2005/February/200502181639511CJsamohT5.593508e-02.html

A liberal researcher who was surprised at finding that showed conservatives being more giving, set out to do a more thorough analysis, only to confirm the findings: http://blog.geoiq.com/2009/01/07/dataset-of-the-day-who-is-more-generous-republicans-or-democrats/

Also, the top 10 most generous countries are:

1. United States
2. Ireland
3. Australia
4. New Zealand
5. United Kingdom
6. Netherlands
7. Canada
8. Sri Lanka
9. Thailand
10. Laos

The United States’ first place in the rankings marks a significant improvement from 2010, when it ranked fifth. Other countries making significant gains include Liberia, which went from 39 to 14, and Morocco, which leapt from 33 to 12. http://www.worldvision.org/news/new-report-ranks-most-generous-countries. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 22:27, 27 February 2012 (EST)

==Kirk and Madsen==
The WP page on Marshall Kirk [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Kirk#Health] has this but which i cannot find a source for:

"Marshall suffered from severe migraine headaches that were preceded by a strong desire to talk in a rapid monologue. He found that if he gave into these "babbling fits", the headache would be alleviated. He had other medical problems and suffered from bouts of depression that required electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) on three occasions. Because of the negative effects on his memory, he considered ECT to be the last alternative to avoid death. In part due to this medical history, his knowledge of pharmacology was usually greater than that of anyone who treated him. When he died, he was found alone in his apartment by two friends."

Also cannot find anything on Hunter Madsen (pen name "Erastes== Pill")[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 23:54, 24 February 2012 (EST)

==Article title==
Shouldn't this title be lower cased as [[Homosexual agenda]]? It's too bad we can't give it a title with more bite, something like, "The sodomites and their enablers." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 05:23, 17 January 2014 (EST)

== Please explain edit ==

Why, exactly, was [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&curid=69968&diff=1363708&oldid=1350140 this info removed] from the article? Regardless, it is a lot of info and well-sourced. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:03, 27 July 2017 (EDT)

== "Opposing Christian Agenda" section ==

I know this section is intended to reflect what homosexual activists say about Christians. However, I do have some concerns about it. 
Firstly, the use of "agenda" suggests that Christians are pushing some new or different thing secretly. They aren't, they are just staying the same, while the culture changes around them. Well, actually many churches are changing with the culture too, but that's a different discussion altogether. Regarding the bullets, 
point 1: I think I'll reword that, but it is a valid point. Salvation army (a christian org.) will at all costs avoid hiring unrepentant homosexuals, especially for such public-facing jobs. 
point 2: No argument there--this is fine 
point 3: They help to publish material with is contrary to the the propaganda from activists. Oh yes, and that information happens to be factual, unlike the stuff the liberals crank out. 
point 4: Christians have almost no control over this at all. Liberals own the media. 
point 5: Christians actually do very little lobbying compared to liberal activists. Additionally, unlike liberals, the christians operate on a firm moral code which prevents them from offering brides. Since lobbying is driven largely by bribes, the efforts of Christians have almost no teeth. (I still don't want them offering bribes though) 
point 6: "sinner" yes, but there is also "love the sinner, hate the sin" 

Again, I know this is supposed to be what homosexual activists say about Christians, but I think I'm going to make some edits to tone it down a bit. However, this section is altogether off-topic for this page anyway, so I would not be opposed to it being completely removed, or moved to another page. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 23:28, 1 February 2018 (EST)
:I didn't see your mainspace edit until now -- it's a little better. I originally wanted to delete the section, but (if there's a will to actually do it), I think it would be better to completely revamp that section to add examples of promoters of the homosexual/cultural Marxist agenda trying to marginalize, attack, and persecute Christians and Christian values. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:02, 3 February 2018 (EST)
::I [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&diff=1403183&oldid=1402879 removed] the section. Hopefully, I or someone else will find the time/resources to add a section about homosexual agenda efforts to marginalize Christian views. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:06, 7 February 2018 (EST)

== i talked about the transgender murders, LGBTQ+ suicides and lessons in the bible ==

I know many of you may think I'm being crazy right now but there is a much higher chance of being murdered if you are transgender. I have three sources that show this here:
https://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2015/may/13/garnet-coleman/garnet-coleman-said-transgender-person-has-1-12-ch/
http://time.com/3999348/transgender-murders-2015/
http://transstudent.org/transvis.pdf
and members of the LGBTQ+ community or people questioning their sexuality are more likely to commit suicide according to these sources:
https://www.thetrevorproject.org/resources/preventing-suicide/facts-about-suicide/#sm.0001rf6hd7khwehfzmm1yoh6yynxe
https://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/youth-programs.htm
https://www.nami.org/Find-Support/LGBTQ
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-lgbt-teen-suicide/lgbt-youth-at-higher-risk-for-suicide-attempts-idUSKCN1MI1SL

And it is websites like this that make people think that it is okay to bully your peers who are a part of the LGBTQ+ and when members of the LGBTQ+ community see it they remember how much oppression they face and how many people could harm, rape, or kill them because of what they identify as.

And how does the LGBTQ+ community affect you besides 'being against god's law'? Know what else is said to be against god's law in a way being rich. Remember the bible story about the rich man asking what he could do to join him in heaven?

Jesus said to give all his possession to the needy correct? All of them. Yet you are still here able to access and edit this website with your phones or computers while people starve and die of water poisoning in Africa.

And yes, I have not been as aware of those outcomes either, but Jesus said to make sure you are pure right and just as well as without sin before judging others. I ask you what is this page? Judging others.

unsigned post by [[User:What-up-yall|What-up-yall]] ([[User talk:What-up-yall|talk]]) 13:19, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:[https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2018/july/fascist-crackdown-canadian-christian-faces-jail-time-for-expressing-his-beliefs-at-gay-pride-event] [https://www.dailysignal.com/2017/06/27/new-law-canada-remove-kids-parents-reject-transgender-ideology/] [https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/08/california-law-threatens-jail-time-dissenters-transgender-dogma/] This is what the LGBTQRSTUV movement is doing to us, and there are many more examples. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 14:35, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

::Explaining to others that homosexuality/transgenderism are sinful and damaging behaviors (this is according to the Bible, not ourselves) cannot and shouldn't be compared to bullying -- two completely different things. Christians don't bully/mock homosexuals (actually, much of the bullying/slander comes from either secular people or liberals themselves), but they stand firmly by their view that those behaviors are morally wrong, just as alcoholism or vandalism are wrong.

::And yes, Shobson20 is completely correct that the "LGBTQ+ community" is assaulting theologically conservative Christians -- any Christian who believes marriage is between one man and one woman for life, or who believes there are only two genders will be mocked, harassed, and even prosecuted (Colorado baker, etc., etc.) -- see the [[Liberal bigotry]] article, for example. So, in response to your question "''how does the LGBTQ+ community affect you''", it is affecting Christians big time.

::Also, you misinterpreted the account of the rich young ruler -- the problem was not the inherent fact that he had a lot of money, but that those possessions were an idol to him, preventing him from surrendering to Jesus and following him. He was bound to those things and couldn't give them up to follow Christ. Nowhere, however, does it say that money or possessions are inherently bad -- the Bible says that the love of money is the root of many evils, but not money itself.[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+6%3A10&version=ESV] Also, some passages appear to promote good money management, with one of Jesus's parables being about a master who rewards the servants who make the biggest profit (see [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A14-30&version=ESV Matthew 25:14–30]). Also, see this: [https://www.gotquestions.org/poor-vs-rich.html] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:55, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:::Also, you're taking a single Bible passage about judging others way out of context -- many passages of the Bible call on believers to discern between right and wrong (for example, Matthew 7:6, 15-16; John 7:24). Per John 7:24, Christians should "judge correctly," and this means they should not throw out correct doctrine in the name of postmodern "tolerance." There are two good articles explaining what the Bible says about judging others in further detail: [https://www.gotquestions.org/do-not-judge.html][https://answersingenesis.org/bible-questions/does-the-bible-tell-christians-to-judge-not/] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:55, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
::::Whether you translate ''agape'' as "love" or "charity" (1 Cor. 13:13), it's easy to see why casual browsers can have a hard time finding much evidence of it around here.
::::And given the size of your editor base / audience vs. the millions of conservative Christians you're supposedly producing content for, that's something you might all do well to ponder. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:02, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::::So, what you're saying, JohnZ, is that we in this website must cave in to the left's way of thinking. Is that what you're saying, JohnZ? Is that what your version of "love" means? That we have to tolerate everyone, behavior included? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 17:31, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

::::::@JohnZ: Love is not synonymous (actually, it's an antonym) with failure to discern between what is morally right and wrong, and popularity is not an indicator of truth. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:12, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::::(edit conflict) Also, keep in mind that we don't oppose homosexuality or transgenderism because we simply dislike it or have some "subconscious hatred" or whatever -- we're simply repeating what the Bible says, as the ultimate source of authority. For example, [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1&version=ESV Romans 1:26-27] states that homosexuality not only is sinful behavior, but that it's also punishment for sinful behavior (remember, this is the New Testament--good bye to your notions that it's all just "Old Testament stuff"). Also, [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+6&version=ESV 1 Corinthians 6:9-10] lists homosexuality as an act that indicates that one is not saved. Also, see [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+1&version=ESV 1 Timothy 1:9-10]. There are other passages that deal with the topic of marriage (see Jesus's statement in [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+19&version=ESV Matthew 19:4-5], for example). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:12, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
=== JohnZ: Excerpt, picture and caption from Conservapedia's flagship [[homosexuality]] article ===

[[Image:FacProfilemontoya.jpg‎|right|150px|thumb|Dr. [[Alex D. Montoya]] wrote:"The [[Christianity|Christian]] needs to befriend and witness to the homosexual with such [[love]], [[compassion]], and [[wisdom]] that such will respond to the saving [[grace]] of [[God]]."[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj11h.pdf] ]]
{{clear}}
JohnZ, here is a quote from Conservapedia's flagship [[homosexuality]] article: "In his essay which examines the biblical passages regarding homosexuality, Pastor and Associate Professor of Pastoral Ministries at [[The Master's Seminary]] Dr. [[Alex D. Montoya]] states that 'The [[Christianity|Christian]] needs to befriend and witness to the homosexual with such [[love]], [[compassion]], and [[wisdom]] that such will respond to the saving [[grace]] of [[God]].'"[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj11h.pdf]

JohnZ, I hope this helps clarifies Conservapedia's views on homosexuals.

By the way, have you read the article: [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]]?[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:39, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:Aye, more stuff like that Montoya quote would probably be helpful. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:51, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
::Let me also share with you something a Pastor once said: "Marriage is by definition heterosexual. This is the definition of it...that doesn't mean we don't love our homosexual friends, we love them, we share Christ with them, but we do not affirm for them that what they have is by definition marriage, it is not. And it doesn't matter to me what the State eventually says." (This was before Obergefell v. Hodges, the second-worst act of legislating from the bench since Roe v. Wade.) Understand that the biblical definition of "love" is a DO, not a FEEL, that clarifies the often misunderstood verse of how God "loved Jacob but hated Isau" or how "the man that spares the rod hates his son, but the man who loves his son is careful to discipline him." [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 19:03, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::Yeah, that works, too. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 19:08, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

=== Pro-homosexuality activist: Put this in your victimhood pipe and smoke it!!! ===

Pro-homosexuality activist: Please see: [[Homosexuality and Murders]] and [[Homosexual Couples and Domestic Violence]]

I hope this helps clarify matters for you.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:21, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:I love it:

::when members of the LGBTQ+ community see it they remember how much oppression they face and how many people could harm, rape, or kill them because of what they identify as.

:In addition to what was said above, I thought homosexual identitarians were excited about their new found acceptance, proved by their ability to force people to regard their unions as marriage. That's even an out-and-out privilege, not a right. How could that be if they "face" so "much oppression"? Actually this sounds more like they're doubling down their grievance techniques because they're greedy for more privileges.

:And What-up-yall, how could they "face oppression...because of what they identify as"? You imposed your own identity on them by referring them as "the LGBTQ+ community" and became their self-proclaimed spokesman!

:How do you know any of those people want to belong with all the members or even every group in the same alphabet soup union you cooked up?

:All this is dazzle camouflage that keeps everything up in the air, the better to hide the guilt of male homosexuals spreading a fatal venereal disease over the course of the last third of the century, when it could have been stopped in one year, and all they had to do was practice abstinence.

:You didn't capitalize "God" but you capitalized at the beginning of sentences. I'm blocking you for a week, for being incivil. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 16:43, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

==Shock therapy==
A citation is needed for the statement that [[shock therapy]] is a "scientifically proven method of homosexual conversion". Thank you. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 02:47, June 29, 2021 (EDT)
==Cannot edit but here are two more links for substantiation==
While it seems that much any text from "After the Ball" has been expunged from the Internet, this page provides the text from "THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA" by Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill: http://library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm showing the psychological tactics that the section of the CP article quotes from, but with the only link to the actual text at length being from from Google books, which only provides very brief excerpts.

Note also that the cited link www.parentsofgaychildren.org is no longer available at this time and needs to direct to https://web.archive.org/web/20180319222723/http://parentsofgaychildren.org/. I could normally do so (as a primary editor to the psychological tactics section of the article, but for some unexplained reason I am no longer allowed to do so, perhaps since I have not logged in for some time. Also, attempts to access or publish requires two tries, as Service Unavailable is the first.Daniel1212 20:19, December 17, 2022 (EST)

:The page is unlocked for editing. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']] 20:28, December 17, 2022 (EST)
::Thanks but I see no references when I try to edit it, thus I cannot edit: parentsofgaychildren.org ''to'' https://web.archive.org/web/20180319222723/http://parentsofgaychildren.org). Maybe I could manually write an edit for the other link, but as of now it the page seems to be in a form of "safe mode." Sorry for not keeping up on things here. I do understand however, why this page would need to be locked, esp. this section (which I myself provided much to in the past, by God's grace, and have often linked to), since it is targeted, yet which page is due to the provocative pushing of LGBTQ propaganda. Daniel1212

===Admin HELP needed!!!==
After receiving no response to my post above on the inability to see or add any refs,as one of the main editors on this page I went ahead and did added the reference , expecting that the others I could not see would show up once saved. However, all is deleted except for the first section! I deleted nothing, and I tried Undo but it does not do so. So I copied the text in that section since I duplicated the tab before I tried to edit, and posted that, but once saved then no references are show. Please revert. Here is the recent archive version is that would help: https://web.archive.org/web/20221213223909/https://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual_Agenda Sorry for the mess, but something is wrong that you cannot edit correctly. Daniel1212 23:19, December 21, 2022 (EST)

Homosexual Agenda

2022-12-22T04:13:13Z

Daniel1212: Trying to manually restore

Talk:Homosexual Agenda

2022-12-22T03:58:44Z

Daniel1212: /* Cannot edit but here are two more links for substantiation */

Scalia mentioned that in a dissenting opinion, which isn't binding law. --[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 00:59, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

== Vic Eliason passage should be removed ==

I write this because I have met VE here in Wisconsin and believe he'd be uncomfortable with the logic of including this information in this particular article. The passage: "Vic Eliason of Crosstalk America rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies." Nobody believes that homosexuality is contagious, like a virus, and the probability is 0% that "all Americans" would turn homosexual. I doubt that any homosexual, including activist leaders, would think it would be possible at all or even desirable. There is as little temptation for a heterosexual to want homosexual sex as there is for homosexuals to want heterosexual sex. Also, the comment about the US being more vulnerable to attack because the country doesn't procreate also makes no sense, given that the likelihood of that happening for this reason is 0%. Three other potential problems. 1) The passage is completely undocumented. 2) The link for biographical information for VE is to Wikipedia. Couldn't someone here write an article about him for CP? He has been, after all, a leading figure in Christian radio for 40+ years. 3) Besides being unrelated to the topic of the article and having 0% possibility of describing a real situation, the passage detracts from the credibility of the article and CP. This passage should be removed.

== WOV's got a point ==

Not only that, but this entire article is biased tripe. It presents the "homosexual agenda" from a one-sided perspective, and is filled with hate commentary. '''I recommend the entire thing for deletion.'''

Scalia's remark is regretful and a blemish on the pages of the U.S. Reporter, up there with Scott v. Sanford. But let's not expand it still further.

I have cleaned up biased and vitriolic language as best as I can, but this entry deserves deletion.

Seconded. If this is a homosexual agenda, then what homosexual wrote it? This is nothing but political game-playing: Identify a group as ''The Enemy'' and then brand them haters and abusers of family, children, and country. It makes dehumanising them so much easier. - Suricou

: I didn't see anything "hateful" in it. The Scalia reference was not intended to be about what is binding law, obviously. There was nothing binding about his phrase. I'll note that it was in dissent.

: The edits to this article were completely inappropriate, turning it into a liberal puff piece. Wikipedia exists for that. Actually, your edits made this even more liberal than Wikipedia's article on the same topic!

: The hour is very late and I need to lock this page to guard against vandalism or conversion to a liberal message. I can unlock tomorrow. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 02:11, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: Presenting both points doesn't make it a liberal puff piece! It presented only one perspective (Focus on the Family), and referred to the Shepard incident as OVERBLOWN. That's awful!! I consider my entry a moderate tack, but if you can think of an acceptable compromise that preserves an unbiased perspective, be my guest. It shocks me to see you go against your own commandments, though, about not including bias, and not importing a political perspective. I have tried to, and continue to try to, do the same.--[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 02:13, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:Instead of the http://www.citizenlink.org/CLFeatures/A000000562.cfm cite you may want to use this one [http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.htm] This cite goes straight (NPI) to a section of the book ''After the Ball''. -)[[User:Cracker|Cracker]][[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]] 02:24, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: Thanks. Will do tomorrow. Goodnight, Cracker!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 02:25, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

I would definitely change the "promote homosexuality in schools" to "promote acceptance of homosexuality in schools". Definitely sounds like they're trying to make me gay. --[[User:Splark|Splark]] 21:45, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

:I agree with the comments of [[User:AmesG|AmesG]] and [[User:Splark|Splark]]. The idea that one's ideological opponents have a specific "agenda" is an all-too common one, but such agendas are more often touted by those who oppose than by those who support a group. That a Supreme Court Justice referred to it, or that it's in some leaflet somewhere, isn't substantive evidence that it exists.. [[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 18:22, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

Aren't those five points of the "homosexual agenda" linked to more of a strategy than an "agenda"? And, aren't they the standard strategy for all interest groups? 1. Talk about your issue. 2. Show your group is harmed unless you get what you want. 3. Provide facts so people can justify agreeing with you. 4. Portray yourself and your point of view as right and moral. 5. Portray your opponents and their point of view as wrong and immoral. 6. Get corporate or other financial support. Every group and lobbying organization does that, and I don't know that singling out gays and the gay rights movement as doing that is really informative.--[[User:Epicurius|Epicurius]] 11:23, 15 March 2007 (ED

I will go on the record and say that yes, there is a homosexual agenda. As a homosexual myself, I'm pretty much in the middle of it. All we want is to be treated the same as any other tax-paying American. If my partner is injured, I would like to be able to have the same visitation and decision-making power as a husband/wife would. I would like to be able to transfer property when I die without having to jump through a million legal hoops. Many people claim that we want "special" rights. We really don't. We just want to be treated the same as everyone else.--[[User:Patthew|Patthew]] 12:01, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

I think this page is extremely biased. It presents only one side of the issue and is locked to prevent the other side from responding. Proof of a bias of another kind here.
-Gasmonkey

== Everything you post must be true and verifiable ==

This entry violates the first (and perhaps most important) Conservapedia commandment. There is no homosexual "agenda" -- no "they" who "wrote a book", no 10-point plan. It's the same kind of paranoid nonsense that's in the articles here on Joseph McCarthy and Alger Hiss (WP has far more accurate articles on both subjects, with the one on Hiss very clearly identifying areas of controversy), with conspiracy-theorist types quoting and sourcing one another. I propose this entire article for immediate deletion. [[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 10:56, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Agreed. The "Homosexual agenda" is no more factual than the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Delete, or recreate as an article about the popular (?) but false belief in this "agenda." [[User:Pkoad|Pkoad]] 00:21, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

:It refers to the [[gay rights]] activism, which may be a [[grassroots]] movement but which has multiple goals which are easily identified. The Liberal POV that such goals are non-existent is a kind of denialism.

:It will be good for the article to discuss this denial, in conjunction with [[gay rights]] critics who oppose the points which the denialists says no one advances. (Not worded right, but I think you get the gist.) See you all tomorrow. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 00:29, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

::There's no more gay agenda other than there was a "black agenda" before ''Brown'' came down. The gay agenda is equal treatment. Oh no, quick, ma, shut the doors! Equality's a-comin'!-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]

:::I'd say "keep it" so the world can really see how these strange nutkins think. But in the interest of humanity, decency, and honesty, it is a pack of paranoid, politico-religious agenda lies. Really, really strange nutjob lies. [[User:Human|Human]] 02:51, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

:'''Keep:'''Let's assume for one moment that the homosexual agenda is complete hogwash and homosexual activists don't believe in it: Isn't the fact that Conservative Christians do believe in it enough to keep the article so that the "opinions" of Christians about homosexual activists be here. The fact that many talk about it is clear evidence that this is a valid article--[[User:Djcreativity|Djcreativity]] 15:47, 9 May 2009 (EDT)
::Shouldn't we present information that is factual, and not misleading, though? If the intention of the article was to present Christian responses to gay rights activism, it should be presented as such. Given that ''After the Ball'' was published twenty years ago, presenting it as an active force in the gay rights movement (rather than as a foundation of the movement as a whole) is a bit disingenuous, don't you think? If we were talking about the Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam we could reference Malcom X and Louis Farrakhan, but to act as though their works were part of current politics and national discourse would be misguided at best, and flatly wrong, at worst. --[[User:Jfavor|Jfavor]] 00:40, 20 May 2009 (EDT)

== Opposing Christian Agenda ==

I can't work out what the point of the "Opposing Christian Agenda" section is. The sentences don't make sense, and the referenced page does not mention homosexuality or gay. I propose the section be deleted by someone with the privilege to edit the article. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 01:33, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

:I think it's not nearly explicit enough. More than anything else except perhaps abortion, the homosexual subversion of Christian values is illustrative of the influence of Satan upon liberals and other leftists, and his influence through them on our society. Should I rework the section to include such? --[[User:Nathan|Nathan]] 22:20, 11 February 2009 (EST)

== Improvements ==

Shouldn't ''Gayness'' in part 1. of the agenda be ''Gaiety''?
The term ''[[homosexual protectors]]'' in part three surely merits its own article. Is this the same as ''[[Homosexualist]]s''? [[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 07:11, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

:Any attempt to trivialize or confuse the issue will be frowned upon here. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 07:22, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

We should delete the cite at the bottom saying that homosexuality caused Nazism. That's a truly disturbing allegation.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 12:59, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

:Especially considering that the Nazis actually murdered thousands of homosexuals during World War II.--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 18:32, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
::Yes they did, but it was because of Hitler. NOT homosexuality. And waaay more Jews were killed than homosexuals, giving Jews a larger spotlight. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] I'm liberal, but I don't edit pages-just [[User talk:Clorox|talk page]]s. don't worry. 23:25, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

'''
I believe langauge needs to be corrected in the the first bullet of the list of homosexual goals. It currently states "Censoring sections of the bible condemning homosexuality." The source cited is an article about an offensive tee shirt being censored not the bible its self. There needs to be eaither a new source about Homosexuals attempting to change the bible or the wording must be changed to "preventing materials that denounce homosexuality from being displayed publicly."

Reference number "8" rrefers back to the Conservapedia site. In order to maintain integrity it must refer to an ouside source if one is not provided the reference and quote should be deleted. Currently it is a logical fallacy and is not up to encyclopedic standards. Someone not dyslexic (i.e. somone who isn't me.) should get on that.

== Very Informative ==
'''

Excellent portrayal of the truth. This is a nice breather from the left-wing saturated wikipedia.com. If you agree with the article, you should check out the highly accurate article on homophobia. Everyone knows that the creation of homophobia is a foundation of the gay agenda.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Homophobia

Wikipedia is subject to open edits that don't reqier an account. Are you suggesting that the monitors of wikipedia aka "everyone who can type" has a liberal bias?

== Is this real? ==

This article seems like a parody. I can't believe that... oh yeah, I'm at conservapedia. I can believe anything. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 12:44, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

As well as the mysterious reference to a "leading book in the homosexual movement", it refers to a book claiming that the Nazi Party supported homosexuality. Clearly this has to be satirical. Either that, or someone has a serious case of paranoia - all the sources, as well as being of dubious credabililty, point towards independent events but the whole point of the page is to talk about a shadowy conspiricy - a 'Secret Society' of homosexuals trying to gayify the world. I suggest deleting the whole page - and if it reappears in a similar form, delete and protect. - [[User:Suricou|Suricou]]

== Agendas ==
So since there are so many references on this wiki to the "homosexual agenda" can we also cite the "Conservative Agenda" or "Republican Agenda" or "Christian Agenda"? {{unsigned|prof0705}}
:I don't see why not, as long as they sourced and reasonably recognizable as phrases in common use. In fact, here, I would expect an article on [[conservative agenda]] to be very good. [[User:Human|Human]] 17:56, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

This article violates the [[Conservapedia:Commandments]] (number 2: cite sources and 5: personal opinion).
#It claims to quote Focus on the Family for the definition of The Homosexual Agenda without giving a specific reference, and FotF is only claimed to be quoting "a leading book in the homosexual movement" without even bothering to name the book or its author.
#The two bulleted points in "The Goals" (about 8-year-old boys and 12-to-14 year olds) are stating as fact the opinion of Craig Osten, a vice president at the Alliance Defense Fund.
#Several of the other references to that section are either citing journalist's or lawyer's opinions, not facts or any quote from the people who are alleged to hold the agenda under discussion.

I am prohibited from editing the page but I suggest that the Agenda is moved to the top, and the original source for it cited, rather than a vague second-hand reference. The judge's quote should then be indented as a block quote so it is more clearly identifiable as quoting the judge. The Goals and Opposing Christian Agenda should be cleaned up and cite proper sources not opinions, or be more clearly marked as only opinions of people who oppose the Homosexual Agenda. If Conservapedia could handle it, even a quote from someone who supports it would be good. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 06:06, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

:[[Conservapedia:Commandments]] (number 2: cite sources and 5: personal opinion) is superceded by [[Conservapedia:Locks and Blocks]]:
::''Sysop's and Bureaucrats are the Administrators of Conservapedia. Their instructions, as to Conservapedia policy and/or the appropriateness or inappropriateness of user actions, are to be followed. Failure to do so will result in the user being blocked.''
:Note: ''Their <nowiki>[</nowiki>[[Special:ListUsers/sysop sysops]]<nowiki>]</nowiki> instructions, as to Conservapedia policy [...] are to be followed'', which means if a sysop has decided it is so it is so. If you continue to argue you may get blocked.
:[[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 07:23, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

What about Hot man on man/woman on woman action? I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that homosexuals were pretty in favor of that.

== Is this really as big as people make it out to be? ==
While I personally do not like anyone being too open about their personal lives, especially concerning anything to do with sex, still when I hear about a "Homosexual Agenda" I can only think of another fear that other people once tried to infect people with: it was called "The Protocols of The Elders of Zion." I think some of you may understand my point... [[User:Jros83|Jros83]] 16:15, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

Yeah, I don't really understand why people even care if someone is homosexual or not. If you're not a homosexual yourself you're not gonna be involved with homosexuality so why even care? It doesn't affect you in that case. If someones is homosexual, then fine. Let them be. Has nothing to do with you. [[User:JohnKite|JohnKite]] 11:33, 28 January 2009 (EST)
:Do you not care about God, JohnKite? Do you not care about His society? Do you not acre about moral erosion, disease, and the future of humanity? Do you not care about what is right and what is wrong? [[User:MauriceB|MauriceB]] 11:35, 28 January 2009 (EST)

==Please remove the reference to Scott Lively's propaganda book==
This is propaganda. It seems you don't allow neutrality here. [[User:GayMan|GayMan]] 21:51, 28 June 2007 (EDT)
:I agree. Numbers 1-5 on there are kinda wrong, and number 6 tops it off as crap. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] 23:11, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

== Hey, now... ==
I'm LGBT and I'm certainly not aware of any sort of "agenda" being discussed. Perhaps this is just a typical case of right-wing paranoia? --[[User:Afi|Afi]] 18:07, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

You're not aware because you're not hive-minded. The agenda is memetic, therefore you're not all going to know about it. --[[User:Pious|Pious]] 18:21, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

==What the hell?==

The “homosexuality agenda" was created by Focus on the Family, which you say later in the article, ACTIVELY OPPOSES homosexuality. You wouldn’t let me post Jon Stewart quotes on the Bush page, so why is this kind of crap aloud here? [[User:Tesfan|Tesfan]] 11:43, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

This is exactly the sort of thing that inspires violence against homosexuals. Be more neutral.[[User:Alloco1|Alloco1]] 12:34, 27 September 2007 (EDT)
:Good luck pal, I've been saying that for months. And watch your language, they'll ban you for that here. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 12:46, 27 September 2007 (EDT)

==Politics and science==

Dr. Ronald Bayer, writing in Homosexuality And American Psychiatry: The Politics Of Diagnosis said the APA decision was a political one, not a scientific one: "The result [of the APA removal of homosexuality from the DSM] was not a conclusion based upon an approximation of the scientific truth as dictated by reason, but was instead an action demanded by the ideological temper of the times." [http://traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/Homosexuality101.pdf]
==Liberal Deceit==
I suggest we change the category from Deceit to Liberal Deceit because liberals universally support the gay agenda. --[[User:Konservativekanadian|Konservativekanadian]] 22:26, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
*Good idea! --[[User:TK|şŷŝoρ-₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Ṣρёаќǃ]] 23:08, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
::Bad idea. It's not deceit. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] 23:16, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
Again I find myself disturbed by the language of absolutes that have infested this site. There are liberal and homosexual philosophies mentioned in this site that some liberals and homosexuals don't have simply because they don't know about them- and it's certainly not a stretch of the imagination to say these people are generally ignorant. Are children in Africa who die young damned simply because a missionary doesn't exist where they live and they couldn't have possibly heard the good news about Christ? I think not. I believe they get another chance to. --[[User:Pious|Pious]] 18:26, 24 June 2011 (CDT)

==Sources?==

Are there any sources besides those accusing the gay agenda? There's no evidence of any organized "agenda", and all of the goals and such are provided by those opposing it. Best case, this is an article about a pundit talking point, and worst case it's a conspiracy theory masked as an encyclopedia article. Shouldn't it at least mention that there has never been any evidence of even a mildly organized or centralized gay agenda? The fact that it's permanently locked further undermines CP credibility. [[User:RWest|RWest]] 12:32, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Specific suggestion:
:Focus on the Family quotes below from a leading book in the homosexual movement which outlines the points of the homosexual agenda:
There is no source cited here. The source is "The Overhauling of Straight America," an article which appeared in the November 1987 issue of a gay magazine called ''The Guide''. [[User:Shii|Shii]] 22:44, 23 November 2007 (EST)

:: Thanks, I just added an online link to it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:04, 23 November 2007 (EST)

== Mottos? ==

The edit replacing "beliefs" with "mottos" was unjustified. There is a (baseless) belief system inherent in the homosexual agenda.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:41, 12 October 2008 (EDT)

== References: "small looks better" ==

Why? All the other articles I've seen have references at regular text size. What's particular about this article that it needs to have really tiny footnotes? [[User:Sideways|Sideways]] 17:24, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

==Homosexuality in Congress==

In a recent discussion with a friend of mine, we discussed what is here called the "homosexual agenda". In addition to the notion of whether "everyone has an agenda" (something I would consider adding to the Debate pool if anyone would like clarification of my terms/beliefs here, I brought up the notion of whether or not there exists a disproportionate number of homosexuals or, unfortunately, scandals regarding previously latent homosexual desires among otherwise Conservative men (Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Bob Allen, the Glenn Murphy scandal), and whether this constitutes the corrupting nature of power, or, as my friend (a somewhat eccentric, Ron Paul-supporter type) suggests, whether these men are "moles" (his term, not mine) representing a quote, "homo infiltration". To put it bluntly, imagine the Manchurian Candidate, but with sodomy.

I was wondering if anyone here (I imagine you have all put some effort into the research and sourcing for this article) had ever heard trustworthy sources, blogs, or essays dealing with such a belief. I obviously don't support the endorsement of wingnut theories, but if it is a more widespread belief among self-avowed Republicans and conservatives, then I think it bears mentioning. I wait to see if any such evidence exists. [[User:MICasey|MICasey]] 10:48, 9 September 2009 (EDT)

==Iran?==
This site considers Iran as an example for how to deal with homosexuals?? I hope this is a joke; otherwise, this is one of the sickest, most hateful websites I've ever seen. You claim to follow Jesus, and then condone executing homosexuals?? This must be an example of following the hard-ass God of the Old Testament.{{unsigned|User:Pete5383}}

:This site does not condone the murder of homosexuals by the state. It is a true statement on Iran and most Muslim countries are no different. So yes, they oppose the homosexual agenda but that doesn't correspond to the section which talks of political/cultural opposition. Instead, a foreign section needs created and the FACTS put in the proper place.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:37, 17 August 2010 (EDT)

==Merge from "pro-Gay"==

Thanks for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&curid=69968&diff=877518&oldid=877453&rcid=1187531 merging this point] from the "[[pro-gay]]" article. I sure wish I had '''bothered to look''' for the diff before undoing your careful work. *sigh* --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 16:44, 9 June 2011 (EDT)

==Homophobes==

Westboro is probably the only authentically "[[homophobic]]" group in the USA. They used to have a "God hates fags" website. No one takes them seriously, on either side of the ideological battle lines. They are the poster boys for [[hate speech]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:00, 2 October 2011 (EDT)

==Charity==

:Cut from lede:

:* Liberals generally give much less than conservatives to charity, but charity work by gays in particular is virtually non-existent.

:This needs references, if true. But I don't believe it - or maybe I just don't understand it. Isn't [[Gay Men's Health Crisis]] a [[charity]]? (Or is it merely a [[non-profit organization]] '''without''' a charitable purpose? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:44, 12 October 2011 (EDT)

Just happened to see this, and so here is some data:

On average, weekly churchgoers donate 3.8% of their income to charity, compared to 0.8% for those who never go. Independent Sector (charitable clearing house): Atheists won't save Europe by Don Feder; http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27937

Religious citizens who make $49,000 gave away about 3.5 times as much money as secular citizens with the same income. They also volunteered twice as often, are 57 percent more likely to help homeless persons, and two-thirds more likely to give blood at their workplace. Arthur C. Brooks' Who Really Cares. http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2008/001/8.11.html

In 2006, Americans gave 1.66% of their aggregate income to charity, with donations totaling US$182 billion. This rate of giving is more than double that of Canadians, who gave 0.76% of aggregate income (CA$8.4 billion in total) to charity in 2006. http://www.fraserinstitute.org/commerce.web/product_files/Generosity_Index_2008.pdf

See [http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Statistical_Correlations.html here] for a table of many comparison btwn states, and [http://247wallst.com/2011/12/15/americas-most-and-least-charitable-states/2/ here] for recent stats on giving per state.

$8.8 billion worth of goods and services that churches are giving overseas to developing (“Third World”) countries. This figures out to be nearly 40 percent of the foreign aid provided by the United States to the same region. U.S. foreign aid to those same countries is $23.5 billion. Carol Adelman of the Hudson Institute, from Notre Dame University study. http://www.onenewsnow.com/Church/Default.aspx?id=118566

Giving as a percentage of income was higher at the depth of the Great Depression in the 1930s (3.3 percent of per capita income in 1933) than after a half-century of unprecedented prosperity (2.5 percent in 2004) John Ronsvalle and Sylvia Ronsvalle, The State of Church Giving through 2004: Will We Will? 16th ed. (Champaign, Ill.: Empty Tomb, 2006). ^

The proportion of adults who tithe dropped by 62 percent in the past year. (2) Just 6 percent of born-again households tithed to their churches in 2002. (3) Tithing, when it occurs, is generally among Protestants: 5 percent of adults who attend Protestant churches tithed last year, compared to less than one-tenth of 1 percent among Catholics. (4) Among the groups most likely to tithe are people over 55, college graduates, Evangelicals, Republicans, conservatives, and residents of the South—but there was no segment among which at least 10 percent tithed. George Barna. News release by Barna Research Group, May 19, 2003. ^

Including religious, American households overall gave 3.5% of their income to charity, with approx. 33% going to to religious institutions. Utah was the state with the highest average per-capita charitable contributions, followed by Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee and Arkansas. Professor Arthur Brooks, 2005. http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2005/February/200502181639511CJsamohT5.593508e-02.html

A liberal researcher who was surprised at finding that showed conservatives being more giving, set out to do a more thorough analysis, only to confirm the findings: http://blog.geoiq.com/2009/01/07/dataset-of-the-day-who-is-more-generous-republicans-or-democrats/

Also, the top 10 most generous countries are:

1. United States
2. Ireland
3. Australia
4. New Zealand
5. United Kingdom
6. Netherlands
7. Canada
8. Sri Lanka
9. Thailand
10. Laos

The United States’ first place in the rankings marks a significant improvement from 2010, when it ranked fifth. Other countries making significant gains include Liberia, which went from 39 to 14, and Morocco, which leapt from 33 to 12. http://www.worldvision.org/news/new-report-ranks-most-generous-countries. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 22:27, 27 February 2012 (EST)

==Kirk and Madsen==
The WP page on Marshall Kirk [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Kirk#Health] has this but which i cannot find a source for:

"Marshall suffered from severe migraine headaches that were preceded by a strong desire to talk in a rapid monologue. He found that if he gave into these "babbling fits", the headache would be alleviated. He had other medical problems and suffered from bouts of depression that required electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) on three occasions. Because of the negative effects on his memory, he considered ECT to be the last alternative to avoid death. In part due to this medical history, his knowledge of pharmacology was usually greater than that of anyone who treated him. When he died, he was found alone in his apartment by two friends."

Also cannot find anything on Hunter Madsen (pen name "Erastes== Pill")[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 23:54, 24 February 2012 (EST)

==Article title==
Shouldn't this title be lower cased as [[Homosexual agenda]]? It's too bad we can't give it a title with more bite, something like, "The sodomites and their enablers." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 05:23, 17 January 2014 (EST)

== Please explain edit ==

Why, exactly, was [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&curid=69968&diff=1363708&oldid=1350140 this info removed] from the article? Regardless, it is a lot of info and well-sourced. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:03, 27 July 2017 (EDT)

== "Opposing Christian Agenda" section ==

I know this section is intended to reflect what homosexual activists say about Christians. However, I do have some concerns about it. 
Firstly, the use of "agenda" suggests that Christians are pushing some new or different thing secretly. They aren't, they are just staying the same, while the culture changes around them. Well, actually many churches are changing with the culture too, but that's a different discussion altogether. Regarding the bullets, 
point 1: I think I'll reword that, but it is a valid point. Salvation army (a christian org.) will at all costs avoid hiring unrepentant homosexuals, especially for such public-facing jobs. 
point 2: No argument there--this is fine 
point 3: They help to publish material with is contrary to the the propaganda from activists. Oh yes, and that information happens to be factual, unlike the stuff the liberals crank out. 
point 4: Christians have almost no control over this at all. Liberals own the media. 
point 5: Christians actually do very little lobbying compared to liberal activists. Additionally, unlike liberals, the christians operate on a firm moral code which prevents them from offering brides. Since lobbying is driven largely by bribes, the efforts of Christians have almost no teeth. (I still don't want them offering bribes though) 
point 6: "sinner" yes, but there is also "love the sinner, hate the sin" 

Again, I know this is supposed to be what homosexual activists say about Christians, but I think I'm going to make some edits to tone it down a bit. However, this section is altogether off-topic for this page anyway, so I would not be opposed to it being completely removed, or moved to another page. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 23:28, 1 February 2018 (EST)
:I didn't see your mainspace edit until now -- it's a little better. I originally wanted to delete the section, but (if there's a will to actually do it), I think it would be better to completely revamp that section to add examples of promoters of the homosexual/cultural Marxist agenda trying to marginalize, attack, and persecute Christians and Christian values. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:02, 3 February 2018 (EST)
::I [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&diff=1403183&oldid=1402879 removed] the section. Hopefully, I or someone else will find the time/resources to add a section about homosexual agenda efforts to marginalize Christian views. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:06, 7 February 2018 (EST)

== i talked about the transgender murders, LGBTQ+ suicides and lessons in the bible ==

I know many of you may think I'm being crazy right now but there is a much higher chance of being murdered if you are transgender. I have three sources that show this here:
https://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2015/may/13/garnet-coleman/garnet-coleman-said-transgender-person-has-1-12-ch/
http://time.com/3999348/transgender-murders-2015/
http://transstudent.org/transvis.pdf
and members of the LGBTQ+ community or people questioning their sexuality are more likely to commit suicide according to these sources:
https://www.thetrevorproject.org/resources/preventing-suicide/facts-about-suicide/#sm.0001rf6hd7khwehfzmm1yoh6yynxe
https://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/youth-programs.htm
https://www.nami.org/Find-Support/LGBTQ
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-lgbt-teen-suicide/lgbt-youth-at-higher-risk-for-suicide-attempts-idUSKCN1MI1SL

And it is websites like this that make people think that it is okay to bully your peers who are a part of the LGBTQ+ and when members of the LGBTQ+ community see it they remember how much oppression they face and how many people could harm, rape, or kill them because of what they identify as.

And how does the LGBTQ+ community affect you besides 'being against god's law'? Know what else is said to be against god's law in a way being rich. Remember the bible story about the rich man asking what he could do to join him in heaven?

Jesus said to give all his possession to the needy correct? All of them. Yet you are still here able to access and edit this website with your phones or computers while people starve and die of water poisoning in Africa.

And yes, I have not been as aware of those outcomes either, but Jesus said to make sure you are pure right and just as well as without sin before judging others. I ask you what is this page? Judging others.

unsigned post by [[User:What-up-yall|What-up-yall]] ([[User talk:What-up-yall|talk]]) 13:19, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:[https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2018/july/fascist-crackdown-canadian-christian-faces-jail-time-for-expressing-his-beliefs-at-gay-pride-event] [https://www.dailysignal.com/2017/06/27/new-law-canada-remove-kids-parents-reject-transgender-ideology/] [https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/08/california-law-threatens-jail-time-dissenters-transgender-dogma/] This is what the LGBTQRSTUV movement is doing to us, and there are many more examples. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 14:35, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

::Explaining to others that homosexuality/transgenderism are sinful and damaging behaviors (this is according to the Bible, not ourselves) cannot and shouldn't be compared to bullying -- two completely different things. Christians don't bully/mock homosexuals (actually, much of the bullying/slander comes from either secular people or liberals themselves), but they stand firmly by their view that those behaviors are morally wrong, just as alcoholism or vandalism are wrong.

::And yes, Shobson20 is completely correct that the "LGBTQ+ community" is assaulting theologically conservative Christians -- any Christian who believes marriage is between one man and one woman for life, or who believes there are only two genders will be mocked, harassed, and even prosecuted (Colorado baker, etc., etc.) -- see the [[Liberal bigotry]] article, for example. So, in response to your question "''how does the LGBTQ+ community affect you''", it is affecting Christians big time.

::Also, you misinterpreted the account of the rich young ruler -- the problem was not the inherent fact that he had a lot of money, but that those possessions were an idol to him, preventing him from surrendering to Jesus and following him. He was bound to those things and couldn't give them up to follow Christ. Nowhere, however, does it say that money or possessions are inherently bad -- the Bible says that the love of money is the root of many evils, but not money itself.[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+6%3A10&version=ESV] Also, some passages appear to promote good money management, with one of Jesus's parables being about a master who rewards the servants who make the biggest profit (see [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A14-30&version=ESV Matthew 25:14–30]). Also, see this: [https://www.gotquestions.org/poor-vs-rich.html] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:55, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:::Also, you're taking a single Bible passage about judging others way out of context -- many passages of the Bible call on believers to discern between right and wrong (for example, Matthew 7:6, 15-16; John 7:24). Per John 7:24, Christians should "judge correctly," and this means they should not throw out correct doctrine in the name of postmodern "tolerance." There are two good articles explaining what the Bible says about judging others in further detail: [https://www.gotquestions.org/do-not-judge.html][https://answersingenesis.org/bible-questions/does-the-bible-tell-christians-to-judge-not/] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:55, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
::::Whether you translate ''agape'' as "love" or "charity" (1 Cor. 13:13), it's easy to see why casual browsers can have a hard time finding much evidence of it around here.
::::And given the size of your editor base / audience vs. the millions of conservative Christians you're supposedly producing content for, that's something you might all do well to ponder. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:02, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::::So, what you're saying, JohnZ, is that we in this website must cave in to the left's way of thinking. Is that what you're saying, JohnZ? Is that what your version of "love" means? That we have to tolerate everyone, behavior included? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 17:31, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

::::::@JohnZ: Love is not synonymous (actually, it's an antonym) with failure to discern between what is morally right and wrong, and popularity is not an indicator of truth. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:12, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::::(edit conflict) Also, keep in mind that we don't oppose homosexuality or transgenderism because we simply dislike it or have some "subconscious hatred" or whatever -- we're simply repeating what the Bible says, as the ultimate source of authority. For example, [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1&version=ESV Romans 1:26-27] states that homosexuality not only is sinful behavior, but that it's also punishment for sinful behavior (remember, this is the New Testament--good bye to your notions that it's all just "Old Testament stuff"). Also, [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+6&version=ESV 1 Corinthians 6:9-10] lists homosexuality as an act that indicates that one is not saved. Also, see [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+1&version=ESV 1 Timothy 1:9-10]. There are other passages that deal with the topic of marriage (see Jesus's statement in [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+19&version=ESV Matthew 19:4-5], for example). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:12, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
=== JohnZ: Excerpt, picture and caption from Conservapedia's flagship [[homosexuality]] article ===

[[Image:FacProfilemontoya.jpg‎|right|150px|thumb|Dr. [[Alex D. Montoya]] wrote:"The [[Christianity|Christian]] needs to befriend and witness to the homosexual with such [[love]], [[compassion]], and [[wisdom]] that such will respond to the saving [[grace]] of [[God]]."[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj11h.pdf] ]]
{{clear}}
JohnZ, here is a quote from Conservapedia's flagship [[homosexuality]] article: "In his essay which examines the biblical passages regarding homosexuality, Pastor and Associate Professor of Pastoral Ministries at [[The Master's Seminary]] Dr. [[Alex D. Montoya]] states that 'The [[Christianity|Christian]] needs to befriend and witness to the homosexual with such [[love]], [[compassion]], and [[wisdom]] that such will respond to the saving [[grace]] of [[God]].'"[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj11h.pdf]

JohnZ, I hope this helps clarifies Conservapedia's views on homosexuals.

By the way, have you read the article: [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]]?[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:39, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:Aye, more stuff like that Montoya quote would probably be helpful. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:51, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
::Let me also share with you something a Pastor once said: "Marriage is by definition heterosexual. This is the definition of it...that doesn't mean we don't love our homosexual friends, we love them, we share Christ with them, but we do not affirm for them that what they have is by definition marriage, it is not. And it doesn't matter to me what the State eventually says." (This was before Obergefell v. Hodges, the second-worst act of legislating from the bench since Roe v. Wade.) Understand that the biblical definition of "love" is a DO, not a FEEL, that clarifies the often misunderstood verse of how God "loved Jacob but hated Isau" or how "the man that spares the rod hates his son, but the man who loves his son is careful to discipline him." [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 19:03, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::Yeah, that works, too. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 19:08, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

=== Pro-homosexuality activist: Put this in your victimhood pipe and smoke it!!! ===

Pro-homosexuality activist: Please see: [[Homosexuality and Murders]] and [[Homosexual Couples and Domestic Violence]]

I hope this helps clarify matters for you.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:21, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:I love it:

::when members of the LGBTQ+ community see it they remember how much oppression they face and how many people could harm, rape, or kill them because of what they identify as.

:In addition to what was said above, I thought homosexual identitarians were excited about their new found acceptance, proved by their ability to force people to regard their unions as marriage. That's even an out-and-out privilege, not a right. How could that be if they "face" so "much oppression"? Actually this sounds more like they're doubling down their grievance techniques because they're greedy for more privileges.

:And What-up-yall, how could they "face oppression...because of what they identify as"? You imposed your own identity on them by referring them as "the LGBTQ+ community" and became their self-proclaimed spokesman!

:How do you know any of those people want to belong with all the members or even every group in the same alphabet soup union you cooked up?

:All this is dazzle camouflage that keeps everything up in the air, the better to hide the guilt of male homosexuals spreading a fatal venereal disease over the course of the last third of the century, when it could have been stopped in one year, and all they had to do was practice abstinence.

:You didn't capitalize "God" but you capitalized at the beginning of sentences. I'm blocking you for a week, for being incivil. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 16:43, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

==Shock therapy==
A citation is needed for the statement that [[shock therapy]] is a "scientifically proven method of homosexual conversion". Thank you. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 02:47, June 29, 2021 (EDT)
==Cannot edit but here are two more links for substantiation==
While it seems that much any text from "After the Ball" has been expunged from the Internet, this page provides the text from "THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA" by Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill: http://library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm showing the psychological tactics that the section of the CP article quotes from, but with the only link to the actual text at length being from from Google books, which only provides very brief excerpts.

Note also that the cited link www.parentsofgaychildren.org is no longer available at this time and needs to direct to https://web.archive.org/web/20180319222723/http://parentsofgaychildren.org/. I could normally do so (as a primary editor to the psychological tactics section of the article, but for some unexplained reason I am no longer allowed to do so, perhaps since I have not logged in for some time. Also, attempts to access or publish requires two tries, as Service Unavailable is the first.Daniel1212 20:19, December 17, 2022 (EST)

:The page is unlocked for editing. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']] 20:28, December 17, 2022 (EST)
::Thanks but I see no references when I try to edit it, thus I cannot edit: parentsofgaychildren.org ''to'' https://web.archive.org/web/20180319222723/http://parentsofgaychildren.org). Maybe I could manually write an edit for the other link, but as of now it the page seems to be in a form of "safe mode." Sorry for not keeping up on things here. I do understand however, why this page would need to be locked, esp. this section (which I myself provided much to in the past, by God's grace, and have often linked to), since it is targeted, yet which page is due to the provocative pushing of LGBTQ propaganda. Daniel1212

:::Help! After receiving no response to the inability to see or add any refs, I went ahead and did it, expecting that the others would show up. However, all is deleted except for the first section! I tried Undo but it does not do so. Please revert. Daniel1212 22:58, December 21, 2022 (EST)

Homosexual Agenda

2022-12-22T03:52:42Z

Daniel1212: Cannot ad new refs - none were visible: adding one deleted the rest. Revert

Homosexual Agenda

2022-12-22T03:51:10Z

Daniel1212: /* Strategies and psychological tactics */

{{Homosexuality}}
The '''Homosexual Agenda''' is a self-centered set of beliefs and objectives designed to mandate approval of [[homosexuality]] and its ideology. The goals and means of this movement include indoctrinating students in [[public school]], restricting the free speech of opposition, obtaining [[special rights|special treatment]] for homosexuals, distorting [[Bible|Biblical]] teaching and science, and interfering with freedom of association. Advocates of the homosexual agenda seek special rights for [[homosexuals]] and self-described "LGBTQ people" that other people don't have, such as immunity from criticism (see [[hate speech]], [[hate crime]]s).<ref>Such special rights will necessarily [[zero-sum game|come at the expense]] of the rights of broader society.</ref> '''''The homosexual agenda is the biggest threat to the rights of [[free speech]] and [[religious freedom]] today.'''''<ref>Daniels, Fletch (September 10, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/the-lgbt-endgame-is-to-destroy-christianity The LGBT endgame is to destroy Christianity]. ''LifeSiteNews'' (from the ''American Thinker''). Retrieved September 10, 2019.</ref><ref>Duke, Selwyn (September 11, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/item/33387-lgbt-activists-hate-christianity-and-want-to-destroy-it LGBT Activists Hate Christianity — and Want to Destroy It]. ''The New American''. Retrieved September 11, 2019.</ref><ref>In 2020, more than 10% (90 out of 879) of the featured characters on scripted primetime television programs are openly [[LGBTQ]], an attempt by the pro-LGBTQ producers of those shows to deceitfully push the discredited claim that "10%" of the population is homosexual when, in fact, less than 2% of the population actually identify as such.</ref>

One of the top priorities of the Homosexual Agenda is to prohibit and outlaw [[conversion therapy]]. Activities like [[baseball]] and [[chess]] reduce homosexual proclivities, while other activities like figure skating for men and soccer for women seem to encourage homosexuality.
[[Leftists]] are pushing unconstitutional bans on conversion therapy, apparently unable to tolerate things they dislike. Their priorities include electing high-ranking officials who are openly homosexual, with the ultimate goal of electing a president who is in a [[same-sex marriage]], like the top [[Dem]] fundraising candidate [[Pete Buttigieg]] in 2020.

In a speech on December 10, 2013, to a pro-family rally in [[Jamaica]], a country that rejects same-sex "marriage", Brian Camenker of [[MassResistance]] outlined the step-by-step approach of the homosexual agenda:<ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen2/13d/jamaica-speech-121013/index.html "MassResistance helps Jamaica confront ‘gay’ agenda"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

*Legalize homosexuality
*Hold "gay pride" parades
*Accept child sex trafficking
*Demand non-discrimination laws
*Insist on homosexuals' adoption of children
*Push the homosexual agenda in schools<ref>{{cite web |title=Criticism of Transgender Agenda Will Get Virginia Students Expelled |author=Austin Ruse |date=10 Jun 2016 |url=https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/10/transgender-northern-virginia-students-can-now-expelled-criticizing-transgenderism/ |publisher=BREITBART |quote=The transgender change in school regulations was imposed last night during a dramatic board meeting where only 12 pro-trans witnesses were invited to testify. ... No opposing voices were allowed to be heard, parents were relegated to shouting opposition from the seats and some were ejected from the meeting.... Last year, they were promised a lengthy investigation and a full hearing. Instead, it was foisted upon them with less than 24 hours-notice. ... an Oregon law recently allowed a jury to award $60,000 t0 a transgender teacher because other teachers declined to use the teacher’s preferred pronoun, which is “they” rather than “him” or “her.” Deputies for President Barack Obama have backed similar rules for all K-12 schools, and New York City has established similar forced-speech rules.|accessdate=12 Jun 2016}}</ref>
*Legalize various alternate forms of partnership and call them "marriage" (i.e. man and man, woman and woman, man and multiple women)
*Demand public funding to deal with increased homosexual-related social problems
*Promote the [[gender confusion]] agenda
*Demand to be treated "equally"
*Impose a large-scale loss of free speech
*Ban counseling for kids confused by [[homosexual issues]]
*[[Drag queen]] story times to indoctrinate children
*Ban scientifically and religiously proven methods of homosexual conversion
*Attack churches
*Encourage [[abortion]]

[[Russia]] is a leader in rejecting the homosexual agenda.<ref>{{cite web |title=Is the Homosexual Agenda 'Unstoppable'? - Comparing America with Russia |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msLH6f6vyC4 |accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=RUSSIA VS. THE LGBT GLOBALISTS: A Climate of Hate and Fear |url=http://www.scottlively.net/2015/02/25/russia-vs-the-lgbt-globalists-a-climate-of-hate-and-fear-part-two/ |quote=This dangerous LGBT strategy has now gone global and the target is the Russian Federation. ... Core American values to Obama are publicly celebrated sodomy and doctor-assisted transsexual self-mutilation. ... The Russian anti-propaganda law, passed June 11, 2013, was the first truly effective international counter-measure since the “gay” agenda went global around the turn of the millennium. Typically, the “gays” characterized the law as hateful and an incitement to violence, but in doing so they revealed that propagandizing children is part of their agenda, since the law simply classifies “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relationships” as material that cannot be distributed among minors and commands the government to protect children from it. Just after the passage of this law Barack Obama did an about-face on the “reset” policy (in which Russia had been recognized as an equal partner in the world community) and instead began reviving cold-war rhetoric.|accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Pro-Russian Press Conference |date=22 February 2014 |url=http://www.scottlively.net/2014/02/22/pro-russian-press-conference/ |quote=We got lots of coverage from the event, and I believe we accomplished our objective which was to bring awareness to the world that the pro-family movement in the U.S., Canada, UK, and other “pro-gay” countries is happy to see the Russian Federation standing up for family values. We think this will encourage other nations to follow their example. |accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref> For example, Russia banned adoption by Americans as the Obama Administration aggressively pushed the homosexual agenda, and in June 2013 a house in the [[Russian]] parliament passed legislation to ban foreign adoption by gay couples or single parents who live in any [[same-sex marriage|gay marriage]] nation.<ref>[https://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-russia-ban-adoption-gay-couples-20130618,0,4633280.story "Russian lawmakers pass ban on adoption tied to gay foreign couples"]. ''Los Angeles Times''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

[[Barack Hussein Obama]], [[Hillary Clinton]], and essentially all [[Democratic Party|Democrat]] politicians now advocate the homosexual agenda, reflecting the growing financial power of the homosexual network. Obama's self-centered obsession with his own re-election, and fundraising for his campaign, has caused him to create a national political issue out of this, rather than deal with other issues like the economy. Many [[establishment]] Republicans and [[Cafeteria Christians]] also have bought into the homosexual agenda.

'''''Among all the [[liberal]] belief systems, the homosexual ideology is the most self-centered or selfish''''' – unlike the vast charity performed by thousands of churches in the U.S. alone, a homosexual charity can be considered an [[oxymoron]].

The late Supreme Court Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] referred to the "so-called homosexual agenda" in ''[[Lawrence v. Texas]]'', 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (dissenting opinion). Justice Scalia also predicted that this was the first step to legalizing homosexual civil unions. He was proven right with the outcome of ''[[Obergefell v. Hodges]]''. The goal of the latter decision was the societal affirmation of homosexuality rather than simple equality.<ref>Williams, Thomas D. (January 5, 2020). [https://www.breitbart.com/education/2020/01/05/usa-today-obergefell-was-never-about-freedom-to-marry/ USA Today: Obergefell Was Never About ‘Freedom to Marry’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved January 5, 2020.</ref>

Despite the fact that only 4.1% of the U.S. population identified as [[LGBT]], just over half a percentage point higher than four years prior,<ref>Gates, Gary J. (January 11, 2017). [https://www.gallup.com/poll/201731/lgbt-identification-rises.aspx In US, More Adults Identifying as LGBT]. ''Gallup''. Retrieved January 18, 2017.</ref> Americans '''''greatly overestimate the proportion of homosexuals''''' in the nation to be an average of 23%.<ref name="GreatlyOver">Newport, Frank (May 21, 2015). [https://www.gallup.com/poll/183383/americans-greatly-overestimate-percent-gay-lesbian.aspx Americans Greatly Overestimate Percent Gay, Lesbian in U.S.] ''Gallup''. Retrieved January 18, 2017. See also:
*Mainwaring, Doug (June 28, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/americans-vastly-overestimate-the-size-of-the-lgbt-population Americans vastly overestimate the size of the LGBT population]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved June 28, 2019.</ref> Interestingly, Republicans and conservatives gave estimates closest to the actual number.<ref name="GreatlyOver"/>

== The Homosexual Agenda ==
Joseph P. Gudel, in ''That Which is Unnatural''<ref>[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0108a.html "That Which is Unnatural" Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture] Part Two in a Two-Part Series on Homosexuality, from the Christian Research Journal, Winter 1993, page 8</ref> contended that the homosexual movement,

:has been militantly demanding not just the homosexuals' right to do whatever they wish to do behind closed doors, but, more importantly, that society fully accept their lifestyle as both healthy and normal, even demanding special rights and legislation as an "oppressed minority." Gudel quotes various sources evidencing this.

In a 1987 speech to the National Press Club in Washington, homosexual spokesperson Jeff Levi proclaimed,

:We are no longer seeking just a right to privacy and a protection from wrong. We also have a right — as heterosexual Americans already have — to see government and society affirm our lives.<ref>Jeff Levi, in William Dannemeyer, Shadow in the Land (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1989), 86.</ref>

In an article entitled "Gays on the March" in 1975, Time magazine quoted lesbian activist Barbara Gittings who stated:

:What the homosexual wants, and here he is neither willing to compromise nor morally required to compromise — is acceptance of homosexuality as a way of life fully on a par with heterosexuality." In response, Time opined, "It is one thing to remove legal discrimination against homosexuals. It is another to mandate approval....It is this goal of full acceptance, which no known society past or present has granted to homosexuals, that makes many Americans apprehensive.<ref>Gays on the March," Time, 8 Sept. 1975, 43</ref>

A primary goal of the homosexual agenda is to normalize the lifestyle in [[public schools]]. This occurred quickly and intensely after same-sex "marriage" was illegally imposed in Massachusetts, where homosexual relationships are taught to children as young as kindergartners, as recounted by the decision of ''[[Parker v. Hurley]]''.<ref>The ''Parker v. Hurley'' decision explained, "In January 2005, when Jacob Parker ("Jacob") was in kindergarten, he brought home a 'Diversity Book Bag.' This included a picture book, ''Who's in a Family?'', which depicted different families, including single-parent families, an extended family, interracial families, animal families, a family without children, and — to the concern of the Parkers — a family with two dads and a family with two moms. The book concludes by answering the question, 'Who's in a family?': 'The people who love you the most!' The book says nothing about marriage."</ref>

In a 1992 report by John Leo in U.S. News & World Report, he notes some books which were part of New York City's public school curriculum.

The first-grade book, ''Children of the Rainbow'', stated on page 145, which states that teachers must "be aware of varied family structures, including...gay or lesbian parents," and "children must be taught to acknowledge the positive aspects of each type of household." Another children book is Heather Has Two Mommies, which is about a lesbian couple having a child through artificial insemination. Another book, ''Gloria Goes to Gay Pride'', states, "Some women love women, some men love men, some women and men love each other. That's why we march in the parade, so everyone can have a choice."

Leo commented,

:A line is being crossed here; in fact, a brand new ethic is descending upon the city's public school system. The traditional civic virtue of tolerance (if gays want to live together, it's their own business) has been replaced with a new ethic requiring approval and endorsement (if gays want to live together, we must 'acknowledge the positive aspects' of their way of life).<ref>John Leo, "Heather Has a Message," U.S. News & World Report, 17 Aug. 1992, 16.</ref>

Dr. Judith A. Reisman in her extensive ''Crafting “Gay” Children'',<ref>http://www.defendthefamily.com/_docs/resources/6390601.pdf</ref> reports that Harvard homosexual Toby Morotta, PhD, stated that in the 1970s, members of the Gay Activists Alliance - who were trained in the “zapping" of any who rebuffed homosexuality.<ref>Toby Marotta: THE POLITICS OF HOMOSEXUALITY: HOW LESBIANS AND GAY MEN HAVE MADE THEMSELVES A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL FORCE IN MODERN AMERICA, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1981 at 319</ref> And that these formed the “Gay Academic Union,” (GAU) which was made up of faculty and students in major universities. She states that the GAU has long fought for domination of its worldview within the academic community, and professional journals commonly assigned GAU and other homosexual peer reviewers to research touching on homosexuality, generally resulting in a quick death to possible unfavorable findings.<ref>See extensive reports in regular NARTH Bulletins as well as Ray Johnson, “American Psychology: The Political Science, at 53-57.</ref>

This and the general agenda is seen to be overall implementing a marketing strategy explained in a book called ''After the Ball,'' by [[gay rights]] activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in the late 1980s, in which a six-point plan was set forth as to how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior in a decade-long time frame:
:"The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior." <ref name="Winn07252003">''After the Ball'' (1989), quoted from Winn, Pete (7-25-2003) [ ''Q&A: The Homosexual Agenda''] Citizenlink</ref> "Thus propagandistic advertising can depict all opponents of the gay movement as homophobic bigots who are 'not Christian' and the propaganda can further show them [[homosexuals]] as being criticized, hated and shunned..."<ref>After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's, by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen (Author) (p. 152-153)</ref>

[[Focus on the Family]] provides additional quotes from ''After the Ball'', outlining key points of the homosexual agenda:<ref name="Winn07252003"/><ref>Kirk, Marshall K. and Erastes Pill (11-1987) ''The Overhauling of Straight America'' Available at [http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/overhauling.htm ''STRATEGIES OF THE HOMOSEXUAL MOVEMENT: "The Overhauling of Straight America"'']</ref>

#"Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible." (They use late night air waves and special channels, as well as their right to peacefully assemble to do so.)
#"Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers."
#"Give homosexual protectors a just cause."
#"Make gays look good."
#"Make the victimizers look bad."
#"Get funds from corporate America."

[[United States Supreme Court]] Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] wrote:
{{cquote|Today's opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=02-102#dissent1 ''LAWRENCE et al. v. TEXAS''] at findlaw.com</ref>}}

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vic_Eliason Vic Eliason] of [http://www.crosstalkamerica.com Crosstalk America] rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies.

== Specific goals ==
The goals of the homosexual movement include:

#Ignoring Christian morals and discouraging religiously based laws.
#Attempting to convince the world that marriage should be defined secularly, instead of as one of the Lord's commandments.
#Ignore the clear message of the [[Bible]] that [[homosexuality]] is a sin and an abomination unto [[God]] because their First Amendment rights allow them to.
#Remind conservatives that there cannot be a "gay ([[homosexual attraction]]) gene", just like like there cannot be a "black gene" because complex things like these are caused by complex interactions between genes.
#Censoring evidence that the "gay gene" is a hoax. After all, it would have to be multiple genes interacting together.<ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08a/born_gay_hoax/smith_0329/index.html ''Lesbian activists at Smith College riot, shut down Ryan Sorba speech on "The Born Gay Hoax" as police watch. See exclusive videos.''] Mass Resistance</ref>
#Censoring speech against homosexuality by branding it to be "hate-speech"<ref>[http://www.silencingchristians.com Video:Silencing Christians]</ref><ref>[http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2009/06/homosexuality-its-crime-in-england-to.html "Marquette Warrior"]. ''mu-warrior.blogspot.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[http://www.ccfon.org/view.php?id=745 Bishops fight for right to criticize homosexual lifestyle, 25th May 2009]</ref>
#Censoring biblical statements condemning homosexuality<ref>White, Hilary (04-21-2006) [http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/apr/06042105.html ''Court Upholds School Ban on "Homosexuality is Shameful" T-Shirt''] LifeSiteNews.com</ref>
#Lobbying for equal employment rights.<ref>The Crimson Staff (10-13-2006) [http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=514950 ''A Box of Their Own?''] (opinion) The Crimson</ref><ref>http://www.afa.net, Homosexual Agenda Platforms from 1972 - 2000</ref>
#Expand hate crimes legislation to include sexual orientation, which would be equally wrong for heterosexuals to do.<ref>Pelosi, Nancy Office of (09-28-2004) [http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/Sept04/HateCrimes092804.html ''Pelosi: "Hate Crimes Prevention Legislation is Right Thing to Do, Long Overdue"''] From the office of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi</ref>
#Ending the military's and Boy Scouts' restrictions on homosexuality<ref>''Boy Scouts of Am. v. Dale'', 530 U.S. 640 (2000) (Boy Scouts); "Matlovich v. Secretary of the Air Force (591 F.2d 852, DC Circ. 1 978) (military)</ref>
#Stopping children as young as 5 years old from attending therapy to repair their sexual preference<ref>[http://www.thetaskforce.org/reports_and_research/youth_in_the_crosshairs National Gay and Lesbian Task Force:Youth in the Crosshairs]</ref>
#Teach tolerance of homosexuals in schools.
#In places like Massachusetts and California, where the homosexual lobby is the strongest, it starts as early as preschool. They tell seven- or eight-year-old boys, "If you only like boys, there's a chance you may be homosexual," or "If you only like girls, maybe you are lesbian." Children at that age also do not have the hormones to experience sexual attraction, so they cannot understand this yet.
#Demands protections from job discrimination.<ref>[http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/nondiscrimination/ENDA_main_page Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) | National Gay and Lesbian Task Force]</ref>
#Suing an online dating website for discrimination. This was because sexual orientation is a federally protected group, as such, this company was claimed to be "breaking" the law.<ref>Joshua Rhett Miller. [https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,454904,00.html "eHarmony to Provide Gay Dating Service After Lawsuit"]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>
#Undermining the [[Essay:Quantifying Mental Strength|resolve]] of [[Homosexuality and choice#Choice and Genetics|latent homosexuals]] so that their will becomes too weak to resist the temptations of homosexuality<ref>http://www.thetaskforce.org/activist_center/resources_and_tools/challenge_exgay</ref>
#Pushing for legalized adoption by homosexual individuals and couples<ref>http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/parenting_and_family</ref>
#Indoctrination of public school children to support the homosexual agenda
#Allowing boys into girls' restrooms and vice versa, without restriction.
#Forced feminization
#Defunding public transit systems

The state-by-state push for same-sex "marriage" can be viewed as a means to the above goals, or a goal in itself.<ref>[[Lewis v. Harris]]</ref> An example of this would be the recent New Hampshire law that makes same-sex civil unions "legal".<ref>[http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/06/01/new_hampshire_law_makes_same_sex_civil_unions_legal/ "New Hampshire law makes same-sex civil unions legal"]. ''boston.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Although notable gains toward achieving its goals continue to manifest, homosexual activists later began been expressing a high level of dissatisfaction with the [[Obama regime]]. Commenting on such, Massresistance.org, an organization which opposes the homosexual agenda in [[Massachusetts]], noted that Obama had,

*signed an order extending federal benefits to same-sex partners.
*pushed an extreme hate crimes bill in Congress.
*declared his intention to repeal the Defense of Marriage.
*pushed a pro-homosexual and transgender version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
*appointed homosexual activists to high level positions, including Harry Knox, of the homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign, and Kevin Jennings, founder of the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which educates kids in the public schools.
*declared February to be "Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month."
*demanded the State Department allow homosexual couples to use their married names (from marriages or civil unions) on US passports.<ref>update@massresistance.org 6/24/2009 11:56 PM</ref>

In Europe, countries such as the [[United Kingdom]] and [[France]] have adopted policies promoting gender confusion.<ref>Friedman, Victoria (February 15, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/02/15/france-mother-father-parent-uk-govt-lawyer-mother-not-gender-specific/ Men Can Be Mothers in UK, While French Schools Erase Terms ‘Father,’ ‘Mother’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved February 15, 2019.</ref>

=== Strategies and psychological tactics ===
Homosexual activists are often seen as engaging in [[homosexual logic|specious argumentation]], such as attempts to controvert the consistent teaching of the Bible on homosexual relations (see [[homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]), and using false analogies, in order to gain acceptance of homosexuality. One common argument used by homosexual activists seeks to compare their quest for equal rights to that of others. This argument is countered by the observation that blacks were able to peacefully argue that mankind should not be "judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character", as the former yields no certain moral distinction. In contrast, homosexual activists seek acceptance of an immoral practice(s), and in addition, engage in certain coercive and manipulative means to do so. This includes the use of demonstrative protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way. In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality. Another strategy used by supporters of the homosexual agenda is to publicly deny that such an agenda exists.

While not all homosexuals agree with the use of deceptive psychological tactics, leading homosexual activists willfully employ them. The aforementioned book, [https://archive.org/details/AfterTheBallHowAmericaWillConquerItsFearHatredOfGaysInThe90s ''After The Ball How America Will Conquer Its Fear & Hatred Of Gays In The 90s''], is widely regarded as the handbook for the homosexual agenda, in which two homosexual Harvard-trained graduates, Marshall Kirk (1957–2005), a researcher in neuropsychiatry, and Hunter Madsen (pen name ''Erastes Pill''), who was schooled in social marketing, advocated avoiding portraying homosexuals as aggressive challengers, but as "victims" instead, while making all those who opposed them to be "evil persecutors". As a means of the latter, they used ''jamming,'' in which Christians, traditionalists, or anyone else who opposes the gay agenda are publicly smeared. Their strategy was based on the premise that, "In any campaign to win over the public, Gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector. The purpose of victim imagery is to make straight people feel very uncomfortable." <ref>[http://library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm "THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA" by Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill]</ref> Leftists also label Christians who support biblical marriage as "anti-gay," equating them with non-western Muslims who support stoning homosexuals.

"Jamming" [[homo-hatred]] (disagreement with [[homosexual behavior]]s) was to be done by linking it to [[Nazi]] horror, advised Kirk and Madsen. Associate all who oppose homosexuality with images of Klansmen demanding that gays be slaughtered, hysterical backwoods preachers, menacing punks, and a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed. Thus, "propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths..." " It can show them being criticized, hated, shunned. It can depict gays experiencing horrific suffering as the direct result of homohatred-suffering of which even most bigots would be ashamed to be the cause. It can, in short, link homohating bigotry with all sorts of attributes the bigot would be ashamed to possess, and with social consequences he would find unpleasant and scary... our effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof."

Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, writes,

Kirk and Madsen's open admission of their deceptive tactics is noted as most revealing: [O]ur effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof. "...the person's beliefs can be altered whether he is conscious of the attack or not" “The campaign we outline in this book, though complex, depends centrally upon a program of unabashed propaganda, firmly grounded in long-established principles of psychology and advertising.”

Similarly, author Robert Bauman additionally records: "It makes no difference that the ads are lies... because were using them to ethically good effect, to counter negative stereotypes that are every bit as much lies, and far more wicked ones."

The need for Kirk and Madsen to engage in such manipulation may be seen as being due to their sober realization of the deleterious nature of the homosexual lifestyle. This includes sodomy being responsible for 81% of new HIV cases aged 13 and older among men - despite only representing approximately 4% of the male population - and 92% of new HIV among youth (2020), and (historically) a greatly increased incidence of other infectious diseases and premature death, and despite decades of attempting to subdue homoerotic practices into being "safe."

“In short, the gay lifestyle - if such a chaos can, after all, legitimately be called a lifestyle - it just doesn’t work: it doesn’t serve the two functions for which all social framework evolve: to constrain people’s natural impulses to behave badly and to meet their natural needs. While it’s impossible to provide an exhaustive analytic list of all the root causes and aggravants of this failure, we can asseverate at least some of the major causes. Many have been dissected, above, as elements of the Ten Misbehaviors; it only remains to discuss the failure of the gay community to provide a viable alternative to the heterosexual family.”

David Kupelian, author of ''[[The Marketing of Evil]],'' describes Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, stating,

Marshall Kirk died in 2005 at the young age of 47. The cause of death has not been publicly revealed.

Often cited as an early example of such tactics was the role of homosexual activists in persuading the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II). Dr. Ronald Bayer, though being himself a pro-homosexual psychiatrist, described this removal as being the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation, rather than any new scientific discoveries. In so doing, like slavery before it, the homosexual agenda is seen to threaten basic freedoms, principally the First Amendment.

The charge of "[[homophobia]]" has been increasingly evidenced as being part of a means of intimidation used in pushing the Homosexual Agenda. Due to what homophobia has been made to denote, that of being a repressed homosexual, or possessing an irrational fear of being approached by homosexuals, or of being a "bigot" "persecuting" victims, the widespread use of the term "homophobic" attaches a powerful stigma to anyone who may even conscientiously oppose the practice of homosexuality, thus silencing many who might otherwise object to it.

In relation to such oppression, psychologist Nicholas Cummings, former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), observed, "Homophobia as intimidation is one of the most pervasive techniques used to silence anyone who would disagree with the gay activist agenda." As an example of such fear within the APA, in addressing 100 fellow professionals Cummings related that while writing "Destructive Trends in Mental Health," with psychologist Rogers Wright, a number of fellow psychologists were invited to participate. However, these flatly turned them down, as they feared loss of tenure, loss of promotion, and other forms of professional retaliation. "We were bombarded by horror stories," Dr. Cummings said. "Their greatest fear was of the gay lobby, which is very strong in the APA.

Noted homosexual activist and pornographer Clinton Fein, in his article, ''The Gay Agenda stated'': "Homophobic inclinations alone, even without any actions, should be criminal and punishable to the full extent of the law."

Erik Holland, author of ''The Nature of Homosexuality'', perceives that homosexuals have become so reckless in labeling others "homophobic" that "anyone who questions their labeling someone [is] a homophobe himself. Even quoting factual statistics about the connection between homosexuality and AIDS is allegedly homophobic." In addition, according to pro-homosexual author Vernon A. Wall, "even acceptance of homosexuality can be seen as a form of homophobia, because to talk about the acceptance of homosexuality is to imply that there is something about homosexuality that needs acceptance."

It may be speculated that if the liberal use of the term "homophobia" is not primarily a psychological tactic, then it indicates a psychological condition on the part of those who use the term in which they [[wishful thinking|wishfully]] or neurotically imagine that all those who oppose them are "fearful" of them, or of being one.

More recently, after 25 years of claiming she was not indoctrinating anyone with pro-homosexual beliefs, one activist honestly admitted to this being a lie. Canadian lesbian activist S. Bear Bergman, a female who identifies as a gender-confused "male", stated, "All that time I said I wasn't indoctrinating anyone with my beliefs about gay and lesbian and bi and trans and queer people? That was a lie.” Bergman recounted that she was instructed as a young gay activist to tell concerned parents that she was “just providing an alternate viewpoint” when accused of engaging in “indoctrination and recruiting,” and to use “soft” language when speaking about homosexuality. In her article on the notoriously liberal web site, the [[Huffington Post]], he went on to candidly confess that this indoctrination, "is absolutely my goal. I want to make your children like people like me and my family, even if that goes against the way you have interpreted the teachings of your religion." Bergman fantasized that in an ideal world he would have been "ushered into the world of queerness with care and tenderness by experienced homos" (akin to "camp counselors"), "and issued my leather jacket and my protest pins, my safer sex supplies..."

Bergman expressed that his goal was that of portraying to "impressionable young minds" the idea that "queers and transfolk are just as fine and lovely a kind of human as any other kind," and stated that he did not like the idea of sending her kid to schools where any kid could share with him their ideas about homosexuals. Thus Bergman, who believes that "books a kid hears at bedtime affect their sleep and also their dreams," is finalizing a series of children's books that all feature lesbian, homosexual, bisexual, gender-confused, or queer kids or families, with the goal that the young readers come to believe that people like him and his family are "absolutely great," that "lesbian, gay, bi, queer, and trans people -- that we exist, that we're perfectly fine and often really excellent." Bergman then concludes, "If that makes me an indoctrinator, I accept it. Let me be honest -- I am not even a little bit sorry."

Commenting on this frank article, Pete Baklinski of LifeSiteNews.com, states that,

To which Baklinski adds the spiritual consequences, citing one of the texts in the Bible which condemn homosexual relations:
{{Cquote|“For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error” (Letter to ). }}

For Christians believe God created man and women uniquely compatible and complimentary, and they alone are joined by God in marriage, with opposite genders being specified by both Genesis and personally by Jesus Christ. (; ) The Bible only condemns homosexual relations - by design and decree, in principle and by precept - and never sanctions them wherever they are manifestly dealt with, and the injunctions against them are part of the transcendent and immutable moral law. (Lv. 18:22; Rm. 1:26,27)

However, Christians also understand that some of the first Christians were likely former homosexuals, () and believe that there is room at the cross for all who want the Lord Jesus over sin, and believe upon Him to save them who died for them, and rose again, and who thus are baptized and follow Him, to the glory of God.

===Influence in the academic world===
Professor Jerry Z. Muller described in an article titled ''First Things'' (Aug/Sept. 1993) how the homosexual lobby has gained widespread acceptance in the educational realm.
{{cquote|[Their] strategy has been remarkably successful. With a rapidity largely attributable in large part to a total lack of articulate resistance, homosexual ideology has gained an unquestioned and uncontested legitimacy in American academic life. Within the academy, as within nonacademic elite culture, the definition of opposite to homosexuality as "homophobia - a definition which implies that it is impossible to give good reasons for the cultural disapproval of homosexuality - is the best evidence of the success of this strategy.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=cbfVg_1qhe0C&pg=PP1&lpg=PP1&dq=David+W.+Virtue+scots+college&source=bl&ots=aDW7a615Gn&sig=Y1cLsx5sCQTgUUDJ88b5AKPRkNg&hl=en&ei=8skISpP1AcGktgfi2PzsCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPR14,M1 "Homosexuality"]. ''google.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>}}

====In the public schools====
{{See also|Homosexuality in Schools}}
[[File:Prairie Ridge High School LGBT+ Flag.jpg|thumb|200px|School in Chicago area (Prairie Ridge High School) with LGBT+ [[Rainbow#Rainbow flag|rainbow flag]]. Students in the same school who display the [[Confederate flag]] will face discipline.<ref name="NWHerald2017"/>]]
[[File:Prairie Ridge High School LGBT.jpg|thumb|200px|This Chicago-area school has "safe spaces" for students with homosexual attraction (sponsored by [[GLSEN]]).]]
Many public schools throughout the United States welcome the Homosexual Agenda, oftentimes through publicly-funded school programs created by [[GLSEN]].<ref name="Heyer2015">Heyer, Walt (June 8, 2015). [http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/06/15118/ Public School LGBT Programs Don't Just Trample Parental Rights. They Also Put Kids at Risk]. ''The Witherspoon Institute -- Public Discourse''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> Much of this was the work of the [[Obama Administration]].<ref name="Heyer2015"/> GLSEN celebrates the Homosexual Agenda through a "day of silence."<ref>Berry, Susan (April 11, 2015). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/11/day-of-silence-how-the-lgbt-agenda-is-hijacking-americas-youth/ Day of Silence: How the LGBT Agenda Is Hijacking America’s Youth]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> In 2016, [[California]] became the first state to legislate the teaching of the homosexual agenda in public schools to children as young as second grade.<ref>Berry, Susan (July 19, 2016). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/19/lgbt-history-california-first-to-teach/ California: 1st State To Teach LGBT Curriculum — to Second Graders]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> These California students are now banned from opting-out from this [[indoctrination]].<ref>Newman, Alex (January 4, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/27883-students-banned-from-opting-out-of-lgbt-education Students Banned From Opting Out of LGBT Education]. ''The New American''. Retrieved January 5, 2018.</ref> In February 2019, the Department of Education in the [[United Kingdom]] announced that public school children starting at the age of five would be required to learn about homosexual and transgender relationships, with parents being unable to withdraw their children from such classes.<ref>Tennant, Michael (February 27, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/31593-u-k-schools-to-indoctrinate-kids-as-young-as-five-in-lgbt-agenda U.K. Schools to Indoctrinate Kids as Young as Five in LGBT Agenda]. ''The New American''. Retrieved February 27, 2019. See also:
*McLean, Dorothy Cummings (March 25, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/christian-mom-sues-uk-primary-school-for-forcing-lgbt-pride-celebrations-on-kids Christian mom sues UK primary school for forcing LGBT Pride celebrations on kids]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved March 25, 2019.</ref>

At a recent sold-out California Teachers Association (CTA) conference in Palm Springs, Calif (October 2021), a leaked audio recording reveals two teachers mocking parents over their concerns about homosexual and transgender indoctrination at school, says a source who attended the event. “It was horrifying to listen to not just one teacher but really all of the teachers in all of these seminars, excoriating parents,” and that “The overarching theme of the classes that I attended were California teachers instructing other teachers on how to sneak in the LGBTQ+ curriculum in a manner that does not alert parents,” said the source, who also related how some teachers at the conference also suggested that parents who refuse to call their child by pronouns of the child’s choosing should be arrested and charged with child abuse. In the audio clip, one teacher advised other teachers who lead LGBTQ clubs to maintain an air of plausible deniability so they can play dumb if they are questioned by parents. “Because we are not official, we have no club rosters. We keep no records,” said the teacher, who is also an LGBTQ club leader. “In fact, sometimes we don’t really want to keep records because if parents get upset that their kids are coming? We’re like, ‘Yeah, I don’t know. Maybe they came?’. Another teacher suggesteed activist teachers disguise the nature of GSA clubs with an example being calling her LGBTQ club the “You Be You” club." Teachers also boasted about spying on students’ online searches and activity inn attempting to recruit sixth-grade students into these LGBTQ clubs whose membership rolls are kept from the eyes of parents. One of the teachers said, “We totally stalked what they were doing on Google.” As of 11/23/2021 the “UBU (You Be You)” club was suspended after information about the leaked audio was made public. <ref>Jones, Brad (November 23, 2021). https://www.theepochtimes.com/leaked-audio-reveals-how-california-teachers-recruit-kids-into-lgbtq-clubs_4114896.html Leaked Audio Reveals How California Teachers Recruit Kids Into LGBTQ Clubs]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved November 23, 2021.</ref>

In schools where the homosexual agenda is welcomed, students who fly the [[Confederate flag]] may expect to face disciplinary actions.<ref name="NWHerald2017">Prokop, Hannah (November 11, 2016). [http://www.nwherald.com/2016/11/09/prairie-ridge-high-school-suspends-student-for-wearing-confederate-flag-to-school/aelbmro/ Prairie Ridge High School suspends student for wearing Confederate flag to school]. ''Northwest Herald''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref><ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/apr/20/confederate-flags-not-rainbow-ones-banned-in-schoo/ Wyoming school district bans Confederate flags, allows gay-pride ones]. ''The Washington Times'' (from the ''Associated Press''). April 20, 2019. Retrieved April 20, 2019.</ref> In March 2019, an Ohio public school student was suspended for posting Bible verses next to homosexual flags.<ref>Gstalter, Morgan (March 13, 2019). [https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/433823-ohio-student-suspended-for-targeting-gay-straight-alliance-by Ohio student suspended for 'targeting' Gay-Straight Alliance by posting Bible verses in response to LGBT flags]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved March 13, 2019.</ref><ref>Kaplan, Talia (March 12, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/ohio-student-suspended-after-posting-bible-verses-around-school-i-wanted-to-spread-the-word-of-god Ohio student suspended after posting Bible verses around school: 'I wanted to spread the word of God']. ''Fox News''. Retrieved March 13, 2019.</ref>

===Immorality in society===
The “gay” activists welcome [[immorality]] in [[society]]. As no one wants to be called a [[hypocrite]], every act of sexual sin by society members serves the “gay” interest by lessening the public will to uphold public morality. That's why, wherever the acceptance of sexual sin is observed, it is likely there are “gay” activists involved.

==== The abortion industry ====
The best example of the Homosexual Agenda causing societal immorality is seen in their aggressive defense of the abortion industry. Obviously, homosexuals cannot have an “unwanted pregnancy,” yet in an extensive experience, the big part of “pro-choice” street activists at abortion clinics are homosexuals. This is so because they know that preserving the people's option to destroy unborn life is essential to maintaining so-called “[[sexual freedom]]” as a social norm. If women lost their choice to legally kill their unborn offspring, the resulting inevitable shift of emphasis from self-gratification to family responsibility in such a large section of the population would change the entire culture. When a woman gives in to fear and selfishness to kill the child in her womb, she will not feel that she can criticize other sinners. The choice to kill their unborn children morally compromises both men and women (making them unwilling to criticize choices to engage in other forms of immoral behavior), and ensures that the outcome of an unwanted child will not be a lasting deterrent to those who have chosen sexual “freedom” over family. This explains why homosexuals, who by definition cannot conceive children together, are among the most militant advocates of abortion on demand.

==== The pornography industry ====
The existence of a thriving pornography industry where “gays” are also notoriously prevalent serves the “gay” cause by morally corrupting the men who use it, making them less likely to oppose homosexuality on moral grounds and more likely to support public policies which legitimize sexual [[hedonism]]. “Gay” activists love sexual anarchy because they know that when a man falls in bondage to pornography he is less willing to oppose other sexual sins in society.

==== The entertainment industry ====
When young people enjoy music or films that glorify sexual lust, they feel more sympathy to the “gay” arguments.

The “gays” have it easy pushing sexual “freedom”, because every person, in their flesh, wants to indulge themselves in their own choices.
This is like children being offered only candy to eat. People want to eat only sweets until they get sick. Only with maturity do they know how to eat to stay healthy.

The “gay” movement has many allies in its campaign to aggrandize sexual immorality, but it is the only social movement in the history of the world whose primary purpose is to eliminate social restraints on [[sexual]] conduct. It is heavily funded, highly organized and strategically positioned to maximize its ability to change societies and cultures.<ref name="Lively2009">{{cite book |title=Redeeming the Rainbow: A Christian Response to the "Gay" Agenda |author=[[Scott Lively]] |publisher=Veritas Aeterna Press |place=Springfield, MA |year=2009 |edition=1 (Version 1.1)|chapter=1: Pro-family answers to common questions about homosexuality and "gay" agenda |pages=8, 60, 176|url=http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09b/Redeeming_rainbow}}</ref>

==Opponents of the Homosexual Agenda ==
Some well known individuals/groups in the [[United States]] who actively oppose the homosexual agenda are: [[MassResistance]], [[Focus on the Family]], [[Peter LaBarbera]]'s American's for Truth, the [[Traditional Values Coalition]] ([[Louis Sheldon]] is a chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition), and [[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]].

===Peter LaBarbera===
As noted earlier, [[Peter LaBarbera]] is the founder of [[Americans For Truth]] (AFT) which is a national organization in the United States devoted solely to confronting the homosexual agenda.<ref name="americansfortruth.com">[http://www.americansfortruth.com/about/ "About Americans for Truth About Homosexuality and AFTAH Founder Peter LaBarbera » Americans for Truth"]. ''americansfortruth.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Peter LaBarbera said the following regarding the need for the organization Americans for Truth:
{{cquote|Homosexual, [[bisexuality|bisexual]], and [[transsexual]] groups spend tens of millions of dollars every year to market and normalize their aberrant lifestyles, yet after all these years there is not a single, serious national group dedicated specifically to exposing and countering their agendas...

It’s time for Americans to unapologetically resist the demands of this lobby, and to counter the lies upon which it is built-the foremost being that certain people are inherently or ‘born’ homosexual and that this is a [[civil rights]] issue.<ref name="americansfortruth.com"/>}}

===Matt Barber===
[[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]] is one the more notable figures in regards to opposing the homosexual agenda. Matt Barber wrote the following regarding the homosexual agenda:
[[Image:Mbarber_b.jpg‎|right|thumb|175px|[[Matt Barber]]]]
{{cquote|Ironically, sexual [[relativism|relativists]] are anything but relative. They are quite affirmative in principle. But the principles they foist demand comprehensive acceptance of homosexual conduct — by force of law — through federal edicts such as “hate crimes” legislation, the so-called “Employment Non-Discrimination Act” (ENDA) and by imposing government sanctioned “same-sex marriage.” All such government mandates grant special protected “minority” status to those who define themselves by aberrant sexual preferences and changeable sexual behaviors. These laws put people with traditional values directly in the crosshairs of official government policy.

Throughout society, homosexual activists demand that homosexual behaviors not only be “tolerated,” but celebrated. (That’s what the euphemistic slogan “celebrate diversity” supposes). They have masked their true political agenda by hijacking the language of the genuine civil rights movement and through the crafty and disingenuous rhetoric of “tolerance” and “diversity.”

Anyone who believes the Biblical directive that human sexuality is a gift from [[God]], to be shared between man and wife within the bonds of marriage, is branded “homophobic,” “hateful” or “discriminatory.” They are to be silenced by all means possible.<ref>http://www.cwfa.org/articledisplay.asp?id=14696&department=CFI&categoryid=family</ref>}}

===Steffen Königer===
[[German]] politician Steffen Königer from the party [[Alternative for Germany]] (AfD) showed that it is possible to use [[irony]] when opposing the [[extremist]] gender agenda. In his address in the parliament of the [[Brandenburg]], the federated state of [[Germany]], he ridiculed homosexual lobbyists and gender ideologists by enlisting in his introduction, for about two minutes, all "gender and sexual varieties" he could find on the Internet. This way he brought to attention of the general public the absurdity of the proposal put forward by the German [[Green Party]] that demanded to introduce multiple "gender identities" in state documents. When the Parliamentary Speaker tried to stop him, he just replied that he is not finished yet and further adamantly continued in naming all alleged gender declinations. When he was finally done with his introduction, his actual reaction to the proposal took less than three seconds: ''"The AfD party rejects your proposal."''<ref>{{cite web |title=Un político alemán ridiculiza los postulados del LGBTI |url=https://youtu.be/GzIwvHUvFR0 |accessdate=23 Jun 2016 |language=German (English subtitles)}}</ref>

==Further reading==
*https://www.amazon.com/dp/B012YKIQ2M Counterfeiting the Rainbow by Beverly Rachel
*[http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html Homosexuality and the Nazi Party] by Scott Lively. Excellent discussion of the anti-Christian and homosexual origins of the Nazism.
*[http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/ Documentation of the links between homosexuals and the Nazis] by the Government of Israel.
*[http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/BPCollectionNews.asp?ID=131 2008 McDonald's and the Homosexual Agenda], Baptist Press
*[http://www.couplescompany.com/FEATURES/politics/2004/Selling%20Homosexuality.pdf Paul E. Rondeau, Selling homosexuality to America (PDF)] [http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/730694/posts Or html form]
*Shupe, Jamie (March 10, 2019). [https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/03/10/i-was-americas-first-non-binary-person-it-was-all-a-sham/ I Was America’s First ‘Nonbinary’ Person. It Was All a Sham.] ''The Daily Signal''. Retrieved April 15, 2019.

==See also==
*[[ACT-UP]]
*[[Anti-Defamation League]]
*[[Anthropological Revolution]]
*[[Essay:Sodomism]]
*[[Homosexual belief system]]
*[[Gay affirmative]]
*[[Gay rights]]
*[[Homophobia]]
*[[Hate speech]], [[Hate crime]]
*[[Homosexual logic]], used to justify and mandate the Homosexual Agenda
*[[Homosexuality]]
*[[Homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]
*[[Homosexualization]]
*[[Gleichschaltung#LGBTI Gleichschaltung|LGBTI Gleichschaltung]]
*[[San Francisco values]]
*[[Fashion industry values]]
*[[Hollywood values]]
*[[Slogans and the Homosexual Agenda]]
*[[Stonewall UK]]

== References ==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

{{liberalism}}
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Homosexuality]]
[[Category:Liberal Deceit]]
[[Category:Hollywood Values]]

Talk:Homosexual Agenda

2022-12-20T05:15:56Z

Daniel1212: /* Cannot edit but here are two more links for substantiation */

Talk:Homosexual Agenda

2022-12-20T05:15:08Z

Daniel1212: /* Cannot edit but here are two more links for substantiation */

Scalia mentioned that in a dissenting opinion, which isn't binding law. --[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 00:59, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

== Vic Eliason passage should be removed ==

I write this because I have met VE here in Wisconsin and believe he'd be uncomfortable with the logic of including this information in this particular article. The passage: "Vic Eliason of Crosstalk America rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies." Nobody believes that homosexuality is contagious, like a virus, and the probability is 0% that "all Americans" would turn homosexual. I doubt that any homosexual, including activist leaders, would think it would be possible at all or even desirable. There is as little temptation for a heterosexual to want homosexual sex as there is for homosexuals to want heterosexual sex. Also, the comment about the US being more vulnerable to attack because the country doesn't procreate also makes no sense, given that the likelihood of that happening for this reason is 0%. Three other potential problems. 1) The passage is completely undocumented. 2) The link for biographical information for VE is to Wikipedia. Couldn't someone here write an article about him for CP? He has been, after all, a leading figure in Christian radio for 40+ years. 3) Besides being unrelated to the topic of the article and having 0% possibility of describing a real situation, the passage detracts from the credibility of the article and CP. This passage should be removed.

== WOV's got a point ==

Not only that, but this entire article is biased tripe. It presents the "homosexual agenda" from a one-sided perspective, and is filled with hate commentary. '''I recommend the entire thing for deletion.'''

Scalia's remark is regretful and a blemish on the pages of the U.S. Reporter, up there with Scott v. Sanford. But let's not expand it still further.

I have cleaned up biased and vitriolic language as best as I can, but this entry deserves deletion.

Seconded. If this is a homosexual agenda, then what homosexual wrote it? This is nothing but political game-playing: Identify a group as ''The Enemy'' and then brand them haters and abusers of family, children, and country. It makes dehumanising them so much easier. - Suricou

: I didn't see anything "hateful" in it. The Scalia reference was not intended to be about what is binding law, obviously. There was nothing binding about his phrase. I'll note that it was in dissent.

: The edits to this article were completely inappropriate, turning it into a liberal puff piece. Wikipedia exists for that. Actually, your edits made this even more liberal than Wikipedia's article on the same topic!

: The hour is very late and I need to lock this page to guard against vandalism or conversion to a liberal message. I can unlock tomorrow. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 02:11, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: Presenting both points doesn't make it a liberal puff piece! It presented only one perspective (Focus on the Family), and referred to the Shepard incident as OVERBLOWN. That's awful!! I consider my entry a moderate tack, but if you can think of an acceptable compromise that preserves an unbiased perspective, be my guest. It shocks me to see you go against your own commandments, though, about not including bias, and not importing a political perspective. I have tried to, and continue to try to, do the same.--[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 02:13, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:Instead of the http://www.citizenlink.org/CLFeatures/A000000562.cfm cite you may want to use this one [http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.htm] This cite goes straight (NPI) to a section of the book ''After the Ball''. -)[[User:Cracker|Cracker]][[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]] 02:24, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: Thanks. Will do tomorrow. Goodnight, Cracker!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 02:25, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

I would definitely change the "promote homosexuality in schools" to "promote acceptance of homosexuality in schools". Definitely sounds like they're trying to make me gay. --[[User:Splark|Splark]] 21:45, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

:I agree with the comments of [[User:AmesG|AmesG]] and [[User:Splark|Splark]]. The idea that one's ideological opponents have a specific "agenda" is an all-too common one, but such agendas are more often touted by those who oppose than by those who support a group. That a Supreme Court Justice referred to it, or that it's in some leaflet somewhere, isn't substantive evidence that it exists.. [[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 18:22, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

Aren't those five points of the "homosexual agenda" linked to more of a strategy than an "agenda"? And, aren't they the standard strategy for all interest groups? 1. Talk about your issue. 2. Show your group is harmed unless you get what you want. 3. Provide facts so people can justify agreeing with you. 4. Portray yourself and your point of view as right and moral. 5. Portray your opponents and their point of view as wrong and immoral. 6. Get corporate or other financial support. Every group and lobbying organization does that, and I don't know that singling out gays and the gay rights movement as doing that is really informative.--[[User:Epicurius|Epicurius]] 11:23, 15 March 2007 (ED

I will go on the record and say that yes, there is a homosexual agenda. As a homosexual myself, I'm pretty much in the middle of it. All we want is to be treated the same as any other tax-paying American. If my partner is injured, I would like to be able to have the same visitation and decision-making power as a husband/wife would. I would like to be able to transfer property when I die without having to jump through a million legal hoops. Many people claim that we want "special" rights. We really don't. We just want to be treated the same as everyone else.--[[User:Patthew|Patthew]] 12:01, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

I think this page is extremely biased. It presents only one side of the issue and is locked to prevent the other side from responding. Proof of a bias of another kind here.
-Gasmonkey

== Everything you post must be true and verifiable ==

This entry violates the first (and perhaps most important) Conservapedia commandment. There is no homosexual "agenda" -- no "they" who "wrote a book", no 10-point plan. It's the same kind of paranoid nonsense that's in the articles here on Joseph McCarthy and Alger Hiss (WP has far more accurate articles on both subjects, with the one on Hiss very clearly identifying areas of controversy), with conspiracy-theorist types quoting and sourcing one another. I propose this entire article for immediate deletion. [[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 10:56, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Agreed. The "Homosexual agenda" is no more factual than the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Delete, or recreate as an article about the popular (?) but false belief in this "agenda." [[User:Pkoad|Pkoad]] 00:21, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

:It refers to the [[gay rights]] activism, which may be a [[grassroots]] movement but which has multiple goals which are easily identified. The Liberal POV that such goals are non-existent is a kind of denialism.

:It will be good for the article to discuss this denial, in conjunction with [[gay rights]] critics who oppose the points which the denialists says no one advances. (Not worded right, but I think you get the gist.) See you all tomorrow. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 00:29, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

::There's no more gay agenda other than there was a "black agenda" before ''Brown'' came down. The gay agenda is equal treatment. Oh no, quick, ma, shut the doors! Equality's a-comin'!-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]

:::I'd say "keep it" so the world can really see how these strange nutkins think. But in the interest of humanity, decency, and honesty, it is a pack of paranoid, politico-religious agenda lies. Really, really strange nutjob lies. [[User:Human|Human]] 02:51, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

:'''Keep:'''Let's assume for one moment that the homosexual agenda is complete hogwash and homosexual activists don't believe in it: Isn't the fact that Conservative Christians do believe in it enough to keep the article so that the "opinions" of Christians about homosexual activists be here. The fact that many talk about it is clear evidence that this is a valid article--[[User:Djcreativity|Djcreativity]] 15:47, 9 May 2009 (EDT)
::Shouldn't we present information that is factual, and not misleading, though? If the intention of the article was to present Christian responses to gay rights activism, it should be presented as such. Given that ''After the Ball'' was published twenty years ago, presenting it as an active force in the gay rights movement (rather than as a foundation of the movement as a whole) is a bit disingenuous, don't you think? If we were talking about the Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam we could reference Malcom X and Louis Farrakhan, but to act as though their works were part of current politics and national discourse would be misguided at best, and flatly wrong, at worst. --[[User:Jfavor|Jfavor]] 00:40, 20 May 2009 (EDT)

== Opposing Christian Agenda ==

I can't work out what the point of the "Opposing Christian Agenda" section is. The sentences don't make sense, and the referenced page does not mention homosexuality or gay. I propose the section be deleted by someone with the privilege to edit the article. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 01:33, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

:I think it's not nearly explicit enough. More than anything else except perhaps abortion, the homosexual subversion of Christian values is illustrative of the influence of Satan upon liberals and other leftists, and his influence through them on our society. Should I rework the section to include such? --[[User:Nathan|Nathan]] 22:20, 11 February 2009 (EST)

== Improvements ==

Shouldn't ''Gayness'' in part 1. of the agenda be ''Gaiety''?
The term ''[[homosexual protectors]]'' in part three surely merits its own article. Is this the same as ''[[Homosexualist]]s''? [[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 07:11, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

:Any attempt to trivialize or confuse the issue will be frowned upon here. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 07:22, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

We should delete the cite at the bottom saying that homosexuality caused Nazism. That's a truly disturbing allegation.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 12:59, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

:Especially considering that the Nazis actually murdered thousands of homosexuals during World War II.--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 18:32, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
::Yes they did, but it was because of Hitler. NOT homosexuality. And waaay more Jews were killed than homosexuals, giving Jews a larger spotlight. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] I'm liberal, but I don't edit pages-just [[User talk:Clorox|talk page]]s. don't worry. 23:25, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

'''
I believe langauge needs to be corrected in the the first bullet of the list of homosexual goals. It currently states "Censoring sections of the bible condemning homosexuality." The source cited is an article about an offensive tee shirt being censored not the bible its self. There needs to be eaither a new source about Homosexuals attempting to change the bible or the wording must be changed to "preventing materials that denounce homosexuality from being displayed publicly."

Reference number "8" rrefers back to the Conservapedia site. In order to maintain integrity it must refer to an ouside source if one is not provided the reference and quote should be deleted. Currently it is a logical fallacy and is not up to encyclopedic standards. Someone not dyslexic (i.e. somone who isn't me.) should get on that.

== Very Informative ==
'''

Excellent portrayal of the truth. This is a nice breather from the left-wing saturated wikipedia.com. If you agree with the article, you should check out the highly accurate article on homophobia. Everyone knows that the creation of homophobia is a foundation of the gay agenda.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Homophobia

Wikipedia is subject to open edits that don't reqier an account. Are you suggesting that the monitors of wikipedia aka "everyone who can type" has a liberal bias?

== Is this real? ==

This article seems like a parody. I can't believe that... oh yeah, I'm at conservapedia. I can believe anything. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 12:44, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

As well as the mysterious reference to a "leading book in the homosexual movement", it refers to a book claiming that the Nazi Party supported homosexuality. Clearly this has to be satirical. Either that, or someone has a serious case of paranoia - all the sources, as well as being of dubious credabililty, point towards independent events but the whole point of the page is to talk about a shadowy conspiricy - a 'Secret Society' of homosexuals trying to gayify the world. I suggest deleting the whole page - and if it reappears in a similar form, delete and protect. - [[User:Suricou|Suricou]]

== Agendas ==
So since there are so many references on this wiki to the "homosexual agenda" can we also cite the "Conservative Agenda" or "Republican Agenda" or "Christian Agenda"? {{unsigned|prof0705}}
:I don't see why not, as long as they sourced and reasonably recognizable as phrases in common use. In fact, here, I would expect an article on [[conservative agenda]] to be very good. [[User:Human|Human]] 17:56, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

This article violates the [[Conservapedia:Commandments]] (number 2: cite sources and 5: personal opinion).
#It claims to quote Focus on the Family for the definition of The Homosexual Agenda without giving a specific reference, and FotF is only claimed to be quoting "a leading book in the homosexual movement" without even bothering to name the book or its author.
#The two bulleted points in "The Goals" (about 8-year-old boys and 12-to-14 year olds) are stating as fact the opinion of Craig Osten, a vice president at the Alliance Defense Fund.
#Several of the other references to that section are either citing journalist's or lawyer's opinions, not facts or any quote from the people who are alleged to hold the agenda under discussion.

I am prohibited from editing the page but I suggest that the Agenda is moved to the top, and the original source for it cited, rather than a vague second-hand reference. The judge's quote should then be indented as a block quote so it is more clearly identifiable as quoting the judge. The Goals and Opposing Christian Agenda should be cleaned up and cite proper sources not opinions, or be more clearly marked as only opinions of people who oppose the Homosexual Agenda. If Conservapedia could handle it, even a quote from someone who supports it would be good. --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 06:06, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

:[[Conservapedia:Commandments]] (number 2: cite sources and 5: personal opinion) is superceded by [[Conservapedia:Locks and Blocks]]:
::''Sysop's and Bureaucrats are the Administrators of Conservapedia. Their instructions, as to Conservapedia policy and/or the appropriateness or inappropriateness of user actions, are to be followed. Failure to do so will result in the user being blocked.''
:Note: ''Their <nowiki>[</nowiki>[[Special:ListUsers/sysop sysops]]<nowiki>]</nowiki> instructions, as to Conservapedia policy [...] are to be followed'', which means if a sysop has decided it is so it is so. If you continue to argue you may get blocked.
:[[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 07:23, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

What about Hot man on man/woman on woman action? I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that homosexuals were pretty in favor of that.

== Is this really as big as people make it out to be? ==
While I personally do not like anyone being too open about their personal lives, especially concerning anything to do with sex, still when I hear about a "Homosexual Agenda" I can only think of another fear that other people once tried to infect people with: it was called "The Protocols of The Elders of Zion." I think some of you may understand my point... [[User:Jros83|Jros83]] 16:15, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

Yeah, I don't really understand why people even care if someone is homosexual or not. If you're not a homosexual yourself you're not gonna be involved with homosexuality so why even care? It doesn't affect you in that case. If someones is homosexual, then fine. Let them be. Has nothing to do with you. [[User:JohnKite|JohnKite]] 11:33, 28 January 2009 (EST)
:Do you not care about God, JohnKite? Do you not care about His society? Do you not acre about moral erosion, disease, and the future of humanity? Do you not care about what is right and what is wrong? [[User:MauriceB|MauriceB]] 11:35, 28 January 2009 (EST)

==Please remove the reference to Scott Lively's propaganda book==
This is propaganda. It seems you don't allow neutrality here. [[User:GayMan|GayMan]] 21:51, 28 June 2007 (EDT)
:I agree. Numbers 1-5 on there are kinda wrong, and number 6 tops it off as crap. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] 23:11, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

== Hey, now... ==
I'm LGBT and I'm certainly not aware of any sort of "agenda" being discussed. Perhaps this is just a typical case of right-wing paranoia? --[[User:Afi|Afi]] 18:07, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

You're not aware because you're not hive-minded. The agenda is memetic, therefore you're not all going to know about it. --[[User:Pious|Pious]] 18:21, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

==What the hell?==

The “homosexuality agenda" was created by Focus on the Family, which you say later in the article, ACTIVELY OPPOSES homosexuality. You wouldn’t let me post Jon Stewart quotes on the Bush page, so why is this kind of crap aloud here? [[User:Tesfan|Tesfan]] 11:43, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

This is exactly the sort of thing that inspires violence against homosexuals. Be more neutral.[[User:Alloco1|Alloco1]] 12:34, 27 September 2007 (EDT)
:Good luck pal, I've been saying that for months. And watch your language, they'll ban you for that here. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 12:46, 27 September 2007 (EDT)

==Politics and science==

Dr. Ronald Bayer, writing in Homosexuality And American Psychiatry: The Politics Of Diagnosis said the APA decision was a political one, not a scientific one: "The result [of the APA removal of homosexuality from the DSM] was not a conclusion based upon an approximation of the scientific truth as dictated by reason, but was instead an action demanded by the ideological temper of the times." [http://traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/Homosexuality101.pdf]
==Liberal Deceit==
I suggest we change the category from Deceit to Liberal Deceit because liberals universally support the gay agenda. --[[User:Konservativekanadian|Konservativekanadian]] 22:26, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
*Good idea! --[[User:TK|şŷŝoρ-₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Ṣρёаќǃ]] 23:08, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
::Bad idea. It's not deceit. [[User:Clorox|Clorox]] 23:16, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
Again I find myself disturbed by the language of absolutes that have infested this site. There are liberal and homosexual philosophies mentioned in this site that some liberals and homosexuals don't have simply because they don't know about them- and it's certainly not a stretch of the imagination to say these people are generally ignorant. Are children in Africa who die young damned simply because a missionary doesn't exist where they live and they couldn't have possibly heard the good news about Christ? I think not. I believe they get another chance to. --[[User:Pious|Pious]] 18:26, 24 June 2011 (CDT)

==Sources?==

Are there any sources besides those accusing the gay agenda? There's no evidence of any organized "agenda", and all of the goals and such are provided by those opposing it. Best case, this is an article about a pundit talking point, and worst case it's a conspiracy theory masked as an encyclopedia article. Shouldn't it at least mention that there has never been any evidence of even a mildly organized or centralized gay agenda? The fact that it's permanently locked further undermines CP credibility. [[User:RWest|RWest]] 12:32, 13 November 2007 (EST)

Specific suggestion:
:Focus on the Family quotes below from a leading book in the homosexual movement which outlines the points of the homosexual agenda:
There is no source cited here. The source is "The Overhauling of Straight America," an article which appeared in the November 1987 issue of a gay magazine called ''The Guide''. [[User:Shii|Shii]] 22:44, 23 November 2007 (EST)

:: Thanks, I just added an online link to it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:04, 23 November 2007 (EST)

== Mottos? ==

The edit replacing "beliefs" with "mottos" was unjustified. There is a (baseless) belief system inherent in the homosexual agenda.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:41, 12 October 2008 (EDT)

== References: "small looks better" ==

Why? All the other articles I've seen have references at regular text size. What's particular about this article that it needs to have really tiny footnotes? [[User:Sideways|Sideways]] 17:24, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

==Homosexuality in Congress==

In a recent discussion with a friend of mine, we discussed what is here called the "homosexual agenda". In addition to the notion of whether "everyone has an agenda" (something I would consider adding to the Debate pool if anyone would like clarification of my terms/beliefs here, I brought up the notion of whether or not there exists a disproportionate number of homosexuals or, unfortunately, scandals regarding previously latent homosexual desires among otherwise Conservative men (Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Bob Allen, the Glenn Murphy scandal), and whether this constitutes the corrupting nature of power, or, as my friend (a somewhat eccentric, Ron Paul-supporter type) suggests, whether these men are "moles" (his term, not mine) representing a quote, "homo infiltration". To put it bluntly, imagine the Manchurian Candidate, but with sodomy.

I was wondering if anyone here (I imagine you have all put some effort into the research and sourcing for this article) had ever heard trustworthy sources, blogs, or essays dealing with such a belief. I obviously don't support the endorsement of wingnut theories, but if it is a more widespread belief among self-avowed Republicans and conservatives, then I think it bears mentioning. I wait to see if any such evidence exists. [[User:MICasey|MICasey]] 10:48, 9 September 2009 (EDT)

==Iran?==
This site considers Iran as an example for how to deal with homosexuals?? I hope this is a joke; otherwise, this is one of the sickest, most hateful websites I've ever seen. You claim to follow Jesus, and then condone executing homosexuals?? This must be an example of following the hard-ass God of the Old Testament.{{unsigned|User:Pete5383}}

:This site does not condone the murder of homosexuals by the state. It is a true statement on Iran and most Muslim countries are no different. So yes, they oppose the homosexual agenda but that doesn't correspond to the section which talks of political/cultural opposition. Instead, a foreign section needs created and the FACTS put in the proper place.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:37, 17 August 2010 (EDT)

==Merge from "pro-Gay"==

Thanks for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&curid=69968&diff=877518&oldid=877453&rcid=1187531 merging this point] from the "[[pro-gay]]" article. I sure wish I had '''bothered to look''' for the diff before undoing your careful work. *sigh* --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 16:44, 9 June 2011 (EDT)

==Homophobes==

Westboro is probably the only authentically "[[homophobic]]" group in the USA. They used to have a "God hates fags" website. No one takes them seriously, on either side of the ideological battle lines. They are the poster boys for [[hate speech]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:00, 2 October 2011 (EDT)

==Charity==

:Cut from lede:

:* Liberals generally give much less than conservatives to charity, but charity work by gays in particular is virtually non-existent.

:This needs references, if true. But I don't believe it - or maybe I just don't understand it. Isn't [[Gay Men's Health Crisis]] a [[charity]]? (Or is it merely a [[non-profit organization]] '''without''' a charitable purpose? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:44, 12 October 2011 (EDT)

Just happened to see this, and so here is some data:

On average, weekly churchgoers donate 3.8% of their income to charity, compared to 0.8% for those who never go. Independent Sector (charitable clearing house): Atheists won't save Europe by Don Feder; http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27937

Religious citizens who make $49,000 gave away about 3.5 times as much money as secular citizens with the same income. They also volunteered twice as often, are 57 percent more likely to help homeless persons, and two-thirds more likely to give blood at their workplace. Arthur C. Brooks' Who Really Cares. http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2008/001/8.11.html

In 2006, Americans gave 1.66% of their aggregate income to charity, with donations totaling US$182 billion. This rate of giving is more than double that of Canadians, who gave 0.76% of aggregate income (CA$8.4 billion in total) to charity in 2006. http://www.fraserinstitute.org/commerce.web/product_files/Generosity_Index_2008.pdf

See [http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Statistical_Correlations.html here] for a table of many comparison btwn states, and [http://247wallst.com/2011/12/15/americas-most-and-least-charitable-states/2/ here] for recent stats on giving per state.

$8.8 billion worth of goods and services that churches are giving overseas to developing (“Third World”) countries. This figures out to be nearly 40 percent of the foreign aid provided by the United States to the same region. U.S. foreign aid to those same countries is $23.5 billion. Carol Adelman of the Hudson Institute, from Notre Dame University study. http://www.onenewsnow.com/Church/Default.aspx?id=118566

Giving as a percentage of income was higher at the depth of the Great Depression in the 1930s (3.3 percent of per capita income in 1933) than after a half-century of unprecedented prosperity (2.5 percent in 2004) John Ronsvalle and Sylvia Ronsvalle, The State of Church Giving through 2004: Will We Will? 16th ed. (Champaign, Ill.: Empty Tomb, 2006). ^

The proportion of adults who tithe dropped by 62 percent in the past year. (2) Just 6 percent of born-again households tithed to their churches in 2002. (3) Tithing, when it occurs, is generally among Protestants: 5 percent of adults who attend Protestant churches tithed last year, compared to less than one-tenth of 1 percent among Catholics. (4) Among the groups most likely to tithe are people over 55, college graduates, Evangelicals, Republicans, conservatives, and residents of the South—but there was no segment among which at least 10 percent tithed. George Barna. News release by Barna Research Group, May 19, 2003. ^

Including religious, American households overall gave 3.5% of their income to charity, with approx. 33% going to to religious institutions. Utah was the state with the highest average per-capita charitable contributions, followed by Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee and Arkansas. Professor Arthur Brooks, 2005. http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2005/February/200502181639511CJsamohT5.593508e-02.html

A liberal researcher who was surprised at finding that showed conservatives being more giving, set out to do a more thorough analysis, only to confirm the findings: http://blog.geoiq.com/2009/01/07/dataset-of-the-day-who-is-more-generous-republicans-or-democrats/

Also, the top 10 most generous countries are:

1. United States
2. Ireland
3. Australia
4. New Zealand
5. United Kingdom
6. Netherlands
7. Canada
8. Sri Lanka
9. Thailand
10. Laos

The United States’ first place in the rankings marks a significant improvement from 2010, when it ranked fifth. Other countries making significant gains include Liberia, which went from 39 to 14, and Morocco, which leapt from 33 to 12. http://www.worldvision.org/news/new-report-ranks-most-generous-countries. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 22:27, 27 February 2012 (EST)

==Kirk and Madsen==
The WP page on Marshall Kirk [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Kirk#Health] has this but which i cannot find a source for:

"Marshall suffered from severe migraine headaches that were preceded by a strong desire to talk in a rapid monologue. He found that if he gave into these "babbling fits", the headache would be alleviated. He had other medical problems and suffered from bouts of depression that required electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) on three occasions. Because of the negative effects on his memory, he considered ECT to be the last alternative to avoid death. In part due to this medical history, his knowledge of pharmacology was usually greater than that of anyone who treated him. When he died, he was found alone in his apartment by two friends."

Also cannot find anything on Hunter Madsen (pen name "Erastes== Pill")[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 23:54, 24 February 2012 (EST)

==Article title==
Shouldn't this title be lower cased as [[Homosexual agenda]]? It's too bad we can't give it a title with more bite, something like, "The sodomites and their enablers." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] 05:23, 17 January 2014 (EST)

== Please explain edit ==

Why, exactly, was [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&curid=69968&diff=1363708&oldid=1350140 this info removed] from the article? Regardless, it is a lot of info and well-sourced. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 00:03, 27 July 2017 (EDT)

== "Opposing Christian Agenda" section ==

I know this section is intended to reflect what homosexual activists say about Christians. However, I do have some concerns about it. 
Firstly, the use of "agenda" suggests that Christians are pushing some new or different thing secretly. They aren't, they are just staying the same, while the culture changes around them. Well, actually many churches are changing with the culture too, but that's a different discussion altogether. Regarding the bullets, 
point 1: I think I'll reword that, but it is a valid point. Salvation army (a christian org.) will at all costs avoid hiring unrepentant homosexuals, especially for such public-facing jobs. 
point 2: No argument there--this is fine 
point 3: They help to publish material with is contrary to the the propaganda from activists. Oh yes, and that information happens to be factual, unlike the stuff the liberals crank out. 
point 4: Christians have almost no control over this at all. Liberals own the media. 
point 5: Christians actually do very little lobbying compared to liberal activists. Additionally, unlike liberals, the christians operate on a firm moral code which prevents them from offering brides. Since lobbying is driven largely by bribes, the efforts of Christians have almost no teeth. (I still don't want them offering bribes though) 
point 6: "sinner" yes, but there is also "love the sinner, hate the sin" 

Again, I know this is supposed to be what homosexual activists say about Christians, but I think I'm going to make some edits to tone it down a bit. However, this section is altogether off-topic for this page anyway, so I would not be opposed to it being completely removed, or moved to another page. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 23:28, 1 February 2018 (EST)
:I didn't see your mainspace edit until now -- it's a little better. I originally wanted to delete the section, but (if there's a will to actually do it), I think it would be better to completely revamp that section to add examples of promoters of the homosexual/cultural Marxist agenda trying to marginalize, attack, and persecute Christians and Christian values. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:02, 3 February 2018 (EST)
::I [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&diff=1403183&oldid=1402879 removed] the section. Hopefully, I or someone else will find the time/resources to add a section about homosexual agenda efforts to marginalize Christian views. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:06, 7 February 2018 (EST)

== i talked about the transgender murders, LGBTQ+ suicides and lessons in the bible ==

I know many of you may think I'm being crazy right now but there is a much higher chance of being murdered if you are transgender. I have three sources that show this here:
https://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2015/may/13/garnet-coleman/garnet-coleman-said-transgender-person-has-1-12-ch/
http://time.com/3999348/transgender-murders-2015/
http://transstudent.org/transvis.pdf
and members of the LGBTQ+ community or people questioning their sexuality are more likely to commit suicide according to these sources:
https://www.thetrevorproject.org/resources/preventing-suicide/facts-about-suicide/#sm.0001rf6hd7khwehfzmm1yoh6yynxe
https://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/youth-programs.htm
https://www.nami.org/Find-Support/LGBTQ
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-lgbt-teen-suicide/lgbt-youth-at-higher-risk-for-suicide-attempts-idUSKCN1MI1SL

And it is websites like this that make people think that it is okay to bully your peers who are a part of the LGBTQ+ and when members of the LGBTQ+ community see it they remember how much oppression they face and how many people could harm, rape, or kill them because of what they identify as.

And how does the LGBTQ+ community affect you besides 'being against god's law'? Know what else is said to be against god's law in a way being rich. Remember the bible story about the rich man asking what he could do to join him in heaven?

Jesus said to give all his possession to the needy correct? All of them. Yet you are still here able to access and edit this website with your phones or computers while people starve and die of water poisoning in Africa.

And yes, I have not been as aware of those outcomes either, but Jesus said to make sure you are pure right and just as well as without sin before judging others. I ask you what is this page? Judging others.

unsigned post by [[User:What-up-yall|What-up-yall]] ([[User talk:What-up-yall|talk]]) 13:19, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:[https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2018/july/fascist-crackdown-canadian-christian-faces-jail-time-for-expressing-his-beliefs-at-gay-pride-event] [https://www.dailysignal.com/2017/06/27/new-law-canada-remove-kids-parents-reject-transgender-ideology/] [https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/08/california-law-threatens-jail-time-dissenters-transgender-dogma/] This is what the LGBTQRSTUV movement is doing to us, and there are many more examples. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 14:35, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

::Explaining to others that homosexuality/transgenderism are sinful and damaging behaviors (this is according to the Bible, not ourselves) cannot and shouldn't be compared to bullying -- two completely different things. Christians don't bully/mock homosexuals (actually, much of the bullying/slander comes from either secular people or liberals themselves), but they stand firmly by their view that those behaviors are morally wrong, just as alcoholism or vandalism are wrong.

::And yes, Shobson20 is completely correct that the "LGBTQ+ community" is assaulting theologically conservative Christians -- any Christian who believes marriage is between one man and one woman for life, or who believes there are only two genders will be mocked, harassed, and even prosecuted (Colorado baker, etc., etc.) -- see the [[Liberal bigotry]] article, for example. So, in response to your question "''how does the LGBTQ+ community affect you''", it is affecting Christians big time.

::Also, you misinterpreted the account of the rich young ruler -- the problem was not the inherent fact that he had a lot of money, but that those possessions were an idol to him, preventing him from surrendering to Jesus and following him. He was bound to those things and couldn't give them up to follow Christ. Nowhere, however, does it say that money or possessions are inherently bad -- the Bible says that the love of money is the root of many evils, but not money itself.[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+6%3A10&version=ESV] Also, some passages appear to promote good money management, with one of Jesus's parables being about a master who rewards the servants who make the biggest profit (see [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A14-30&version=ESV Matthew 25:14–30]). Also, see this: [https://www.gotquestions.org/poor-vs-rich.html] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:55, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:::Also, you're taking a single Bible passage about judging others way out of context -- many passages of the Bible call on believers to discern between right and wrong (for example, Matthew 7:6, 15-16; John 7:24). Per John 7:24, Christians should "judge correctly," and this means they should not throw out correct doctrine in the name of postmodern "tolerance." There are two good articles explaining what the Bible says about judging others in further detail: [https://www.gotquestions.org/do-not-judge.html][https://answersingenesis.org/bible-questions/does-the-bible-tell-christians-to-judge-not/] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:55, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
::::Whether you translate ''agape'' as "love" or "charity" (1 Cor. 13:13), it's easy to see why casual browsers can have a hard time finding much evidence of it around here.
::::And given the size of your editor base / audience vs. the millions of conservative Christians you're supposedly producing content for, that's something you might all do well to ponder. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:02, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::::So, what you're saying, JohnZ, is that we in this website must cave in to the left's way of thinking. Is that what you're saying, JohnZ? Is that what your version of "love" means? That we have to tolerate everyone, behavior included? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 17:31, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

::::::@JohnZ: Love is not synonymous (actually, it's an antonym) with failure to discern between what is morally right and wrong, and popularity is not an indicator of truth. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:12, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::::(edit conflict) Also, keep in mind that we don't oppose homosexuality or transgenderism because we simply dislike it or have some "subconscious hatred" or whatever -- we're simply repeating what the Bible says, as the ultimate source of authority. For example, [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1&version=ESV Romans 1:26-27] states that homosexuality not only is sinful behavior, but that it's also punishment for sinful behavior (remember, this is the New Testament--good bye to your notions that it's all just "Old Testament stuff"). Also, [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+6&version=ESV 1 Corinthians 6:9-10] lists homosexuality as an act that indicates that one is not saved. Also, see [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+1&version=ESV 1 Timothy 1:9-10]. There are other passages that deal with the topic of marriage (see Jesus's statement in [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+19&version=ESV Matthew 19:4-5], for example). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:12, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
=== JohnZ: Excerpt, picture and caption from Conservapedia's flagship [[homosexuality]] article ===

[[Image:FacProfilemontoya.jpg‎|right|150px|thumb|Dr. [[Alex D. Montoya]] wrote:"The [[Christianity|Christian]] needs to befriend and witness to the homosexual with such [[love]], [[compassion]], and [[wisdom]] that such will respond to the saving [[grace]] of [[God]]."[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj11h.pdf] ]]
{{clear}}
JohnZ, here is a quote from Conservapedia's flagship [[homosexuality]] article: "In his essay which examines the biblical passages regarding homosexuality, Pastor and Associate Professor of Pastoral Ministries at [[The Master's Seminary]] Dr. [[Alex D. Montoya]] states that 'The [[Christianity|Christian]] needs to befriend and witness to the homosexual with such [[love]], [[compassion]], and [[wisdom]] that such will respond to the saving [[grace]] of [[God]].'"[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj11h.pdf]

JohnZ, I hope this helps clarifies Conservapedia's views on homosexuals.

By the way, have you read the article: [[Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals]]?[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:39, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:Aye, more stuff like that Montoya quote would probably be helpful. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:51, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
::Let me also share with you something a Pastor once said: "Marriage is by definition heterosexual. This is the definition of it...that doesn't mean we don't love our homosexual friends, we love them, we share Christ with them, but we do not affirm for them that what they have is by definition marriage, it is not. And it doesn't matter to me what the State eventually says." (This was before Obergefell v. Hodges, the second-worst act of legislating from the bench since Roe v. Wade.) Understand that the biblical definition of "love" is a DO, not a FEEL, that clarifies the often misunderstood verse of how God "loved Jacob but hated Isau" or how "the man that spares the rod hates his son, but the man who loves his son is careful to discipline him." [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 19:03, 16 May 2019 (EDT)
:::Yeah, that works, too. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 19:08, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

=== Pro-homosexuality activist: Put this in your victimhood pipe and smoke it!!! ===

Pro-homosexuality activist: Please see: [[Homosexuality and Murders]] and [[Homosexual Couples and Domestic Violence]]

I hope this helps clarify matters for you.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:21, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

:I love it:

::when members of the LGBTQ+ community see it they remember how much oppression they face and how many people could harm, rape, or kill them because of what they identify as.

:In addition to what was said above, I thought homosexual identitarians were excited about their new found acceptance, proved by their ability to force people to regard their unions as marriage. That's even an out-and-out privilege, not a right. How could that be if they "face" so "much oppression"? Actually this sounds more like they're doubling down their grievance techniques because they're greedy for more privileges.

:And What-up-yall, how could they "face oppression...because of what they identify as"? You imposed your own identity on them by referring them as "the LGBTQ+ community" and became their self-proclaimed spokesman!

:How do you know any of those people want to belong with all the members or even every group in the same alphabet soup union you cooked up?

:All this is dazzle camouflage that keeps everything up in the air, the better to hide the guilt of male homosexuals spreading a fatal venereal disease over the course of the last third of the century, when it could have been stopped in one year, and all they had to do was practice abstinence.

:You didn't capitalize "God" but you capitalized at the beginning of sentences. I'm blocking you for a week, for being incivil. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 16:43, 16 May 2019 (EDT)

==Shock therapy==
A citation is needed for the statement that [[shock therapy]] is a "scientifically proven method of homosexual conversion". Thank you. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 02:47, June 29, 2021 (EDT)
==Cannot edit but here are two more links for substantiation==
While it seems that much any text from "After the Ball" has been expunged from the Internet, this page provides the text from "THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA" by Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill: http://library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm showing the psychological tactics that the section of the CP article quotes from, but with the only link to the actual text at length being from from Google books, which only provides very brief excerpts.

Note also that the cited link www.parentsofgaychildren.org is no longer available at this time and needs to direct to https://web.archive.org/web/20180319222723/http://parentsofgaychildren.org/. I could normally do so (as a primary editor to the psychological tactics section of the article, but for some unexplained reason I am no longer allowed to do so, perhaps since I have not logged in for some time. Also, attempts to access or publish requires two tries, as Service Unavailable is the first.Daniel1212 20:19, December 17, 2022 (EST)

:The page is unlocked for editing. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a chance'']] 20:28, December 17, 2022 (EST)
::Thanks but I see no references when I try to edit it, thus I cannot edit: parentsofgaychildren.org ''to'' https://web.archive.org/web/20180319222723/http://parentsofgaychildren.org). Maybe I could manually write an edit for the other link, but as of now it the page seems to be in a form of "safe mode." Sorry for not keeping up on things here. I do understand however, why this page would need to be locked, esp. this section (which I myself provided much to in the past, by God's grace, and have often linked to), since it is target, yet which is due to the provocative pushing of LGBTQ propaganda. Daniel1212

Talk:Homosexual Agenda

2022-12-20T05:06:35Z

Daniel1212: No can do

Talk:Homosexual Agenda

2022-12-18T01:19:12Z

Daniel1212: two more links for substantiation

Theodicy

2022-08-25T11:36:14Z

Daniel1212: /* Proposals */

'''Theodicy''' is a branch of [[theology]] that defends [[God]]'s goodness and justice in response to the [[problem of evil]].

The word was supposedly coined by the German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716), and is derived from two Greek words (theos, God, and dike, justice).

The premise which Theodicy is based upon is that God is [[omnipotence|omnipotent]], [[omniscience|omniscient]], and [[omnibenevolence|omnibenevolent]], with the question being how can God be the author of [[evil]], or allow evil and suffering to exist?

==Proposals==
In response, various proposals have been made, such as,

God could have,

*1. made us (and angels) with no moral standard or sense or deprived us from the moral ability to respond to or choose good [morally insensible, even as with clouds].

*2. granted us free moral agency, but never have given us anything to choose between [negation of moral choices, and no devil or God].

*3. left man only with recourse to finite competing sources as his ultimate object of spiritual affection and allegiance and source of security, and supreme judge of what is good [atheism and atheistic governments].

*4. called man to make the Creator their ultimate object of spiritual affection and allegiance and source of security as being what is right and what is best for man, versus finite created beings or things being one's "god," and provided moral revelation and influences. Yet always have moved us to do good, and never have allowed us to choose evil (even if as by making believing in God and choosing good so utterly compelling — like God appearing daily and always doing miracles on demand, and preventing any seeming evidence to the contrary - so that no man could attempt to make excuses for not believing in Him [effective negation of any freedom to choose]).

*5. allowed created beings a negative alternative to faithfulness to the creator, and the ability to choose evil, but immediately reversed any effects and not penalized such [negation of consequences to choices].

*6. allowed us to do bad, but restricted us to a place where it would harm no one but ourselves [isolated consequences to choices].

*7. allowed us to choose between good and evil, and to affect others by it, but not ultimately reward or punish us accordingly [negation of judicial and eternal consequences, positive or negative].

*8. given us the ability to choose, and alternatives to chose between, and to face and overcome evil or be overcome by it, with the ability to effect others and things by our choices, and to exercise some reward or punishment in this life for morality, and ultimately reward or punishment all accordingly [pure justice].

*9. restrained evil to some degree, while making the evil that man does to work out for what is Good, with justice yet with mercy, and grace, towards those who want good, and who thus the One who is supremely Good.

*10. in accordance with 8, the Creator could have chose to manifest Himself in the flesh, and by Him to provide man a means of escaping the ultimate retribution of Divine justice, and instead receive unmerited eternal favor, at God's own expense and credit, appropriated by a repentant obedient faith, in addition to the loss or gaining of certain rewards based on one's quality of work as a child of God. And eternally punish, to varying degrees relative to iniquity and accountability, those whose response to God's revelation manifested they want evil, [justice maintained while mercy and grace given].

==Arminian response==

Christian responses include the [[Arminian]] position that argues that evil is a consequence of God giving man freedom to choose, and that, if choice means anything, man must have something to choose from, this being turning away from the good to do the opposite. As angels or man have chosen to do evil, this results in suffering. While God knows what man will do, that is not the same as ordaining or decreeing it.

==Calvinist response==

The [[Calvinist]] position is that of "determinism", which holds that man has a more limited extent of free will than in the Arminian position, and that God has determined all things that will ever come to pass, as the ''[[Westminster Confession of Faith]]'' states. (3:1 5:2, 4) The Confession essentially states that God in His sovereignty is the first cause of all things, though many of the things which occur are through the "free" actions of man, which God influences. As one authority wrote, God "does not arrange things or control history apart from second causes...", and He uses such as instruments, so as to make all things work together to accomplish His plan, which is for the good of those who love Him. (Rom. 8:28)<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/theology/theodicy.html W. Gary Crampton, ''A Biblical Theodicy''</ref>

Some object to the further conclusions of Calvinism related to this.<ref>http://www.gospeltruth.net/foster_on_cal/otc_2.htm</ref> While Armianism believes God has the right and the ability to ultimately determine all things, it seeks to reconcile the actions of God concerning the basis for the [[predestination]] of the lost with God's own statements about justice, (Dt. 24:16; etc.) while the Calvinist tends to appeal to God's sovereign right to do as He pleases, as Scripture does, (Rom. 11:20) in which not all things are revealed. (Dt. 29:29)

==Non-Christian==
Non-Christian attempts to resolve this problem range from denying at least one of the omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence of God, to denying the reality of evil, to making God consist of a dual nature. However, the Bible upholds that God is both almighty and all-knowing, and of a consistent character, and that evil does exist as a reality, and is in opposition to the character of God.

== See also ==

*[[Atheism and the Problem of Evil|Atheism and the problem of evil]]

*[[Atheism and the Euthyphro Dilemma]]

*[[Atheism and morality]]

*[[Atheism and ethics]]

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Theology]]

Theodicy

2022-08-25T11:35:48Z

Daniel1212: /* Proposals */ slightly revised.

'''Theodicy''' is a branch of [[theology]] that defends [[God]]'s goodness and justice in response to the [[problem of evil]].

The word was supposedly coined by the German philosopher Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716), and is derived from two Greek words (theos, God, and dike, justice).

The premise which Theodicy is based upon is that God is [[omnipotence|omnipotent]], [[omniscience|omniscient]], and [[omnibenevolence|omnibenevolent]], with the question being how can God be the author of [[evil]], or allow evil and suffering to exist?

==Proposals==
In response, various proposals have been made, such as,

God could have,

*1. made us (and angels) with no moral standard or sense or deprived us from the moral ability to respond to or choose good [morally insensible, even as with clouds].

*2. granted us free moral agency, but never have given us anything to choose between [negation of moral choices, and no devil or God].

*3. left man only with recourse to finite competing sources as his ultimate object of spiritual affection and allegiance and source of security, and supreme judge of what is good [atheism and atheistic governments].

*4. called man to make the Creator their ultimate object of spiritual affection and allegiance and source of security as being what is right and what is best for man, versus finite created beings or things being one's "god," and provided moral revelation and influences. Yet always have moved us to do good, and never have allowed us to choose evil (even if as by making believing in God and choosing good so utterly compelling — like God appearing daily and always doing miracles on demand, and preventing any seeming evidence to the contrary - so that no man could attempt to make excuses for not believing in Him [effective negation of any freedom to choose]).

*5. allowed created beings a negative alternative to faithfulness to the creator, and the ability to choose evil, but immediately reversed any effects and not penalized such [negation of consequences to choices].

*6. allowed us to do bad, but restricted us to a place where it would harm no one but ourselves [isolated consequences to choices].

*7. allowed us to choose between good and evil, and to affect others by it, but not ultimately reward or punish us accordingly [negation of judicial and eternal consequences, positive or negative].

*8. given us the ability to choose, and alternatives to chose between, and to face and overcome evil or be overcome by it, with the ability to effect others and things by our choices, and to exercise some reward or punishment in this life for morality, and ultimately reward or punishment all accordingly [pure justice].

*8. restrained evil to some degree, while making the evil that man does to work out for what is Good, with justice yet with mercy, and grace, towards those who want good, and who thus the One who is supremely Good.

*10. in accordance with 8, the Creator could have chose to manifest Himself in the flesh, and by Him to provide man a means of escaping the ultimate retribution of Divine justice, and instead receive unmerited eternal favor, at God's own expense and credit, appropriated by a repentant obedient faith, in addition to the loss or gaining of certain rewards based on one's quality of work as a child of God. And eternally punish, to varying degrees relative to iniquity and accountability, those whose response to God's revelation manifested they want evil, [justice maintained while mercy and grace given].

==Arminian response==

Christian responses include the [[Arminian]] position that argues that evil is a consequence of God giving man freedom to choose, and that, if choice means anything, man must have something to choose from, this being turning away from the good to do the opposite. As angels or man have chosen to do evil, this results in suffering. While God knows what man will do, that is not the same as ordaining or decreeing it.

==Calvinist response==

The [[Calvinist]] position is that of "determinism", which holds that man has a more limited extent of free will than in the Arminian position, and that God has determined all things that will ever come to pass, as the ''[[Westminster Confession of Faith]]'' states. (3:1 5:2, 4) The Confession essentially states that God in His sovereignty is the first cause of all things, though many of the things which occur are through the "free" actions of man, which God influences. As one authority wrote, God "does not arrange things or control history apart from second causes...", and He uses such as instruments, so as to make all things work together to accomplish His plan, which is for the good of those who love Him. (Rom. 8:28)<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/theology/theodicy.html W. Gary Crampton, ''A Biblical Theodicy''</ref>

Some object to the further conclusions of Calvinism related to this.<ref>http://www.gospeltruth.net/foster_on_cal/otc_2.htm</ref> While Armianism believes God has the right and the ability to ultimately determine all things, it seeks to reconcile the actions of God concerning the basis for the [[predestination]] of the lost with God's own statements about justice, (Dt. 24:16; etc.) while the Calvinist tends to appeal to God's sovereign right to do as He pleases, as Scripture does, (Rom. 11:20) in which not all things are revealed. (Dt. 29:29)

==Non-Christian==
Non-Christian attempts to resolve this problem range from denying at least one of the omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence of God, to denying the reality of evil, to making God consist of a dual nature. However, the Bible upholds that God is both almighty and all-knowing, and of a consistent character, and that evil does exist as a reality, and is in opposition to the character of God.

== See also ==

*[[Atheism and the Problem of Evil|Atheism and the problem of evil]]

*[[Atheism and the Euthyphro Dilemma]]

*[[Atheism and morality]]

*[[Atheism and ethics]]

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Theology]]

Homosexual Agenda

2022-01-02T13:53:25Z

Daniel1212: /* Strategies and psychological tactics */ Link to actual copy

{{Homosexuality}}
The '''Homosexual Agenda''' is a self-centered set of beliefs and objectives designed to mandate approval of [[homosexuality]] and its ideology. The goals and means of this movement include indoctrinating students in [[public school]], restricting the free speech of opposition, obtaining [[special rights|special treatment]] for homosexuals, distorting [[Bible|Biblical]] teaching and science, and interfering with freedom of association. Advocates of the homosexual agenda seek special rights for [[homosexuals]] and self-described "LGBTQ people" that other people don't have, such as immunity from criticism (see [[hate speech]], [[hate crime]]s).<ref>Such special rights will necessarily [[zero-sum game|come at the expense]] of the rights of broader society.</ref> '''''The homosexual agenda is the biggest threat to the rights of [[free speech]] and [[religious freedom]] today.'''''<ref>Daniels, Fletch (September 10, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/the-lgbt-endgame-is-to-destroy-christianity The LGBT endgame is to destroy Christianity]. ''LifeSiteNews'' (from the ''American Thinker''). Retrieved September 10, 2019.</ref><ref>Duke, Selwyn (September 11, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/item/33387-lgbt-activists-hate-christianity-and-want-to-destroy-it LGBT Activists Hate Christianity — and Want to Destroy It]. ''The New American''. Retrieved September 11, 2019.</ref><ref>In 2020, more than 10% (90 out of 879) of the featured characters on scripted primetime television programs are openly [[LGBTQ]], an attempt by the pro-LGBTQ producers of those shows to deceitfully push the discredited claim that "10%" of the population is homosexual when, in fact, less than 2% of the population actually identify as such.</ref>

One of the top priorities of the Homosexual Agenda is to prohibit and outlaw [[conversion therapy]]. Activities like [[baseball]] and [[chess]] reduce homosexual proclivities, while other activities like figure skating for men and soccer for women seem to encourage homosexuality.
[[Leftists]] are pushing unconstitutional bans on conversion therapy, apparently unable to tolerate things they dislike. Their priorities include electing high-ranking officials who are openly homosexual, with the ultimate goal of electing a president who is in a [[same-sex marriage]], like the top [[Dem]] fundraising candidate [[Pete Buttigieg]] in 2020.

In a speech on December 10, 2013, to a pro-family rally in [[Jamaica]], a country that rejects same-sex "marriage", Brian Camenker of [[MassResistance]] outlined the step-by-step approach of the homosexual agenda:<ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen2/13d/jamaica-speech-121013/index.html "MassResistance helps Jamaica confront ‘gay’ agenda"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

*Legalize homosexuality
*Hold "gay pride" parades
*Accept child sex trafficking
*Demand non-discrimination laws
*Insist on homosexuals' adoption of children
*Push the homosexual agenda in schools<ref>{{cite web |title=Criticism of Transgender Agenda Will Get Virginia Students Expelled |author=Austin Ruse |date=10 Jun 2016 |url=https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/10/transgender-northern-virginia-students-can-now-expelled-criticizing-transgenderism/ |publisher=BREITBART |quote=The transgender change in school regulations was imposed last night during a dramatic board meeting where only 12 pro-trans witnesses were invited to testify. ... No opposing voices were allowed to be heard, parents were relegated to shouting opposition from the seats and some were ejected from the meeting.... Last year, they were promised a lengthy investigation and a full hearing. Instead, it was foisted upon them with less than 24 hours-notice. ... an Oregon law recently allowed a jury to award $60,000 t0 a transgender teacher because other teachers declined to use the teacher’s preferred pronoun, which is “they” rather than “him” or “her.” Deputies for President Barack Obama have backed similar rules for all K-12 schools, and New York City has established similar forced-speech rules.|accessdate=12 Jun 2016}}</ref>
*Legalize various alternate forms of partnership and call them "marriage" (i.e. man and man, woman and woman, man and multiple women)
*Demand public funding to deal with increased homosexual-related social problems
*Promote the [[gender confusion]] agenda
*Demand to be treated "equally"
*Impose a large-scale loss of free speech
*Ban counseling for kids confused by homosexual issues
*[[Drag queen]] story times to indoctrinate children
*Ban scientifically and religiously proven methods of homosexual conversion
*Attack churches
*Encourage [[abortion]]

[[Russia]] is a leader in rejecting the homosexual agenda.<ref>{{cite web |title=Is the Homosexual Agenda 'Unstoppable'? - Comparing America with Russia |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msLH6f6vyC4 |accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=RUSSIA VS. THE LGBT GLOBALISTS: A Climate of Hate and Fear |url=http://www.scottlively.net/2015/02/25/russia-vs-the-lgbt-globalists-a-climate-of-hate-and-fear-part-two/ |quote=This dangerous LGBT strategy has now gone global and the target is the Russian Federation. ... Core American values to Obama are publicly celebrated sodomy and doctor-assisted transsexual self-mutilation. ... The Russian anti-propaganda law, passed June 11, 2013, was the first truly effective international counter-measure since the “gay” agenda went global around the turn of the millennium. Typically, the “gays” characterized the law as hateful and an incitement to violence, but in doing so they revealed that propagandizing children is part of their agenda, since the law simply classifies “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relationships” as material that cannot be distributed among minors and commands the government to protect children from it. Just after the passage of this law Barack Obama did an about-face on the “reset” policy (in which Russia had been recognized as an equal partner in the world community) and instead began reviving cold-war rhetoric.|accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Pro-Russian Press Conference |date=22 February 2014 |url=http://www.scottlively.net/2014/02/22/pro-russian-press-conference/ |quote=We got lots of coverage from the event, and I believe we accomplished our objective which was to bring awareness to the world that the pro-family movement in the U.S., Canada, UK, and other “pro-gay” countries is happy to see the Russian Federation standing up for family values. We think this will encourage other nations to follow their example. |accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref> For example, Russia banned adoption by Americans as the Obama Administration aggressively pushed the homosexual agenda, and in June 2013 a house in the [[Russian]] parliament passed legislation to ban foreign adoption by gay couples or single parents who live in any [[same-sex marriage|gay marriage]] nation.<ref>[https://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-russia-ban-adoption-gay-couples-20130618,0,4633280.story "Russian lawmakers pass ban on adoption tied to gay foreign couples"]. ''Los Angeles Times''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

[[Barack Hussein Obama]], [[Hillary Clinton]], and essentially all [[Democratic Party|Democrat]] politicians now advocate the homosexual agenda, reflecting the growing financial power of the homosexual network. Obama's self-centered obsession with his own re-election, and fundraising for his campaign, has caused him to create a national political issue out of this, rather than deal with other issues like the economy. Many [[establishment]] Republicans and [[Cafeteria Christians]] also have bought into the homosexual agenda.

'''''Among all the [[liberal]] belief systems, the homosexual ideology is the most self-centered or selfish''''' – unlike the vast charity performed by thousands of churches in the U.S. alone, a homosexual charity can be considered an [[oxymoron]].

The late Supreme Court Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] referred to the "so-called homosexual agenda" in ''[[Lawrence v. Texas]]'', 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (dissenting opinion). Justice Scalia also predicted that this was the first step to legalizing homosexual civil unions. He was proven right with the outcome of ''[[Obergefell v. Hodges]]''. The goal of the latter decision was the societal affirmation of homosexuality rather than simple equality.<ref>Williams, Thomas D. (January 5, 2020). [https://www.breitbart.com/education/2020/01/05/usa-today-obergefell-was-never-about-freedom-to-marry/ USA Today: Obergefell Was Never About ‘Freedom to Marry’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved January 5, 2020.</ref>

Despite the fact that only 4.1% of the U.S. population identified as [[LGBT]], just over half a percentage point higher than four years prior,<ref>Gates, Gary J. (January 11, 2017). [https://www.gallup.com/poll/201731/lgbt-identification-rises.aspx In US, More Adults Identifying as LGBT]. ''Gallup''. Retrieved January 18, 2017.</ref> Americans '''''greatly overestimate the proportion of homosexuals''''' in the nation to be an average of 23%.<ref name="GreatlyOver">Newport, Frank (May 21, 2015). [https://www.gallup.com/poll/183383/americans-greatly-overestimate-percent-gay-lesbian.aspx Americans Greatly Overestimate Percent Gay, Lesbian in U.S.] ''Gallup''. Retrieved January 18, 2017. See also:
*Mainwaring, Doug (June 28, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/americans-vastly-overestimate-the-size-of-the-lgbt-population Americans vastly overestimate the size of the LGBT population]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved June 28, 2019.</ref> Interestingly, Republicans and conservatives gave estimates closest to the actual number.<ref name="GreatlyOver"/>

== The Homosexual Agenda ==
Joseph P. Gudel, in ''That Which is Unnatural''<ref>[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0108a.html "That Which is Unnatural" Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture] Part Two in a Two-Part Series on Homosexuality, from the Christian Research Journal, Winter 1993, page 8</ref> contended that the homosexual movement,

:has been militantly demanding not just the homosexuals' right to do whatever they wish to do behind closed doors, but, more importantly, that society fully accept their lifestyle as both healthy and normal, even demanding special rights and legislation as an "oppressed minority." Gudel quotes various sources evidencing this.

In a 1987 speech to the National Press Club in Washington, homosexual spokesperson Jeff Levi proclaimed,

:We are no longer seeking just a right to privacy and a protection from wrong. We also have a right — as heterosexual Americans already have — to see government and society affirm our lives.<ref>Jeff Levi, in William Dannemeyer, Shadow in the Land (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1989), 86.</ref>

In an article entitled "Gays on the March" in 1975, Time magazine quoted lesbian activist Barbara Gittings who stated:

:What the homosexual wants, and here he is neither willing to compromise nor morally required to compromise — is acceptance of homosexuality as a way of life fully on a par with heterosexuality." In response, Time opined, "It is one thing to remove legal discrimination against homosexuals. It is another to mandate approval....It is this goal of full acceptance, which no known society past or present has granted to homosexuals, that makes many Americans apprehensive.<ref>Gays on the March," Time, 8 Sept. 1975, 43</ref>

A primary goal of the homosexual agenda is to normalize the lifestyle in [[public schools]]. This occurred quickly and intensely after same-sex "marriage" was illegally imposed in Massachusetts, where homosexual relationships are taught to children as young as kindergartners, as recounted by the decision of ''[[Parker v. Hurley]]''.<ref>The ''Parker v. Hurley'' decision explained, "In January 2005, when Jacob Parker ("Jacob") was in kindergarten, he brought home a 'Diversity Book Bag.' This included a picture book, ''Who's in a Family?'', which depicted different families, including single-parent families, an extended family, interracial families, animal families, a family without children, and — to the concern of the Parkers — a family with two dads and a family with two moms. The book concludes by answering the question, 'Who's in a family?': 'The people who love you the most!' The book says nothing about marriage."</ref>

In a 1992 report by John Leo in U.S. News & World Report, he notes some books which were part of New York City's public school curriculum.

The first-grade book, ''Children of the Rainbow'', stated on page 145, which states that teachers must "be aware of varied family structures, including...gay or lesbian parents," and "children must be taught to acknowledge the positive aspects of each type of household." Another children book is Heather Has Two Mommies, which is about a lesbian couple having a child through artificial insemination. Another book, ''Gloria Goes to Gay Pride'', states, "Some women love women, some men love men, some women and men love each other. That's why we march in the parade, so everyone can have a choice."

Leo commented,

:A line is being crossed here; in fact, a brand new ethic is descending upon the city's public school system. The traditional civic virtue of tolerance (if gays want to live together, it's their own business) has been replaced with a new ethic requiring approval and endorsement (if gays want to live together, we must 'acknowledge the positive aspects' of their way of life).<ref>John Leo, "Heather Has a Message," U.S. News & World Report, 17 Aug. 1992, 16.</ref>

Dr. Judith A. Reisman in her extensive ''Crafting “Gay” Children'',<ref>http://www.defendthefamily.com/_docs/resources/6390601.pdf</ref> reports that Harvard homosexual Toby Morotta, PhD, stated that in the 1970s, members of the Gay Activists Alliance - who were trained in the “zapping" of any who rebuffed homosexuality.<ref>Toby Marotta: THE POLITICS OF HOMOSEXUALITY: HOW LESBIANS AND GAY MEN HAVE MADE THEMSELVES A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL FORCE IN MODERN AMERICA, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1981 at 319</ref> And that these formed the “Gay Academic Union,” (GAU) which was made up of faculty and students in major universities. She states that the GAU has long fought for domination of its worldview within the academic community, and professional journals commonly assigned GAU and other homosexual peer reviewers to research touching on homosexuality, generally resulting in a quick death to possible unfavorable findings.<ref>See extensive reports in regular NARTH Bulletins as well as Ray Johnson, “American Psychology: The Political Science, at 53-57.</ref>

This and the general agenda is seen to be overall implementing a marketing strategy explained in a book called ''After the Ball,'' by [[gay rights]] activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in the late 1980s, in which a six-point plan was set forth as to how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior in a decade-long time frame:
:"The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior." <ref name="Winn07252003">''After the Ball'' (1989), quoted from Winn, Pete (7-25-2003) [ ''Q&A: The Homosexual Agenda''] Citizenlink</ref> "Thus propagandistic advertising can depict all opponents of the gay movement as homophobic bigots who are 'not Christian' and the propaganda can further show them [[homosexuals]] as being criticized, hated and shunned..."<ref>After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's, by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen (Author) (p. 152-153)</ref>

[[Focus on the Family]] provides additional quotes from ''After the Ball'', outlining key points of the homosexual agenda:<ref name="Winn07252003"/><ref>Kirk, Marshall K. and Erastes Pill (11-1987) ''The Overhauling of Straight America'' Available at [http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/overhauling.htm ''STRATEGIES OF THE HOMOSEXUAL MOVEMENT: "The Overhauling of Straight America"'']</ref>

#"Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible." (They use late night air waves and special channels, as well as their right to peacefully assemble to do so.)
#"Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers."
#"Give homosexual protectors a just cause."
#"Make gays look good."
#"Make the victimizers look bad."
#"Get funds from corporate America."

[[United States Supreme Court]] Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] wrote:
{{cquote|Today's opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=02-102#dissent1 ''LAWRENCE et al. v. TEXAS''] at findlaw.com</ref>}}

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vic_Eliason Vic Eliason] of [http://www.crosstalkamerica.com Crosstalk America] rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies.

== Specific goals ==
The goals of the homosexual movement include:

#Ignoring Christian morals and discouraging religiously based laws.
#Attempting to convince the world that marriage should be defined secularly, instead of as one of the Lord's commandments.
#Ignore the clear message of the [[Bible]] that [[homosexuality]] is a sin and an abomination unto [[God]] because their First Amendment rights allow them to.
#Remind conservatives that there cannot be a "gay ([[homosexual attraction]]) gene", just like like there cannot be a "black gene" because complex things like these are caused by complex interactions between genes.
#Censoring evidence that the "gay gene" is a hoax. After all, it would have to be multiple genes interacting together.<ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08a/born_gay_hoax/smith_0329/index.html ''Lesbian activists at Smith College riot, shut down Ryan Sorba speech on "The Born Gay Hoax" as police watch. See exclusive videos.''] Mass Resistance</ref>
#Censoring speech against homosexuality by branding it to be "hate-speech"<ref>[http://www.silencingchristians.com Video:Silencing Christians]</ref><ref>[http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2009/06/homosexuality-its-crime-in-england-to.html "Marquette Warrior"]. ''mu-warrior.blogspot.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[http://www.ccfon.org/view.php?id=745 Bishops fight for right to criticize homosexual lifestyle, 25th May 2009]</ref>
#Censoring biblical statements condemning homosexuality<ref>White, Hilary (04-21-2006) [http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/apr/06042105.html ''Court Upholds School Ban on "Homosexuality is Shameful" T-Shirt''] LifeSiteNews.com</ref>
#Lobbying for equal employment rights.<ref>The Crimson Staff (10-13-2006) [http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=514950 ''A Box of Their Own?''] (opinion) The Crimson</ref><ref>http://www.afa.net, Homosexual Agenda Platforms from 1972 - 2000</ref>
#Expand hate crimes legislation to include sexual orientation, which would be equally wrong for heterosexuals to do.<ref>Pelosi, Nancy Office of (09-28-2004) [http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/Sept04/HateCrimes092804.html ''Pelosi: "Hate Crimes Prevention Legislation is Right Thing to Do, Long Overdue"''] From the office of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi</ref>
#Ending the military's and Boy Scouts' restrictions on homosexuality<ref>''Boy Scouts of Am. v. Dale'', 530 U.S. 640 (2000) (Boy Scouts); "Matlovich v. Secretary of the Air Force (591 F.2d 852, DC Circ. 1 978) (military)</ref>
#Stopping children as young as 5 years old from attending therapy to repair their sexual preference<ref>[http://www.thetaskforce.org/reports_and_research/youth_in_the_crosshairs National Gay and Lesbian Task Force:Youth in the Crosshairs]</ref>
#Teach tolerance of homosexuals in schools.
#In places like Massachusetts and California, where the homosexual lobby is the strongest, it starts as early as preschool. They tell seven- or eight-year-old boys, "If you only like boys, there's a chance you may be homosexual," or "If you only like girls, maybe you are lesbian." Children at that age also do not have the hormones to experience sexual attraction, so they cannot understand this yet.
#Demands protections from job discrimination.<ref>[http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/nondiscrimination/ENDA_main_page Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) | National Gay and Lesbian Task Force]</ref>
#Suing an online dating website for discrimination. This was because sexual orientation is a federally protected group, as such, this company was claimed to be "breaking" the law.<ref>Joshua Rhett Miller. [https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,454904,00.html "eHarmony to Provide Gay Dating Service After Lawsuit"]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>
#Undermining the [[Essay:Quantifying Mental Strength|resolve]] of [[Homosexuality and choice#Choice and Genetics|latent homosexuals]] so that their will becomes too weak to resist the temptations of homosexuality<ref>http://www.thetaskforce.org/activist_center/resources_and_tools/challenge_exgay</ref>
#Pushing for legalized adoption by homosexual individuals and couples<ref>http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/parenting_and_family</ref>
#Indoctrination of public school children to support the homosexual agenda
#Allowing boys into girls' restrooms and vice versa, without restriction.
#Forced feminization
#Defunding public transit systems

The state-by-state push for same-sex "marriage" can be viewed as a means to the above goals, or a goal in itself.<ref>[[Lewis v. Harris]]</ref> An example of this would be the recent New Hampshire law that makes same-sex civil unions "legal".<ref>[http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/06/01/new_hampshire_law_makes_same_sex_civil_unions_legal/ "New Hampshire law makes same-sex civil unions legal"]. ''boston.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Although notable gains toward achieving its goals continue to manifest, homosexual activists later began been expressing a high level of dissatisfaction with the [[Obama regime]]. Commenting on such, Massresistance.org, an organization which opposes the homosexual agenda in [[Massachusetts]], noted that Obama had,

*signed an order extending federal benefits to same-sex partners.
*pushed an extreme hate crimes bill in Congress.
*declared his intention to repeal the Defense of Marriage.
*pushed a pro-homosexual and transgender version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
*appointed homosexual activists to high level positions, including Harry Knox, of the homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign, and Kevin Jennings, founder of the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which educates kids in the public schools.
*declared February to be "Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month."
*demanded the State Department allow homosexual couples to use their married names (from marriages or civil unions) on US passports.<ref>update@massresistance.org 6/24/2009 11:56 PM</ref>

In Europe, countries such as the [[United Kingdom]] and [[France]] have adopted policies promoting gender confusion.<ref>Friedman, Victoria (February 15, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/02/15/france-mother-father-parent-uk-govt-lawyer-mother-not-gender-specific/ Men Can Be Mothers in UK, While French Schools Erase Terms ‘Father,’ ‘Mother’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved February 15, 2019.</ref>

=== Strategies and psychological tactics ===
Homosexual activists are often seen as engaging in [[homosexual logic|specious argumentation]], such as attempts to controvert the consistent teaching of the Bible on homosexual relations (see [[homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]), and using false analogies, in order to gain acceptance of homosexuality. One common argument used by homosexual activists seeks to compare their quest for equal rights to that of others.<ref>Miner, Homosexuality, Civil Rights, and the Church</ref> This argument is countered by the observation that blacks were able to peacefully argue that mankind should not be "judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character",<ref>[http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm, Speech by Martin Luther King Jr.]</ref> as the former yields no certain moral distinction. In contrast, homosexual activists seek acceptance of an immoral practice(s), and in addition, engage in certain coercive and manipulative means to do so. This includes the use of demonstrative protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way.<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/socialsciences/sellinghomosexuality.html</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.html "The homosexual propaganda campaign in America's media"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.amazon.com/After-Ball-America-Conquer-Hatred/dp/0452264987 "After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's (Plume): Marshall Kirk, Hunter Madsen: 9780452264984: Amazon.com: Books"]. ''amazon.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89526 "‘Gays’ put ‘terrorist’ label on Christians"]. ''WND''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08c/Prop8/church_attacks.html "Homosexuals begin campaign of terror over Prop 8 loss"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>http://rebuildtheparty.ning.com/video/exodus-protest-park-street</ref><ref>http://theway2k.vox.com/library/post/homosexuals-persecuting-christians-and-mormons.html</ref><ref>http://www.hamiltonsquare.net/articlesRiotsSep1993.htm</ref><ref>[https://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/may/08050205.html "Lesbian Break-in and Riot During College Speech on “Born-Gay Hoax” Forces Cancellation"]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95296 "‘How hate crimes laws forced me into exile’"]. ''WND''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>Muehlenberg, Bill, [http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/06/04/another-nail-in-the-christian-coffin/ Another Nail in the Christian Coffin], [[4 June]] [[2009]]</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09a/feder_0311/index.html "Gay activists stop free speech at UMass Amherst"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref> In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality.<ref>LZ Granderson, ''Commentary: Gay is not the new black'', Cable News Network,July 16, 2009</ref> Another strategy used by supporters of the homosexual agenda is to publicly deny that such an agenda exists.<ref>[http://onug.us/content/christians-america-and-gay-agenda "Christians, America, And The Gay Agenda"]. ''onug.us''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

While not all homosexuals agree with the use of deceptive psychological tactics, leading homosexual activists willfully employ them. The aforementioned book, [https://archive.org/details/AfterTheBallHowAmericaWillConquerItsFearHatredOfGaysInThe90s ''After The Ball How America Will Conquer Its Fear & Hatred Of Gays In The 90s''], is widely regarded as the handbook for the homosexual agenda, in which two homosexual Harvard-trained graduates, <ref>[http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,152180,00.html "Is The Gay Revolution a Flop?"]. ''time.com''. 24 June 2001. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref> Marshall Kirk (1957–2005), a researcher in neuropsychiatry, and Hunter Madsen (pen name ''Erastes Pill''), who was schooled in social marketing, advocated avoiding portraying homosexuals as aggressive challengers, but as "victims" instead, while making all those who opposed them to be "evil persecutors". As a means of the latter, they used ''jamming,'' in which Christians, traditionalists, or anyone else who opposes the gay agenda are publicly smeared. Their strategy was based on the premise that, "In any campaign to win over the public, Gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector. The purpose of victim imagery is to make straight people feel very uncomfortable."<ref>[http://www.parentsofgaychildren.org/uploads/After_the_Ball_-_outline_by_Richard_Cohen.pdf After the Ball: How America Will Conquer It’s Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90’s Outline compiled by Richard Cohen, MA]</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Kirk|first1=Marshall|last2=Madsen|first2=Hunter|title=After the ball : how America will conquer its fear and hatred of gays in the 90s|date=1989|publisher=Plume|location=New York|isbn=978-0452264984|page=183|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=+victims+in+need++of+protection|accessdate=2 February 2018}}</ref> Leftists also label Christians who support biblical marriage as "anti-gay," equating them with non-western Muslims who support stoning homosexuals.<ref>Mainwaring, Doug (April 3, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/jack-phillips-is-not-the-sultan-of-brunei-the-indiscriminate-weaponization-of-the-term-anti-gay Jack Phillips is not the Sultan of Brunei: The indiscriminate weaponization of the term ‘anti-gay’]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved April 4, 2019.</ref>

"Jamming" [[homo-hatred]] (disagreement with [[homosexual behavior]]s) was to be done by linking it to [[Nazi]] horror, advised Kirk and Madsen. Associate all who oppose homosexuality with images of Klansmen demanding that gays be slaughtered, hysterical backwoods preachers, menacing punks, and a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed. Thus, "propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths..."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20110603050349/http://www.renewamerica.com:80/columns/mbarber/080213 "Unmasking the "gay" agenda"]. ''renewamerica.com''. Retrieved on 2 Feb. 2018.</ref> " It can show them being criticized, hated, shunned. It can depict gays experiencing horrific suffering as the direct result of homohatred-suffering of which even most bigots would be ashamed to be the cause. It can, in short, link homohating bigotry with all sorts of attributes the bigot would be ashamed to possess, and with social consequences he would find unpleasant and scary... our effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof."<ref> http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.html The homosexual propaganda campaign in America's media, </ref>

Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, writes,
<blockquote>
There can be no doubt that Christianity represents the greatest obstacle to the normalization of homosexual behavior. It cannot be otherwise, because of the clear biblical teachings concerning the inherent sinfulness of homosexuality in all forms, and the normativity of heterosexual marriage. In order to counter this obstacle, Kirk and Madsen advised gays to "use talk to muddy the moral waters, that is, to undercut the rationalizations that 'justify' religious bigotry and to jam some of its psychic rewards." How can this be done? "This entails publicizing support by moderate churches and raising serious theological objections to conservative biblical teachings." [The latter of which attempts [[homosexuality and biblical interpretation]] examine and expose.]<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20070927163416/http://www.gender-news.com/other.php?id=19 ''After the Ball--Why the Homosexual Movement Has Won,''] Thursday, June 3rd, 2004</ref>
</blockquote>

Kirk and Madsen's open admission of their deceptive tactics is noted as most revealing: [O]ur effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof. "...the person's beliefs can be altered whether he is conscious of the attack or not"<ref>After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s, p. 152-153 (1989, Doubleday/Bantam)</ref> “The campaign we outline in this book, though complex, depends centrally upon a program of unabashed propaganda, firmly grounded in long-established principles of psychology and advertising.”<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=unabashed+propaganda%2C+firmly+grounded Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.xxvi]</ref><ref>[http://banap.net/ "[Behavior, and Not a Person]"]. ''banap.net''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Similarly, author Robert Bauman additionally records: "It makes no difference that the ads are lies... because were using them to ethically good effect, to counter negative stereotypes that are every bit as much lies, and far more wicked ones."<ref>The Gentleman from Maryland: The Conscience of a gay Conservative, by Robert Bauman, 1986, page 163.</ref>

The need for Kirk and Madsen to engage in such manipulation may be seen as being due to their sober realization of the deleterious nature of the homosexual lifestyle. This includes sodomy being responsible for 81% of new HIV cases aged 13 and older among men - despite only representing approximately 4% of the male population - and 92% of new HIV among youth (2020), and (historically) a greatly increased incidence of other infectious diseases and premature death, and despite decades of attempting to subdue homoerotic practices into being "safe." <ref>[https://peacebyjesuscom.blogspot.com/2019/10/negative-effects-of-homosexual.html Negative effects of homosexual relations (and heterosexual fornication)] Retrieved on November 24, 2021</ref>

“In short, the gay lifestyle - if such a chaos can, after all, legitimately be called a lifestyle - it just doesn’t work: it doesn’t serve the two functions for which all social framework evolve: to constrain people’s natural impulses to behave badly and to meet their natural needs. While it’s impossible to provide an exhaustive analytic list of all the root causes and aggravants of this failure, we can asseverate at least some of the major causes. Many have been dissected, above, as elements of the Ten Misbehaviors; it only remains to discuss the failure of the gay community to provide a viable alternative to the heterosexual family.”<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=exhaustive+analytic+list Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.363 ]</ref>

David Kupelian, author of ''[[The Marketing of Evil]],'' describes Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, stating,
<blockquote>
Kirk and Madsen were not the kind of drooling activists that would burst into churches and throw condoms in the air. They were smart guys – very smart. Kirk, a Harvard-educated researcher in neuropsychiatry, worked with the Johns Hopkins Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth and designed aptitude tests for adults with 200+ IQs. Madsen, with a doctorate in politics from Harvard, was an expert on public persuasion tactics and social marketing.<ref>[http://pearl-diving.blogspot.com/2009/01/sold-on-homosexuality-marketing-of-evil.html "Sold on Homosexuality – The Marketing of Evil"]. ''pearl-diving.blogspot.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>
</blockquote>

Marshall Kirk died in 2005 at the young age of 47.<ref>http://www.americanancestors.org/PageDetail.aspx?recordId=134544248</ref> The cause of death has not been publicly revealed.

Often cited as an early example of such tactics was the role of homosexual activists in persuading the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II). Dr. Ronald Bayer, though being himself a pro-homosexual psychiatrist, described this removal as being the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation, rather than any new scientific discoveries.<ref>[http://www.traditionalvalues.org/urban/eleven.php Exposed: The Myth That Psychiatry Has Proven That Homosexual Behavior Is Normal]</ref> In so doing, like slavery before it, the homosexual agenda is seen to threaten basic freedoms, principally the First Amendment.<ref>Adams, Guy (11-8-2008) [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mormon-stars-face-backlash-after-gay-marriage-ban-1003967.html ''Mormon stars face backlash after gay marriage ban''] The Independent</ref>

The charge of "[[homophobia]]" has been increasingly evidenced as being part of a means of intimidation used in pushing the Homosexual Agenda. Due to what homophobia has been made to denote, that of being a repressed homosexual, or possessing an irrational fear of being approached by homosexuals, or of being a "bigot" "persecuting" victims, the widespread use of the term "homophobic" attaches a powerful stigma to anyone who may even conscientiously oppose the practice of homosexuality, thus silencing many who might otherwise object to it.<ref>[http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/1995papers/socarides.html Thought Reform And The Psychology of Homosexual Advocacy, Charles W. Socarides, M.D.]</ref>

In relation to such oppression, psychologist Nicholas Cummings, former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), observed, "Homophobia as intimidation is one of the most pervasive techniques used to silence anyone who would disagree with the gay activist agenda." As an example of such fear within the APA, in addressing 100 fellow professionals Cummings related that while writing "Destructive Trends in Mental Health," with psychologist Rogers Wright, a number of fellow psychologists were invited to participate. However, these flatly turned them down, as they feared loss of tenure, loss of promotion, and other forms of professional retaliation. "We were bombarded by horror stories," Dr. Cummings said. "Their greatest fear was of the gay lobby, which is very strong in the APA.<ref>[Psychology Losing Scientific Credibility, Say APA Insiders http://www.narth.com/docs/insiders.html]</ref>

Noted homosexual activist and pornographer Clinton Fein, in his article, ''The Gay Agenda stated'': "Homophobic inclinations alone, even without any actions, should be criminal and punishable to the full extent of the law."

Erik Holland, author of ''The Nature of Homosexuality'', perceives that homosexuals have become so reckless in labeling others "homophobic" that "anyone who questions their labeling someone [is] a homophobe himself. Even quoting factual statistics about the connection between homosexuality and AIDS is allegedly homophobic." In addition, according to pro-homosexual author Vernon A. Wall, "even acceptance of homosexuality can be seen as a form of homophobia, because to talk about the acceptance of homosexuality is to imply that there is something about homosexuality that needs acceptance."<ref>[http://www.homosexinfo.org/Homophobia/HomePage "Homosexinfo - Homophobia - Homophobia: Fear of homosexuals?"]. ''homosexinfo.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

It may be speculated that if the liberal use of the term "homophobia" is not primarily a psychological tactic, then it indicates a psychological condition on the part of those who use the term in which they [[wishful thinking|wishfully]] or neurotically imagine that all those who oppose them are "fearful" of them, or of being one.

More recently, after 25 years of claiming she was not indoctrinating anyone with pro-homosexual beliefs, one activist honestly admitted to this being a lie. Canadian lesbian activist S. Bear Bergman, a female who identifies as a gender-confused "male", stated, "All that time I said I wasn't indoctrinating anyone with my beliefs about gay and lesbian and bi and trans and queer people? That was a lie.” Bergman recounted that she was instructed as a young gay activist to tell concerned parents that she was “just providing an alternate viewpoint” when accused of engaging in “indoctrination and recruiting,” and to use “soft” language when speaking about homosexuality. In her article on the notoriously liberal web site, the [[Huffington Post]], he went on to candidly confess that this indoctrination, "is absolutely my goal. I want to make your children like people like me and my family, even if that goes against the way you have interpreted the teachings of your religion." Bergman fantasized that in an ideal world he would have been "ushered into the world of queerness with care and tenderness by experienced homos" (akin to "camp counselors"), "and issued my leather jacket and my protest pins, my safer sex supplies..."

Bergman expressed that his goal was that of portraying to "impressionable young minds" the idea that "queers and transfolk are just as fine and lovely a kind of human as any other kind," and stated that he did not like the idea of sending her kid to schools where any kid could share with him their ideas about homosexuals. Thus Bergman, who believes that "books a kid hears at bedtime affect their sleep and also their dreams," is finalizing a series of children's books that all feature lesbian, homosexual, bisexual, gender-confused, or queer kids or families, with the goal that the young readers come to believe that people like him and his family are "absolutely great," that "lesbian, gay, bi, queer, and trans people -- that we exist, that we're perfectly fine and often really excellent." Bergman then concludes, "If that makes me an indoctrinator, I accept it. Let me be honest -- I am not even a little bit sorry."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.huffingtonpost.com/s-bear-bergman/i-have-come-to-indoctrinate-your-children-lgtbq_b_6795152.html|title=I have come to indoctrinate your children into my LGBTQ agenda (and I'm not a bit sorry)|last1=Bergman|first1=S. Bear|website=Huffington Post|accessdate=22 March 2015}}</ref>

Commenting on this frank article, Pete Baklinski of LifeSiteNews.com, states that, <blockquote>While Bergman paints a “friendly and cheerful” picture of the gay lifestyle, she fails to mention the serious health risks tied to homosexual behaviors....Research done in 2002 by Dr. John R. Diggs found that same-sex sexual behaviors expose gays, lesbians and bisexuals to “extreme risks of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), physical injuries, mental disorders and even a shortened life span.” Common sexual practices among gay men were found to lead to “numerous STDs and physical injuries, some of which are virtually unknown in the heterosexual population.” Gay and bisexual men were found to “lose up to 20 years of life expectancy.” The US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have warned on numerous occasions that HIV rates, already at epidemic proportions, are continuing to climb steadily among men who have ‘sex’ with men. The CDC has stated that gay and bisexual men continue to remain at the epicenter of what they call a “HIV/AIDS epidemic.”</blockquote>

To which Baklinski adds the spiritual consequences, citing one of the texts in the Bible which condemn homosexual relations:
{{Cquote|“For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error” (Letter to Romans 1:26).<ref>{{cite web|last1=Baklinski|first1=Pete|title=Gay activist: Of course our goal is to ‘indoctrinate children into LGBTQ agenda’|url=https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gay-activist-our-goal-is-to-indoctrinate-children-into-lgbtq-agenda|website=LifeSiteNews.com|accessdate=22 March 2015}}</ref> }}

For Christians believe God created man and women uniquely compatible and complimentary, and they alone are joined by God in marriage, with opposite genders being specified by both Genesis and personally by Jesus Christ. (Gn. 2:18-24; Mt. 19:4) The Bible only condemns homosexual relations - by design and decree, in principle and by precept - and never sanctions them wherever they are manifestly dealt with, and the injunctions against them are part of the transcendent and immutable moral law. (Lv. 18:22; Rm. 1:26,27)

However, Christians also understand that some of the first Christians were likely former homosexuals, (1Cor. 6:9-11) and believe that there is room at the cross for all who want the Lord Jesus over sin, and believe upon Him to save them who died for them, and rose again, and who thus are baptized and follow Him, to the glory of God.<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONS and the BIBLE]</ref>

===Influence in the academic world===
Professor Jerry Z. Muller described in an article titled ''First Things'' (Aug/Sept. 1993) how the homosexual lobby has gained widespread acceptance in the educational realm.
{{cquote|[Their] strategy has been remarkably successful. With a rapidity largely attributable in large part to a total lack of articulate resistance, homosexual ideology has gained an unquestioned and uncontested legitimacy in American academic life. Within the academy, as within nonacademic elite culture, the definition of opposite to homosexuality as "homophobia - a definition which implies that it is impossible to give good reasons for the cultural disapproval of homosexuality - is the best evidence of the success of this strategy.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=cbfVg_1qhe0C&pg=PP1&lpg=PP1&dq=David+W.+Virtue+scots+college&source=bl&ots=aDW7a615Gn&sig=Y1cLsx5sCQTgUUDJ88b5AKPRkNg&hl=en&ei=8skISpP1AcGktgfi2PzsCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPR14,M1 "Homosexuality"]. ''google.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>}}

====In the public schools====
{{See also|Homosexuality in Schools}}
[[File:Prairie Ridge High School LGBT+ Flag.jpg|thumb|200px|School in Chicago area (Prairie Ridge High School) with LGBT+ [[Rainbow#Rainbow flag|rainbow flag]]. Students in the same school who display the [[Confederate flag]] will face discipline.<ref name="NWHerald2017"/>]]
[[File:Prairie Ridge High School LGBT.jpg|thumb|200px|This Chicago-area school has "safe spaces" for students with homosexual attraction (sponsored by [[GLSEN]]).]]
Many public schools throughout the United States welcome the Homosexual Agenda, oftentimes through publicly-funded school programs created by [[GLSEN]].<ref name="Heyer2015">Heyer, Walt (June 8, 2015). [http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/06/15118/ Public School LGBT Programs Don't Just Trample Parental Rights. They Also Put Kids at Risk]. ''The Witherspoon Institute -- Public Discourse''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> Much of this was the work of the [[Obama Administration]].<ref name="Heyer2015"/> GLSEN celebrates the Homosexual Agenda through a "day of silence."<ref>Berry, Susan (April 11, 2015). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/11/day-of-silence-how-the-lgbt-agenda-is-hijacking-americas-youth/ Day of Silence: How the LGBT Agenda Is Hijacking America’s Youth]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> In 2016, [[California]] became the first state to legislate the teaching of the homosexual agenda in public schools to children as young as second grade.<ref>Berry, Susan (July 19, 2016). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/19/lgbt-history-california-first-to-teach/ California: 1st State To Teach LGBT Curriculum — to Second Graders]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> These California students are now banned from opting-out from this [[indoctrination]].<ref>Newman, Alex (January 4, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/27883-students-banned-from-opting-out-of-lgbt-education Students Banned From Opting Out of LGBT Education]. ''The New American''. Retrieved January 5, 2018.</ref> In February 2019, the Department of Education in the [[United Kingdom]] announced that public school children starting at the age of five would be required to learn about homosexual and transgender relationships, with parents being unable to withdraw their children from such classes.<ref>Tennant, Michael (February 27, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/31593-u-k-schools-to-indoctrinate-kids-as-young-as-five-in-lgbt-agenda U.K. Schools to Indoctrinate Kids as Young as Five in LGBT Agenda]. ''The New American''. Retrieved February 27, 2019. See also:
*McLean, Dorothy Cummings (March 25, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/christian-mom-sues-uk-primary-school-for-forcing-lgbt-pride-celebrations-on-kids Christian mom sues UK primary school for forcing LGBT Pride celebrations on kids]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved March 25, 2019.</ref>

At a recent sold-out California Teachers Association (CTA) conference in Palm Springs, Calif (October 2021), a leaked audio recording reveals two teachers mocking parents over their concerns about homosexual and transgender indoctrination at school, says a source who attended the event. “It was horrifying to listen to not just one teacher but really all of the teachers in all of these seminars, excoriating parents,” and that “The overarching theme of the classes that I attended were California teachers instructing other teachers on how to sneak in the LGBTQ+ curriculum in a manner that does not alert parents,” said the source, who also related how some teachers at the conference also suggested that parents who refuse to call their child by pronouns of the child’s choosing should be arrested and charged with child abuse. In the audio clip, one teacher advised other teachers who lead LGBTQ clubs to maintain an air of plausible deniability so they can play dumb if they are questioned by parents. “Because we are not official, we have no club rosters. We keep no records,” said the teacher, who is also an LGBTQ club leader. “In fact, sometimes we don’t really want to keep records because if parents get upset that their kids are coming? We’re like, ‘Yeah, I don’t know. Maybe they came?’. Another teacher suggesteed activist teachers disguise the nature of GSA clubs with an example being calling her LGBTQ club the “You Be You” club." Teachers also boasted about spying on students’ online searches and activity inn attempting to recruit sixth-grade students into these LGBTQ clubs whose membership rolls are kept from the eyes of parents. One of the teachers said, “We totally stalked what they were doing on Google.” As of 11/23/2021 the “UBU (You Be You)” club was suspended after information about the leaked audio was made public. <ref>Jones, Brad (November 23, 2021). https://www.theepochtimes.com/leaked-audio-reveals-how-california-teachers-recruit-kids-into-lgbtq-clubs_4114896.html Leaked Audio Reveals How California Teachers Recruit Kids Into LGBTQ Clubs]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved November 23, 2021.</ref>

In schools where the homosexual agenda is welcomed, students who fly the [[Confederate flag]] may expect to face disciplinary actions.<ref name="NWHerald2017">Prokop, Hannah (November 11, 2016). [http://www.nwherald.com/2016/11/09/prairie-ridge-high-school-suspends-student-for-wearing-confederate-flag-to-school/aelbmro/ Prairie Ridge High School suspends student for wearing Confederate flag to school]. ''Northwest Herald''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref><ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/apr/20/confederate-flags-not-rainbow-ones-banned-in-schoo/ Wyoming school district bans Confederate flags, allows gay-pride ones]. ''The Washington Times'' (from the ''Associated Press''). April 20, 2019. Retrieved April 20, 2019.</ref> In March 2019, an Ohio public school student was suspended for posting Bible verses next to homosexual flags.<ref>Gstalter, Morgan (March 13, 2019). [https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/433823-ohio-student-suspended-for-targeting-gay-straight-alliance-by Ohio student suspended for 'targeting' Gay-Straight Alliance by posting Bible verses in response to LGBT flags]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved March 13, 2019.</ref><ref>Kaplan, Talia (March 12, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/ohio-student-suspended-after-posting-bible-verses-around-school-i-wanted-to-spread-the-word-of-god Ohio student suspended after posting Bible verses around school: 'I wanted to spread the word of God']. ''Fox News''. Retrieved March 13, 2019.</ref>

===Immorality in society===
The “gay” activists welcome [[immorality]] in [[society]]. As no one wants to be called a [[hypocrite]], every act of sexual sin by society members serves the “gay” interest by lessening the public will to uphold public morality. That's why, wherever the acceptance of sexual sin is observed, it is likely there are “gay” activists involved.

==== The abortion industry ====
The best example of the Homosexual Agenda causing societal immorality is seen in their aggressive defense of the abortion industry. Obviously, homosexuals cannot have an “unwanted pregnancy,” yet in an extensive experience, the big part of “pro-choice” street activists at abortion clinics are homosexuals. This is so because they know that preserving the people's option to destroy unborn life is essential to maintaining so-called “[[sexual freedom]]” as a social norm. If women lost their choice to legally kill their unborn offspring, the resulting inevitable shift of emphasis from self-gratification to family responsibility in such a large section of the population would change the entire culture. When a woman gives in to fear and selfishness to kill the child in her womb, she will not feel that she can criticize other sinners. The choice to kill their unborn children morally compromises both men and women (making them unwilling to criticize choices to engage in other forms of immoral behavior), and ensures that the outcome of an unwanted child will not be a lasting deterrent to those who have chosen sexual “freedom” over family. This explains why homosexuals, who by definition cannot conceive children together, are among the most militant advocates of abortion on demand.

==== The pornography industry ====
The existence of a thriving pornography industry where “gays” are also notoriously prevalent serves the “gay” cause by morally corrupting the men who use it, making them less likely to oppose homosexuality on moral grounds and more likely to support public policies which legitimize sexual [[hedonism]]. “Gay” activists love sexual anarchy because they know that when a man falls in bondage to pornography he is less willing to oppose other sexual sins in society.

==== The entertainment industry ====
When young people enjoy music or films that glorify sexual lust, they feel more sympathy to the “gay” arguments.

The “gays” have it easy pushing sexual “freedom”, because every person, in their flesh, wants to indulge themselves in their own choices.
This is like children being offered only candy to eat. People want to eat only sweets until they get sick. Only with maturity do they know how to eat to stay healthy.

The “gay” movement has many allies in its campaign to aggrandize sexual immorality, but it is the only social movement in the history of the world whose primary purpose is to eliminate social restraints on [[sexual]] conduct. It is heavily funded, highly organized and strategically positioned to maximize its ability to change societies and cultures.<ref name="Lively2009">{{cite book |title=Redeeming the Rainbow: A Christian Response to the "Gay" Agenda |author=[[Scott Lively]] |publisher=Veritas Aeterna Press |place=Springfield, MA |year=2009 |edition=1 (Version 1.1)|chapter=1: Pro-family answers to common questions about homosexuality and "gay" agenda |pages=8, 60, 176|url=http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09b/Redeeming_rainbow}}</ref>

==Opponents of the Homosexual Agenda ==
Some well known individuals/groups in the [[United States]] who actively oppose the homosexual agenda are: [[MassResistance]], [[Focus on the Family]], [[Peter LaBarbera]]'s American's for Truth, the [[Traditional Values Coalition]] ([[Louis Sheldon]] is a chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition), and [[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]].

===Peter LaBarbera===
As noted earlier, [[Peter LaBarbera]] is the founder of [[Americans For Truth]] (AFT) which is a national organization in the United States devoted solely to confronting the homosexual agenda.<ref name="americansfortruth.com">[http://www.americansfortruth.com/about/ "About Americans for Truth About Homosexuality and AFTAH Founder Peter LaBarbera » Americans for Truth"]. ''americansfortruth.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Peter LaBarbera said the following regarding the need for the organization Americans for Truth:
{{cquote|Homosexual, [[bisexuality|bisexual]], and [[transsexual]] groups spend tens of millions of dollars every year to market and normalize their aberrant lifestyles, yet after all these years there is not a single, serious national group dedicated specifically to exposing and countering their agendas...

It’s time for Americans to unapologetically resist the demands of this lobby, and to counter the lies upon which it is built-the foremost being that certain people are inherently or ‘born’ homosexual and that this is a [[civil rights]] issue.<ref name="americansfortruth.com"/>}}

===Matt Barber===
[[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]] is one the more notable figures in regards to opposing the homosexual agenda. Matt Barber wrote the following regarding the homosexual agenda:
[[Image:Mbarber_b.jpg‎|right|thumb|175px|[[Matt Barber]]]]
{{cquote|Ironically, sexual [[relativism|relativists]] are anything but relative. They are quite affirmative in principle. But the principles they foist demand comprehensive acceptance of homosexual conduct — by force of law — through federal edicts such as “hate crimes” legislation, the so-called “Employment Non-Discrimination Act” (ENDA) and by imposing government sanctioned “same-sex marriage.” All such government mandates grant special protected “minority” status to those who define themselves by aberrant sexual preferences and changeable sexual behaviors. These laws put people with traditional values directly in the crosshairs of official government policy.

Throughout society, homosexual activists demand that homosexual behaviors not only be “tolerated,” but celebrated. (That’s what the euphemistic slogan “celebrate diversity” supposes). They have masked their true political agenda by hijacking the language of the genuine civil rights movement and through the crafty and disingenuous rhetoric of “tolerance” and “diversity.”

Anyone who believes the Biblical directive that human sexuality is a gift from [[God]], to be shared between man and wife within the bonds of marriage, is branded “homophobic,” “hateful” or “discriminatory.” They are to be silenced by all means possible.<ref>http://www.cwfa.org/articledisplay.asp?id=14696&department=CFI&categoryid=family</ref>}}

===Steffen Königer===
[[German]] politician Steffen Königer from the party [[Alternative for Germany]] (AfD) showed that it is possible to use [[irony]] when opposing the [[extremist]] gender agenda. In his address in the parliament of the [[Brandenburg]], the federated state of [[Germany]], he ridiculed homosexual lobbyists and gender ideologists by enlisting in his introduction, for about two minutes, all "gender and sexual varieties" he could find on the Internet. This way he brought to attention of the general public the absurdity of the proposal put forward by the German [[Green Party]] that demanded to introduce multiple "gender identities" in state documents. When the Parliamentary Speaker tried to stop him, he just replied that he is not finished yet and further adamantly continued in naming all alleged gender declinations. When he was finally done with his introduction, his actual reaction to the proposal took less than three seconds: ''"The AfD party rejects your proposal."''<ref>{{cite web |title=Un político alemán ridiculiza los postulados del LGBTI |url=https://youtu.be/GzIwvHUvFR0 |accessdate=23 Jun 2016 |language=German (English subtitles)}}</ref>

==Further reading==
*https://www.amazon.com/dp/B012YKIQ2M Counterfeiting the Rainbow by Beverly Rachel
*[http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html Homosexuality and the Nazi Party] by Scott Lively. Excellent discussion of the anti-Christian and homosexual origins of the Nazism.
*[http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/ Documentation of the links between homosexuals and the Nazis] by the Government of Israel.
*[http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/BPCollectionNews.asp?ID=131 2008 McDonald's and the Homosexual Agenda], Baptist Press
*[http://www.couplescompany.com/FEATURES/politics/2004/Selling%20Homosexuality.pdf Paul E. Rondeau, Selling homosexuality to America (PDF)] [http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/730694/posts Or html form]
*Shupe, Jamie (March 10, 2019). [https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/03/10/i-was-americas-first-non-binary-person-it-was-all-a-sham/ I Was America’s First ‘Nonbinary’ Person. It Was All a Sham.] ''The Daily Signal''. Retrieved April 15, 2019.

==See also==
*[[ACT-UP]]
*[[Anti-Defamation League]]
*[[Anthropological Revolution]]
*[[Essay:Sodomism]]
*[[Homosexual belief system]]
*[[Gay affirmative]]
*[[Gay rights]]
*[[Homophobia]]
*[[Hate speech]], [[Hate crime]]
*[[Homosexual logic]], used to justify and mandate the Homosexual Agenda
*[[Homosexuality]]
*[[Homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]
*[[Homosexualization]]
*[[Gleichschaltung#LGBTI Gleichschaltung|LGBTI Gleichschaltung]]
*[[San Francisco values]]
*[[Fashion industry values]]
*[[Hollywood values]]
*[[Slogans and the Homosexual Agenda]]
*[[Stonewall UK]]

== References ==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

{{liberalism}}
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Homosexuality]]
[[Category:Liberal Deceit]]
[[Category:Hollywood Values]]

User talk:Daniel1212

2021-11-24T10:36:01Z

Daniel1212: /* Want to add sidebar images */

{{Welcome}} [[User:DanH|DanH]] 23:16, 20 February 2008 (EST)

:A much belated welcome. I used your user page's link to start an article on [[Homosexual misinterpretation]]s of the Bible. Join in any time! --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 21:02, 5 December 2008 (EST)

*Would you be willing to donate the entire text of your website to this project? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:49, 8 December 2008 (EST)

== [[Mainstream Media]] ==

I reverted your additions for the simple reason you did not provide citations for the items. If you have them, please put them back, with the proper links. Thanks. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 21:57, 14 February 2009 (EST)

* I understand. The hard evidence for the first is in my physical file cabinet, a photocopy. But here are two links to the story, though not from the Globe but the AP. http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2001/cyb20011227.asp http://static.record-eagle.com/2000/jul/9letter.htm For the second, see http://www.nmsr.org/nmsr2002.htm A third example is linked.

*The title I put should not have been the Boston Globe, but "Notable Examples" but the page is really sparse and much needs more material. Which is easy to find, but i do not have the time now. The External link i placed to http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/biasbasics1.asp much substantiates the bias change in other ways - which of course, is not seen by those who provide it. I think I will just delete the section, and put the material on the talk page until someone provides more examples to warrant a section on examples. {{unsigned|Daniel1212}} -- 09:58, 15 February 2009

::Well, as I said, add the material back if you have something to cite, which you seem to have. Use the links and add whatever explanations you feel needed to give users confidence in the material. Thanks for responding and letting me know! --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 07:10, 16 February 2009 (EST)

Thanks for the encouragement. I had just run across the article and thought I would add to it. Some people from Free Republic might help there. But I am more preoccupied on working on the substantial and referenced page on [[Homosexual misinterpretation]] which you started me one (thanks!). I left a message on your page about my need for a Leviticus 18 page to link to it, with the reftagger script embedded. Thanks again and praise be to God.

== I linked to your bible interpretation and homosexuality article from the main conservapedia article. ==

I linked to your bible interpretation and homosexuality article from the main conservapedia homosexuality article. When I have more time, I can link to the article more prominently in the article. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 18:48, 27 February 2009 (EST)
::::I looked at the article and found another place to link to your article and it is in a very prominent place. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 18:54, 27 February 2009 (EST)

Thanks for taking an interest. Any honest critiques I can also appreciate. Pray and press. Ever revising.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 14:18, 28 February 2009 (EST)

== I believe I can get a lot more views to your homosexuality and biblical interpretation article plus the homosexuality article as a whole ==

I believe I can get a lot more views to your homosexuality and biblical interpretation article plus the homosexuality article as a whole. Please email me if you want to help cause this to happen. If you prefer just writing material that is fine to. Keep up the good work! :) [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 03:30, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

== [[Salvation]] ==

Open for you now, Daniel. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:07, 11 April 2009 (EDT)

:Glad to see you are on top of things! Thanks be to God.

::Well, it appears you are not going to be getting to this now, so just let me know whenever, and I will unlock it for you. Today is Resurrection Sunday / Easter Sunday. Rejoice! --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 01:26, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

Ready when you are. Praise be to God[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 15:40, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

BTW, is there an easy way i could convert this page to put it on CP? http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/BooksOfTheBible.html There is no such page now. Also when i placed a

*You were cut off......opened [[Salvation]] for you again. I just copy and paste from Word into the edit box here at CP, for the longer items. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 21:13, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

:TK. The page i was referring to was highly formatted, with tables, and cut and past would not do it. So i edited my original (OpenOffice) this AM, and uploaded it to Firefox, selected it all and and copied the "view selection source" and pasted it in. With some minor deleting here it is, but do you think it is too colorful for CP? I could not do references the normal Wiki way, and it would be very hard for someone else to edit.

::Sorry I missed your post here completely! If still having trouble formatting for the wiki, I reccomend you check with [[user:Iduan|Iduan]]. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 22:28, 25 April 2009 (EDT)

== Please be encyclopedic ==

Please be encyclopedic, and don't repeat absurdities simply to refute them. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:01, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

*Daniel, maybe this will help you:

<blockquote>
'''encyclopedic''' : of, relating to, or suggestive of an encyclopedia or its methods of treating or covering a subject: ''comprehensive'' (an encyclopedic mind an encyclopedic collection of armor).

'''encyclopedic'''
Function: adjective

Text: also encyclopaedic
covering everything or all important points <a tour guide with an encyclopedic knowledge of New York City and its people>
'''Synonyms:''' compendious, complete, comprehensive, full, global, inclusive, in-depth, omnibus, panoramic, universal
Related Words: broad, catholic, extensive, far-reaching, general, overall, sweeping, vast, wide; blanket, indiscriminate, unrestricted.
</blockquote>

*''Words that are jargon speak, "homosex" and the like are not encyclopedic.'' Their use conjures up near-parody, as they are politically inspired buzzwords, and likely to have little meaning and cause confusion among the majority of the population not specializing in whatever topic. Hope this gives you some help. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 15:12, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

:Thank you very much for helping me discover any errors. However, homosex did not seem to be what Andy objected to, as his edits only changed pro-homosex to prohomosex. I do think some of my division titles were too inventive however, and will change some, as well as do a review of this article and try to change like terms.

:The reason i use homosex is because it is the term of choice by the most prolific conservative writer on the issue, Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon, who references it's use by some advocates of homosexual behavior See explanation for Why use the word "homosex"? @ http://www.robgagnon.net (2nd up from the bottom). The problem is that "homosexuality" is not precise enough, and while homoeroticism could be used, yet the Bible most specifically prohibits actual sex. Like in the realm of heterosexual sexual relations, the Biblical prohibitions on such also forbid all unmarried erotic activity, but i was trying to be precise, and "homosex" seemed to serve that purpose, and may become more used. Thus i placed a "Terms Defined" section. Maybe know i should change it to homoeroticism.

:But "absurdities" must have also related to my refutations of the prohomosexual attempts to read sex into Scripture, and not just the title. But that was part of being encyclopedic, as "covering everything... comprehensive, full, global, inclusive, in-depth,.."

:Thanks for your help.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 17:57, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

*:Oftentimes when we are refuting the things we feel strongly about, there is a tendency to go overboard, to really hammer the point home, when more restrained language would do the job just as well, in a subtler way. When we do that (hammer, or bludgeon) the point home, those who are not practicing Christians or even Christians who might not be evangelical are put-off by our language, not only the terms which are jargon, but the dire nature of what we write. When needed, Christ used a "velvet glove" to make his points, not a bare fist, and that might be best for an encyclopedia trying to win converts, and since CP attracts people of all stripes, more people are attracted to sugar than vinegar. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 18:19, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

I appreciate your spirit, and counsel. I am addressing the "jargon" issue as i see it. But you are also addressing something i have struggled with. As an apologist i can easily slip into an overt polemical style. But on the other hand in a case like the Bible and homosex, when the obvious is smoke screened by specious if sometimes sophisticated sophistry, then presenting it as purely neutral manner comes across as conceding that they may be a case, which gets back to absurdities. I see the CP evolution article dealing with the theory as a refuted hypothesis, while i have represented the revisionist side on homosex, while manifesting with detail that the traditional position is what is warranted, which also fits with CP. But i do see myself sometimes going too overboard for this format, in tone, and in "jargon."

So i am working on improving it, and a review of the whole article by me was overdue. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 21:05, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

:TK, just what is going on here? I did not reinsert jingoistic phrases that Andy took out, but in fact was editing more of what i perceived were of that type. If the main problematic term is Gagnon's homosex, which is still in the page in many places, then consider that Andy had left them in. I could easily replace those, if i was not now locked out of the article i wrote. I was in the process of revising the article in seeking to comply with the objections, and could see places where i did use "jargon" that sounded fitting it me but it not encyclopedic, and changed some of them until i had to quite for the night. Rather than just locking someone out who had worked much to make an article(s) which would enhance CP, there ought to be some more specific dialog as to what changes are desired and were made. Thanks[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 22:34, 28 April 2009 (EDT)

::I think in the class discussion I made myself clear, Daniel. Editing is a trust, not some right, and by your pedantic demeanor, you have (temporarily, I hope) lost my trust. What you are inserting is didactic, and I am using the word to mean inclined to lecture others too much. I am not saying you are wrong in my opinion, but how can one convey knowledge, which is the point, if one is going overboard too much, as you admit above? I am not locking you out of it, and will unlock it when I feel people have stopped retreating to their respective corners, and are ready to show some geniality. Try to remember people, as opposed to computers, have feelings, emotions, and arguing with others in the wrong way, same as conveying information in articles in a way that makes people not want to read it, is counterproductive. I am not indulgent like Andy, and will not engage you in a open-ended discourse here, which is a distraction to other editors, and quite frankly, to me as well. If you have something specific to ask, use the email. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:21, 28 April 2009 (EDT)

Dear TK, I receive your correction, and i was hoping someone would do some necessary editing, and i myself was not finished with the page. But if you look at the exchange, what i was asking for was more specifics as to what was "jargon" and non-encyclopedic, so that i could fix it, and you were the only one who made some attempt to help. I pray that you can edit the wording of the content to make it better, as it was perhaps the most comprehensive referenced page on that subject available to read on the web. All i was going to basically add was the issue of Jesus and John, as well as the centurions servant, in the light of traditional [[exegesis]], as pro homosexual assertions of both are popular, as WP's page also shows. In the meantime, I will take Andy's advice. Thanks [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 08:58, 29 April 2009 (EDT)

==Specifics requested==

What do you mean by "absurdities"? The whole article deals with what normally would be considered absurdities, but now are accepted are viable interpretations. You have deleted an entire section which deals with attempts to read homosex into passages, and which WP offers as viable, as i am sure most of today's universities would see as the same! Due to the foundational liberal revisionist grid most anything can now be considered reasonable.

Thanks for better formatting changes and any worthy corrections, but realize that it is hardly a full treatment of the issue if prohomosex contentions of approved homosex are not dealt with. BTW, Googling Homosexuality and biblical interpretation conservapedia did not show in the first 50 hits, which i used to see in similar searches, and i could only find it if i put it in quotes. However, it did have the mother page, homosexuality and the Bible. Thanks[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 09:02, 25 April 2009 (EDT)

== a request ==

I know you had some conflict as far as the jargon you used in the homosexuality and biblical interpretation article. I do think that it would be a shame, however, for Conservapedia to lose a prolific editor who is sincere.

So I have a request, could you please expand the article on the [[History of homosexuality]] ? [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 18:52, 22 May 2009 (EDT)

:It was jargon, as well as being too polemical. But I have been posting occasionally, and am only locked out of my main work. I am quite busy now, but by God's grace i hope to improve the History of homosexuality soon. Thanks.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 21:25, 22 May 2009 (EDT)

== article request ==

When you are done with your [[History of homosexuality]] would you be interested in doing the following:

Create the following articles :

*[[Homosexuality and Christianity]]

*[[Dangers of homosexuality]] (individual and societal dangers)

*[[Religion and homosexuality]]

*[[Homosexuality and opposing viewpoints]]

*[[Homosexuality in America]]

*[[New Testament and homosexuality]]

*[[Presbyterian views on homosexuality]]

Expand these articles:

*[[Greek Homosexuality]]

*[[Roman Homosexuality]] (right now it has a dead link)

I will email you further about this matter. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 01:06, 3 June 2009 (EDT)

The latter actually does work, though it is brief. I am busy now but will try to get to some these pages by the grace of God. Some may be a bit redundant, but maybe it makes CP more viable. Yet I think i should explains that my motive in doing the Homosexuality and biblical interpretation page (and it would good if TK lets me edit it again as it needs much), was not really that i have a driving animosity toward homosexuality, though i certain consider it to be sinful, but it was because of the extremes they went to in seeking to negate the Biblical injunctions against it, as well as to enlist it for their cause which actually kinds of how AIDS works. Had they simple been advocating it i would not have put much effort into showing that Biblically it is sin, but as they realize the authority of the Bible so their efforts supererogatory. So the history of it all does not interest me that much, though it confirms that the pagans did what the Bible charges them with, and uses their examples as what to avoid.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 23:02, 4 June 2009 (EDT)

*I strongly resent your false statement, inasmuch as you have never once contacted me asking to edit the article again. Anyone can read the history there, and what it shows is the site owner, Andy Schlafly reverting your contributions, and me merely complying with his wishes....expressed in his reversion of your edits. I made many attempts to dialog with you, arrive at some accommodation of your verbosity, your inflammatory language, which is what Mr. Schlafly was concerned with. You have two choices, as I see it; You can attempt to comply with the requests of an Administrator, or not edit that article, or any others where you insert jingoism. I also expect an apology, and an end to mean-spirited snipes inserted in your posts. Such conduct is decidedly not Christian, in word and deed, Daniel. I hope that upon reconsideration, you will realize it was beneath you. I have a great appreciation for your valuable contributions, and you have previously acknowledged my compliments, so I wonder where this hostility is coming from? --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:25, 4 June 2009 (EDT)

:TK, I must ask, what false statement, and what hostility? What you had said on 28 April 2009 was "I am not locking you out of it, and will unlock it when I feel people have stopped retreating to their respective corners, and are ready to show some geniality." I therefore assumed that is what you would do, and that it did not require a request to get unlocked.

:As for the whole issue, and the idea of hostility, that also has an element of mystery. Andy did not revert all my contributions, but as the 23 April 2009 comparison shows, he did some editing which left most of the article intact, though he deleted the sections on pro homosexual attempts to read homosex into the Bible. But for some reason the edit history says "(Reverted edits by Daniel1212 (Talk) to last version by Ed Poor)", while in reality all Ed did was start the article for me to work on it, which the history shows i did for months. But bcz it mentioned Ed Poor, and i wanted to know what i was dong wrong, i also inquired about the edits on his page, which you reproved me for. Inquiring of Andy, who is likely quite busy, had given me little info on what he wanted changed. You in turn were helpful on that, and upon reviewing the article i understood my errors more clearly. Accordingly, I then did some editing to correct them, but in response you reverted my edits, with a note "Constant re-insertion of jingoistic words and phrasing." when in fact i did not reinsert any but instead was removing such, including the term homosex, with Andy had not edited.

:As for my tone, I did appreciate your being more specific on what needed to be changed, though some would have been obvious to me if had done a complete review first, but after reverting my attempts to comply it seems that your tone changed, perhaps due to the above misunderstandings. Seeing i was locked out, i began working on an edited version of the article on a personal wikia page, which i hoped would be acceptable in case i could edit the CP page again. As it is, this was the most extensive referenced treatment of homosexual apologetics, which issue they take very seriously, but in addition to the phrases at issue and digressing into an overt polemic style sometimes, it has other errors which need fixing. Thank you for corresponding. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 10:09, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

::You might want to check my user page, and the number of pages I am watching. While you have a narrow focus in this matter, it is really impossible for me to remember to check back with you. The edits were discussed on the articles talk pages, and on Andy's personal one as well, I remember. At no time did I receive feedback from you, after the decision was made, and Andy agreed with my comments...so if you want to link me to whatever you have added on some personal page, that would be great...but it isn't logical to assume that if someone makes a personal page and does editing, I will notice it.

::In the future, just email me, or post a message on my page, rather than including me in when discussing something with another Admin. You might want to argue the point, and claim you don't understand, but your comment was negative, was initially negative, up to and until Andy commented that your edit were too bombastic and narrowly focused. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but that isn't necessarily the POV we want to present publicly, or perhaps more precisely, not exactly the style we wish to use. If you don't understand, or wish to continue this line, please use the email. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 19:41, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

:::Thanks for getting back to me on this, and i know these things are hard to track, and thus some more clarification is needed, and i will write to you in an email.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 10:58, 6 June 2009 (EDT)

== Mainstream media ==

I am wondering if your material added to MSM might be more appropriate in [[Liberal media]] ? --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 19:19, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

:Hmm, i did not know there was such a page. Yes, it would go there, but people searching for "main stream media" would not get much on its real nature, as [[Liberal media]] is not even linked to on that page. I shall effect changes, by the grace of God.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 08:12, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

::Thanks, Daniel....I wasn't sure myself! --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 12:37, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

::Yes, liberal media is now linked in MSM, and the stats added, etc., and an expose of Newsweek. Thank God.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 12:41, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

==Daniel==

You seem to have an unhealthy obsession with homosexuality. I hope that you seek help. [[User:CindyL|CindyL]] 10:01, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

:Dear Cindy,

the real obsession is on the part of homosexuals activists who make constant and inordinate efforts to misconstrue the Bible. Outside of atheism, which i also contend against, they are the foremost promoters of radical revisionism, and demand acceptance of homosexuality, which is a particular manifestation of rebellion against God, as seen in [[Romans 1]]. My response is in reaction to such, by objectively contending against it. As for the unhealthy part, it is sadly incontrovertible that pertains to the typical homosexual lifestyle. God's laws are good, and to our individual and collective benefit when obeyed, and to our hurt when we do not, as nations now in dust - and souls in Hell - testify to. Yet apparently some of the first Christians were former homosexuals, (1Cor. 6:11) and there is room at the cross for those who will repent and believe - to God be the glory!

==SDA infomercial==

What is the reason why there apparently cannot be the history of the very relevant conflict between Evangelical faith and the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]], and ongoing doctrinal controversy, and much needed balance (and links) in that regard. Must readers go to WP to obtain a more comprehensive view of SDA and its history? I do want to commend you however, for your first class writing on the [[Second Great Awakening]] which i came across as a result of the SDA page.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 21:31, 10 July 2009 (EDT)
::Please try your hand at some other topics. CP discourages people who have a strong theological dislike of this Christian church or that one which prevents them from an objective assessment and inclines them to attack it. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 21:35, 10 July 2009 (EDT)

:"Objective assessment" is precisely the problem. If that was the real issue, then why was the article not targeted before when it was basically a advertisement for the SDA? Seeking to add balance, i added countering links to its obviously pro sda links. And then i added history, of which it really had none, which referenced the diligent research of Martin and his conciliatory conclusion that the SDA was not a cult, or cultic, but a heterodox, essentially Christian denomination. Necessary distinctions were then made btwn the 2 basic divisions which are manifest today. The Further reading section could have been neutral, if had been already. It is hardly fitting or balanced to have only basically positive info of SDA, especially when it has truly problematic doctrines. Should this be done with the [[Jehovah's Witnesses]], and should the Controversy section on the [[Mormons]] be eliminated? If anything it is too brief. At least clearly reference some opposing views, esp. the historical summation work by Samples. Thanks[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 22:06, 10 July 2009 (EDT)

::Sigh. Daniel, you know I admire your abilities, and how throughly you document your additions, right? In today's world, with literally the barbarians at the gate, wanting to destroy Christianity, and the entire western world, do you really think this is the time to hone your skills on how different Christian's are from each other? Or would you be willing to concede that perhaps for the good of all, that isn't of the greatest import right now? Don't you think Jesus would prefer us concentrating on the positive, how we are all alike, how we should join together to defeat the agents of Satan? I know I am clear in my heart what He would like from us....I pray you are too. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 00:43, 11 July 2009 (EDT)

:::Thanks for your observations and compliments (though i find many faults in my writings, and Richard Jensen is a much better one), and desire to resist such things as the objectively baseless moral foundation of atheism which such great men like Mao and Pol Pot operated out of, doing what seemed "reasonable" to them. In contrast, the we who claim to be Christian have the Word of God as out "Golden Compass," and which points due North. But which hates a false balance, and requires objectivity, and exposing darkness. I see that the line "Many Evangelicals in the 21th century denounce SDA as an illegitimate cult with a good link has been provided, which can get them many good resources, and the article is now a well written one, though absent of the historical conflict and change of the 1950's and beyond.

But your response here transcends the issue of my edits of the SDA page, and relates to CP as an encyclopedia, and the issue of ecumenism, and is a topic worthy i would like top respond to with some consideration. As it is true that all encyclopedias (etc.) have a certain bias, and spirit behind them, i understand that CP basically operates out of (if not exclusively) a Christian worldview in seeking to fight a manifest evil that seeks to silence and supplant most all Biblical moral and spiritual truth. And in so doing it can provide information without treating such things as specious attempts of liberal revisionism and propaganda as equally viable ideas, but objectively and informationally expose them. But i think it loses viability when its content is cursory or manifests unwarranted bias, and it loses its conservative credibility when it becomes promotional of a historically aberrant conservative view.

:As relates to your appeal to ecumenism on a personal level, and what Jesus would have His own to do, while i agree that honest minded men and women of basic ideological agreement can ''somewhat'' work together against a common enemy, yet it is Biblically clear that this does not allow marginalization of serious doctrinal issues. I think it should be obvious that things such as musical instruments in church is not in view here, but matters that the Bible manifests more weight one. As regards the SDA, there is a reason why Martin engaged is such exhaustive analysis. And while this showed them (at their core) to be closer to historical, conservative orthodoxy than many thought, yet (for one) the promoting of annihilationism is no peripheral issue, and which (for one) makes a mockery of Christ's repeated warning to cut of an offending member rather than to enter unquenchable fire. (Mk. 9:43-48) Not much deterrent factor for Hitlers and Hugh Hefners are just going to be get toasted like the rest. Or justice, but differing degrees of damnation are in view for eternal punishment, (Lk. 12:46,47) and which i contend is eternal as eternal life. (Mt. 25:41,46; Rv. 14:11; 20:10)

:In addition, historically it has been the SDA that has been dead set against ecumenism, considering themselves to be the one true remnant. And while Martin's work (in part) helped the Evangelical SDA arise, yet it is the Traditional SDA that has the upper hand, with the historical position on their side. As for me, i consider evangelical Christianity to be the major foundation for conservatism in America, and which should primarily decide which is aberrant and which is not (but which historical orthodoxy it itself is much deviating from).

:Nor do i believe that "Jesus would prefer us concentrating on the positive, how we are all alike" and ignore the doctrinal differences regarding Truth, which got Him crucified, (Jn. 19:7) even if circumstances require some common unity. While i am sure Jesus was basically doctrinally unified with Pharisees on moral laws, (Mt. 23:2) in contrast to homosexual Caesars, yet Jesus still reproved their false doctrine, even about extra Biblical laws against washing, (Mk. 7) and His Spirit places a priority on doctrine (1Tim. 4:16) and commands contending for the faith. (Jude v. 3) While Christians would vote for a true conservative Mormon or an Orthodox Jew against a real liberal like Ted K., we cannot say we are all brethren.

Finally, my intent on the SDA was not to hone my skills on how different Christians are from each other, but to provided balance and refutation to an extremely brief and biased entry which was allowed to be that way, and which gave virtually no real historical information, but served as a infomercial for a church. It thus needed balance, and more pertinent history, and apart from some links necessitated by the one sided versions of the same, i proved informational history of a most notable conflict, and the evangelical perspective. I pray the prayer of Martin and many other concerned Christians in this regard may yet be answered. Meanwhile, Richard is a gifted and learned writer, and the SDA is far far better than it originally was, so praise God for that, and i will tell Richard i am sorry Richard got some of my overflow of grief from its original state.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 13:41, 11 July 2009 (EDT)

== An interesting mission..... ==

I have an article I don't quite know what to do with....

[[Last_Thursdayism]] is pretty much a useless piece of junk, as it is. Looking at the history it was originally created by vandal site members, and I suppose was intended to be a clever piece of parody. It isn't. They were going for something on the ''Omphalos Hypothesis'', and attaching a too pop culture name to it. [http://books.google.com/books?id=acwQAAAAIAAJ Omphalos: An Attempt to Untie the Geological Knot], written by Philip H. Gosse, a Creationist, was his attempt to explain some technical points of Creation. His effort preceded Darwin's own, opposite hypothesis by several years, as I remember. I propose to re-name the article to "Omphalos". If you are versed in this topic, or it interests you, could you please flesh this out, and I will then move it to a more correct title? Thanks, Daniel. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 13:10, 11 July 2009 (EDT)

:Thanks for thinking of me worthy to perhaps handle it, but that is really not my area, as this high school graduate/former trucker driver deals mostly with Biblical issues, and ideological moral conflicts and history. I do know someone whom i have tried before to enlist in CP, and who i think would be an asset in this area, and maybe i can enlist his help. But the way, most everytime i look at the bible and homosexual interpretation page i see things which need correcting, both related to what was discussed in the past and flow, etc., and as i hope things are better understood now i hope to be able to edit it again soon. Thanks. Today its out to the garden, seeing as "Global Cooling" has slowed things down for now. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 14:09, 11 July 2009 (EDT)

::Indeed! My cukes are as slow as molasses this year, along with the tomatoes and peppers.... :-( Thanks for reminding me of that article, which I will now go unlock. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 14:26, 11 July 2009 (EDT)

Thanks!! Just got back and we are making progress (as are the weeds). 2nd cloudiest and 4th coldest June on record here. So much for GW here. But the real GW that people need to fear is that which the Bible predicts, (Rv. 16:5) and which Al Gore cannot stop.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 21:59, 11 July 2009 (EDT)

:Neat weather map - U.S. climate at a glance: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/regional.html And the CAPTCHA was 10 spinach![[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 17:08, 21 July 2009 (EDT)

== Quran versus the Bible ==

Would you have any objection to breaking out your excellent contribution to its own page? --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 22:32, 10 August 2009 (EDT)

:No, and praise God for any warranted compliment. I see you are on the ball also and work late! But i do not know if i would add much more to what i have placed on the Quran page. Maybe because its 90 degrees (answered prayer) and i am also often fatigued.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 22:47, 10 August 2009 (EDT)

::Daniel, Ovid said: '''"Take a rest; a field that has rested gives a bountiful crop."''' And we read in Exodus: 33:14 where The Lord says: '''"My presence will go with you, and I will give you rest."''' Always remember a bountiful crop is desirable in the eyes of The Lord, so take care to always rest yourself; the coming battle will not be for the fatigued. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 01:13, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

:::Thanks. I am not sure what is wrong, but for some years time i have been realizing increasing inordinate fatigue, especially mentally, and much reduced attention span. So i need to learn to exchange my weakness for God's strength better, as well as continue to pray. And in so doing i plan to do the suggested article.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 09:42, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

::::But what i want to even more is a page on moral decline, in particular, that of America, which i have been cataloging for many years now: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/RevealingStatistics.html New stats relative to this: http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/16-teensnext-gen/25-young-adults-and-liberals-struggle-with-morality Even the Democratic [[DANIEL PATRICK MOYNIHAN]] warned of "Defining Deviancy Down" If you think that would be a viable page, what could i title it? Western moral decline might be apt, as it could include the U.K. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 10:21, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

Such a cataloging would be encyclopedic, approaching book size, and has, with Wil and Ariel Durant, I believe, a dozen volumes or so. Although not even really touching on the actual moral quagmire of man. I wouldn't lump the U.K. in the the U.S. Different dynamic there, and totally different religious forces at work there. How about a series, linked to the main country articles, for the U.S. and U.K., and other western countries? That way the treatment can be more concise and relevant to the country. Remember, too long, too long on detail, people don't read it all.....such is the reality of online encyclopedia's. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 16:19, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

Yes, moral decline as a main subject, with different nations as subsets sounds reasonable. And i acknowledge my occasional tendency to prolixity. Esp. with ideological subjects in which much fallacious flack has been launched against Bible truth. God was thorough in dealing with the Canaanites, but His word conveys an abundance of truth with an economy of words. May we do likewise by His Spirit.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 20:57, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

BTW, does CP have an article on the Christian heritage of America?[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 21:59, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

==Making a real contribution==

I like this Teddy Roosevelt quote. [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Theodore_Roosevelt&curid=10124&diff=691825&oldid=690100&rcid=757767] Should we add it to our guidelines? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 12:32, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

:Maybe even just, ''The function of the mere critic is of very subordinate usefulness. It is the doer of deeds who actually counts in the battle for life, and not the man who looks on and says how the fight ought to be fought, without himself sharing the stress and the danger.''

:Oddly enough, i came across similar quote while searching on Islamic issues. When i see something useful i try to add it to a CP page.

:Here are other ones i added to the [[Theodore Roosevelt]] page:

:''A thorough knowledge of the Bible is worth more than a college education.''

:''...any nation which in its youth lives only for the day, reaps without sowing, and consumes without husbanding, must expect the penalty of the prodigal whose labor could with difficulty find him the bare means of life.''

:''The only man who makes no mistakes is the man who never does anything.''

:''A thorough knowledge of the Bible is worth more than a college education.''

''To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society.''

:''Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.'' (and some make T.R. [[liberal]])

:''It is better to be faithful than famous.''

:''A man who has never gone to school may steal from a freight car; but if he has a university education, he may steal the whole railroad.''

:More here: http://www.answers.com/topic/quote-4?author=Roosevelt,%20Theodore&s2=Theodore%20Roosevelt[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 17:43, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

==Quotes==
One thing I've found out about quotes... most are fakes. RJJensen suggested I use Google Books as a source for quotes. Most quotes published are accurate, though not 100%, as I found with Thomas Jefferson. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 17:49, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

:I do use Google books a lot, but none of them have been loading the past couple of days or so. However the majority of these quotes are accredited to ''The Works of Theodore Roosevelt - National Edition, H-BAR Enterprises'', and are from the www.theodoreroosevelt.org/ site, which also has the church quotes, so they are not exactly fly by night. Britannica Online Encyclopedia had "if we educate a man's mind but not his heart..."[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 21:58, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

== Password ==
Hi, saw your post to Andy's talk page about the temp password request. You posted the password itself -- you'd better log in and choose a permanent password if you haven't already, or else someone else can use the temporary one to take over your account. Perhaps you've already done this -- just a heads-up in case not! Several others got this email too and TK says to ignore it if it keeps happening. Cheers, --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 14:41, 11 October 2009 (EDT)

: I misread "set" as "sent" to... and being alerted by you, I signed out and signed in using the posted pword, and then changed it back to the original and it works as before. Sorry for my error, and thank for the '''quick''' action. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 14:55, 11 October 2009 (EDT)

== Beliefs - [[Scientology]] ==

Please edit the information and I will add it for you! --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 08:33, 29 October 2009 (EDT)

: Done. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 07:59, 30 October 2009 (EDT)

::Thanks. It does not go too much into doctrine, as how it operates says more about what it effective believes than the spiritual ethos of Hubbard's science fiction, which, consistent with his stated motive (according to two sources) serves as a means to an end, that of Scientology's gain of possessions and power. The religious doctrine of Scientology is sufficiently outlandish that little should need to be said on it, and the Further Reading section has links which pertain to that. Any benefit from that program is due to the use of Biblical principals, primarily that of being able to talk at debt to someone and get some counsel, and gain a perfect condition, but in Scientology that comes at ever increasing prices, (I think Christian counselors who charge 80-100 bucks an hours for their "ministry" are also wrong), and the clear condition. Once hooked, the Scientology client begins an ever increasing series of "auditing" sessions and courses in order to achieve a "clear" state, which is not moral heart purity and Christ-likeness, but a psychological goal, and which "carrot" Scientology continually keeps just out of reach of the client in order to get more money, and that which it purchases. Seeing as that is the goal of Scientology, it is not wonder the Hubbard directed his workers to go after celebrities. And given the suppression (or lack) of conscience which is typically required of those employed by Hollywood, and the focus upon personal attainment in Scientology, as well as the minimal requirements for humility, contrition and moral repentance, it is no wonder they are attracted to Scientology, and the lifestyle it supports.

It is manifestly evident that, in heart as well as in doctrine, Scientology is antithetical to Christ. Relatively few former Scientologists seem to come to repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus, but here is quite a testimony, praise be to God. http://www.christianindex.org/1468.article [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 19:44, 30 October 2009 (EDT)

== Interesting, for your use ==

[http://www.examiner.com/x-9111-SF-Environmental-Policy-Examiner~y2009m5d7-Global-warming-common-sense-and-expert-opinion] --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 17:14, 20 December 2009 (EST)

::Thanks, but outside of his testimony, I do not think his article or case is substantial enough. Will keep an eye out though for more on the cooling of Global warming. Which we could use now! God's Global Warming (2Pet. 3) is the "warming" that the world needs to fear.

BTW, see the new quotes by Gen. [[Douglas MacArthur]]. "History fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to moral decay have not passed in to political and economic decline."[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 20:38, 21 December 2009 (EST)

== Apology ==

Daniel,

It was brought to my attention that you were blocked a short time ago, which I promptly reversed. The sanction was invalid on its face and contrary to established policy. I sincerely hope that this did not interfere with your work and does not cause you irreparable harm. Please accept my apologies, both as a senior Administrator and on the behalf of Conservapedia for this deeply distressing action.

Shalom,

[[User:Geo.plrd|Geoff Plourde]][[User_talk:Geo.plrd|Complain!]] 02:15, 10 January 2010 (EST) 
--<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 02:17, 10 January 2010 (EST)

:Yes, I must apologize for that block. I read an edit of yours with a word mix-up I interpreted to be parody, but upon a further review of your edits, it becomes clear to anybody that you are a valuable contributor and that your edits are in good faith.
:Please forgive me for my hasty actions! [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 13:15, 10 January 2010 (EST)

::Anyone can make a mistake, Daniel. Don't hold a grudge; I too have done hasty actions and had to repent. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 16:09, 10 January 2010 (EST)

No grudge at all, i did not even know i was blocked till i thought about adding these quotes by Wernher von Braun:

When he and his rocket team surrendered to the Americans (choosing them over the Russians) in 1945:

"We knew that we had created a new means of warfare, and the question as to what nation, to what victorious nation we were willing to entrust this brainchild of ours was a moral decision more than anything else. We wanted to see the world spared another conflict such as Germany had just been through, and we felt that only by surrendering such a weapon to people who are guided by the Bible could such an assurance to the world be best secured."

However, i can only ind 2 sources for the quote, and they conflict. [http://www.tell-usa.org/totl/0-Introduction.htm#_edn1a] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun#cite_note-60

Likewise, regarding Adolf Hitler:

"I began to see the shape of the man - his brilliance, the tremendous force of personality. It gripped you somehow. But also you could see his flaw — he was wholly without scruples, a godless man who thought himself the only god, the only authority he needed."

Only WP has a source for the above, and i do not want to copy from them.

More on him and his later Christian faith here, which otherwise is left out of the WP article.
http://www.icr.org/articles/view/3770/313/ http://www.creationsafaris.com/wgcs_4vonbraun.htm http://www.adherents.com/people/pv/Wernher_von_Braun.html

BTW, do you why this page is constantly loading?It never fully loads and keeps at it.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 21:51, 10 January 2010 (EST)

:No idea at all, other than the server is sometimes slow due to the vandal site members. Try hitting the stop button if its loading too often. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 22:03, 10 January 2010 (EST)

::What Firefox did was refresh the page enough so that your new post and editing was available, but it kept trying to load more of the page. Refreshing it again (F5) did the same thing. I signed in on IE8 (much less preferred) and it does not do it, nor does FF do it once now that i am signed out. I'll switch back to FF now and see if it fixes it.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 14:06, 11 January 2010 (EST)

:::I did not have to log in again on FF as i thought i would after logging in on IE, and but when i post anew it does the perpetual load again. Must be Global Warming, or former Pres. George Bush's fault. I'll work on it more.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 14:12, 11 January 2010 (EST)

::::Cleared cache and cookies, logged in again, and that fixed it. Thank God. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 14:15, 11 January 2010 (EST)

== Article you posted with list of Haitian leaders--racist much? ==

Daniel, did you read the last line of the article before the list of Haiti's rulers? "Of course, we need not look as far as Haiti to understand the link between race and civilization, and what it means for America. Haiti is nothing more than Camden or East St. Louis writ large, and without the surrounding white society to support it. Africans remake Africa wherever they may go." I hardly think CP should want to link to such an article. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 00:05, 18 January 2010 (EST)
:Wow, I just read that organization's [http://www.amren.com/siteinfo/readers_guide.html "Reader's Guide"] page. Nasty stuff indeed. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 00:08, 18 January 2010 (EST)

::No i did not! Refs to this will be removed pronto. Thank God you caught that.I am not racists, but it was late when i saw some information posted on FreeRepublic that i thought would be helpful to a very present subject of interest, but i should have vetted the original source better before referencing it, though i usually reluctant to even ref. the liberal BBC. Good night/morning.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 00:46, 18 January 2010 (EST)

:::No problem Daniel, thanks for cleaning it up, and to AlexWD for noticing it. While most of the information was good, their editorial POV certainly wasn't Christian! --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 01:44, 18 January 2010 (EST)

::::Thank God, it was to my horror when i realized what i linked to. God "hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth," and i don't care what color a man's skin, but religion and ideology are the real issues. “America, America, God shed His grace on thee” is so true. The foundation of a country, and its leaders, is so critical, and Divine providence was so manifest in ours. Also critical is how the succeeding generations are raised as well.

::::As far as what is good is concerned, we here have much entered into other man's Godly and God-inspired labors and wisdom, and some seek to preserve such. The heritage of Haitians is decidedly and tragically different. While i have never been able to document by reliable sources the "that the nation of Haiti was dedicated to Satan 200 years ago", the former "gem of the Caribbean" has evidenced the devil's influence, who comes to steal, kill and destroy. But idolatry is the mother of all sins, and as judgment happens, America is not immune, even according as Jesus said. (Lk. 13:3)

Along ideological lines, here is a recent work you may find interesting: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Statistical_Correlations.html[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 08:54, 18 January 2010 (EST)

== Ref tagger ==

Your concerns are best addressed by posting to the Webmaster's page, Daniel. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 21:32, 25 January 2010 (EST)

:: You mean the owners? A long time ago you had recommended Iduan in relation to this, though the issue was not clear, and so I looked him up. But you sure are on top of things (fast)! BTW, how do i get "moral decline" to redirect to [[Moral degeneration]]? [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 21:49, 25 January 2010 (EST)

== Good article work ==

That's an enormous amount of material you just put together. Well done! [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 19:00, 16 March 2010 (EDT)

:Praise God for whatever is good. Went over my requested 500 words (though much smaller than [[Homosexuality and_biblical interpretation]], but more could be said in refuting the determinative argument that is popular today. I did not look at the other CP info on Causes... but i can add some from there. Pray and press. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 19:59, 16 March 2010 (EDT)

== Impressive additions to the article! ==

Good job!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 18:16, 27 July 2011 (EDT)

That was quick! But it was a rush job, and i hope to add more, but thank God if it helps provide a fuller view of Andrew's character, and his contrast to Christ.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 18:26, 27 July 2011 (EDT)

Please do continue! I am a member of the Featured Article committee and may propose your article for featuring. Actually, [[Elvis Presley|an article I have done significant work on]] has been proposed by another editor. I hope you do continuing your work on this article! We could also try and get an image or two.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 18:34, 27 July 2011 (EDT)

:It needs a history section, etc., but in the next two days i need to get to something else. As for you Elvis, i cannot glory in him overall, but the outcome of his life is sad. He had a heart for God, but serving two masters kills us..[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 18:53, 27 July 2011 (EDT)
::No problem! Take your time, and work on the article when you please. Yes, the outcome of Elvis' life was sad, but he just had a few problems. I believe though, that he is with the Lord now, but no one knows for sure. Good job on your article so far and keep going when you get the time.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 19:02, 27 July 2011 (EDT)

:::I added some more, but my main interest was dealing with the aspect of the supposed evangelical, fundamental Christian link, based upon some shared values, which all different groups have to some degree, but Brievik was opposed to fundamental Christianity, and the "Christian culture" he wanted would be opposed to it, while Brievik himself is fundamentally contrary to Christ and N.T. Christianity. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 19:59, 29 July 2011 (EDT)
::::Good! As you can see, I now have nominated your article for featuring!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 20:03, 29 July 2011 (EDT)

:::::I would not consider it so, as it is limited. See [[Moral decline]] sometime. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 15:56, 30 July 2011 (EDT)
::::::Very good. Maybe I will consider it for nomination sometime.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 11:46, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

== NY Times article ==

Man, the "most prestigious paper in America" is nothing more than a big joke. Interesting find.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 11:45, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

== Congratulations ==

Your account has been granted blocking privileges!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:09, 15 November 2011 (EST)

:Whatever that means, but I used to play football. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 07:58, 18 November 2011 (EST)

== I added your material to the Conservapedia homosexuality article ==

Daniel1212, I added your material from ''The Atlantic'' article to the Conservapedia [[homosexuality]] article. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:32, 29 December 2012 (EST)

== Talk homosexuality page ==

Hello, [[User:Conservative]] recommended that I speak with you about possible changes to the homosexuality page, see [[Talk:Homosexuality]]. I was reorganizing the material, moving everything into categories and removing redundant references.[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexuality&action=historysubmit&diff=1135467&oldid=1134830] Let me know what you think. My goal was to reduce page sections so the Table of Contents is more readable. --[[User:JZambrano|Joshua Zambrano]] 00:29, 26 January 2015 (EST)

== A bot with username Minuteman blocked you. It was nothing personal! LOL. I unblocked you. ==

A bot with the username Minuteman blocked you. It was nothing personal! LOL. I unblocked you.

Keep up the good work.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:50, 5 May 2019 (EDT)

:You beat me to it--thanks Conservative! As he said, it's nothing against you. "Buttigieg‎" is an unfortunate last name for both the owner, and data analytics. Sorry about that! --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 15:52, 5 May 2019 (EDT)

::I was trying to get more yardage but I was blocked by a bot!

::But the Buttigieg‎ article should get more material since the media is pushing him more than Biden. I see him as the primary candidate of the Left, unless marital problems or some real scandal and lack of support from blacks dictates differently. And if he gets in, then the Left will really work as proxy servants of the devil to compel saluting the flag of Sodom, etc.
::For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. (Ephesians 6:12) Daniel1212 16:34, 5 May 2019 (EDT)

:::Please continue! You shouldn't have any further problems from Minuteman. Again, sorry about that. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 17:08, 5 May 2019 (EDT)

== Needs better and more logical and consistent structuring==

This article provides much what WP or other liberal sources do not, or allow. However, it needs better and more logical and consistent structuring as an encyclopedic article, which I hope to somewhat provide.Daniel1212 10:18, 22 November 2019 (EST)
==Want to add sidebar images==
These two:
https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/images/group/gender/men/2020/cdc-hiv-men-diagnoses-bar-graph-700x318.png
https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/images/group/age/youth/cdc-hiv-youth-sex-700x698.png
Daniel1212 05:33, November 24, 2021 (EST)

User talk:Daniel1212

2021-11-24T10:33:13Z

Daniel1212: /* Needs better and more logical and consistent structuring */

Homosexual Agenda

2021-11-24T10:29:41Z

Daniel1212: /* Strategies and psychological tactics */ More material

{{Homosexuality}}
The '''Homosexual Agenda''' is a self-centered set of beliefs and objectives designed to mandate approval of [[homosexuality]] and its ideology. The goals and means of this movement include indoctrinating students in [[public school]], restricting the free speech of opposition, obtaining [[special rights|special treatment]] for homosexuals, distorting [[Bible|Biblical]] teaching and science, and interfering with freedom of association. Advocates of the homosexual agenda seek special rights for [[homosexuals]] and self-described "LGBTQ people" that other people don't have, such as immunity from criticism (see [[hate speech]], [[hate crime]]s).<ref>Such special rights will necessarily [[zero-sum game|come at the expense]] of the rights of broader society.</ref> '''''The homosexual agenda is the biggest threat to the rights of [[free speech]] and [[religious freedom]] today.'''''<ref>Daniels, Fletch (September 10, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/the-lgbt-endgame-is-to-destroy-christianity The LGBT endgame is to destroy Christianity]. ''LifeSiteNews'' (from the ''American Thinker''). Retrieved September 10, 2019.</ref><ref>Duke, Selwyn (September 11, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/item/33387-lgbt-activists-hate-christianity-and-want-to-destroy-it LGBT Activists Hate Christianity — and Want to Destroy It]. ''The New American''. Retrieved September 11, 2019.</ref><ref>In 2020, more than 10% (90 out of 879) of the featured characters on scripted primetime television programs are openly [[LGBTQ]], an attempt by the pro-LGBTQ producers of those shows to deceitfully push the discredited claim that "10%" of the population is homosexual when, in fact, less than 2% of the population actually identify as such.</ref>

One of the top priorities of the Homosexual Agenda is to prohibit and outlaw [[conversion therapy]]. Activities like [[baseball]] and [[chess]] reduce homosexual proclivities, while other activities like figure skating for men and soccer for women seem to encourage homosexuality.
[[Leftists]] are pushing unconstitutional bans on conversion therapy, apparently unable to tolerate things they dislike. Their priorities include electing high-ranking officials who are openly homosexual, with the ultimate goal of electing a president who is in a [[same-sex marriage]], like the top [[Dem]] fundraising candidate [[Pete Buttigieg]] in 2020.

In a speech on December 10, 2013, to a pro-family rally in [[Jamaica]], a country that rejects same-sex "marriage", Brian Camenker of [[MassResistance]] outlined the step-by-step approach of the homosexual agenda:<ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen2/13d/jamaica-speech-121013/index.html "MassResistance helps Jamaica confront ‘gay’ agenda"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

*Legalize homosexuality
*Hold "gay pride" parades
*Accept child sex trafficking
*Demand non-discrimination laws
*Insist on homosexuals' adoption of children
*Push the homosexual agenda in schools<ref>{{cite web |title=Criticism of Transgender Agenda Will Get Virginia Students Expelled |author=Austin Ruse |date=10 Jun 2016 |url=https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/10/transgender-northern-virginia-students-can-now-expelled-criticizing-transgenderism/ |publisher=BREITBART |quote=The transgender change in school regulations was imposed last night during a dramatic board meeting where only 12 pro-trans witnesses were invited to testify. ... No opposing voices were allowed to be heard, parents were relegated to shouting opposition from the seats and some were ejected from the meeting.... Last year, they were promised a lengthy investigation and a full hearing. Instead, it was foisted upon them with less than 24 hours-notice. ... an Oregon law recently allowed a jury to award $60,000 t0 a transgender teacher because other teachers declined to use the teacher’s preferred pronoun, which is “they” rather than “him” or “her.” Deputies for President Barack Obama have backed similar rules for all K-12 schools, and New York City has established similar forced-speech rules.|accessdate=12 Jun 2016}}</ref>
*Legalize various alternate forms of partnership and call them "marriage" (i.e. man and man, woman and woman, man and multiple women)
*Demand public funding to deal with increased homosexual-related social problems
*Promote the [[gender confusion]] agenda
*Demand to be treated "equally"
*Impose a large-scale loss of free speech
*Ban counseling for kids confused by homosexual issues
*[[Drag queen]] story times to indoctrinate children
*Ban scientifically and religiously proven methods of homosexual conversion
*Attack churches
*Encourage [[abortion]]

[[Russia]] is a leader in rejecting the homosexual agenda.<ref>{{cite web |title=Is the Homosexual Agenda 'Unstoppable'? - Comparing America with Russia |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msLH6f6vyC4 |accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=RUSSIA VS. THE LGBT GLOBALISTS: A Climate of Hate and Fear |url=http://www.scottlively.net/2015/02/25/russia-vs-the-lgbt-globalists-a-climate-of-hate-and-fear-part-two/ |quote=This dangerous LGBT strategy has now gone global and the target is the Russian Federation. ... Core American values to Obama are publicly celebrated sodomy and doctor-assisted transsexual self-mutilation. ... The Russian anti-propaganda law, passed June 11, 2013, was the first truly effective international counter-measure since the “gay” agenda went global around the turn of the millennium. Typically, the “gays” characterized the law as hateful and an incitement to violence, but in doing so they revealed that propagandizing children is part of their agenda, since the law simply classifies “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relationships” as material that cannot be distributed among minors and commands the government to protect children from it. Just after the passage of this law Barack Obama did an about-face on the “reset” policy (in which Russia had been recognized as an equal partner in the world community) and instead began reviving cold-war rhetoric.|accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Pro-Russian Press Conference |date=22 February 2014 |url=http://www.scottlively.net/2014/02/22/pro-russian-press-conference/ |quote=We got lots of coverage from the event, and I believe we accomplished our objective which was to bring awareness to the world that the pro-family movement in the U.S., Canada, UK, and other “pro-gay” countries is happy to see the Russian Federation standing up for family values. We think this will encourage other nations to follow their example. |accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref> For example, Russia banned adoption by Americans as the Obama Administration aggressively pushed the homosexual agenda, and in June 2013 a house in the [[Russian]] parliament passed legislation to ban foreign adoption by gay couples or single parents who live in any [[same-sex marriage|gay marriage]] nation.<ref>[https://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-russia-ban-adoption-gay-couples-20130618,0,4633280.story "Russian lawmakers pass ban on adoption tied to gay foreign couples"]. ''Los Angeles Times''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

[[Barack Hussein Obama]], [[Hillary Clinton]], and essentially all [[Democratic Party|Democrat]] politicians now advocate the homosexual agenda, reflecting the growing financial power of the homosexual network. Obama's self-centered obsession with his own re-election, and fundraising for his campaign, has caused him to create a national political issue out of this, rather than deal with other issues like the economy. Many [[establishment]] Republicans and [[Cafeteria Christians]] also have bought into the homosexual agenda.

'''''Among all the [[liberal]] belief systems, the homosexual ideology is the most self-centered or selfish''''' – unlike the vast charity performed by thousands of churches in the U.S. alone, a homosexual charity can be considered an [[oxymoron]].

The late Supreme Court Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] referred to the "so-called homosexual agenda" in ''[[Lawrence v. Texas]]'', 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (dissenting opinion). Justice Scalia also predicted that this was the first step to legalizing homosexual civil unions. He was proven right with the outcome of ''[[Obergefell v. Hodges]]''. The goal of the latter decision was the societal affirmation of homosexuality rather than simple equality.<ref>Williams, Thomas D. (January 5, 2020). [https://www.breitbart.com/education/2020/01/05/usa-today-obergefell-was-never-about-freedom-to-marry/ USA Today: Obergefell Was Never About ‘Freedom to Marry’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved January 5, 2020.</ref>

Despite the fact that only 4.1% of the U.S. population identified as [[LGBT]], just over half a percentage point higher than four years prior,<ref>Gates, Gary J. (January 11, 2017). [https://www.gallup.com/poll/201731/lgbt-identification-rises.aspx In US, More Adults Identifying as LGBT]. ''Gallup''. Retrieved January 18, 2017.</ref> Americans '''''greatly overestimate the proportion of homosexuals''''' in the nation to be an average of 23%.<ref name="GreatlyOver">Newport, Frank (May 21, 2015). [https://www.gallup.com/poll/183383/americans-greatly-overestimate-percent-gay-lesbian.aspx Americans Greatly Overestimate Percent Gay, Lesbian in U.S.] ''Gallup''. Retrieved January 18, 2017. See also:
*Mainwaring, Doug (June 28, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/americans-vastly-overestimate-the-size-of-the-lgbt-population Americans vastly overestimate the size of the LGBT population]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved June 28, 2019.</ref> Interestingly, Republicans and conservatives gave estimates closest to the actual number.<ref name="GreatlyOver"/>

== The Homosexual Agenda ==
Joseph P. Gudel, in ''That Which is Unnatural''<ref>[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0108a.html "That Which is Unnatural" Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture] Part Two in a Two-Part Series on Homosexuality, from the Christian Research Journal, Winter 1993, page 8</ref> contended that the homosexual movement,

:has been militantly demanding not just the homosexuals' right to do whatever they wish to do behind closed doors, but, more importantly, that society fully accept their lifestyle as both healthy and normal, even demanding special rights and legislation as an "oppressed minority." Gudel quotes various sources evidencing this.

In a 1987 speech to the National Press Club in Washington, homosexual spokesperson Jeff Levi proclaimed,

:We are no longer seeking just a right to privacy and a protection from wrong. We also have a right — as heterosexual Americans already have — to see government and society affirm our lives.<ref>Jeff Levi, in William Dannemeyer, Shadow in the Land (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1989), 86.</ref>

In an article entitled "Gays on the March" in 1975, Time magazine quoted lesbian activist Barbara Gittings who stated:

:What the homosexual wants, and here he is neither willing to compromise nor morally required to compromise — is acceptance of homosexuality as a way of life fully on a par with heterosexuality." In response, Time opined, "It is one thing to remove legal discrimination against homosexuals. It is another to mandate approval....It is this goal of full acceptance, which no known society past or present has granted to homosexuals, that makes many Americans apprehensive.<ref>Gays on the March," Time, 8 Sept. 1975, 43</ref>

A primary goal of the homosexual agenda is to normalize the lifestyle in [[public schools]]. This occurred quickly and intensely after same-sex "marriage" was illegally imposed in Massachusetts, where homosexual relationships are taught to children as young as kindergartners, as recounted by the decision of ''[[Parker v. Hurley]]''.<ref>The ''Parker v. Hurley'' decision explained, "In January 2005, when Jacob Parker ("Jacob") was in kindergarten, he brought home a 'Diversity Book Bag.' This included a picture book, ''Who's in a Family?'', which depicted different families, including single-parent families, an extended family, interracial families, animal families, a family without children, and — to the concern of the Parkers — a family with two dads and a family with two moms. The book concludes by answering the question, 'Who's in a family?': 'The people who love you the most!' The book says nothing about marriage."</ref>

In a 1992 report by John Leo in U.S. News & World Report, he notes some books which were part of New York City's public school curriculum.

The first-grade book, ''Children of the Rainbow'', stated on page 145, which states that teachers must "be aware of varied family structures, including...gay or lesbian parents," and "children must be taught to acknowledge the positive aspects of each type of household." Another children book is Heather Has Two Mommies, which is about a lesbian couple having a child through artificial insemination. Another book, ''Gloria Goes to Gay Pride'', states, "Some women love women, some men love men, some women and men love each other. That's why we march in the parade, so everyone can have a choice."

Leo commented,

:A line is being crossed here; in fact, a brand new ethic is descending upon the city's public school system. The traditional civic virtue of tolerance (if gays want to live together, it's their own business) has been replaced with a new ethic requiring approval and endorsement (if gays want to live together, we must 'acknowledge the positive aspects' of their way of life).<ref>John Leo, "Heather Has a Message," U.S. News & World Report, 17 Aug. 1992, 16.</ref>

Dr. Judith A. Reisman in her extensive ''Crafting “Gay” Children'',<ref>http://www.defendthefamily.com/_docs/resources/6390601.pdf</ref> reports that Harvard homosexual Toby Morotta, PhD, stated that in the 1970s, members of the Gay Activists Alliance - who were trained in the “zapping" of any who rebuffed homosexuality.<ref>Toby Marotta: THE POLITICS OF HOMOSEXUALITY: HOW LESBIANS AND GAY MEN HAVE MADE THEMSELVES A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL FORCE IN MODERN AMERICA, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1981 at 319</ref> And that these formed the “Gay Academic Union,” (GAU) which was made up of faculty and students in major universities. She states that the GAU has long fought for domination of its worldview within the academic community, and professional journals commonly assigned GAU and other homosexual peer reviewers to research touching on homosexuality, generally resulting in a quick death to possible unfavorable findings.<ref>See extensive reports in regular NARTH Bulletins as well as Ray Johnson, “American Psychology: The Political Science, at 53-57.</ref>

This and the general agenda is seen to be overall implementing a marketing strategy explained in a book called ''After the Ball,'' by [[gay rights]] activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in the late 1980s, in which a six-point plan was set forth as to how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior in a decade-long time frame:
:"The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior." <ref name="Winn07252003">''After the Ball'' (1989), quoted from Winn, Pete (7-25-2003) [ ''Q&A: The Homosexual Agenda''] Citizenlink</ref> "Thus propagandistic advertising can depict all opponents of the gay movement as homophobic bigots who are 'not Christian' and the propaganda can further show them [[homosexuals]] as being criticized, hated and shunned..."<ref>After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's, by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen (Author) (p. 152-153)</ref>

[[Focus on the Family]] provides additional quotes from ''After the Ball'', outlining key points of the homosexual agenda:<ref name="Winn07252003"/><ref>Kirk, Marshall K. and Erastes Pill (11-1987) ''The Overhauling of Straight America'' Available at [http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/overhauling.htm ''STRATEGIES OF THE HOMOSEXUAL MOVEMENT: "The Overhauling of Straight America"'']</ref>

#"Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible." (They use late night air waves and special channels, as well as their right to peacefully assemble to do so.)
#"Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers."
#"Give homosexual protectors a just cause."
#"Make gays look good."
#"Make the victimizers look bad."
#"Get funds from corporate America."

[[United States Supreme Court]] Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] wrote:
{{cquote|Today's opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=02-102#dissent1 ''LAWRENCE et al. v. TEXAS''] at findlaw.com</ref>}}

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vic_Eliason Vic Eliason] of [http://www.crosstalkamerica.com Crosstalk America] rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies.

== Specific goals ==
The goals of the homosexual movement include:

#Ignoring Christian morals and discouraging religiously based laws.
#Attempting to convince the world that marriage should be defined secularly, instead of as one of the Lord's commandments.
#Ignore the clear message of the [[Bible]] that [[homosexuality]] is a sin and an abomination unto [[God]] because their First Amendment rights allow them to.
#Remind conservatives that there cannot be a "gay ([[homosexual attraction]]) gene", just like like there cannot be a "black gene" because complex things like these are caused by complex interactions between genes.
#Censoring evidence that the "gay gene" is a hoax. After all, it would have to be multiple genes interacting together.<ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08a/born_gay_hoax/smith_0329/index.html ''Lesbian activists at Smith College riot, shut down Ryan Sorba speech on "The Born Gay Hoax" as police watch. See exclusive videos.''] Mass Resistance</ref>
#Censoring speech against homosexuality by branding it to be "hate-speech"<ref>[http://www.silencingchristians.com Video:Silencing Christians]</ref><ref>[http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2009/06/homosexuality-its-crime-in-england-to.html "Marquette Warrior"]. ''mu-warrior.blogspot.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[http://www.ccfon.org/view.php?id=745 Bishops fight for right to criticize homosexual lifestyle, 25th May 2009]</ref>
#Censoring biblical statements condemning homosexuality<ref>White, Hilary (04-21-2006) [http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/apr/06042105.html ''Court Upholds School Ban on "Homosexuality is Shameful" T-Shirt''] LifeSiteNews.com</ref>
#Lobbying for equal employment rights.<ref>The Crimson Staff (10-13-2006) [http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=514950 ''A Box of Their Own?''] (opinion) The Crimson</ref><ref>http://www.afa.net, Homosexual Agenda Platforms from 1972 - 2000</ref>
#Expand hate crimes legislation to include sexual orientation, which would be equally wrong for heterosexuals to do.<ref>Pelosi, Nancy Office of (09-28-2004) [http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/Sept04/HateCrimes092804.html ''Pelosi: "Hate Crimes Prevention Legislation is Right Thing to Do, Long Overdue"''] From the office of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi</ref>
#Ending the military's and Boy Scouts' restrictions on homosexuality<ref>''Boy Scouts of Am. v. Dale'', 530 U.S. 640 (2000) (Boy Scouts); "Matlovich v. Secretary of the Air Force (591 F.2d 852, DC Circ. 1 978) (military)</ref>
#Stopping children as young as 5 years old from attending therapy to repair their sexual preference<ref>[http://www.thetaskforce.org/reports_and_research/youth_in_the_crosshairs National Gay and Lesbian Task Force:Youth in the Crosshairs]</ref>
#Teach tolerance of homosexuals in schools.
#In places like Massachusetts and California, where the homosexual lobby is the strongest, it starts as early as preschool. They tell seven- or eight-year-old boys, "If you only like boys, there's a chance you may be homosexual," or "If you only like girls, maybe you are lesbian." Children at that age also do not have the hormones to experience sexual attraction, so they cannot understand this yet.
#Demands protections from job discrimination.<ref>[http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/nondiscrimination/ENDA_main_page Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) | National Gay and Lesbian Task Force]</ref>
#Suing an online dating website for discrimination. This was because sexual orientation is a federally protected group, as such, this company was claimed to be "breaking" the law.<ref>Joshua Rhett Miller. [https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,454904,00.html "eHarmony to Provide Gay Dating Service After Lawsuit"]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>
#Undermining the [[Essay:Quantifying Mental Strength|resolve]] of [[Homosexuality and choice#Choice and Genetics|latent homosexuals]] so that their will becomes too weak to resist the temptations of homosexuality<ref>http://www.thetaskforce.org/activist_center/resources_and_tools/challenge_exgay</ref>
#Pushing for legalized adoption by homosexual individuals and couples<ref>http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/parenting_and_family</ref>
#Indoctrination of public school children to support the homosexual agenda
#Allowing boys into girls' restrooms and vice versa, without restriction.

The state-by-state push for same-sex "marriage" can be viewed as a means to the above goals, or a goal in itself.<ref>[[Lewis v. Harris]]</ref> An example of this would be the recent New Hampshire law that makes same-sex civil unions "legal".<ref>[http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/06/01/new_hampshire_law_makes_same_sex_civil_unions_legal/ "New Hampshire law makes same-sex civil unions legal"]. ''boston.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Although notable gains toward achieving its goals continue to manifest, homosexual activists later began been expressing a high level of dissatisfaction with the [[Obama regime]]. Commenting on such, Massresistance.org, an organization which opposes the homosexual agenda in [[Massachusetts]], noted that Obama had,

*signed an order extending federal benefits to same-sex partners.
*pushed an extreme hate crimes bill in Congress.
*declared his intention to repeal the Defense of Marriage.
*pushed a pro-homosexual and transgender version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
*appointed homosexual activists to high level positions, including Harry Knox, of the homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign, and Kevin Jennings, founder of the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which educates kids in the public schools.
*declared February to be "Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month."
*demanded the State Department allow homosexual couples to use their married names (from marriages or civil unions) on US passports.<ref>update@massresistance.org 6/24/2009 11:56 PM</ref>

In Europe, countries such as the [[United Kingdom]] and [[France]] have adopted policies promoting gender confusion.<ref>Friedman, Victoria (February 15, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/02/15/france-mother-father-parent-uk-govt-lawyer-mother-not-gender-specific/ Men Can Be Mothers in UK, While French Schools Erase Terms ‘Father,’ ‘Mother’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved February 15, 2019.</ref>

=== Strategies and psychological tactics ===
Homosexual activists are often seen as engaging in [[homosexual logic|specious argumentation]], such as attempts to controvert the consistent teaching of the Bible on homosexual relations (see [[homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]), and using false analogies, in order to gain acceptance of homosexuality. One common argument used by homosexual activists seeks to compare their quest for equal rights to that of others.<ref>Miner, Homosexuality, Civil Rights, and the Church</ref> This argument is countered by the observation that blacks were able to peacefully argue that mankind should not be "judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character",<ref>[http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm, Speech by Martin Luther King Jr.]</ref> as the former yields no certain moral distinction. In contrast, homosexual activists seek acceptance of an immoral practice(s), and in addition, engage in certain coercive and manipulative means to do so. This includes the use of demonstrative protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way.<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/socialsciences/sellinghomosexuality.html</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.html "The homosexual propaganda campaign in America's media"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.amazon.com/After-Ball-America-Conquer-Hatred/dp/0452264987 "After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's (Plume): Marshall Kirk, Hunter Madsen: 9780452264984: Amazon.com: Books"]. ''amazon.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89526 "‘Gays’ put ‘terrorist’ label on Christians"]. ''WND''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08c/Prop8/church_attacks.html "Homosexuals begin campaign of terror over Prop 8 loss"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>http://rebuildtheparty.ning.com/video/exodus-protest-park-street</ref><ref>http://theway2k.vox.com/library/post/homosexuals-persecuting-christians-and-mormons.html</ref><ref>http://www.hamiltonsquare.net/articlesRiotsSep1993.htm</ref><ref>[https://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/may/08050205.html "Lesbian Break-in and Riot During College Speech on “Born-Gay Hoax” Forces Cancellation"]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95296 "‘How hate crimes laws forced me into exile’"]. ''WND''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>Muehlenberg, Bill, [http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/06/04/another-nail-in-the-christian-coffin/ Another Nail in the Christian Coffin], [[4 June]] [[2009]]</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09a/feder_0311/index.html "Gay activists stop free speech at UMass Amherst"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref> In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality.<ref>LZ Granderson, ''Commentary: Gay is not the new black'', Cable News Network,July 16, 2009</ref> Another strategy used by supporters of the homosexual agenda is to publicly deny that such an agenda exists.<ref>[http://onug.us/content/christians-america-and-gay-agenda "Christians, America, And The Gay Agenda"]. ''onug.us''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

While not all homosexuals agree with the use of deceptive psychological tactics, leading homosexual activists willfully employ them. The aforementioned book, ''After the Ball'', is widely regarded as the handbook for the homosexual agenda, in which two homosexual Harvard-trained graduates, <ref>[http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,152180,00.html "Is The Gay Revolution a Flop?"]. ''time.com''. 24 June 2001. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref> Marshall Kirk (1957–2005), a researcher in neuropsychiatry, and Hunter Madsen (pen name ''Erastes Pill''), who was schooled in social marketing, advocated avoiding portraying homosexuals as aggressive challengers, but as "victims" instead, while making all those who opposed them to be "evil persecutors". As a means of the latter, they used ''jamming,'' in which Christians, traditionalists, or anyone else who opposes the gay agenda are publicly smeared. Their strategy was based on the premise that, "In any campaign to win over the public, Gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector. The purpose of victim imagery is to make straight people feel very uncomfortable."<ref>[http://www.parentsofgaychildren.org/uploads/After_the_Ball_-_outline_by_Richard_Cohen.pdf After the Ball: How America Will Conquer It’s Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90’s Outline compiled by Richard Cohen, MA]</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Kirk|first1=Marshall|last2=Madsen|first2=Hunter|title=After the ball : how America will conquer its fear and hatred of gays in the 90s|date=1989|publisher=Plume|location=New York|isbn=978-0452264984|page=183|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=+victims+in+need++of+protection|accessdate=2 February 2018}}</ref> Leftists also label Christians who support biblical marriage as "anti-gay," equating them with non-western Muslims who support stoning homosexuals.<ref>Mainwaring, Doug (April 3, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/jack-phillips-is-not-the-sultan-of-brunei-the-indiscriminate-weaponization-of-the-term-anti-gay Jack Phillips is not the Sultan of Brunei: The indiscriminate weaponization of the term ‘anti-gay’]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved April 4, 2019.</ref>

"Jamming" [[homo-hatred]] (disagreement with [[homosexual behavior]]s) was to be done by linking it to [[Nazi]] horror, advised Kirk and Madsen. Associate all who oppose homosexuality with images of Klansmen demanding that gays be slaughtered, hysterical backwoods preachers, menacing punks, and a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed. Thus, "propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths..."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20110603050349/http://www.renewamerica.com:80/columns/mbarber/080213 "Unmasking the "gay" agenda"]. ''renewamerica.com''. Retrieved on 2 Feb. 2018.</ref> " It can show them being criticized, hated, shunned. It can depict gays experiencing horrific suffering as the direct result of homohatred-suffering of which even most bigots would be ashamed to be the cause. It can, in short, link homohating bigotry with all sorts of attributes the bigot would be ashamed to possess, and with social consequences he would find unpleasant and scary... our effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof."<ref> http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.html The homosexual propaganda campaign in America's media, </ref>

Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, writes,
<blockquote>
There can be no doubt that Christianity represents the greatest obstacle to the normalization of homosexual behavior. It cannot be otherwise, because of the clear biblical teachings concerning the inherent sinfulness of homosexuality in all forms, and the normativity of heterosexual marriage. In order to counter this obstacle, Kirk and Madsen advised gays to "use talk to muddy the moral waters, that is, to undercut the rationalizations that 'justify' religious bigotry and to jam some of its psychic rewards." How can this be done? "This entails publicizing support by moderate churches and raising serious theological objections to conservative biblical teachings." [The latter of which attempts [[homosexuality and biblical interpretation]] examine and expose.]<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20070927163416/http://www.gender-news.com/other.php?id=19 ''After the Ball--Why the Homosexual Movement Has Won,''] Thursday, June 3rd, 2004</ref>
</blockquote>

Kirk and Madsen's open admission of their deceptive tactics is noted as most revealing: [O]ur effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof. "...the person's beliefs can be altered whether he is conscious of the attack or not"<ref>After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s, p. 152-153 (1989, Doubleday/Bantam)</ref> “The campaign we outline in this book, though complex, depends centrally upon a program of unabashed propaganda, firmly grounded in long-established principles of psychology and advertising.”<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=unabashed+propaganda%2C+firmly+grounded Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.xxvi]</ref><ref>[http://banap.net/ "[Behavior, and Not a Person]"]. ''banap.net''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Similarly, author Robert Bauman additionally records: "It makes no difference that the ads are lies... because were using them to ethically good effect, to counter negative stereotypes that are every bit as much lies, and far more wicked ones."<ref>The Gentleman from Maryland: The Conscience of a gay Conservative, by Robert Bauman, 1986, page 163.</ref>

The need for Kirk and Madsen to engage in such manipulation may be seen as being due to their sober realization of the deleterious nature of the homosexual lifestyle. This includes sodomy being responsible for 81% of new HIV cases aged 13 and older among men - despite only representing approximately 4% of the male population - and 92% of new HIV among youth (2020), and (historically) a greatly increased incidence of other infectious diseases and premature death, and despite decades of attempting to subdue homoerotic practices into being "safe." <ref>[https://peacebyjesuscom.blogspot.com/2019/10/negative-effects-of-homosexual.html Negative effects of homosexual relations (and heterosexual fornication)] Retrieved on November 24, 2021</ref>

“In short, the gay lifestyle - if such a chaos can, after all, legitimately be called a lifestyle - it just doesn’t work: it doesn’t serve the two functions for which all social framework evolve: to constrain people’s natural impulses to behave badly and to meet their natural needs. While it’s impossible to provide an exhaustive analytic list of all the root causes and aggravants of this failure, we can asseverate at least some of the major causes. Many have been dissected, above, as elements of the Ten Misbehaviors; it only remains to discuss the failure of the gay community to provide a viable alternative to the heterosexual family.”<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=exhaustive+analytic+list Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.363 ]</ref>

David Kupelian, author of ''[[The Marketing of Evil]],'' describes Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, stating,
<blockquote>
Kirk and Madsen were not the kind of drooling activists that would burst into churches and throw condoms in the air. They were smart guys – very smart. Kirk, a Harvard-educated researcher in neuropsychiatry, worked with the Johns Hopkins Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth and designed aptitude tests for adults with 200+ IQs. Madsen, with a doctorate in politics from Harvard, was an expert on public persuasion tactics and social marketing.<ref>[http://pearl-diving.blogspot.com/2009/01/sold-on-homosexuality-marketing-of-evil.html "Sold on Homosexuality – The Marketing of Evil"]. ''pearl-diving.blogspot.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>
</blockquote>

Marshall Kirk died in 2005 at the young age of 47.<ref>http://www.americanancestors.org/PageDetail.aspx?recordId=134544248</ref> The cause of death has not been publicly revealed.

Often cited as an early example of such tactics was the role of homosexual activists in persuading the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II). Dr. Ronald Bayer, though being himself a pro-homosexual psychiatrist, described this removal as being the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation, rather than any new scientific discoveries.<ref>[http://www.traditionalvalues.org/urban/eleven.php Exposed: The Myth That Psychiatry Has Proven That Homosexual Behavior Is Normal]</ref> In so doing, like slavery before it, the homosexual agenda is seen to threaten basic freedoms, principally the First Amendment.<ref>Adams, Guy (11-8-2008) [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mormon-stars-face-backlash-after-gay-marriage-ban-1003967.html ''Mormon stars face backlash after gay marriage ban''] The Independent</ref>

The charge of "[[homophobia]]" has been increasingly evidenced as being part of a means of intimidation used in pushing the Homosexual Agenda. Due to what homophobia has been made to denote, that of being a repressed homosexual, or possessing an irrational fear of being approached by homosexuals, or of being a "bigot" "persecuting" victims, the widespread use of the term "homophobic" attaches a powerful stigma to anyone who may even conscientiously oppose the practice of homosexuality, thus silencing many who might otherwise object to it.<ref>[http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/1995papers/socarides.html Thought Reform And The Psychology of Homosexual Advocacy, Charles W. Socarides, M.D.]</ref>

In relation to such oppression, psychologist Nicholas Cummings, former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), observed, "Homophobia as intimidation is one of the most pervasive techniques used to silence anyone who would disagree with the gay activist agenda." As an example of such fear within the APA, in addressing 100 fellow professionals Cummings related that while writing "Destructive Trends in Mental Health," with psychologist Rogers Wright, a number of fellow psychologists were invited to participate. However, these flatly turned them down, as they feared loss of tenure, loss of promotion, and other forms of professional retaliation. "We were bombarded by horror stories," Dr. Cummings said. "Their greatest fear was of the gay lobby, which is very strong in the APA.<ref>[Psychology Losing Scientific Credibility, Say APA Insiders http://www.narth.com/docs/insiders.html]</ref>

Noted homosexual activist and pornographer Clinton Fein, in his article, ''The Gay Agenda stated'': "Homophobic inclinations alone, even without any actions, should be criminal and punishable to the full extent of the law."

Erik Holland, author of ''The Nature of Homosexuality'', perceives that homosexuals have become so reckless in labeling others "homophobic" that "anyone who questions their labeling someone [is] a homophobe himself. Even quoting factual statistics about the connection between homosexuality and AIDS is allegedly homophobic." In addition, according to pro-homosexual author Vernon A. Wall, "even acceptance of homosexuality can be seen as a form of homophobia, because to talk about the acceptance of homosexuality is to imply that there is something about homosexuality that needs acceptance."<ref>[http://www.homosexinfo.org/Homophobia/HomePage "Homosexinfo - Homophobia - Homophobia: Fear of homosexuals?"]. ''homosexinfo.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

It may be speculated that if the liberal use of the term "homophobia" is not primarily a psychological tactic, then it indicates a psychological condition on the part of those who use the term in which they [[wishful thinking|wishfully]] or neurotically imagine that all those who oppose them are "fearful" of them, or of being one.

More recently, after 25 years of claiming she was not indoctrinating anyone with pro-homosexual beliefs, one activist honestly admitted to this being a lie. Canadian lesbian activist S. Bear Bergman, a female who identifies as a gender-confused "male", stated, "All that time I said I wasn't indoctrinating anyone with my beliefs about gay and lesbian and bi and trans and queer people? That was a lie.” Bergman recounted that she was instructed as a young gay activist to tell concerned parents that she was “just providing an alternate viewpoint” when accused of engaging in “indoctrination and recruiting,” and to use “soft” language when speaking about homosexuality. In her article on the notoriously liberal web site, the [[Huffington Post]], he went on to candidly confess that this indoctrination, "is absolutely my goal. I want to make your children like people like me and my family, even if that goes against the way you have interpreted the teachings of your religion." Bergman fantasized that in an ideal world he would have been "ushered into the world of queerness with care and tenderness by experienced homos" (akin to "camp counselors"), "and issued my leather jacket and my protest pins, my safer sex supplies..."

Bergman expressed that his goal was that of portraying to "impressionable young minds" the idea that "queers and transfolk are just as fine and lovely a kind of human as any other kind," and stated that he did not like the idea of sending her kid to schools where any kid could share with him their ideas about homosexuals. Thus Bergman, who believes that "books a kid hears at bedtime affect their sleep and also their dreams," is finalizing a series of children's books that all feature lesbian, homosexual, bisexual, gender-confused, or queer kids or families, with the goal that the young readers come to believe that people like him and his family are "absolutely great," that "lesbian, gay, bi, queer, and trans people -- that we exist, that we're perfectly fine and often really excellent." Bergman then concludes, "If that makes me an indoctrinator, I accept it. Let me be honest -- I am not even a little bit sorry."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.huffingtonpost.com/s-bear-bergman/i-have-come-to-indoctrinate-your-children-lgtbq_b_6795152.html|title=I have come to indoctrinate your children into my LGBTQ agenda (and I'm not a bit sorry)|last1=Bergman|first1=S. Bear|website=Huffington Post|accessdate=22 March 2015}}</ref>

Commenting on this frank article, Pete Baklinski of LifeSiteNews.com, states that, <blockquote>While Bergman paints a “friendly and cheerful” picture of the gay lifestyle, she fails to mention the serious health risks tied to homosexual behaviors....Research done in 2002 by Dr. John R. Diggs found that same-sex sexual behaviors expose gays, lesbians and bisexuals to “extreme risks of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), physical injuries, mental disorders and even a shortened life span.” Common sexual practices among gay men were found to lead to “numerous STDs and physical injuries, some of which are virtually unknown in the heterosexual population.” Gay and bisexual men were found to “lose up to 20 years of life expectancy.” The US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have warned on numerous occasions that HIV rates, already at epidemic proportions, are continuing to climb steadily among men who have ‘sex’ with men. The CDC has stated that gay and bisexual men continue to remain at the epicenter of what they call a “HIV/AIDS epidemic.”</blockquote>

To which Baklinski adds the spiritual consequences, citing one of the texts in the Bible which condemn homosexual relations:
{{Cquote|“For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error” (Letter to Romans 1:26).<ref>{{cite web|last1=Baklinski|first1=Pete|title=Gay activist: Of course our goal is to ‘indoctrinate children into LGBTQ agenda’|url=https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gay-activist-our-goal-is-to-indoctrinate-children-into-lgbtq-agenda|website=LifeSiteNews.com|accessdate=22 March 2015}}</ref> }}

For Christians believe God created man and women uniquely compatible and complimentary, and they alone are joined by God in marriage, with opposite genders being specified by both Genesis and personally by Jesus Christ. (Gn. 2:18-24; Mt. 19:4) The Bible only condemns homosexual relations - by design and decree, in principle and by precept - and never sanctions them wherever they are manifestly dealt with, and the injunctions against them are part of the transcendent and immutable moral law. (Lv. 18:22; Rm. 1:26,27)

However, Christians also understand that some of the first Christians were likely former homosexuals, (1Cor. 6:9-11) and believe that there is room at the cross for all who want the Lord Jesus over sin, and believe upon Him to save them who died for them, and rose again, and who thus are baptized and follow Him, to the glory of God.<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONS and the BIBLE]</ref>

===Influence in the academic world===
Professor Jerry Z. Muller described in an article titled ''First Things'' (Aug/Sept. 1993) how the homosexual lobby has gained widespread acceptance in the educational realm.
{{cquote|[Their] strategy has been remarkably successful. With a rapidity largely attributable in large part to a total lack of articulate resistance, homosexual ideology has gained an unquestioned and uncontested legitimacy in American academic life. Within the academy, as within nonacademic elite culture, the definition of opposite to homosexuality as "homophobia - a definition which implies that it is impossible to give good reasons for the cultural disapproval of homosexuality - is the best evidence of the success of this strategy.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=cbfVg_1qhe0C&pg=PP1&lpg=PP1&dq=David+W.+Virtue+scots+college&source=bl&ots=aDW7a615Gn&sig=Y1cLsx5sCQTgUUDJ88b5AKPRkNg&hl=en&ei=8skISpP1AcGktgfi2PzsCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPR14,M1 "Homosexuality"]. ''google.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>}}

====In the public schools====
{{See also|Homosexuality in Schools}}
[[File:Prairie Ridge High School LGBT+ Flag.jpg|thumb|200px|School in Chicago area (Prairie Ridge High School) with LGBT+ [[Rainbow#Rainbow flag|rainbow flag]]. Students in the same school who display the [[Confederate flag]] will face discipline.<ref name="NWHerald2017"/>]]
[[File:Prairie Ridge High School LGBT.jpg|thumb|200px|This Chicago-area school has "safe spaces" for students with homosexual attraction (sponsored by [[GLSEN]]).]]
Many public schools throughout the United States welcome the Homosexual Agenda, oftentimes through publicly-funded school programs created by [[GLSEN]].<ref name="Heyer2015">Heyer, Walt (June 8, 2015). [http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/06/15118/ Public School LGBT Programs Don't Just Trample Parental Rights. They Also Put Kids at Risk]. ''The Witherspoon Institute -- Public Discourse''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> Much of this was the work of the [[Obama Administration]].<ref name="Heyer2015"/> GLSEN celebrates the Homosexual Agenda through a "day of silence."<ref>Berry, Susan (April 11, 2015). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/11/day-of-silence-how-the-lgbt-agenda-is-hijacking-americas-youth/ Day of Silence: How the LGBT Agenda Is Hijacking America’s Youth]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> In 2016, [[California]] became the first state to legislate the teaching of the homosexual agenda in public schools to children as young as second grade.<ref>Berry, Susan (July 19, 2016). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/19/lgbt-history-california-first-to-teach/ California: 1st State To Teach LGBT Curriculum — to Second Graders]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> These California students are now banned from opting-out from this [[indoctrination]].<ref>Newman, Alex (January 4, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/27883-students-banned-from-opting-out-of-lgbt-education Students Banned From Opting Out of LGBT Education]. ''The New American''. Retrieved January 5, 2018.</ref> In February 2019, the Department of Education in the [[United Kingdom]] announced that public school children starting at the age of five would be required to learn about homosexual and transgender relationships, with parents being unable to withdraw their children from such classes.<ref>Tennant, Michael (February 27, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/31593-u-k-schools-to-indoctrinate-kids-as-young-as-five-in-lgbt-agenda U.K. Schools to Indoctrinate Kids as Young as Five in LGBT Agenda]. ''The New American''. Retrieved February 27, 2019. See also:
*McLean, Dorothy Cummings (March 25, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/christian-mom-sues-uk-primary-school-for-forcing-lgbt-pride-celebrations-on-kids Christian mom sues UK primary school for forcing LGBT Pride celebrations on kids]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved March 25, 2019.</ref>

At a recent sold-out California Teachers Association (CTA) conference in Palm Springs, Calif (October 2021), a leaked audio recording reveals two teachers mocking parents over their concerns about homosexual and transgender indoctrination at school, says a source who attended the event. “It was horrifying to listen to not just one teacher but really all of the teachers in all of these seminars, excoriating parents,” and that “The overarching theme of the classes that I attended were California teachers instructing other teachers on how to sneak in the LGBTQ+ curriculum in a manner that does not alert parents,” said the source, who also related how some teachers at the conference also suggested that parents who refuse to call their child by pronouns of the child’s choosing should be arrested and charged with child abuse. In the audio clip, one teacher advised other teachers who lead LGBTQ clubs to maintain an air of plausible deniability so they can play dumb if they are questioned by parents. “Because we are not official, we have no club rosters. We keep no records,” said the teacher, who is also an LGBTQ club leader. “In fact, sometimes we don’t really want to keep records because if parents get upset that their kids are coming? We’re like, ‘Yeah, I don’t know. Maybe they came?’. Another teacher suggesteed activist teachers disguise the nature of GSA clubs with an example being calling her LGBTQ club the “You Be You” club." Teachers also boasted about spying on students’ online searches and activity inn attempting to recruit sixth-grade students into these LGBTQ clubs whose membership rolls are kept from the eyes of parents. One of the teachers said, “We totally stalked what they were doing on Google.” As of 11/23/2021 the “UBU (You Be You)” club was suspended after information about the leaked audio was made public. <ref>Jones, Brad (November 23, 2021). https://www.theepochtimes.com/leaked-audio-reveals-how-california-teachers-recruit-kids-into-lgbtq-clubs_4114896.html Leaked Audio Reveals How California Teachers Recruit Kids Into LGBTQ Clubs]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved November 23, 2021.</ref>

In schools where the homosexual agenda is welcomed, students who fly the [[Confederate flag]] may expect to face disciplinary actions.<ref name="NWHerald2017">Prokop, Hannah (November 11, 2016). [http://www.nwherald.com/2016/11/09/prairie-ridge-high-school-suspends-student-for-wearing-confederate-flag-to-school/aelbmro/ Prairie Ridge High School suspends student for wearing Confederate flag to school]. ''Northwest Herald''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref><ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/apr/20/confederate-flags-not-rainbow-ones-banned-in-schoo/ Wyoming school district bans Confederate flags, allows gay-pride ones]. ''The Washington Times'' (from the ''Associated Press''). April 20, 2019. Retrieved April 20, 2019.</ref> In March 2019, an Ohio public school student was suspended for posting Bible verses next to homosexual flags.<ref>Gstalter, Morgan (March 13, 2019). [https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/433823-ohio-student-suspended-for-targeting-gay-straight-alliance-by Ohio student suspended for 'targeting' Gay-Straight Alliance by posting Bible verses in response to LGBT flags]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved March 13, 2019.</ref><ref>Kaplan, Talia (March 12, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/ohio-student-suspended-after-posting-bible-verses-around-school-i-wanted-to-spread-the-word-of-god Ohio student suspended after posting Bible verses around school: 'I wanted to spread the word of God']. ''Fox News''. Retrieved March 13, 2019.</ref>

===Immorality in society===
The “gay” activists welcome [[immorality]] in [[society]]. As no one wants to be called a [[hypocrite]], every act of sexual sin by society members serves the “gay” interest by lessening the public will to uphold public morality. That's why, wherever the acceptance of sexual sin is observed, it is likely there are “gay” activists involved.

==== The abortion industry ====
The best example of the Homosexual Agenda causing societal immorality is seen in their aggressive defense of the abortion industry. Obviously, homosexuals cannot have an “unwanted pregnancy,” yet in an extensive experience, the big part of “pro-choice” street activists at abortion clinics are homosexuals. This is so because they know that preserving the people's option to destroy unborn life is essential to maintaining so-called “[[sexual freedom]]” as a social norm. If women lost their choice to legally kill their unborn offspring, the resulting inevitable shift of emphasis from self-gratification to family responsibility in such a large section of the population would change the entire culture. When a woman gives in to fear and selfishness to kill the child in her womb, she will not feel that she can criticize other sinners. The choice to kill their unborn children morally compromises both men and women (making them unwilling to criticize choices to engage in other forms of immoral behavior), and ensures that the outcome of an unwanted child will not be a lasting deterrent to those who have chosen sexual “freedom” over family. This explains why homosexuals, who by definition cannot conceive children together, are among the most militant advocates of abortion on demand.

==== The pornography industry ====
The existence of a thriving pornography industry where “gays” are also notoriously prevalent serves the “gay” cause by morally corrupting the men who use it, making them less likely to oppose homosexuality on moral grounds and more likely to support public policies which legitimize sexual [[hedonism]]. “Gay” activists love sexual anarchy because they know that when a man falls in bondage to pornography he is less willing to oppose other sexual sins in society.

==== The entertainment industry ====
When young people enjoy music or films that glorify sexual lust, they feel more sympathy to the “gay” arguments.

The “gays” have it easy pushing sexual “freedom”, because every person, in their flesh, wants to indulge themselves in their own choices.
This is like children being offered only candy to eat. People want to eat only sweets until they get sick. Only with maturity do they know how to eat to stay healthy.

The “gay” movement has many allies in its campaign to aggrandize sexual immorality, but it is the only social movement in the history of the world whose primary purpose is to eliminate social restraints on [[sexual]] conduct. It is heavily funded, highly organized and strategically positioned to maximize its ability to change societies and cultures.<ref name="Lively2009">{{cite book |title=Redeeming the Rainbow: A Christian Response to the "Gay" Agenda |author=[[Scott Lively]] |publisher=Veritas Aeterna Press |place=Springfield, MA |year=2009 |edition=1 (Version 1.1)|chapter=1: Pro-family answers to common questions about homosexuality and "gay" agenda |pages=8, 60, 176|url=http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09b/Redeeming_rainbow}}</ref>

==Opponents of the Homosexual Agenda ==
Some well known individuals/groups in the [[United States]] who actively oppose the homosexual agenda are: [[MassResistance]], [[Focus on the Family]], [[Peter LaBarbera]]'s American's for Truth, the [[Traditional Values Coalition]] ([[Louis Sheldon]] is a chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition), and [[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]].

===Peter LaBarbera===
As noted earlier, [[Peter LaBarbera]] is the founder of [[Americans For Truth]] (AFT) which is a national organization in the United States devoted solely to confronting the homosexual agenda.<ref name="americansfortruth.com">[http://www.americansfortruth.com/about/ "About Americans for Truth About Homosexuality and AFTAH Founder Peter LaBarbera » Americans for Truth"]. ''americansfortruth.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Peter LaBarbera said the following regarding the need for the organization Americans for Truth:
{{cquote|Homosexual, [[bisexuality|bisexual]], and [[transsexual]] groups spend tens of millions of dollars every year to market and normalize their aberrant lifestyles, yet after all these years there is not a single, serious national group dedicated specifically to exposing and countering their agendas...

It’s time for Americans to unapologetically resist the demands of this lobby, and to counter the lies upon which it is built-the foremost being that certain people are inherently or ‘born’ homosexual and that this is a [[civil rights]] issue.<ref name="americansfortruth.com"/>}}

===Matt Barber===
[[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]] is one the more notable figures in regards to opposing the homosexual agenda. Matt Barber wrote the following regarding the homosexual agenda:
[[Image:Mbarber_b.jpg‎|right|thumb|175px|[[Matt Barber]]]]
{{cquote|Ironically, sexual [[relativism|relativists]] are anything but relative. They are quite affirmative in principle. But the principles they foist demand comprehensive acceptance of homosexual conduct — by force of law — through federal edicts such as “hate crimes” legislation, the so-called “Employment Non-Discrimination Act” (ENDA) and by imposing government sanctioned “same-sex marriage.” All such government mandates grant special protected “minority” status to those who define themselves by aberrant sexual preferences and changeable sexual behaviors. These laws put people with traditional values directly in the crosshairs of official government policy.

Throughout society, homosexual activists demand that homosexual behaviors not only be “tolerated,” but celebrated. (That’s what the euphemistic slogan “celebrate diversity” supposes). They have masked their true political agenda by hijacking the language of the genuine civil rights movement and through the crafty and disingenuous rhetoric of “tolerance” and “diversity.”

Anyone who believes the Biblical directive that human sexuality is a gift from [[God]], to be shared between man and wife within the bonds of marriage, is branded “homophobic,” “hateful” or “discriminatory.” They are to be silenced by all means possible.<ref>http://www.cwfa.org/articledisplay.asp?id=14696&department=CFI&categoryid=family</ref>}}

===Steffen Königer===
[[German]] politician Steffen Königer from the party [[Alternative for Germany]] (AfD) showed that it is possible to use [[irony]] when opposing the [[extremist]] gender agenda. In his address in the parliament of the [[Brandenburg]], the federated state of [[Germany]], he ridiculed homosexual lobbyists and gender ideologists by enlisting in his introduction, for about two minutes, all "gender and sexual varieties" he could find on the Internet. This way he brought to attention of the general public the absurdity of the proposal put forward by the German [[Green Party]] that demanded to introduce multiple "gender identities" in state documents. When the Parliamentary Speaker tried to stop him, he just replied that he is not finished yet and further adamantly continued in naming all alleged gender declinations. When he was finally done with his introduction, his actual reaction to the proposal took less than three seconds: ''"The AfD party rejects your proposal."''<ref>{{cite web |title=Un político alemán ridiculiza los postulados del LGBTI |url=https://youtu.be/GzIwvHUvFR0 |accessdate=23 Jun 2016 |language=German (English subtitles)}}</ref>

==Further reading==
*https://www.amazon.com/dp/B012YKIQ2M Counterfeiting the Rainbow by Beverly Rachel
*[http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html Homosexuality and the Nazi Party] by Scott Lively. Excellent discussion of the anti-Christian and homosexual origins of the Nazism.
*[http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/ Documentation of the links between homosexuals and the Nazis] by the Government of Israel.
*[http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/BPCollectionNews.asp?ID=131 2008 McDonald's and the Homosexual Agenda], Baptist Press
*[http://www.couplescompany.com/FEATURES/politics/2004/Selling%20Homosexuality.pdf Paul E. Rondeau, Selling homosexuality to America (PDF)] [http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/730694/posts Or html form]
*Shupe, Jamie (March 10, 2019). [https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/03/10/i-was-americas-first-non-binary-person-it-was-all-a-sham/ I Was America’s First ‘Nonbinary’ Person. It Was All a Sham.] ''The Daily Signal''. Retrieved April 15, 2019.

==See also==
*[[ACT-UP]]
*[[Anti-Defamation League]]
*[[Anthropological Revolution]]
*[[Essay:Sodomism]]
*[[Homosexual belief system]]
*[[Gay affirmative]]
*[[Gay rights]]
*[[Homophobia]]
*[[Hate speech]], [[Hate crime]]
*[[Homosexual logic]], used to justify and mandate the Homosexual Agenda
*[[Homosexuality]]
*[[Homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]
*[[Homosexualization]]
*[[Gleichschaltung#LGBTI Gleichschaltung|LGBTI Gleichschaltung]]
*[[San Francisco values]]
*[[Fashion industry values]]
*[[Hollywood values]]
*[[Slogans and the Homosexual Agenda]]
*[[Stonewall UK]]

== References ==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

{{liberalism}}
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Homosexuality]]
[[Category:Liberal Deceit]]
[[Category:Hollywood Values]]

Homosexual Agenda

2021-11-24T10:15:48Z

Daniel1212: Leaked Audio Reveals How California Teachers Recruit Kids Into LGBTQ Clubs

{{Homosexuality}}
The '''Homosexual Agenda''' is a self-centered set of beliefs and objectives designed to mandate approval of [[homosexuality]] and its ideology. The goals and means of this movement include indoctrinating students in [[public school]], restricting the free speech of opposition, obtaining [[special rights|special treatment]] for homosexuals, distorting [[Bible|Biblical]] teaching and science, and interfering with freedom of association. Advocates of the homosexual agenda seek special rights for [[homosexuals]] and self-described "LGBTQ people" that other people don't have, such as immunity from criticism (see [[hate speech]], [[hate crime]]s).<ref>Such special rights will necessarily [[zero-sum game|come at the expense]] of the rights of broader society.</ref> '''''The homosexual agenda is the biggest threat to the rights of [[free speech]] and [[religious freedom]] today.'''''<ref>Daniels, Fletch (September 10, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/the-lgbt-endgame-is-to-destroy-christianity The LGBT endgame is to destroy Christianity]. ''LifeSiteNews'' (from the ''American Thinker''). Retrieved September 10, 2019.</ref><ref>Duke, Selwyn (September 11, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/item/33387-lgbt-activists-hate-christianity-and-want-to-destroy-it LGBT Activists Hate Christianity — and Want to Destroy It]. ''The New American''. Retrieved September 11, 2019.</ref><ref>In 2020, more than 10% (90 out of 879) of the featured characters on scripted primetime television programs are openly [[LGBTQ]], an attempt by the pro-LGBTQ producers of those shows to deceitfully push the discredited claim that "10%" of the population is homosexual when, in fact, less than 2% of the population actually identify as such.</ref>

One of the top priorities of the Homosexual Agenda is to prohibit and outlaw [[conversion therapy]]. Activities like [[baseball]] and [[chess]] reduce homosexual proclivities, while other activities like figure skating for men and soccer for women seem to encourage homosexuality.
[[Leftists]] are pushing unconstitutional bans on conversion therapy, apparently unable to tolerate things they dislike. Their priorities include electing high-ranking officials who are openly homosexual, with the ultimate goal of electing a president who is in a [[same-sex marriage]], like the top [[Dem]] fundraising candidate [[Pete Buttigieg]] in 2020.

In a speech on December 10, 2013, to a pro-family rally in [[Jamaica]], a country that rejects same-sex "marriage", Brian Camenker of [[MassResistance]] outlined the step-by-step approach of the homosexual agenda:<ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen2/13d/jamaica-speech-121013/index.html "MassResistance helps Jamaica confront ‘gay’ agenda"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

*Legalize homosexuality
*Hold "gay pride" parades
*Accept child sex trafficking
*Demand non-discrimination laws
*Insist on homosexuals' adoption of children
*Push the homosexual agenda in schools<ref>{{cite web |title=Criticism of Transgender Agenda Will Get Virginia Students Expelled |author=Austin Ruse |date=10 Jun 2016 |url=https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/10/transgender-northern-virginia-students-can-now-expelled-criticizing-transgenderism/ |publisher=BREITBART |quote=The transgender change in school regulations was imposed last night during a dramatic board meeting where only 12 pro-trans witnesses were invited to testify. ... No opposing voices were allowed to be heard, parents were relegated to shouting opposition from the seats and some were ejected from the meeting.... Last year, they were promised a lengthy investigation and a full hearing. Instead, it was foisted upon them with less than 24 hours-notice. ... an Oregon law recently allowed a jury to award $60,000 t0 a transgender teacher because other teachers declined to use the teacher’s preferred pronoun, which is “they” rather than “him” or “her.” Deputies for President Barack Obama have backed similar rules for all K-12 schools, and New York City has established similar forced-speech rules.|accessdate=12 Jun 2016}}</ref>
*Legalize various alternate forms of partnership and call them "marriage" (i.e. man and man, woman and woman, man and multiple women)
*Demand public funding to deal with increased homosexual-related social problems
*Promote the [[gender confusion]] agenda
*Demand to be treated "equally"
*Impose a large-scale loss of free speech
*Ban counseling for kids confused by homosexual issues
*[[Drag queen]] story times to indoctrinate children
*Ban scientifically and religiously proven methods of homosexual conversion
*Attack churches
*Encourage [[abortion]]

[[Russia]] is a leader in rejecting the homosexual agenda.<ref>{{cite web |title=Is the Homosexual Agenda 'Unstoppable'? - Comparing America with Russia |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msLH6f6vyC4 |accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=RUSSIA VS. THE LGBT GLOBALISTS: A Climate of Hate and Fear |url=http://www.scottlively.net/2015/02/25/russia-vs-the-lgbt-globalists-a-climate-of-hate-and-fear-part-two/ |quote=This dangerous LGBT strategy has now gone global and the target is the Russian Federation. ... Core American values to Obama are publicly celebrated sodomy and doctor-assisted transsexual self-mutilation. ... The Russian anti-propaganda law, passed June 11, 2013, was the first truly effective international counter-measure since the “gay” agenda went global around the turn of the millennium. Typically, the “gays” characterized the law as hateful and an incitement to violence, but in doing so they revealed that propagandizing children is part of their agenda, since the law simply classifies “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relationships” as material that cannot be distributed among minors and commands the government to protect children from it. Just after the passage of this law Barack Obama did an about-face on the “reset” policy (in which Russia had been recognized as an equal partner in the world community) and instead began reviving cold-war rhetoric.|accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Pro-Russian Press Conference |date=22 February 2014 |url=http://www.scottlively.net/2014/02/22/pro-russian-press-conference/ |quote=We got lots of coverage from the event, and I believe we accomplished our objective which was to bring awareness to the world that the pro-family movement in the U.S., Canada, UK, and other “pro-gay” countries is happy to see the Russian Federation standing up for family values. We think this will encourage other nations to follow their example. |accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref> For example, Russia banned adoption by Americans as the Obama Administration aggressively pushed the homosexual agenda, and in June 2013 a house in the [[Russian]] parliament passed legislation to ban foreign adoption by gay couples or single parents who live in any [[same-sex marriage|gay marriage]] nation.<ref>[https://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-russia-ban-adoption-gay-couples-20130618,0,4633280.story "Russian lawmakers pass ban on adoption tied to gay foreign couples"]. ''Los Angeles Times''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

[[Barack Hussein Obama]], [[Hillary Clinton]], and essentially all [[Democratic Party|Democrat]] politicians now advocate the homosexual agenda, reflecting the growing financial power of the homosexual network. Obama's self-centered obsession with his own re-election, and fundraising for his campaign, has caused him to create a national political issue out of this, rather than deal with other issues like the economy. Many [[establishment]] Republicans and [[Cafeteria Christians]] also have bought into the homosexual agenda.

'''''Among all the [[liberal]] belief systems, the homosexual ideology is the most self-centered or selfish''''' – unlike the vast charity performed by thousands of churches in the U.S. alone, a homosexual charity can be considered an [[oxymoron]].

The late Supreme Court Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] referred to the "so-called homosexual agenda" in ''[[Lawrence v. Texas]]'', 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (dissenting opinion). Justice Scalia also predicted that this was the first step to legalizing homosexual civil unions. He was proven right with the outcome of ''[[Obergefell v. Hodges]]''. The goal of the latter decision was the societal affirmation of homosexuality rather than simple equality.<ref>Williams, Thomas D. (January 5, 2020). [https://www.breitbart.com/education/2020/01/05/usa-today-obergefell-was-never-about-freedom-to-marry/ USA Today: Obergefell Was Never About ‘Freedom to Marry’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved January 5, 2020.</ref>

Despite the fact that only 4.1% of the U.S. population identified as [[LGBT]], just over half a percentage point higher than four years prior,<ref>Gates, Gary J. (January 11, 2017). [https://www.gallup.com/poll/201731/lgbt-identification-rises.aspx In US, More Adults Identifying as LGBT]. ''Gallup''. Retrieved January 18, 2017.</ref> Americans '''''greatly overestimate the proportion of homosexuals''''' in the nation to be an average of 23%.<ref name="GreatlyOver">Newport, Frank (May 21, 2015). [https://www.gallup.com/poll/183383/americans-greatly-overestimate-percent-gay-lesbian.aspx Americans Greatly Overestimate Percent Gay, Lesbian in U.S.] ''Gallup''. Retrieved January 18, 2017. See also:
*Mainwaring, Doug (June 28, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/americans-vastly-overestimate-the-size-of-the-lgbt-population Americans vastly overestimate the size of the LGBT population]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved June 28, 2019.</ref> Interestingly, Republicans and conservatives gave estimates closest to the actual number.<ref name="GreatlyOver"/>

== The Homosexual Agenda ==
Joseph P. Gudel, in ''That Which is Unnatural''<ref>[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0108a.html "That Which is Unnatural" Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture] Part Two in a Two-Part Series on Homosexuality, from the Christian Research Journal, Winter 1993, page 8</ref> contended that the homosexual movement,

:has been militantly demanding not just the homosexuals' right to do whatever they wish to do behind closed doors, but, more importantly, that society fully accept their lifestyle as both healthy and normal, even demanding special rights and legislation as an "oppressed minority." Gudel quotes various sources evidencing this.

In a 1987 speech to the National Press Club in Washington, homosexual spokesperson Jeff Levi proclaimed,

:We are no longer seeking just a right to privacy and a protection from wrong. We also have a right — as heterosexual Americans already have — to see government and society affirm our lives.<ref>Jeff Levi, in William Dannemeyer, Shadow in the Land (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1989), 86.</ref>

In an article entitled "Gays on the March" in 1975, Time magazine quoted lesbian activist Barbara Gittings who stated:

:What the homosexual wants, and here he is neither willing to compromise nor morally required to compromise — is acceptance of homosexuality as a way of life fully on a par with heterosexuality." In response, Time opined, "It is one thing to remove legal discrimination against homosexuals. It is another to mandate approval....It is this goal of full acceptance, which no known society past or present has granted to homosexuals, that makes many Americans apprehensive.<ref>Gays on the March," Time, 8 Sept. 1975, 43</ref>

A primary goal of the homosexual agenda is to normalize the lifestyle in [[public schools]]. This occurred quickly and intensely after same-sex "marriage" was illegally imposed in Massachusetts, where homosexual relationships are taught to children as young as kindergartners, as recounted by the decision of ''[[Parker v. Hurley]]''.<ref>The ''Parker v. Hurley'' decision explained, "In January 2005, when Jacob Parker ("Jacob") was in kindergarten, he brought home a 'Diversity Book Bag.' This included a picture book, ''Who's in a Family?'', which depicted different families, including single-parent families, an extended family, interracial families, animal families, a family without children, and — to the concern of the Parkers — a family with two dads and a family with two moms. The book concludes by answering the question, 'Who's in a family?': 'The people who love you the most!' The book says nothing about marriage."</ref>

In a 1992 report by John Leo in U.S. News & World Report, he notes some books which were part of New York City's public school curriculum.

The first-grade book, ''Children of the Rainbow'', stated on page 145, which states that teachers must "be aware of varied family structures, including...gay or lesbian parents," and "children must be taught to acknowledge the positive aspects of each type of household." Another children book is Heather Has Two Mommies, which is about a lesbian couple having a child through artificial insemination. Another book, ''Gloria Goes to Gay Pride'', states, "Some women love women, some men love men, some women and men love each other. That's why we march in the parade, so everyone can have a choice."

Leo commented,

:A line is being crossed here; in fact, a brand new ethic is descending upon the city's public school system. The traditional civic virtue of tolerance (if gays want to live together, it's their own business) has been replaced with a new ethic requiring approval and endorsement (if gays want to live together, we must 'acknowledge the positive aspects' of their way of life).<ref>John Leo, "Heather Has a Message," U.S. News & World Report, 17 Aug. 1992, 16.</ref>

Dr. Judith A. Reisman in her extensive ''Crafting “Gay” Children'',<ref>http://www.defendthefamily.com/_docs/resources/6390601.pdf</ref> reports that Harvard homosexual Toby Morotta, PhD, stated that in the 1970s, members of the Gay Activists Alliance - who were trained in the “zapping" of any who rebuffed homosexuality.<ref>Toby Marotta: THE POLITICS OF HOMOSEXUALITY: HOW LESBIANS AND GAY MEN HAVE MADE THEMSELVES A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL FORCE IN MODERN AMERICA, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1981 at 319</ref> And that these formed the “Gay Academic Union,” (GAU) which was made up of faculty and students in major universities. She states that the GAU has long fought for domination of its worldview within the academic community, and professional journals commonly assigned GAU and other homosexual peer reviewers to research touching on homosexuality, generally resulting in a quick death to possible unfavorable findings.<ref>See extensive reports in regular NARTH Bulletins as well as Ray Johnson, “American Psychology: The Political Science, at 53-57.</ref>

This and the general agenda is seen to be overall implementing a marketing strategy explained in a book called ''After the Ball,'' by [[gay rights]] activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in the late 1980s, in which a six-point plan was set forth as to how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior in a decade-long time frame:
:"The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior." <ref name="Winn07252003">''After the Ball'' (1989), quoted from Winn, Pete (7-25-2003) [ ''Q&A: The Homosexual Agenda''] Citizenlink</ref> "Thus propagandistic advertising can depict all opponents of the gay movement as homophobic bigots who are 'not Christian' and the propaganda can further show them [[homosexuals]] as being criticized, hated and shunned..."<ref>After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's, by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen (Author) (p. 152-153)</ref>

[[Focus on the Family]] provides additional quotes from ''After the Ball'', outlining key points of the homosexual agenda:<ref name="Winn07252003"/><ref>Kirk, Marshall K. and Erastes Pill (11-1987) ''The Overhauling of Straight America'' Available at [http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/overhauling.htm ''STRATEGIES OF THE HOMOSEXUAL MOVEMENT: "The Overhauling of Straight America"'']</ref>

#"Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible." (They use late night air waves and special channels, as well as their right to peacefully assemble to do so.)
#"Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers."
#"Give homosexual protectors a just cause."
#"Make gays look good."
#"Make the victimizers look bad."
#"Get funds from corporate America."

[[United States Supreme Court]] Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] wrote:
{{cquote|Today's opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=02-102#dissent1 ''LAWRENCE et al. v. TEXAS''] at findlaw.com</ref>}}

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vic_Eliason Vic Eliason] of [http://www.crosstalkamerica.com Crosstalk America] rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies.

== Specific goals ==
The goals of the homosexual movement include:

#Ignoring Christian morals and discouraging religiously based laws.
#Attempting to convince the world that marriage should be defined secularly, instead of as one of the Lord's commandments.
#Ignore the clear message of the [[Bible]] that [[homosexuality]] is a sin and an abomination unto [[God]] because their First Amendment rights allow them to.
#Remind conservatives that there cannot be a "gay ([[homosexual attraction]]) gene", just like like there cannot be a "black gene" because complex things like these are caused by complex interactions between genes.
#Censoring evidence that the "gay gene" is a hoax. After all, it would have to be multiple genes interacting together.<ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08a/born_gay_hoax/smith_0329/index.html ''Lesbian activists at Smith College riot, shut down Ryan Sorba speech on "The Born Gay Hoax" as police watch. See exclusive videos.''] Mass Resistance</ref>
#Censoring speech against homosexuality by branding it to be "hate-speech"<ref>[http://www.silencingchristians.com Video:Silencing Christians]</ref><ref>[http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2009/06/homosexuality-its-crime-in-england-to.html "Marquette Warrior"]. ''mu-warrior.blogspot.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[http://www.ccfon.org/view.php?id=745 Bishops fight for right to criticize homosexual lifestyle, 25th May 2009]</ref>
#Censoring biblical statements condemning homosexuality<ref>White, Hilary (04-21-2006) [http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/apr/06042105.html ''Court Upholds School Ban on "Homosexuality is Shameful" T-Shirt''] LifeSiteNews.com</ref>
#Lobbying for equal employment rights.<ref>The Crimson Staff (10-13-2006) [http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=514950 ''A Box of Their Own?''] (opinion) The Crimson</ref><ref>http://www.afa.net, Homosexual Agenda Platforms from 1972 - 2000</ref>
#Expand hate crimes legislation to include sexual orientation, which would be equally wrong for heterosexuals to do.<ref>Pelosi, Nancy Office of (09-28-2004) [http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/Sept04/HateCrimes092804.html ''Pelosi: "Hate Crimes Prevention Legislation is Right Thing to Do, Long Overdue"''] From the office of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi</ref>
#Ending the military's and Boy Scouts' restrictions on homosexuality<ref>''Boy Scouts of Am. v. Dale'', 530 U.S. 640 (2000) (Boy Scouts); "Matlovich v. Secretary of the Air Force (591 F.2d 852, DC Circ. 1 978) (military)</ref>
#Stopping children as young as 5 years old from attending therapy to repair their sexual preference<ref>[http://www.thetaskforce.org/reports_and_research/youth_in_the_crosshairs National Gay and Lesbian Task Force:Youth in the Crosshairs]</ref>
#Teach tolerance of homosexuals in schools.
#In places like Massachusetts and California, where the homosexual lobby is the strongest, it starts as early as preschool. They tell seven- or eight-year-old boys, "If you only like boys, there's a chance you may be homosexual," or "If you only like girls, maybe you are lesbian." Children at that age also do not have the hormones to experience sexual attraction, so they cannot understand this yet.
#Demands protections from job discrimination.<ref>[http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/nondiscrimination/ENDA_main_page Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) | National Gay and Lesbian Task Force]</ref>
#Suing an online dating website for discrimination. This was because sexual orientation is a federally protected group, as such, this company was claimed to be "breaking" the law.<ref>Joshua Rhett Miller. [https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,454904,00.html "eHarmony to Provide Gay Dating Service After Lawsuit"]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>
#Undermining the [[Essay:Quantifying Mental Strength|resolve]] of [[Homosexuality and choice#Choice and Genetics|latent homosexuals]] so that their will becomes too weak to resist the temptations of homosexuality<ref>http://www.thetaskforce.org/activist_center/resources_and_tools/challenge_exgay</ref>
#Pushing for legalized adoption by homosexual individuals and couples<ref>http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/parenting_and_family</ref>
#Indoctrination of public school children to support the homosexual agenda
#Allowing boys into girls' restrooms and vice versa, without restriction.

The state-by-state push for same-sex "marriage" can be viewed as a means to the above goals, or a goal in itself.<ref>[[Lewis v. Harris]]</ref> An example of this would be the recent New Hampshire law that makes same-sex civil unions "legal".<ref>[http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/06/01/new_hampshire_law_makes_same_sex_civil_unions_legal/ "New Hampshire law makes same-sex civil unions legal"]. ''boston.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Although notable gains toward achieving its goals continue to manifest, homosexual activists later began been expressing a high level of dissatisfaction with the [[Obama regime]]. Commenting on such, Massresistance.org, an organization which opposes the homosexual agenda in [[Massachusetts]], noted that Obama had,

*signed an order extending federal benefits to same-sex partners.
*pushed an extreme hate crimes bill in Congress.
*declared his intention to repeal the Defense of Marriage.
*pushed a pro-homosexual and transgender version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
*appointed homosexual activists to high level positions, including Harry Knox, of the homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign, and Kevin Jennings, founder of the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which educates kids in the public schools.
*declared February to be "Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month."
*demanded the State Department allow homosexual couples to use their married names (from marriages or civil unions) on US passports.<ref>update@massresistance.org 6/24/2009 11:56 PM</ref>

In Europe, countries such as the [[United Kingdom]] and [[France]] have adopted policies promoting gender confusion.<ref>Friedman, Victoria (February 15, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/02/15/france-mother-father-parent-uk-govt-lawyer-mother-not-gender-specific/ Men Can Be Mothers in UK, While French Schools Erase Terms ‘Father,’ ‘Mother’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved February 15, 2019.</ref>

=== Strategies and psychological tactics ===
Homosexual activists are often seen as engaging in [[homosexual logic|specious argumentation]], such as attempts to controvert the consistent teaching of the Bible on homosexual relations (see [[homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]), and using false analogies, in order to gain acceptance of homosexuality. One common argument used by homosexual activists seeks to compare their quest for equal rights to that of others.<ref>Miner, Homosexuality, Civil Rights, and the Church</ref> This argument is countered by the observation that blacks were able to peacefully argue that mankind should not be "judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character",<ref>[http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm, Speech by Martin Luther King Jr.]</ref> as the former yields no certain moral distinction. In contrast, homosexual activists seek acceptance of an immoral practice(s), and in addition, engage in certain coercive and manipulative means to do so. This includes the use of demonstrative protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way.<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/socialsciences/sellinghomosexuality.html</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.html "The homosexual propaganda campaign in America's media"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.amazon.com/After-Ball-America-Conquer-Hatred/dp/0452264987 "After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's (Plume): Marshall Kirk, Hunter Madsen: 9780452264984: Amazon.com: Books"]. ''amazon.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89526 "‘Gays’ put ‘terrorist’ label on Christians"]. ''WND''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08c/Prop8/church_attacks.html "Homosexuals begin campaign of terror over Prop 8 loss"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>http://rebuildtheparty.ning.com/video/exodus-protest-park-street</ref><ref>http://theway2k.vox.com/library/post/homosexuals-persecuting-christians-and-mormons.html</ref><ref>http://www.hamiltonsquare.net/articlesRiotsSep1993.htm</ref><ref>[https://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/may/08050205.html "Lesbian Break-in and Riot During College Speech on “Born-Gay Hoax” Forces Cancellation"]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95296 "‘How hate crimes laws forced me into exile’"]. ''WND''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>Muehlenberg, Bill, [http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/06/04/another-nail-in-the-christian-coffin/ Another Nail in the Christian Coffin], [[4 June]] [[2009]]</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09a/feder_0311/index.html "Gay activists stop free speech at UMass Amherst"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref> In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality.<ref>LZ Granderson, ''Commentary: Gay is not the new black'', Cable News Network,July 16, 2009</ref> Another strategy used by supporters of the homosexual agenda is to publicly deny that such an agenda exists.<ref>[http://onug.us/content/christians-america-and-gay-agenda "Christians, America, And The Gay Agenda"]. ''onug.us''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

While not all homosexuals agree with the use of deceptive psychological tactics, leading homosexual activists willfully employ them. The aforementioned book, ''After the Ball'', is widely regarded as the handbook for the homosexual agenda, in which two homosexual Harvard-trained graduates, <ref>[http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,152180,00.html "Is The Gay Revolution a Flop?"]. ''time.com''. 24 June 2001. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref> Marshall Kirk (1957–2005), a researcher in neuropsychiatry, and Hunter Madsen (pen name ''Erastes Pill''), who was schooled in social marketing, advocated avoiding portraying homosexuals as aggressive challengers, but as "victims" instead, while making all those who opposed them to be "evil persecutors". As a means of the latter, they used ''jamming,'' in which Christians, traditionalists, or anyone else who opposes the gay agenda are publicly smeared. Their strategy was based on the premise that, "In any campaign to win over the public, Gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector. The purpose of victim imagery is to make straight people feel very uncomfortable."<ref>[http://www.parentsofgaychildren.org/uploads/After_the_Ball_-_outline_by_Richard_Cohen.pdf After the Ball: How America Will Conquer It’s Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90’s Outline compiled by Richard Cohen, MA]</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Kirk|first1=Marshall|last2=Madsen|first2=Hunter|title=After the ball : how America will conquer its fear and hatred of gays in the 90s|date=1989|publisher=Plume|location=New York|isbn=978-0452264984|page=183|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=+victims+in+need++of+protection|accessdate=2 February 2018}}</ref> Leftists also label Christians who support biblical marriage as "anti-gay," equating them with non-western Muslims who support stoning homosexuals.<ref>Mainwaring, Doug (April 3, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/jack-phillips-is-not-the-sultan-of-brunei-the-indiscriminate-weaponization-of-the-term-anti-gay Jack Phillips is not the Sultan of Brunei: The indiscriminate weaponization of the term ‘anti-gay’]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved April 4, 2019.</ref>

"Jamming" [[homo-hatred]] (disagreement with [[homosexual behavior]]s) was to be done by linking it to [[Nazi]] horror, advised Kirk and Madsen. Associate all who oppose homosexuality with images of Klansmen demanding that gays be slaughtered, hysterical backwoods preachers, menacing punks, and a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed. Thus, "propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths..."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20110603050349/http://www.renewamerica.com:80/columns/mbarber/080213 "Unmasking the "gay" agenda"]. ''renewamerica.com''. Retrieved on 2 Feb. 2018.</ref> " It can show them being criticized, hated, shunned. It can depict gays experiencing horrific suffering as the direct result of homohatred-suffering of which even most bigots would be ashamed to be the cause. It can, in short, link homohating bigotry with all sorts of attributes the bigot would be ashamed to possess, and with social consequences he would find unpleasant and scary... our effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof."<ref> http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.html The homosexual propaganda campaign in America's media, </ref>

Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, writes,
<blockquote>
There can be no doubt that Christianity represents the greatest obstacle to the normalization of homosexual behavior. It cannot be otherwise, because of the clear biblical teachings concerning the inherent sinfulness of homosexuality in all forms, and the normativity of heterosexual marriage. In order to counter this obstacle, Kirk and Madsen advised gays to "use talk to muddy the moral waters, that is, to undercut the rationalizations that 'justify' religious bigotry and to jam some of its psychic rewards." How can this be done? "This entails publicizing support by moderate churches and raising serious theological objections to conservative biblical teachings." [The latter of which attempts [[homosexuality and biblical interpretation]] examine and expose.]<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20070927163416/http://www.gender-news.com/other.php?id=19 ''After the Ball--Why the Homosexual Movement Has Won,''] Thursday, June 3rd, 2004</ref>
</blockquote>

Kirk and Madsen's open admission of their deceptive tactics is noted as most revealing: [O]ur effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof. "...the person's beliefs can be altered whether he is conscious of the attack or not"<ref>After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s, p. 152-153 (1989, Doubleday/Bantam)</ref> “The campaign we outline in this book, though complex, depends centrally upon a program of unabashed propaganda, firmly grounded in long-established principles of psychology and advertising.”<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=unabashed+propaganda%2C+firmly+grounded Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.xxvi]</ref><ref>[http://banap.net/ "[Behavior, and Not a Person]"]. ''banap.net''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Similarly, author Robert Bauman additionally records: "It makes no difference that the ads are lies... because were using them to ethically good effect, to counter negative stereotypes that are every bit as much lies, and far more wicked ones."<ref>The Gentleman from Maryland: The Conscience of a gay Conservative, by Robert Bauman, 1986, page 163.</ref>

The need for Kirk and Madsen to engage in such manipulation may be seen as being due to their sober realization of the nature of the homosexual lifestyle.

“In short, the gay lifestyle - if such a chaos can, after all, legitimately be called a lifestyle - it just doesn’t work: it doesn’t serve the two functions for which all social framework evolve: to constrain people’s natural impulses to behave badly and to meet their natural needs. While it’s impossible to provide an exhaustive analytic list of all the root causes and aggravants of this failure, we can asseverate at least some of the major causes. Many have been dissected, above, as elements of the Ten Misbehaviors; it only remains to discuss the failure of the gay community to provide a viable alternative to the heterosexual family.”<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=exhaustive+analytic+list Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.363 ]</ref>

David Kupelian, author of ''[[The Marketing of Evil]],'' describes Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, stating,
<blockquote>
Kirk and Madsen were not the kind of drooling activists that would burst into churches and throw condoms in the air. They were smart guys – very smart. Kirk, a Harvard-educated researcher in neuropsychiatry, worked with the Johns Hopkins Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth and designed aptitude tests for adults with 200+ IQs. Madsen, with a doctorate in politics from Harvard, was an expert on public persuasion tactics and social marketing.<ref>[http://pearl-diving.blogspot.com/2009/01/sold-on-homosexuality-marketing-of-evil.html "Sold on Homosexuality – The Marketing of Evil"]. ''pearl-diving.blogspot.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>
</blockquote>

Marshall Kirk died in 2005 at the age of 47.<ref>http://www.americanancestors.org/PageDetail.aspx?recordId=134544248</ref> The cause of death has not been publicly revealed.

Often cited as an early example of such tactics was the role of homosexual activists in persuading the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II). Dr. Ronald Bayer, though being himself a pro-homosexual psychiatrist, described this removal as being the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation, rather than any new scientific discoveries.<ref>[http://www.traditionalvalues.org/urban/eleven.php Exposed: The Myth That Psychiatry Has Proven That Homosexual Behavior Is Normal]</ref> In so doing, like slavery before it, the homosexual agenda is seen to threaten basic freedoms, principally the First Amendment.<ref>Adams, Guy (11-8-2008) [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mormon-stars-face-backlash-after-gay-marriage-ban-1003967.html ''Mormon stars face backlash after gay marriage ban''] The Independent</ref>

The charge of "[[homophobia]]" has been increasingly evidenced as being part of a means of intimidation used in pushing the Homosexual Agenda. Due to what homophobia has been made to denote, that of being a repressed homosexual, or possessing an irrational fear of being approached by homosexuals, or of being a "bigot" "persecuting" victims, the widespread use of the term "homophobic" attaches a powerful stigma to anyone who may even conscientiously oppose the practice of homosexuality, thus silencing many who might otherwise object to it.<ref>[http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/1995papers/socarides.html Thought Reform And The Psychology of Homosexual Advocacy, Charles W. Socarides, M.D.]</ref>

In relation to such oppression, psychologist Nicholas Cummings, former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), observed, "Homophobia as intimidation is one of the most pervasive techniques used to silence anyone who would disagree with the gay activist agenda." As an example of such fear within the APA, in addressing 100 fellow professionals Cummings related that while writing "Destructive Trends in Mental Health," with psychologist Rogers Wright, a number of fellow psychologists were invited to participate. However, these flatly turned them down, as they feared loss of tenure, loss of promotion, and other forms of professional retaliation. "We were bombarded by horror stories," Dr. Cummings said. "Their greatest fear was of the gay lobby, which is very strong in the APA.<ref>[Psychology Losing Scientific Credibility, Say APA Insiders http://www.narth.com/docs/insiders.html]</ref>

Noted homosexual activist and pornographer Clinton Fein, in his article, ''The Gay Agenda stated'': "Homophobic inclinations alone, even without any actions, should be criminal and punishable to the full extent of the law."

Erik Holland, author of ''The Nature of Homosexuality'', perceives that homosexuals have become so reckless in labeling others "homophobic" that "anyone who questions their labeling someone [is] a homophobe himself. Even quoting factual statistics about the connection between homosexuality and AIDS is allegedly homophobic." In addition, according to pro-homosexual author Vernon A. Wall, "even acceptance of homosexuality can be seen as a form of homophobia, because to talk about the acceptance of homosexuality is to imply that there is something about homosexuality that needs acceptance."<ref>[http://www.homosexinfo.org/Homophobia/HomePage "Homosexinfo - Homophobia - Homophobia: Fear of homosexuals?"]. ''homosexinfo.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

It may be speculated that if the liberal use of the term "homophobia" is not primarily a psychological tactic, then it indicates a psychological condition on the part of those who use the term in which they [[wishful thinking|wishfully]] imagine that those who oppose them are "fearful" of them, or of being one.

More recently, after 25 years of claiming she was not indoctrinating anyone with pro-homosexual beliefs, one activist honestly admitted to this being a lie. Canadian lesbian activist S. Bear Bergman, a female who identifies as a gender-confused "male", stated, "All that time I said I wasn't indoctrinating anyone with my beliefs about gay and lesbian and bi and trans and queer people? That was a lie.” Bergman recounted that she was instructed as a young gay activist to tell concerned parents that she was “just providing an alternate viewpoint” when accused of engaging in “indoctrination and recruiting,” and to use “soft” language when speaking about homosexuality. In her article on the notoriously liberal web site, the [[Huffington Post]], he went on to candidly confess that this indoctrination, "is absolutely my goal. I want to make your children like people like me and my family, even if that goes against the way you have interpreted the teachings of your religion." Bergman fantasized that in an ideal world he would have been "ushered into the world of queerness with care and tenderness by experienced homos" (akin to "camp counselors"), "and issued my leather jacket and my protest pins, my safer sex supplies..."

Bergman expressed that his goal was that of portraying to "impressionable young minds" the idea that "queers and transfolk are just as fine and lovely a kind of human as any other kind," and stated that he did not like the idea of sending her kid to schools where any kid could share with him their ideas about homosexuals. Thus Bergman, who believes that "books a kid hears at bedtime affect their sleep and also their dreams," is finalizing a series of children's books that all feature lesbian, homosexual, bisexual, gender-confused, or queer kids or families, with the goal that the young readers come to believe that people like him and his family are "absolutely great," that "lesbian, gay, bi, queer, and trans people -- that we exist, that we're perfectly fine and often really excellent." Bergman then concludes, "If that makes me an indoctrinator, I accept it. Let me be honest -- I am not even a little bit sorry."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.huffingtonpost.com/s-bear-bergman/i-have-come-to-indoctrinate-your-children-lgtbq_b_6795152.html|title=I have come to indoctrinate your children into my LGBTQ agenda (and I'm not a bit sorry)|last1=Bergman|first1=S. Bear|website=Huffington Post|accessdate=22 March 2015}}</ref>

Commenting on this frank article, Pete Baklinski of LifeSiteNews.com, states that, <blockquote>While Bergman paints a “friendly and cheerful” picture of the gay lifestyle, she fails to mention the serious health risks tied to homosexual behaviors....Research done in 2002 by Dr. John R. Diggs found that same-sex sexual behaviors expose gays, lesbians and bisexuals to “extreme risks of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), physical injuries, mental disorders and even a shortened life span.” Common sexual practices among gay men were found to lead to “numerous STDs and physical injuries, some of which are virtually unknown in the heterosexual population.” Gay and bisexual men were found to “lose up to 20 years of life expectancy.” The US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have warned on numerous occasions that HIV rates, already at epidemic proportions, are continuing to climb steadily among men who have ‘sex’ with men. The CDC has stated that gay and bisexual men continue to remain at the epicenter of what they call a “HIV/AIDS epidemic.”</blockquote>

To which Baklinski adds the spiritual consequences, citing one of the texts in the Bible which condemn homosexual relations:
{{Cquote|“For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error” (Letter to Romans 1:26).<ref>{{cite web|last1=Baklinski|first1=Pete|title=Gay activist: Of course our goal is to ‘indoctrinate children into LGBTQ agenda’|url=https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gay-activist-our-goal-is-to-indoctrinate-children-into-lgbtq-agenda|website=LifeSiteNews.com|accessdate=22 March 2015}}</ref> }}

For Christians believe God created man and women uniquely compatible and complimentary, and they alone are joined by God in marriage, with opposite genders being specified by both Genesis and personally by Jesus Christ. (Gn. 2:18-24; Mt. 19:4) The Bible only condemns homosexual relations - by design and decree, in principle and by precept - and never sanctions them wherever they are manifestly dealt with, and the injunctions against them are part of the transcendent and immutable moral law. (Lv. 18:22; Rm. 1:26,27)

However, Christians also understand that some of the first Christians were likely former homosexuals, (1Cor. 6:9-11) and believe that there is room at the cross for all who want the Lord Jesus over sin, and believe upon Him to save them who died for them, and rose again, and who thus are baptized and follow Him, to the glory of God.<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONS and the BIBLE]</ref>

===Influence in the academic world===
Professor Jerry Z. Muller described in an article titled ''First Things'' (Aug/Sept. 1993) how the homosexual lobby has gained widespread acceptance in the educational realm.
{{cquote|[Their] strategy has been remarkably successful. With a rapidity largely attributable in large part to a total lack of articulate resistance, homosexual ideology has gained an unquestioned and uncontested legitimacy in American academic life. Within the academy, as within nonacademic elite culture, the definition of opposite to homosexuality as "homophobia - a definition which implies that it is impossible to give good reasons for the cultural disapproval of homosexuality - is the best evidence of the success of this strategy.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=cbfVg_1qhe0C&pg=PP1&lpg=PP1&dq=David+W.+Virtue+scots+college&source=bl&ots=aDW7a615Gn&sig=Y1cLsx5sCQTgUUDJ88b5AKPRkNg&hl=en&ei=8skISpP1AcGktgfi2PzsCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPR14,M1 "Homosexuality"]. ''google.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>}}

====In the public schools====
{{See also|Homosexuality in Schools}}
[[File:Prairie Ridge High School LGBT+ Flag.jpg|thumb|200px|School in Chicago area (Prairie Ridge High School) with LGBT+ [[Rainbow#Rainbow flag|rainbow flag]]. Students in the same school who display the [[Confederate flag]] will face discipline.<ref name="NWHerald2017"/>]]
[[File:Prairie Ridge High School LGBT.jpg|thumb|200px|This Chicago-area school has "safe spaces" for students with homosexual attraction (sponsored by [[GLSEN]]).]]
Many public schools throughout the United States welcome the Homosexual Agenda, oftentimes through publicly-funded school programs created by [[GLSEN]].<ref name="Heyer2015">Heyer, Walt (June 8, 2015). [http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/06/15118/ Public School LGBT Programs Don't Just Trample Parental Rights. They Also Put Kids at Risk]. ''The Witherspoon Institute -- Public Discourse''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> Much of this was the work of the [[Obama Administration]].<ref name="Heyer2015"/> GLSEN celebrates the Homosexual Agenda through a "day of silence."<ref>Berry, Susan (April 11, 2015). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/11/day-of-silence-how-the-lgbt-agenda-is-hijacking-americas-youth/ Day of Silence: How the LGBT Agenda Is Hijacking America’s Youth]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> In 2016, [[California]] became the first state to legislate the teaching of the homosexual agenda in public schools to children as young as second grade.<ref>Berry, Susan (July 19, 2016). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/19/lgbt-history-california-first-to-teach/ California: 1st State To Teach LGBT Curriculum — to Second Graders]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> These California students are now banned from opting-out from this [[indoctrination]].<ref>Newman, Alex (January 4, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/27883-students-banned-from-opting-out-of-lgbt-education Students Banned From Opting Out of LGBT Education]. ''The New American''. Retrieved January 5, 2018.</ref> In February 2019, the Department of Education in the [[United Kingdom]] announced that public school children starting at the age of five would be required to learn about homosexual and transgender relationships, with parents being unable to withdraw their children from such classes.<ref>Tennant, Michael (February 27, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/31593-u-k-schools-to-indoctrinate-kids-as-young-as-five-in-lgbt-agenda U.K. Schools to Indoctrinate Kids as Young as Five in LGBT Agenda]. ''The New American''. Retrieved February 27, 2019. See also:
*McLean, Dorothy Cummings (March 25, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/christian-mom-sues-uk-primary-school-for-forcing-lgbt-pride-celebrations-on-kids Christian mom sues UK primary school for forcing LGBT Pride celebrations on kids]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved March 25, 2019.</ref>

At a recent sold-out California Teachers Association (CTA) conference in Palm Springs, Calif (October 2021), a leaked audio recording reveals two teachers mocking parents over their concerns about homosexual and transgender indoctrination at school, says a source who attended the event. “It was horrifying to listen to not just one teacher but really all of the teachers in all of these seminars, excoriating parents,” and that “The overarching theme of the classes that I attended were California teachers instructing other teachers on how to sneak in the LGBTQ+ curriculum in a manner that does not alert parents,” said the source, who also related how some teachers at the conference also suggested that parents who refuse to call their child by pronouns of the child’s choosing should be arrested and charged with child abuse. In the audio clip, one teacher advised other teachers who lead LGBTQ clubs to maintain an air of plausible deniability so they can play dumb if they are questioned by parents. “Because we are not official, we have no club rosters. We keep no records,” said the teacher, who is also an LGBTQ club leader. “In fact, sometimes we don’t really want to keep records because if parents get upset that their kids are coming? We’re like, ‘Yeah, I don’t know. Maybe they came?’. Another teacher suggesteed activist teachers disguise the nature of GSA clubs with an example being calling her LGBTQ club the “You Be You” club." Teachers also boasted about spying on students’ online searches and activity inn attempting to recruit sixth-grade students into these LGBTQ clubs whose membership rolls are kept from the eyes of parents. One of the teachers said, “We totally stalked what they were doing on Google.” As of 11/23/2021 the “UBU (You Be You)” club was suspended after information about the leaked audio was made public. <ref>Jones, Brad (November 23, 2021). https://www.theepochtimes.com/leaked-audio-reveals-how-california-teachers-recruit-kids-into-lgbtq-clubs_4114896.html Leaked Audio Reveals How California Teachers Recruit Kids Into LGBTQ Clubs]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved November 23, 2021.</ref>

In schools where the homosexual agenda is welcomed, students who fly the [[Confederate flag]] may expect to face disciplinary actions.<ref name="NWHerald2017">Prokop, Hannah (November 11, 2016). [http://www.nwherald.com/2016/11/09/prairie-ridge-high-school-suspends-student-for-wearing-confederate-flag-to-school/aelbmro/ Prairie Ridge High School suspends student for wearing Confederate flag to school]. ''Northwest Herald''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref><ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/apr/20/confederate-flags-not-rainbow-ones-banned-in-schoo/ Wyoming school district bans Confederate flags, allows gay-pride ones]. ''The Washington Times'' (from the ''Associated Press''). April 20, 2019. Retrieved April 20, 2019.</ref> In March 2019, an Ohio public school student was suspended for posting Bible verses next to homosexual flags.<ref>Gstalter, Morgan (March 13, 2019). [https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/433823-ohio-student-suspended-for-targeting-gay-straight-alliance-by Ohio student suspended for 'targeting' Gay-Straight Alliance by posting Bible verses in response to LGBT flags]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved March 13, 2019.</ref><ref>Kaplan, Talia (March 12, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/ohio-student-suspended-after-posting-bible-verses-around-school-i-wanted-to-spread-the-word-of-god Ohio student suspended after posting Bible verses around school: 'I wanted to spread the word of God']. ''Fox News''. Retrieved March 13, 2019.</ref>

===Immorality in society===
The “gay” activists welcome [[immorality]] in [[society]]. As no one wants to be called a [[hypocrite]], every act of sexual sin by society members serves the “gay” interest by lessening the public will to uphold public morality. That's why, wherever the acceptance of sexual sin is observed, it is likely there are “gay” activists involved.

==== The abortion industry ====
The best example of the Homosexual Agenda causing societal immorality is seen in their aggressive defense of the abortion industry. Obviously, homosexuals cannot have an “unwanted pregnancy,” yet in an extensive experience, the big part of “pro-choice” street activists at abortion clinics are homosexuals. This is so because they know that preserving the people's option to destroy unborn life is essential to maintaining so-called “[[sexual freedom]]” as a social norm. If women lost their choice to legally kill their unborn offspring, the resulting inevitable shift of emphasis from self-gratification to family responsibility in such a large section of the population would change the entire culture. When a woman gives in to fear and selfishness to kill the child in her womb, she will not feel that she can criticize other sinners. The choice to kill their unborn children morally compromises both men and women (making them unwilling to criticize choices to engage in other forms of immoral behavior), and ensures that the outcome of an unwanted child will not be a lasting deterrent to those who have chosen sexual “freedom” over family. This explains why homosexuals, who by definition cannot conceive children together, are among the most militant advocates of abortion on demand.

==== The pornography industry ====
The existence of a thriving pornography industry where “gays” are also notoriously prevalent serves the “gay” cause by morally corrupting the men who use it, making them less likely to oppose homosexuality on moral grounds and more likely to support public policies which legitimize sexual [[hedonism]]. “Gay” activists love sexual anarchy because they know that when a man falls in bondage to pornography he is less willing to oppose other sexual sins in society.

==== The entertainment industry ====
When young people enjoy music or films that glorify sexual lust, they feel more sympathy to the “gay” arguments.

The “gays” have it easy pushing sexual “freedom”, because every person, in their flesh, wants to indulge themselves in their own choices.
This is like children being offered only candy to eat. People want to eat only sweets until they get sick. Only with maturity do they know how to eat to stay healthy.

The “gay” movement has many allies in its campaign to aggrandize sexual immorality, but it is the only social movement in the history of the world whose primary purpose is to eliminate social restraints on [[sexual]] conduct. It is heavily funded, highly organized and strategically positioned to maximize its ability to change societies and cultures.<ref name="Lively2009">{{cite book |title=Redeeming the Rainbow: A Christian Response to the "Gay" Agenda |author=[[Scott Lively]] |publisher=Veritas Aeterna Press |place=Springfield, MA |year=2009 |edition=1 (Version 1.1)|chapter=1: Pro-family answers to common questions about homosexuality and "gay" agenda |pages=8, 60, 176|url=http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09b/Redeeming_rainbow}}</ref>

==Opponents of the Homosexual Agenda ==
Some well known individuals/groups in the [[United States]] who actively oppose the homosexual agenda are: [[MassResistance]], [[Focus on the Family]], [[Peter LaBarbera]]'s American's for Truth, the [[Traditional Values Coalition]] ([[Louis Sheldon]] is a chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition), and [[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]].

===Peter LaBarbera===
As noted earlier, [[Peter LaBarbera]] is the founder of [[Americans For Truth]] (AFT) which is a national organization in the United States devoted solely to confronting the homosexual agenda.<ref name="americansfortruth.com">[http://www.americansfortruth.com/about/ "About Americans for Truth About Homosexuality and AFTAH Founder Peter LaBarbera » Americans for Truth"]. ''americansfortruth.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Peter LaBarbera said the following regarding the need for the organization Americans for Truth:
{{cquote|Homosexual, [[bisexuality|bisexual]], and [[transsexual]] groups spend tens of millions of dollars every year to market and normalize their aberrant lifestyles, yet after all these years there is not a single, serious national group dedicated specifically to exposing and countering their agendas...

It’s time for Americans to unapologetically resist the demands of this lobby, and to counter the lies upon which it is built-the foremost being that certain people are inherently or ‘born’ homosexual and that this is a [[civil rights]] issue.<ref name="americansfortruth.com"/>}}

===Matt Barber===
[[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]] is one the more notable figures in regards to opposing the homosexual agenda. Matt Barber wrote the following regarding the homosexual agenda:
[[Image:Mbarber_b.jpg‎|right|thumb|175px|[[Matt Barber]]]]
{{cquote|Ironically, sexual [[relativism|relativists]] are anything but relative. They are quite affirmative in principle. But the principles they foist demand comprehensive acceptance of homosexual conduct — by force of law — through federal edicts such as “hate crimes” legislation, the so-called “Employment Non-Discrimination Act” (ENDA) and by imposing government sanctioned “same-sex marriage.” All such government mandates grant special protected “minority” status to those who define themselves by aberrant sexual preferences and changeable sexual behaviors. These laws put people with traditional values directly in the crosshairs of official government policy.

Throughout society, homosexual activists demand that homosexual behaviors not only be “tolerated,” but celebrated. (That’s what the euphemistic slogan “celebrate diversity” supposes). They have masked their true political agenda by hijacking the language of the genuine civil rights movement and through the crafty and disingenuous rhetoric of “tolerance” and “diversity.”

Anyone who believes the Biblical directive that human sexuality is a gift from [[God]], to be shared between man and wife within the bonds of marriage, is branded “homophobic,” “hateful” or “discriminatory.” They are to be silenced by all means possible.<ref>http://www.cwfa.org/articledisplay.asp?id=14696&department=CFI&categoryid=family</ref>}}

===Steffen Königer===
[[German]] politician Steffen Königer from the party [[Alternative for Germany]] (AfD) showed that it is possible to use [[irony]] when opposing the [[extremist]] gender agenda. In his address in the parliament of the [[Brandenburg]], the federated state of [[Germany]], he ridiculed homosexual lobbyists and gender ideologists by enlisting in his introduction, for about two minutes, all "gender and sexual varieties" he could find on the Internet. This way he brought to attention of the general public the absurdity of the proposal put forward by the German [[Green Party]] that demanded to introduce multiple "gender identities" in state documents. When the Parliamentary Speaker tried to stop him, he just replied that he is not finished yet and further adamantly continued in naming all alleged gender declinations. When he was finally done with his introduction, his actual reaction to the proposal took less than three seconds: ''"The AfD party rejects your proposal."''<ref>{{cite web |title=Un político alemán ridiculiza los postulados del LGBTI |url=https://youtu.be/GzIwvHUvFR0 |accessdate=23 Jun 2016 |language=German (English subtitles)}}</ref>

==Further reading==
*https://www.amazon.com/dp/B012YKIQ2M Counterfeiting the Rainbow by Beverly Rachel
*[http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html Homosexuality and the Nazi Party] by Scott Lively. Excellent discussion of the anti-Christian and homosexual origins of the Nazism.
*[http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/ Documentation of the links between homosexuals and the Nazis] by the Government of Israel.
*[http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/BPCollectionNews.asp?ID=131 2008 McDonald's and the Homosexual Agenda], Baptist Press
*[http://www.couplescompany.com/FEATURES/politics/2004/Selling%20Homosexuality.pdf Paul E. Rondeau, Selling homosexuality to America (PDF)] [http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/730694/posts Or html form]
*Shupe, Jamie (March 10, 2019). [https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/03/10/i-was-americas-first-non-binary-person-it-was-all-a-sham/ I Was America’s First ‘Nonbinary’ Person. It Was All a Sham.] ''The Daily Signal''. Retrieved April 15, 2019.

==See also==
*[[ACT-UP]]
*[[Anti-Defamation League]]
*[[Anthropological Revolution]]
*[[Essay:Sodomism]]
*[[Homosexual belief system]]
*[[Gay affirmative]]
*[[Gay rights]]
*[[Homophobia]]
*[[Hate speech]], [[Hate crime]]
*[[Homosexual logic]], used to justify and mandate the Homosexual Agenda
*[[Homosexuality]]
*[[Homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]
*[[Homosexualization]]
*[[Gleichschaltung#LGBTI Gleichschaltung|LGBTI Gleichschaltung]]
*[[San Francisco values]]
*[[Fashion industry values]]
*[[Hollywood values]]
*[[Slogans and the Homosexual Agenda]]
*[[Stonewall UK]]

== References ==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

{{liberalism}}
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Homosexuality]]
[[Category:Liberal Deceit]]
[[Category:Hollywood Values]]

Homosexual Agenda

2021-11-24T09:43:49Z

Daniel1212: worked vs. work

{{Homosexuality}}
The '''Homosexual Agenda''' is a self-centered set of beliefs and objectives designed to mandate approval of [[homosexuality]] and its ideology. The goals and means of this movement include indoctrinating students in [[public school]], restricting the free speech of opposition, obtaining [[special rights|special treatment]] for homosexuals, distorting [[Bible|Biblical]] teaching and science, and interfering with freedom of association. Advocates of the homosexual agenda seek special rights for [[homosexuals]] and self-described "LGBTQ people" that other people don't have, such as immunity from criticism (see [[hate speech]], [[hate crime]]s).<ref>Such special rights will necessarily [[zero-sum game|come at the expense]] of the rights of broader society.</ref> '''''The homosexual agenda is the biggest threat to the rights of [[free speech]] and [[religious freedom]] today.'''''<ref>Daniels, Fletch (September 10, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/the-lgbt-endgame-is-to-destroy-christianity The LGBT endgame is to destroy Christianity]. ''LifeSiteNews'' (from the ''American Thinker''). Retrieved September 10, 2019.</ref><ref>Duke, Selwyn (September 11, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/item/33387-lgbt-activists-hate-christianity-and-want-to-destroy-it LGBT Activists Hate Christianity — and Want to Destroy It]. ''The New American''. Retrieved September 11, 2019.</ref><ref>In 2020, more than 10% (90 out of 879) of the featured characters on scripted primetime television programs are openly [[LGBTQ]], an attempt by the pro-LGBTQ producers of those shows to deceitfully push the discredited claim that "10%" of the population is homosexual when, in fact, less than 2% of the population actually identify as such.</ref>

One of the top priorities of the Homosexual Agenda is to prohibit and outlaw [[conversion therapy]]. Activities like [[baseball]] and [[chess]] reduce homosexual proclivities, while other activities like figure skating for men and soccer for women seem to encourage homosexuality.
[[Leftists]] are pushing unconstitutional bans on conversion therapy, apparently unable to tolerate things they dislike. Their priorities include electing high-ranking officials who are openly homosexual, with the ultimate goal of electing a president who is in a [[same-sex marriage]], like the top [[Dem]] fundraising candidate [[Pete Buttigieg]] in 2020.

In a speech on December 10, 2013, to a pro-family rally in [[Jamaica]], a country that rejects same-sex "marriage", Brian Camenker of [[MassResistance]] outlined the step-by-step approach of the homosexual agenda:<ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen2/13d/jamaica-speech-121013/index.html "MassResistance helps Jamaica confront ‘gay’ agenda"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

*Legalize homosexuality
*Hold "gay pride" parades
*Accept child sex trafficking
*Demand non-discrimination laws
*Insist on homosexuals' adoption of children
*Push the homosexual agenda in schools<ref>{{cite web |title=Criticism of Transgender Agenda Will Get Virginia Students Expelled |author=Austin Ruse |date=10 Jun 2016 |url=https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/10/transgender-northern-virginia-students-can-now-expelled-criticizing-transgenderism/ |publisher=BREITBART |quote=The transgender change in school regulations was imposed last night during a dramatic board meeting where only 12 pro-trans witnesses were invited to testify. ... No opposing voices were allowed to be heard, parents were relegated to shouting opposition from the seats and some were ejected from the meeting.... Last year, they were promised a lengthy investigation and a full hearing. Instead, it was foisted upon them with less than 24 hours-notice. ... an Oregon law recently allowed a jury to award $60,000 t0 a transgender teacher because other teachers declined to use the teacher’s preferred pronoun, which is “they” rather than “him” or “her.” Deputies for President Barack Obama have backed similar rules for all K-12 schools, and New York City has established similar forced-speech rules.|accessdate=12 Jun 2016}}</ref>
*Legalize various alternate forms of partnership and call them "marriage" (i.e. man and man, woman and woman, man and multiple women)
*Demand public funding to deal with increased homosexual-related social problems
*Promote the [[gender confusion]] agenda
*Demand to be treated "equally"
*Impose a large-scale loss of free speech
*Ban counseling for kids confused by homosexual issues
*[[Drag queen]] story times to indoctrinate children
*Ban scientifically and religiously proven methods of homosexual conversion
*Attack churches
*Encourage [[abortion]]

[[Russia]] is a leader in rejecting the homosexual agenda.<ref>{{cite web |title=Is the Homosexual Agenda 'Unstoppable'? - Comparing America with Russia |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msLH6f6vyC4 |accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=RUSSIA VS. THE LGBT GLOBALISTS: A Climate of Hate and Fear |url=http://www.scottlively.net/2015/02/25/russia-vs-the-lgbt-globalists-a-climate-of-hate-and-fear-part-two/ |quote=This dangerous LGBT strategy has now gone global and the target is the Russian Federation. ... Core American values to Obama are publicly celebrated sodomy and doctor-assisted transsexual self-mutilation. ... The Russian anti-propaganda law, passed June 11, 2013, was the first truly effective international counter-measure since the “gay” agenda went global around the turn of the millennium. Typically, the “gays” characterized the law as hateful and an incitement to violence, but in doing so they revealed that propagandizing children is part of their agenda, since the law simply classifies “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relationships” as material that cannot be distributed among minors and commands the government to protect children from it. Just after the passage of this law Barack Obama did an about-face on the “reset” policy (in which Russia had been recognized as an equal partner in the world community) and instead began reviving cold-war rhetoric.|accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Pro-Russian Press Conference |date=22 February 2014 |url=http://www.scottlively.net/2014/02/22/pro-russian-press-conference/ |quote=We got lots of coverage from the event, and I believe we accomplished our objective which was to bring awareness to the world that the pro-family movement in the U.S., Canada, UK, and other “pro-gay” countries is happy to see the Russian Federation standing up for family values. We think this will encourage other nations to follow their example. |accessdate=29 May 2016}}</ref> For example, Russia banned adoption by Americans as the Obama Administration aggressively pushed the homosexual agenda, and in June 2013 a house in the [[Russian]] parliament passed legislation to ban foreign adoption by gay couples or single parents who live in any [[same-sex marriage|gay marriage]] nation.<ref>[https://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-russia-ban-adoption-gay-couples-20130618,0,4633280.story "Russian lawmakers pass ban on adoption tied to gay foreign couples"]. ''Los Angeles Times''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

[[Barack Hussein Obama]], [[Hillary Clinton]], and essentially all [[Democratic Party|Democrat]] politicians now advocate the homosexual agenda, reflecting the growing financial power of the homosexual network. Obama's self-centered obsession with his own re-election, and fundraising for his campaign, has caused him to create a national political issue out of this, rather than deal with other issues like the economy. Many [[establishment]] Republicans and [[Cafeteria Christians]] also have bought into the homosexual agenda.

'''''Among all the [[liberal]] belief systems, the homosexual ideology is the most self-centered or selfish''''' – unlike the vast charity performed by thousands of churches in the U.S. alone, a homosexual charity can be considered an [[oxymoron]].

The late Supreme Court Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] referred to the "so-called homosexual agenda" in ''[[Lawrence v. Texas]]'', 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (dissenting opinion). Justice Scalia also predicted that this was the first step to legalizing homosexual civil unions. He was proven right with the outcome of ''[[Obergefell v. Hodges]]''. The goal of the latter decision was the societal affirmation of homosexuality rather than simple equality.<ref>Williams, Thomas D. (January 5, 2020). [https://www.breitbart.com/education/2020/01/05/usa-today-obergefell-was-never-about-freedom-to-marry/ USA Today: Obergefell Was Never About ‘Freedom to Marry’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved January 5, 2020.</ref>

Despite the fact that only 4.1% of the U.S. population identified as [[LGBT]], just over half a percentage point higher than four years prior,<ref>Gates, Gary J. (January 11, 2017). [https://www.gallup.com/poll/201731/lgbt-identification-rises.aspx In US, More Adults Identifying as LGBT]. ''Gallup''. Retrieved January 18, 2017.</ref> Americans '''''greatly overestimate the proportion of homosexuals''''' in the nation to be an average of 23%.<ref name="GreatlyOver">Newport, Frank (May 21, 2015). [https://www.gallup.com/poll/183383/americans-greatly-overestimate-percent-gay-lesbian.aspx Americans Greatly Overestimate Percent Gay, Lesbian in U.S.] ''Gallup''. Retrieved January 18, 2017. See also:
*Mainwaring, Doug (June 28, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/americans-vastly-overestimate-the-size-of-the-lgbt-population Americans vastly overestimate the size of the LGBT population]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved June 28, 2019.</ref> Interestingly, Republicans and conservatives gave estimates closest to the actual number.<ref name="GreatlyOver"/>

== The Homosexual Agenda ==
Joseph P. Gudel, in ''That Which is Unnatural''<ref>[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0108a.html "That Which is Unnatural" Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture] Part Two in a Two-Part Series on Homosexuality, from the Christian Research Journal, Winter 1993, page 8</ref> contended that the homosexual movement,

:has been militantly demanding not just the homosexuals' right to do whatever they wish to do behind closed doors, but, more importantly, that society fully accept their lifestyle as both healthy and normal, even demanding special rights and legislation as an "oppressed minority." Gudel quotes various sources evidencing this.

In a 1987 speech to the National Press Club in Washington, homosexual spokesperson Jeff Levi proclaimed,

:We are no longer seeking just a right to privacy and a protection from wrong. We also have a right — as heterosexual Americans already have — to see government and society affirm our lives.<ref>Jeff Levi, in William Dannemeyer, Shadow in the Land (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1989), 86.</ref>

In an article entitled "Gays on the March" in 1975, Time magazine quoted lesbian activist Barbara Gittings who stated:

:What the homosexual wants, and here he is neither willing to compromise nor morally required to compromise — is acceptance of homosexuality as a way of life fully on a par with heterosexuality." In response, Time opined, "It is one thing to remove legal discrimination against homosexuals. It is another to mandate approval....It is this goal of full acceptance, which no known society past or present has granted to homosexuals, that makes many Americans apprehensive.<ref>Gays on the March," Time, 8 Sept. 1975, 43</ref>

A primary goal of the homosexual agenda is to normalize the lifestyle in [[public schools]]. This occurred quickly and intensely after same-sex "marriage" was illegally imposed in Massachusetts, where homosexual relationships are taught to children as young as kindergartners, as recounted by the decision of ''[[Parker v. Hurley]]''.<ref>The ''Parker v. Hurley'' decision explained, "In January 2005, when Jacob Parker ("Jacob") was in kindergarten, he brought home a 'Diversity Book Bag.' This included a picture book, ''Who's in a Family?'', which depicted different families, including single-parent families, an extended family, interracial families, animal families, a family without children, and — to the concern of the Parkers — a family with two dads and a family with two moms. The book concludes by answering the question, 'Who's in a family?': 'The people who love you the most!' The book says nothing about marriage."</ref>

In a 1992 report by John Leo in U.S. News & World Report, he notes some books which were part of New York City's public school curriculum.

The first-grade book, ''Children of the Rainbow'', stated on page 145, which states that teachers must "be aware of varied family structures, including...gay or lesbian parents," and "children must be taught to acknowledge the positive aspects of each type of household." Another children book is Heather Has Two Mommies, which is about a lesbian couple having a child through artificial insemination. Another book, ''Gloria Goes to Gay Pride'', states, "Some women love women, some men love men, some women and men love each other. That's why we march in the parade, so everyone can have a choice."

Leo commented,

:A line is being crossed here; in fact, a brand new ethic is descending upon the city's public school system. The traditional civic virtue of tolerance (if gays want to live together, it's their own business) has been replaced with a new ethic requiring approval and endorsement (if gays want to live together, we must 'acknowledge the positive aspects' of their way of life).<ref>John Leo, "Heather Has a Message," U.S. News & World Report, 17 Aug. 1992, 16.</ref>

Dr. Judith A. Reisman in her extensive ''Crafting “Gay” Children'',<ref>http://www.defendthefamily.com/_docs/resources/6390601.pdf</ref> reports that Harvard homosexual Toby Morotta, PhD, stated that in the 1970s, members of the Gay Activists Alliance - who were trained in the “zapping" of any who rebuffed homosexuality.<ref>Toby Marotta: THE POLITICS OF HOMOSEXUALITY: HOW LESBIANS AND GAY MEN HAVE MADE THEMSELVES A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL FORCE IN MODERN AMERICA, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1981 at 319</ref> And that these formed the “Gay Academic Union,” (GAU) which was made up of faculty and students in major universities. She states that the GAU has long fought for domination of its worldview within the academic community, and professional journals commonly assigned GAU and other homosexual peer reviewers to research touching on homosexuality, generally resulting in a quick death to possible unfavorable findings.<ref>See extensive reports in regular NARTH Bulletins as well as Ray Johnson, “American Psychology: The Political Science, at 53-57.</ref>

This and the general agenda is seen to be overall implementing a marketing strategy explained in a book called ''After the Ball,'' by [[gay rights]] activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in the late 1980s, in which a six-point plan was set forth as to how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior in a decade-long time frame:
:"The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior." <ref name="Winn07252003">''After the Ball'' (1989), quoted from Winn, Pete (7-25-2003) [ ''Q&A: The Homosexual Agenda''] Citizenlink</ref> "Thus propagandistic advertising can depict all opponents of the gay movement as homophobic bigots who are 'not Christian' and the propaganda can further show them [[homosexuals]] as being criticized, hated and shunned..."<ref>After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's, by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen (Author) (p. 152-153)</ref>

[[Focus on the Family]] provides additional quotes from ''After the Ball'', outlining key points of the homosexual agenda:<ref name="Winn07252003"/><ref>Kirk, Marshall K. and Erastes Pill (11-1987) ''The Overhauling of Straight America'' Available at [http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/overhauling.htm ''STRATEGIES OF THE HOMOSEXUAL MOVEMENT: "The Overhauling of Straight America"'']</ref>

#"Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible." (They use late night air waves and special channels, as well as their right to peacefully assemble to do so.)
#"Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers."
#"Give homosexual protectors a just cause."
#"Make gays look good."
#"Make the victimizers look bad."
#"Get funds from corporate America."

[[United States Supreme Court]] Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] wrote:
{{cquote|Today's opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=02-102#dissent1 ''LAWRENCE et al. v. TEXAS''] at findlaw.com</ref>}}

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vic_Eliason Vic Eliason] of [http://www.crosstalkamerica.com Crosstalk America] rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies.

== Specific goals ==
The goals of the homosexual movement include:

#Ignoring Christian morals and discouraging religiously based laws.
#Attempting to convince the world that marriage should be defined secularly, instead of as one of the Lord's commandments.
#Ignore the clear message of the [[Bible]] that [[homosexuality]] is a sin and an abomination unto [[God]] because their First Amendment rights allow them to.
#Remind conservatives that there cannot be a "gay ([[homosexual attraction]]) gene", just like like there cannot be a "black gene" because complex things like these are caused by complex interactions between genes.
#Censoring evidence that the "gay gene" is a hoax. After all, it would have to be multiple genes interacting together.<ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08a/born_gay_hoax/smith_0329/index.html ''Lesbian activists at Smith College riot, shut down Ryan Sorba speech on "The Born Gay Hoax" as police watch. See exclusive videos.''] Mass Resistance</ref>
#Censoring speech against homosexuality by branding it to be "hate-speech"<ref>[http://www.silencingchristians.com Video:Silencing Christians]</ref><ref>[http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2009/06/homosexuality-its-crime-in-england-to.html "Marquette Warrior"]. ''mu-warrior.blogspot.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[http://www.ccfon.org/view.php?id=745 Bishops fight for right to criticize homosexual lifestyle, 25th May 2009]</ref>
#Censoring biblical statements condemning homosexuality<ref>White, Hilary (04-21-2006) [http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/apr/06042105.html ''Court Upholds School Ban on "Homosexuality is Shameful" T-Shirt''] LifeSiteNews.com</ref>
#Lobbying for equal employment rights.<ref>The Crimson Staff (10-13-2006) [http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=514950 ''A Box of Their Own?''] (opinion) The Crimson</ref><ref>http://www.afa.net, Homosexual Agenda Platforms from 1972 - 2000</ref>
#Expand hate crimes legislation to include sexual orientation, which would be equally wrong for heterosexuals to do.<ref>Pelosi, Nancy Office of (09-28-2004) [http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/Sept04/HateCrimes092804.html ''Pelosi: "Hate Crimes Prevention Legislation is Right Thing to Do, Long Overdue"''] From the office of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi</ref>
#Ending the military's and Boy Scouts' restrictions on homosexuality<ref>''Boy Scouts of Am. v. Dale'', 530 U.S. 640 (2000) (Boy Scouts); "Matlovich v. Secretary of the Air Force (591 F.2d 852, DC Circ. 1 978) (military)</ref>
#Stopping children as young as 5 years old from attending therapy to repair their sexual preference<ref>[http://www.thetaskforce.org/reports_and_research/youth_in_the_crosshairs National Gay and Lesbian Task Force:Youth in the Crosshairs]</ref>
#Teach tolerance of homosexuals in schools.
#In places like Massachusetts and California, where the homosexual lobby is the strongest, it starts as early as preschool. They tell seven- or eight-year-old boys, "If you only like boys, there's a chance you may be homosexual," or "If you only like girls, maybe you are lesbian." Children at that age also do not have the hormones to experience sexual attraction, so they cannot understand this yet.
#Demands protections from job discrimination.<ref>[http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/nondiscrimination/ENDA_main_page Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) | National Gay and Lesbian Task Force]</ref>
#Suing an online dating website for discrimination. This was because sexual orientation is a federally protected group, as such, this company was claimed to be "breaking" the law.<ref>Joshua Rhett Miller. [https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,454904,00.html "eHarmony to Provide Gay Dating Service After Lawsuit"]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>
#Undermining the [[Essay:Quantifying Mental Strength|resolve]] of [[Homosexuality and choice#Choice and Genetics|latent homosexuals]] so that their will becomes too weak to resist the temptations of homosexuality<ref>http://www.thetaskforce.org/activist_center/resources_and_tools/challenge_exgay</ref>
#Pushing for legalized adoption by homosexual individuals and couples<ref>http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/parenting_and_family</ref>
#Indoctrination of public school children to support the homosexual agenda
#Allowing boys into girls' restrooms and vice versa, without restriction.

The state-by-state push for same-sex "marriage" can be viewed as a means to the above goals, or a goal in itself.<ref>[[Lewis v. Harris]]</ref> An example of this would be the recent New Hampshire law that makes same-sex civil unions "legal".<ref>[http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/06/01/new_hampshire_law_makes_same_sex_civil_unions_legal/ "New Hampshire law makes same-sex civil unions legal"]. ''boston.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Although notable gains toward achieving its goals continue to manifest, homosexual activists later began been expressing a high level of dissatisfaction with the [[Obama regime]]. Commenting on such, Massresistance.org, an organization which opposes the homosexual agenda in [[Massachusetts]], noted that Obama had,

*signed an order extending federal benefits to same-sex partners.
*pushed an extreme hate crimes bill in Congress.
*declared his intention to repeal the Defense of Marriage.
*pushed a pro-homosexual and transgender version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
*appointed homosexual activists to high level positions, including Harry Knox, of the homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign, and Kevin Jennings, founder of the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which educates kids in the public schools.
*declared February to be "Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month."
*demanded the State Department allow homosexual couples to use their married names (from marriages or civil unions) on US passports.<ref>update@massresistance.org 6/24/2009 11:56 PM</ref>

In Europe, countries such as the [[United Kingdom]] and [[France]] have adopted policies promoting gender confusion.<ref>Friedman, Victoria (February 15, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/02/15/france-mother-father-parent-uk-govt-lawyer-mother-not-gender-specific/ Men Can Be Mothers in UK, While French Schools Erase Terms ‘Father,’ ‘Mother’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved February 15, 2019.</ref>

=== Strategies and psychological tactics ===
Homosexual activists are often seen as engaging in [[homosexual logic|specious argumentation]], such as attempts to controvert the consistent teaching of the Bible on homosexual relations (see [[homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]), and using false analogies, in order to gain acceptance of homosexuality. One common argument used by homosexual activists seeks to compare their quest for equal rights to that of others.<ref>Miner, Homosexuality, Civil Rights, and the Church</ref> This argument is countered by the observation that blacks were able to peacefully argue that mankind should not be "judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character",<ref>[http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm, Speech by Martin Luther King Jr.]</ref> as the former yields no certain moral distinction. In contrast, homosexual activists seek acceptance of an immoral practice(s), and in addition, engage in certain coercive and manipulative means to do so. This includes the use of demonstrative protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way.<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/socialsciences/sellinghomosexuality.html</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.html "The homosexual propaganda campaign in America's media"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.amazon.com/After-Ball-America-Conquer-Hatred/dp/0452264987 "After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's (Plume): Marshall Kirk, Hunter Madsen: 9780452264984: Amazon.com: Books"]. ''amazon.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89526 "‘Gays’ put ‘terrorist’ label on Christians"]. ''WND''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08c/Prop8/church_attacks.html "Homosexuals begin campaign of terror over Prop 8 loss"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>http://rebuildtheparty.ning.com/video/exodus-protest-park-street</ref><ref>http://theway2k.vox.com/library/post/homosexuals-persecuting-christians-and-mormons.html</ref><ref>http://www.hamiltonsquare.net/articlesRiotsSep1993.htm</ref><ref>[https://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/may/08050205.html "Lesbian Break-in and Riot During College Speech on “Born-Gay Hoax” Forces Cancellation"]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>[https://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95296 "‘How hate crimes laws forced me into exile’"]. ''WND''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref><ref>Muehlenberg, Bill, [http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/06/04/another-nail-in-the-christian-coffin/ Another Nail in the Christian Coffin], [[4 June]] [[2009]]</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09a/feder_0311/index.html "Gay activists stop free speech at UMass Amherst"]. ''massresistance.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref> In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality.<ref>LZ Granderson, ''Commentary: Gay is not the new black'', Cable News Network,July 16, 2009</ref> Another strategy used by supporters of the homosexual agenda is to publicly deny that such an agenda exists.<ref>[http://onug.us/content/christians-america-and-gay-agenda "Christians, America, And The Gay Agenda"]. ''onug.us''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

While not all homosexuals agree with the use of deceptive psychological tactics, leading homosexual activists willfully employ them. The aforementioned book, ''After the Ball'', is widely regarded as the handbook for the homosexual agenda, in which two homosexual Harvard-trained graduates, <ref>[http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,152180,00.html "Is The Gay Revolution a Flop?"]. ''time.com''. 24 June 2001. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref> Marshall Kirk (1957–2005), a researcher in neuropsychiatry, and Hunter Madsen (pen name ''Erastes Pill''), who was schooled in social marketing, advocated avoiding portraying homosexuals as aggressive challengers, but as "victims" instead, while making all those who opposed them to be "evil persecutors". As a means of the latter, they used ''jamming,'' in which Christians, traditionalists, or anyone else who opposes the gay agenda are publicly smeared. Their strategy was based on the premise that, "In any campaign to win over the public, Gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector. The purpose of victim imagery is to make straight people feel very uncomfortable."<ref>[http://www.parentsofgaychildren.org/uploads/After_the_Ball_-_outline_by_Richard_Cohen.pdf After the Ball: How America Will Conquer It’s Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90’s Outline compiled by Richard Cohen, MA]</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Kirk|first1=Marshall|last2=Madsen|first2=Hunter|title=After the ball : how America will conquer its fear and hatred of gays in the 90s|date=1989|publisher=Plume|location=New York|isbn=978-0452264984|page=183|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=+victims+in+need++of+protection|accessdate=2 February 2018}}</ref> Leftists also label Christians who support biblical marriage as "anti-gay," equating them with non-western Muslims who support stoning homosexuals.<ref>Mainwaring, Doug (April 3, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/jack-phillips-is-not-the-sultan-of-brunei-the-indiscriminate-weaponization-of-the-term-anti-gay Jack Phillips is not the Sultan of Brunei: The indiscriminate weaponization of the term ‘anti-gay’]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved April 4, 2019.</ref>

"Jamming" [[homo-hatred]] (disagreement with [[homosexual behavior]]s) was to be done by linking it to [[Nazi]] horror, advised Kirk and Madsen. Associate all who oppose homosexuality with images of Klansmen demanding that gays be slaughtered, hysterical backwoods preachers, menacing punks, and a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed. Thus, "propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths..."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20110603050349/http://www.renewamerica.com:80/columns/mbarber/080213 "Unmasking the "gay" agenda"]. ''renewamerica.com''. Retrieved on 2 Feb. 2018.</ref> " It can show them being criticized, hated, shunned. It can depict gays experiencing horrific suffering as the direct result of homohatred-suffering of which even most bigots would be ashamed to be the cause. It can, in short, link homohating bigotry with all sorts of attributes the bigot would be ashamed to possess, and with social consequences he would find unpleasant and scary... our effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof."<ref> http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.html The homosexual propaganda campaign in America's media, </ref>

Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, writes,
<blockquote>
There can be no doubt that Christianity represents the greatest obstacle to the normalization of homosexual behavior. It cannot be otherwise, because of the clear biblical teachings concerning the inherent sinfulness of homosexuality in all forms, and the normativity of heterosexual marriage. In order to counter this obstacle, Kirk and Madsen advised gays to "use talk to muddy the moral waters, that is, to undercut the rationalizations that 'justify' religious bigotry and to jam some of its psychic rewards." How can this be done? "This entails publicizing support by moderate churches and raising serious theological objections to conservative biblical teachings." [The latter of which attempts [[homosexuality and biblical interpretation]] examine and expose.]<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20070927163416/http://www.gender-news.com/other.php?id=19 ''After the Ball--Why the Homosexual Movement Has Won,''] Thursday, June 3rd, 2004</ref>
</blockquote>

Kirk and Madsen's open admission of their deceptive tactics is noted as most revealing: [O]ur effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof. "...the person's beliefs can be altered whether he is conscious of the attack or not"<ref>After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s, p. 152-153 (1989, Doubleday/Bantam)</ref> “The campaign we outline in this book, though complex, depends centrally upon a program of unabashed propaganda, firmly grounded in long-established principles of psychology and advertising.”<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=unabashed+propaganda%2C+firmly+grounded Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.xxvi]</ref><ref>[http://banap.net/ "[Behavior, and Not a Person]"]. ''banap.net''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Similarly, author Robert Bauman additionally records: "It makes no difference that the ads are lies... because were using them to ethically good effect, to counter negative stereotypes that are every bit as much lies, and far more wicked ones."<ref>The Gentleman from Maryland: The Conscience of a gay Conservative, by Robert Bauman, 1986, page 163.</ref>

The need for Kirk and Madsen to engage in such manipulation may be seen as being due to their sober realization of the nature of the homosexual lifestyle.

“In short, the gay lifestyle - if such a chaos can, after all, legitimately be called a lifestyle - it just doesn’t work: it doesn’t serve the two functions for which all social framework evolve: to constrain people’s natural impulses to behave badly and to meet their natural needs. While it’s impossible to provide an exhaustive analytic list of all the root causes and aggravants of this failure, we can asseverate at least some of the major causes. Many have been dissected, above, as elements of the Ten Misbehaviors; it only remains to discuss the failure of the gay community to provide a viable alternative to the heterosexual family.”<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=oDwEAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=exhaustive+analytic+list Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.363 ]</ref>

David Kupelian, author of ''[[The Marketing of Evil]],'' describes Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, stating,
<blockquote>
Kirk and Madsen were not the kind of drooling activists that would burst into churches and throw condoms in the air. They were smart guys – very smart. Kirk, a Harvard-educated researcher in neuropsychiatry, worked with the Johns Hopkins Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth and designed aptitude tests for adults with 200+ IQs. Madsen, with a doctorate in politics from Harvard, was an expert on public persuasion tactics and social marketing.<ref>[http://pearl-diving.blogspot.com/2009/01/sold-on-homosexuality-marketing-of-evil.html "Sold on Homosexuality – The Marketing of Evil"]. ''pearl-diving.blogspot.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>
</blockquote>

Marshall Kirk died in 2005 at the age of 47.<ref>http://www.americanancestors.org/PageDetail.aspx?recordId=134544248</ref> The cause of death has not been publicly revealed.

Often cited as an early example of such tactics was the role of homosexual activists in persuading the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II). Dr. Ronald Bayer, though being himself a pro-homosexual psychiatrist, described this removal as being the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation, rather than any new scientific discoveries.<ref>[http://www.traditionalvalues.org/urban/eleven.php Exposed: The Myth That Psychiatry Has Proven That Homosexual Behavior Is Normal]</ref> In so doing, like slavery before it, the homosexual agenda is seen to threaten basic freedoms, principally the First Amendment.<ref>Adams, Guy (11-8-2008) [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mormon-stars-face-backlash-after-gay-marriage-ban-1003967.html ''Mormon stars face backlash after gay marriage ban''] The Independent</ref>

The charge of "[[homophobia]]" has been increasingly evidenced as being part of a means of intimidation used in pushing the Homosexual Agenda. Due to what homophobia has been made to denote, that of being a repressed homosexual, or possessing an irrational fear of being approached by homosexuals, or of being a "bigot" "persecuting" victims, the widespread use of the term "homophobic" attaches a powerful stigma to anyone who may even conscientiously oppose the practice of homosexuality, thus silencing many who might otherwise object to it.<ref>[http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/1995papers/socarides.html Thought Reform And The Psychology of Homosexual Advocacy, Charles W. Socarides, M.D.]</ref>

In relation to such oppression, psychologist Nicholas Cummings, former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), observed, "Homophobia as intimidation is one of the most pervasive techniques used to silence anyone who would disagree with the gay activist agenda." As an example of such fear within the APA, in addressing 100 fellow professionals Cummings related that while writing "Destructive Trends in Mental Health," with psychologist Rogers Wright, a number of fellow psychologists were invited to participate. However, these flatly turned them down, as they feared loss of tenure, loss of promotion, and other forms of professional retaliation. "We were bombarded by horror stories," Dr. Cummings said. "Their greatest fear was of the gay lobby, which is very strong in the APA.<ref>[Psychology Losing Scientific Credibility, Say APA Insiders http://www.narth.com/docs/insiders.html]</ref>

Noted homosexual activist and pornographer Clinton Fein, in his article, ''The Gay Agenda stated'': "Homophobic inclinations alone, even without any actions, should be criminal and punishable to the full extent of the law."

Erik Holland, author of ''The Nature of Homosexuality'', perceives that homosexuals have become so reckless in labeling others "homophobic" that "anyone who questions their labeling someone [is] a homophobe himself. Even quoting factual statistics about the connection between homosexuality and AIDS is allegedly homophobic." In addition, according to pro-homosexual author Vernon A. Wall, "even acceptance of homosexuality can be seen as a form of homophobia, because to talk about the acceptance of homosexuality is to imply that there is something about homosexuality that needs acceptance."<ref>[http://www.homosexinfo.org/Homophobia/HomePage "Homosexinfo - Homophobia - Homophobia: Fear of homosexuals?"]. ''homosexinfo.org''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

It may be speculated that if the liberal use of the term "homophobia" is not primarily a psychological tactic, then it indicates a psychological condition on the part of those who use the term in which they [[wishful thinking|wishfully]] imagine that those who oppose them are "fearful" of them, or of being one.

More recently, after 25 years of claiming she was not indoctrinating anyone with pro-homosexual beliefs, one activist honestly admitted to this being a lie. Canadian lesbian activist S. Bear Bergman, a female who identifies as a gender-confused "male", stated, "All that time I said I wasn't indoctrinating anyone with my beliefs about gay and lesbian and bi and trans and queer people? That was a lie.” Bergman recounted that she was instructed as a young gay activist to tell concerned parents that she was “just providing an alternate viewpoint” when accused of engaging in “indoctrination and recruiting,” and to use “soft” language when speaking about homosexuality. In her article on the notoriously liberal web site, the [[Huffington Post]], he went on to candidly confess that this indoctrination, "is absolutely my goal. I want to make your children like people like me and my family, even if that goes against the way you have interpreted the teachings of your religion." Bergman fantasized that in an ideal world he would have been "ushered into the world of queerness with care and tenderness by experienced homos" (akin to "camp counselors"), "and issued my leather jacket and my protest pins, my safer sex supplies..."

Bergman expressed that his goal was that of portraying to "impressionable young minds" the idea that "queers and transfolk are just as fine and lovely a kind of human as any other kind," and stated that he did not like the idea of sending her kid to schools where any kid could share with him their ideas about homosexuals. Thus Bergman, who believes that "books a kid hears at bedtime affect their sleep and also their dreams," is finalizing a series of children's books that all feature lesbian, homosexual, bisexual, gender-confused, or queer kids or families, with the goal that the young readers come to believe that people like him and his family are "absolutely great," that "lesbian, gay, bi, queer, and trans people -- that we exist, that we're perfectly fine and often really excellent." Bergman then concludes, "If that makes me an indoctrinator, I accept it. Let me be honest -- I am not even a little bit sorry."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.huffingtonpost.com/s-bear-bergman/i-have-come-to-indoctrinate-your-children-lgtbq_b_6795152.html|title=I have come to indoctrinate your children into my LGBTQ agenda (and I'm not a bit sorry)|last1=Bergman|first1=S. Bear|website=Huffington Post|accessdate=22 March 2015}}</ref>

Commenting on this frank article, Pete Baklinski of LifeSiteNews.com, states that, <blockquote>While Bergman paints a “friendly and cheerful” picture of the gay lifestyle, she fails to mention the serious health risks tied to homosexual behaviors....Research done in 2002 by Dr. John R. Diggs found that same-sex sexual behaviors expose gays, lesbians and bisexuals to “extreme risks of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), physical injuries, mental disorders and even a shortened life span.” Common sexual practices among gay men were found to lead to “numerous STDs and physical injuries, some of which are virtually unknown in the heterosexual population.” Gay and bisexual men were found to “lose up to 20 years of life expectancy.” The US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have warned on numerous occasions that HIV rates, already at epidemic proportions, are continuing to climb steadily among men who have ‘sex’ with men. The CDC has stated that gay and bisexual men continue to remain at the epicenter of what they call a “HIV/AIDS epidemic.”</blockquote>

To which Baklinski adds the spiritual consequences, citing one of the texts in the Bible which condemn homosexual relations:
{{Cquote|“For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error” (Letter to Romans 1:26).<ref>{{cite web|last1=Baklinski|first1=Pete|title=Gay activist: Of course our goal is to ‘indoctrinate children into LGBTQ agenda’|url=https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gay-activist-our-goal-is-to-indoctrinate-children-into-lgbtq-agenda|website=LifeSiteNews.com|accessdate=22 March 2015}}</ref> }}

For Christians believe God created man and women uniquely compatible and complimentary, and they alone are joined by God in marriage, with opposite genders being specified by both Genesis and personally by Jesus Christ. (Gn. 2:18-24; Mt. 19:4) The Bible only condemns homosexual relations - by design and decree, in principle and by precept - and never sanctions them wherever they are manifestly dealt with, and the injunctions against them are part of the transcendent and immutable moral law. (Lv. 18:22; Rm. 1:26,27)

However, Christians also understand that some of the first Christians were likely former homosexuals, (1Cor. 6:9-11) and believe that there is room at the cross for all who want the Lord Jesus over sin, and believe upon Him to save them who died for them, and rose again, and who thus are baptized and follow Him, to the glory of God.<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONS and the BIBLE]</ref>

===Influence in the academic world===
Professor Jerry Z. Muller described in an article titled ''First Things'' (Aug/Sept. 1993) how the homosexual lobby has gained widespread acceptance in the educational realm.
{{cquote|[Their] strategy has been remarkably successful. With a rapidity largely attributable in large part to a total lack of articulate resistance, homosexual ideology has gained an unquestioned and uncontested legitimacy in American academic life. Within the academy, as within nonacademic elite culture, the definition of opposite to homosexuality as "homophobia - a definition which implies that it is impossible to give good reasons for the cultural disapproval of homosexuality - is the best evidence of the success of this strategy.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=cbfVg_1qhe0C&pg=PP1&lpg=PP1&dq=David+W.+Virtue+scots+college&source=bl&ots=aDW7a615Gn&sig=Y1cLsx5sCQTgUUDJ88b5AKPRkNg&hl=en&ei=8skISpP1AcGktgfi2PzsCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPR14,M1 "Homosexuality"]. ''google.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>}}

====In the public schools====
{{See also|Homosexuality in Schools}}
[[File:Prairie Ridge High School LGBT+ Flag.jpg|thumb|200px|School in Chicago area (Prairie Ridge High School) with LGBT+ [[Rainbow#Rainbow flag|rainbow flag]]. Students in the same school who display the [[Confederate flag]] will face discipline.<ref name="NWHerald2017"/>]]
[[File:Prairie Ridge High School LGBT.jpg|thumb|200px|This Chicago-area school has "safe spaces" for students with homosexual attraction (sponsored by [[GLSEN]]).]]
Many public schools throughout the United States welcome the Homosexual Agenda, oftentimes through publicly-funded school programs created by [[GLSEN]].<ref name="Heyer2015">Heyer, Walt (June 8, 2015). [http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/06/15118/ Public School LGBT Programs Don't Just Trample Parental Rights. They Also Put Kids at Risk]. ''The Witherspoon Institute -- Public Discourse''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> Much of this was the work of the [[Obama Administration]].<ref name="Heyer2015"/> GLSEN celebrates the Homosexual Agenda through a "day of silence."<ref>Berry, Susan (April 11, 2015). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/11/day-of-silence-how-the-lgbt-agenda-is-hijacking-americas-youth/ Day of Silence: How the LGBT Agenda Is Hijacking America’s Youth]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> In 2016, [[California]] became the first state to legislate the teaching of the homosexual agenda in public schools to children as young as second grade.<ref>Berry, Susan (July 19, 2016). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/19/lgbt-history-california-first-to-teach/ California: 1st State To Teach LGBT Curriculum — to Second Graders]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> These California students are now banned from opting-out from this [[indoctrination]].<ref>Newman, Alex (January 4, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/27883-students-banned-from-opting-out-of-lgbt-education Students Banned From Opting Out of LGBT Education]. ''The New American''. Retrieved January 5, 2018.</ref> In February 2019, the Department of Education in the [[United Kingdom]] announced that public school children starting at the age of five would be required to learn about homosexual and transgender relationships, with parents being unable to withdraw their children from such classes.<ref>Tennant, Michael (February 27, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/31593-u-k-schools-to-indoctrinate-kids-as-young-as-five-in-lgbt-agenda U.K. Schools to Indoctrinate Kids as Young as Five in LGBT Agenda]. ''The New American''. Retrieved February 27, 2019. See also:
*McLean, Dorothy Cummings (March 25, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/christian-mom-sues-uk-primary-school-for-forcing-lgbt-pride-celebrations-on-kids Christian mom sues UK primary school for forcing LGBT Pride celebrations on kids]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved March 25, 2019.</ref>

In schools where the homosexual agenda is welcomed, students who fly the [[Confederate flag]] may expect to face disciplinary actions.<ref name="NWHerald2017">Prokop, Hannah (November 11, 2016). [http://www.nwherald.com/2016/11/09/prairie-ridge-high-school-suspends-student-for-wearing-confederate-flag-to-school/aelbmro/ Prairie Ridge High School suspends student for wearing Confederate flag to school]. ''Northwest Herald''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref><ref>[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/apr/20/confederate-flags-not-rainbow-ones-banned-in-schoo/ Wyoming school district bans Confederate flags, allows gay-pride ones]. ''The Washington Times'' (from the ''Associated Press''). April 20, 2019. Retrieved April 20, 2019.</ref> In March 2019, an Ohio public school student was suspended for posting Bible verses next to homosexual flags.<ref>Gstalter, Morgan (March 13, 2019). [https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/433823-ohio-student-suspended-for-targeting-gay-straight-alliance-by Ohio student suspended for 'targeting' Gay-Straight Alliance by posting Bible verses in response to LGBT flags]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved March 13, 2019.</ref><ref>Kaplan, Talia (March 12, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/ohio-student-suspended-after-posting-bible-verses-around-school-i-wanted-to-spread-the-word-of-god Ohio student suspended after posting Bible verses around school: 'I wanted to spread the word of God']. ''Fox News''. Retrieved March 13, 2019.</ref>

===Immorality in society===
The “gay” activists welcome [[immorality]] in [[society]]. As no one wants to be called a [[hypocrite]], every act of sexual sin by society members serves the “gay” interest by lessening the public will to uphold public morality. That's why, wherever the acceptance of sexual sin is observed, it is likely there are “gay” activists involved.

==== The abortion industry ====
The best example of the Homosexual Agenda causing societal immorality is seen in their aggressive defense of the abortion industry. Obviously, homosexuals cannot have an “unwanted pregnancy,” yet in an extensive experience, the big part of “pro-choice” street activists at abortion clinics are homosexuals. This is so because they know that preserving the people's option to destroy unborn life is essential to maintaining so-called “[[sexual freedom]]” as a social norm. If women lost their choice to legally kill their unborn offspring, the resulting inevitable shift of emphasis from self-gratification to family responsibility in such a large section of the population would change the entire culture. When a woman gives in to fear and selfishness to kill the child in her womb, she will not feel that she can criticize other sinners. The choice to kill their unborn children morally compromises both men and women (making them unwilling to criticize choices to engage in other forms of immoral behavior), and ensures that the outcome of an unwanted child will not be a lasting deterrent to those who have chosen sexual “freedom” over family. This explains why homosexuals, who by definition cannot conceive children together, are among the most militant advocates of abortion on demand.

==== The pornography industry ====
The existence of a thriving pornography industry where “gays” are also notoriously prevalent serves the “gay” cause by morally corrupting the men who use it, making them less likely to oppose homosexuality on moral grounds and more likely to support public policies which legitimize sexual [[hedonism]]. “Gay” activists love sexual anarchy because they know that when a man falls in bondage to pornography he is less willing to oppose other sexual sins in society.

==== The entertainment industry ====
When young people enjoy music or films that glorify sexual lust, they feel more sympathy to the “gay” arguments.

The “gays” have it easy pushing sexual “freedom”, because every person, in their flesh, wants to indulge themselves in their own choices.
This is like children being offered only candy to eat. People want to eat only sweets until they get sick. Only with maturity do they know how to eat to stay healthy.

The “gay” movement has many allies in its campaign to aggrandize sexual immorality, but it is the only social movement in the history of the world whose primary purpose is to eliminate social restraints on [[sexual]] conduct. It is heavily funded, highly organized and strategically positioned to maximize its ability to change societies and cultures.<ref name="Lively2009">{{cite book |title=Redeeming the Rainbow: A Christian Response to the "Gay" Agenda |author=[[Scott Lively]] |publisher=Veritas Aeterna Press |place=Springfield, MA |year=2009 |edition=1 (Version 1.1)|chapter=1: Pro-family answers to common questions about homosexuality and "gay" agenda |pages=8, 60, 176|url=http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09b/Redeeming_rainbow}}</ref>

==Opponents of the Homosexual Agenda ==
Some well known individuals/groups in the [[United States]] who actively oppose the homosexual agenda are: [[MassResistance]], [[Focus on the Family]], [[Peter LaBarbera]]'s American's for Truth, the [[Traditional Values Coalition]] ([[Louis Sheldon]] is a chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition), and [[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]].

===Peter LaBarbera===
As noted earlier, [[Peter LaBarbera]] is the founder of [[Americans For Truth]] (AFT) which is a national organization in the United States devoted solely to confronting the homosexual agenda.<ref name="americansfortruth.com">[http://www.americansfortruth.com/about/ "About Americans for Truth About Homosexuality and AFTAH Founder Peter LaBarbera » Americans for Truth"]. ''americansfortruth.com''. Retrieved on 2 May 2016.</ref>

Peter LaBarbera said the following regarding the need for the organization Americans for Truth:
{{cquote|Homosexual, [[bisexuality|bisexual]], and [[transsexual]] groups spend tens of millions of dollars every year to market and normalize their aberrant lifestyles, yet after all these years there is not a single, serious national group dedicated specifically to exposing and countering their agendas...

It’s time for Americans to unapologetically resist the demands of this lobby, and to counter the lies upon which it is built-the foremost being that certain people are inherently or ‘born’ homosexual and that this is a [[civil rights]] issue.<ref name="americansfortruth.com"/>}}

===Matt Barber===
[[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]] is one the more notable figures in regards to opposing the homosexual agenda. Matt Barber wrote the following regarding the homosexual agenda:
[[Image:Mbarber_b.jpg‎|right|thumb|175px|[[Matt Barber]]]]
{{cquote|Ironically, sexual [[relativism|relativists]] are anything but relative. They are quite affirmative in principle. But the principles they foist demand comprehensive acceptance of homosexual conduct — by force of law — through federal edicts such as “hate crimes” legislation, the so-called “Employment Non-Discrimination Act” (ENDA) and by imposing government sanctioned “same-sex marriage.” All such government mandates grant special protected “minority” status to those who define themselves by aberrant sexual preferences and changeable sexual behaviors. These laws put people with traditional values directly in the crosshairs of official government policy.

Throughout society, homosexual activists demand that homosexual behaviors not only be “tolerated,” but celebrated. (That’s what the euphemistic slogan “celebrate diversity” supposes). They have masked their true political agenda by hijacking the language of the genuine civil rights movement and through the crafty and disingenuous rhetoric of “tolerance” and “diversity.”

Anyone who believes the Biblical directive that human sexuality is a gift from [[God]], to be shared between man and wife within the bonds of marriage, is branded “homophobic,” “hateful” or “discriminatory.” They are to be silenced by all means possible.<ref>http://www.cwfa.org/articledisplay.asp?id=14696&department=CFI&categoryid=family</ref>}}

===Steffen Königer===
[[German]] politician Steffen Königer from the party [[Alternative for Germany]] (AfD) showed that it is possible to use [[irony]] when opposing the [[extremist]] gender agenda. In his address in the parliament of the [[Brandenburg]], the federated state of [[Germany]], he ridiculed homosexual lobbyists and gender ideologists by enlisting in his introduction, for about two minutes, all "gender and sexual varieties" he could find on the Internet. This way he brought to attention of the general public the absurdity of the proposal put forward by the German [[Green Party]] that demanded to introduce multiple "gender identities" in state documents. When the Parliamentary Speaker tried to stop him, he just replied that he is not finished yet and further adamantly continued in naming all alleged gender declinations. When he was finally done with his introduction, his actual reaction to the proposal took less than three seconds: ''"The AfD party rejects your proposal."''<ref>{{cite web |title=Un político alemán ridiculiza los postulados del LGBTI |url=https://youtu.be/GzIwvHUvFR0 |accessdate=23 Jun 2016 |language=German (English subtitles)}}</ref>

==Further reading==
*https://www.amazon.com/dp/B012YKIQ2M Counterfeiting the Rainbow by Beverly Rachel
*[http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html Homosexuality and the Nazi Party] by Scott Lively. Excellent discussion of the anti-Christian and homosexual origins of the Nazism.
*[http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/hsx/ Documentation of the links between homosexuals and the Nazis] by the Government of Israel.
*[http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/BPCollectionNews.asp?ID=131 2008 McDonald's and the Homosexual Agenda], Baptist Press
*[http://www.couplescompany.com/FEATURES/politics/2004/Selling%20Homosexuality.pdf Paul E. Rondeau, Selling homosexuality to America (PDF)] [http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/730694/posts Or html form]
*Shupe, Jamie (March 10, 2019). [https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/03/10/i-was-americas-first-non-binary-person-it-was-all-a-sham/ I Was America’s First ‘Nonbinary’ Person. It Was All a Sham.] ''The Daily Signal''. Retrieved April 15, 2019.

==See also==
*[[ACT-UP]]
*[[Anti-Defamation League]]
*[[Anthropological Revolution]]
*[[Essay:Sodomism]]
*[[Homosexual belief system]]
*[[Gay affirmative]]
*[[Gay rights]]
*[[Homophobia]]
*[[Hate speech]], [[Hate crime]]
*[[Homosexual logic]], used to justify and mandate the Homosexual Agenda
*[[Homosexuality]]
*[[Homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]
*[[Homosexualization]]
*[[Gleichschaltung#LGBTI Gleichschaltung|LGBTI Gleichschaltung]]
*[[San Francisco values]]
*[[Fashion industry values]]
*[[Hollywood values]]
*[[Slogans and the Homosexual Agenda]]
*[[Stonewall UK]]

== References ==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

{{liberalism}}
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Homosexuality]]
[[Category:Liberal Deceit]]
[[Category:Hollywood Values]]

Theodicy

2021-08-28T13:58:04Z

Daniel1212: /* Proposals */

The Bible versus the Qur'an

2021-04-24T14:55:30Z

Daniel1212: /* Muhammad's referencing and contradictions of the Bible */ Updated link

The most predominant formal religions of the world and the largest socio-political ideology in the world, using broad criteria, are [[Christianity]] and [[Islam]] respectively,<ref>http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.htm</ref><ref>based upon critical doctrinal conformity, these numbers would be much smaller, such as in Christianity: http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/15-christianity-is-no-longer-americans-default-faith</ref> with the [[Bible]] and the [[Koran]] being their respective primary authoritative books.

While [[Muhammad]] is evidenced as believing that the Bible was inspired and given by [[God]], and the relatively brief Koran depends upon the Bible in its allusions to it, abundant critical differences exist between the two books, perhaps due to Muhammad's alleged illiteracy and dependence upon similarly biblically illiterate and confused sources.

The Islamic solution to this has typically been to assert the Bible was "altered" after Muhammad's time. However the wealth of manuscripts, including those who antedate the giving of the Koran, disallow that attempt and indicate that it is the Koran that is itself corrupt.

==Distinctions between the Bible and the Koran==
At less than 80,000 words, (figures vary: 77,701 in Arabic by one source,<ref>http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Uk/uk.religion.islam/2005-09/msg01868.html</ref> 77,439 by ‘Ata bin Yasar<ref>http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/bravo_r4bc.htm</ref>) the Koran is much smaller than the Bible, (602,585 words in the Old Testament; 180,552 in the New = 783,037,<ref>http://muthbible.org/resources/bible/biblestatistics.php</ref> with the total words in just the verses in the [[KJV]] being counted at 788,258.<ref>http://www.biblebelievers.com/believers-org/kjv-stats.htm</ref>) The Qur'an is also far more restrictive in in its scope of communication,<ref>[http://www.bible.ca/islam/library/Gilchrist/Vol1/4a.html The Qu'ran: ''The Scripture of Islam; A. THE COMPOSITION AND CHARACTER OF THE QUR'AN'']</ref><ref>http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/bravo_r4bc.htm</ref> lacking the manner of extensive historical narratives of the Bible, and the context it provides for its commands, as well as genealogical records which helps provide historical chronology. In addition, absent from the Koran are extended doctrinal discourses on salvation, such as are especially seen in the New Testament. This results in difficultly formulating broad [[systematic theology]] out of the Koran by itself, and its allusions to Biblical characters and events evidences that it requires knowledge of the Bible, which as the prior revelation, it must agree with.

==Muhammad's referencing and contradictions of the Bible==
Early Islam<ref>http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-bible-not-corrupted-early-muslims.htm</ref> and Muhammad himself is seen to uphold the Scriptures<ref>http://isaalmasih.net/bible-isa/kitab-true.html</ref> that existed then as divinely inspired, both the Torah, (Sura 2:87) and the Psalms, (4:163) and the Gospels, (Suras 3:3; 5:46) such as in stating,
<blockquote>How come they unto thee for judgment when they have the Torah, wherein Allah hath delivered judgment (for them)? Yet even after that they turn away. Such (folk) are not believers. (Sura 5:43; Pickthall)</blockquote>
<blockquote>And We sent after them in their footsteps Isa [Jesus], son of Marium, verifying what was before him of the Taurat [Torah] and We gave him the Injeel [Gospel] in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was before it of Taurat and a guidance and an admonition for those who guard (against evil). (Sura 5:46; Shakir) </blockquote>
<blockquote>
Say: "O People of the Book! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord, (Sura 5:68; Y. Ali) </blockquote>
<blockquote>If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in no wise of those in doubt. (Sura 10:94, Y. Ali)</blockquote>
<blockquote>
And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam). (Sura 29:46; Y. Ali)
</blockquote>

Sura 6:34 also states that "there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah." (Y. Ali)

However, the Koran critically contradicts the Bible,<ref>[http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/ answering-islam.org; ''Contradictions in the Qur'an; Verses contradicting the earlier revelations'']</ref> especially as concerns the person and work of [[Jesus Christ]], as it flatly denies His death and resurrection, as well as His divine nature, both of which are held by Christians to be abundantly testified to.<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.net/JESUS.Vs.Muhammad.html#2 ''MUHAMMAD VERSUS JESUS CHRIST; Death and Resurrection proclaimed'']</ref><ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/DEITYofCHRIST.html ''The DEITY of CHRIST'']</ref>

==Charges of textual corruption==
Islamic apologists recognize these contradictions, and respond by invoking Surah 2:78-79 which speaks of "illiterates, who know not the Book....who write the Book with their own hands" as "evidence" that the Bible was "tampered with".

Christian apologists respond to these charges by pointing out that the Koran itself affirms the integrity of The Book, thus if corruption occurred then it would be in contradiction to the Koran itself, and its doctrine of the preservation of Divine revelation.<ref>[http://www.thebereans.net/arm-muslims.shtml Refuting the Muslims Polemics]</ref> And that the amount of alterations required to explain the Koranic deviations from Biblical text would require a significant amount of changes to the Old Testament and virtually a complete rewriting of the New, yet for such a project there is no manuscript evidence, but the contrary exists for its preservation from such changes.

An abundance of New Testament manuscripts which predate the Koran yet exist,<ref>http://www.spotlights.org/Bible22.htm</ref> including the Codex Sinaiticus (c. 350 AD), with Aland numbering a total of 230 extant New Testament manuscript portions which pre-date 600 AD (192 Greek New Testament manuscripts, 5 Greek lectionaries containing scripture, and 33 translations of the Greek New Testament).<ref>Kurt and Barbara Aland, 1987:82-83</ref><ref>http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/bibmanu.htm</ref>

Archaeological evidence also evidences that manuscripts from the first century could last well over a hundreds of years, and that retired and discarded manuscripts were not altered.<ref>[http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/eva358021.shtml How Long Were Biblical Manuscripts in Use?]</ref> The doctrinal conflation of early manuscripts with later ones manifests that no such manner of alterations or rewriting such as Islam asserts took place,<ref>http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/bibleorigin.html</ref><ref>http://www.carm.org/questions/about-bible/manuscript-evidence-superior-new-testament-reliability</ref> and even the variations among manuscripts (mainly in spelling or sentence structure and other thing which do not change doctrine) help to confirm the reliability of the Biblical texts more than the Islamic choice to burn versions which have variant readings.<ref>[http://www.unchangingword.com/obj_hist_13evidence.php "Is there much Evidence for the Bible's Reliability?"]</ref>

In addition, what further disallows the Islamic theory is that none of the thousands of all extant Biblical manuscripts even from before the time of Muhammad agree with the Koranic contradictions of Scripture.

It is also postulated that if Muhammad could not read, as Islam states, then he would have relied upon the word of others (travelers, etc.) who were overall likely to be significantly Biblically illiterate.<ref>http://www.letusreason.org/Islam5.htm</ref> This would explain how Muhammed could claim that the Christian Trinity consisted of God, Jesus and Mary,<ref>[http://answering-islam.org/Why-not/13trinity.html Jochen Katz, ''My Questions to Muslims''; Answering Islam]</ref> (Sura 5:116-117) in addition to speaking numerous contradictions of the Bible.

In response, Muslim apologists also seek to make a case against a reliable Bible based upon the lack of a universal canon among all Christian churches, or early incomplete manuscripts, or additions to them (''the Epistle of Barnabas'', and portions of ''The Shepherd of Hermas'' to Codex Sinaiticus), as well a relatively small degree of actual (beyond spelling, etc.) textual disagreement<ref>http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Saifullah/bravo_dave.htm</ref> among some of the thousands of existing manuscripts. However, none of these aspects provides a solution to the Islamic problem, as none of the manuscripts substantiate the Koranic deviations, nor does the small percentage (contrary to typical Islamic exaggeration) of actual variants among manuscripts support the manner of massive changes which the Islamic solution requires. Moreover, the Koran, for which there is no manuscript evidence for over 100 years after it was said to be given,<ref>http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/qurmanu.htm</ref> evidences its own problematic texts,<ref>http://www.carm.org/religious-movements/islam/contradictions-quran</ref> even though it is a far smaller (in size and scope) book, and one that was written after durable writing materials came into use, and then underwent a purification process in which variant manuscripts were burned.<ref>[http://www.beholdthebeast.com/textual_history_of_the_koran.htm TEXTUAL HISTORY OF THE KORAN]</ref> One researcher concludes,

:Manuscript, as well as documentary and archaeological evidence indicates that much of what the Koran maintains does not coincide with the historical data at our disposal which comes from that period.<ref>http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/conclu.htm</ref>

Thus it is seen that the manner of corruption of biblical text which Islam charges is that of the Koran, not the Bible which authority it is much based upon, and Muhammad must be charged as being one who attempted to corrupt the Bible.

While Muslims also typically claim that the text of the Koran is identical to that received by Muhammad, Christian researchers contend that there is overwhelming evidence that it is not.<ref>[http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Text/ Textual answering-islam.org; ''Variants of the Qur'an'']</ref>

Although the Koran manuscripts exhibit a notable stability in the text across many centuries, evidence supports the conclusion that considerably greater diversity existed among the earlier texts of the Koran than is reflected in the extant manuscripts studied thereafter. As is widely accepted, in the late 7th century, the Caliph Uthman, being disturbed by the diversity in the text of the Koran, organized a standardization of the Koranic manuscripts, destroying texts considered deviant, and thus cutting off access to possibly more original forms of the text of the Koran. Further steps were taken in successive centuries to fix the text and its recitation.<ref>http://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/textual-criticism-the-new-testament-and-the-quran</ref> The result of textual examination of Koranic manuscripts leads Keith E. Small, Phd. author of ''Textual Criticism and Qur’an Manuscripts'', to conclude,
{{cquote|Though Muslims may take pride in the fidelity of the preservation of this text, it does not reproduce precisely what was originally considered to be the Qur'an' in the early seventh century. Because of the standardizations of the text in 653-705/33-86 AH and 936/324 AH, together with the constant pressure throughout Islamic history to have one text match their dogma, many texts which had equally good claims to containing authentic readings were suppressed and destroyed.

And, because of the emphasis on oral transmission and the vagaries of Arabic as it developed, the written text was constantly vocalized in new ways which did not preserve the original vocalization. The original vocalization must have been lost very early on if it did indeed exist.

While bearing testimony to the careful preservation of one particular consonantal text, the history of the transmission of the text of the Koran is at least as much a testament to the destruction of Koran material as it is to its preservation. It is also testimony to the fact that there never was one original text of the Koran.<ref>Keith E. Small, ''Textual Criticism and Qur’an Manuscripts,'' (Lanham/Boulder/New York/Toronto/Plymouth: Lexington Books, 2012), p. 180</ref><ref>http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2011/07/textual-criticism-and-quran-manuscripts.html?showComment=1311441744807#c7543567119217355174</ref>}}

==Gospel of Barnabas==
As no extant Biblical manuscript, from before the time of Muhammed or after him, agrees with the Koranic contradictions, many Muslim apologists look to the [[Gospel of Barnabas]] for support. However, this radically different account is judged by both Christian and secular academics (and even some Muslims such as Abbas el-Akkad) to be a late work and pseudepigraphical. With its obvious anachronisms and historical errors (like sailing to Nazareth) and utter lack of early manuscript evidence and irreconcilable differences between it and any ancient manuscripts, it is manifest to be a fourteenth century attempt to read Islamic doctrine into the Bible, which clearly refutes it.<ref>http://www.muslimhope.com/ForgeryOfTheGospelOfBarnabas.htm</ref><ref>http://answering-islam.org/Barnabas/saleeb.html</ref><ref>http://www.answering-islam.org/Green/barnabas.htm</ref><ref>http://www.ichthus.info/CaseForChrist/Archeology/intro.html</ref>

==Principal areas of disagreement==
The primary issues in which the Koran radically fails to conflate with the Bible are in regard to the person and work of Christ, as well as the nature of the people of God, and the means by which their mission is carried out.<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/JESUS.Vs.Muhammad.html MUHAMMAD VERSUS JESUS CHRIST]</ref><ref>http://www.answering-islam.org/Nehls/Ask/disagree.html</ref>

While the Bible systematically reveals the [[Messiah]] as being the Divine Son of God, the Koran flatly denies this, but relegates Christ to being a most perfect messenger of God. While the Bible predicts and clearly records and abundantly references the death and resurrection of Christ,<ref>Isa. 53:10-12; Dan. 9:24; Dan. 9:26; Mat. 12:40; 16:21; 20:28; 27:2-10,40,63; Mar. 15:1,16-20; 17:23; Luk. 22:26-27; 23:1-5; 24:7,26-27; Jn. 2:19; 3:14; 8:28-38; Act. 3:13-16; 1Co. 15:3-7; 2Co. 5:21; Gal. 3:13; Phi. 2:5-8; 1Ti. 3:4-6; 2:14; Heb. 5:8; 1Pt. 1:19; 2:24; 3:18,22</ref> that He sacrificially shed His blood and died on the cross in order to make the perfect atonement for man's forgiveness, and rose to life and later ascended to the right hand of the Father, the Koran dismisses this, and offers a brief claim that a "substitute" took His place.(Sura 4:157) As the entire message of the New Testament centers around Jesus Christ being the unique son of God - a title which itself conveyed Deity at that time (Jn. 5:18; 19:7) - who died and rose again and now reigns as the present savior and future judge of mankind, then the Bible and the Koran are most irreconcilable on these points.

In addition, in the New Testament the nature of the people of God is essentially that of a spiritual entity, into which "body" all believers are baptized upon believing, (1 Cor. 12:13) and are translated into the spiritual kingdom of Christ. As such, the means of warfare for the New Testament church was "not carnal", that is, by the sword of men, but spiritual: "By pureness, by knowledge, by longsuffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned, By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left." (2 Cor 6:6-7) In contrast, Islam works out of the model of a seventh century physical theocracy, which thus uses physical means of oppression toward those without as well as within, in order to defeat its enemies and enlarge its borders. Due to both the nature of the Koran, and Muhammad's example, and evidence from the ''Hadityh'', many believe that "radical" Islam is more historically authentic and representative of the modern Islamic world than the "moderate" variety.<ref>http://www.muslimhope.com/WarInIslam.htm.</ref>

Muslims respond to such by repeating atheism's claims of irreconcilable contradictions within the Bible,<ref>http://debate.org.uk/topics/apolog/contrads.htm</ref> which Christians respond to by providing clarifications and explanations, while also documenting various other contradictions between the Bible and the Koran, as well as within the latter, and between the latter and other authorities.<ref>http://answering-islam.org/God/character.html</ref><ref>[http://answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra Contradictions in the Qur'an]</ref>

==Co-existence==
While there exists within [[liberal Christianity]] those who seek to harmonize the two religions,<ref>,http://geoconger.wordpress.com/2007/06/07/us-priest-says-islam-christianity-united-cen-60807-p1/</ref> as well as a form of liberal [[Islam]] which seeks to minimize differences, such results in a denial of truth, as well as freedom of religion in the long term. Patrick Sookhdeo, the director of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity, warned that the Western Church’s growing tendency to blur theological differences and not uphold the absolute truth is contributing to the threat of Islam to the Western World. Sookhdeo, a former Muslim and adviser to British, American and NATO military officials on jihadist ideology, and director of the Barnabas Fund which works with the persecuted church, stated,

:When faced with the uniqueness of Christ we become inclusive. He loves everybody so we talk about love, and hell and damnation goes out the window, said Sookhdeo. It becomes too embarrassing. So our church has conformed itself according to society.

:If the U.S. church goes the way of Europe and embraces liberalism in its theology then it will embrace liberalism in its life,... And if it embraces liberalism in its life then the church will die, and not only will the church die, but society around it will also die.<ref>[http://www.christiantoday.com/article/sookhdeo.liberal.christianity.intensifying.threat.from.radical.islam/16767.htm christiantoday.com] Saturday, February 9, 2008</ref>

The past institutionalization of the church and Islamization of most of Asia Minor, where the seven churches of Revelation were located, are seen by some as examples of dangers now being faced.

==See also==
*[[Islam]]
*[[Bible]]
*[[Koran]]
*[[Jihad]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

==External links==
*[http://www.answering-islam.org Answering-Islam.org]
*[http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/home.htm Debate.org.UK, Topics]
*[http://muslim-canada.org/ch2hamid.html#official The Preservation of the Original Teachings of Islam.]
[[Category:Bible]]
[[Category:Christianity]]
[[Category:Islam]]

Homosexuality and biblical interpretation

2020-09-15T17:44:59Z

Daniel1212: update links from http://witnesstoday.org/ (defunct) to http://peacebyjesus.net

The subject of [[homosexuality and the Bible]] is one in which the Biblical condemnation of homosexual relations has historically been upheld. However, beginning shortly before the sexual revolution of the 1960s, continued attempts have been made by pro-homosexual revisionists to negate the universal injunctions against homosexual relations, and to find sanction for the same via [[wishful thinking]] on the part of those seeking to read homosexuality (and by extension, their own sinful desires) into selected parts of Scripture where such does not exist. This interpretive conflict is one which is between two fundamentally different positions, these being the traditional/historical position and the latter revisionist, pro-homosexual view.<ref>A. J. Gagnon, "The Authority of Scripture in the 'Homosex' Debate"</ref> Principal texts are [[Genesis]] 1:26,27; 2:18-24; [[Leviticus 18]], and [[Romans 1]]. The religious conflict between the two positions by churches or individuals is typically manifest as correlating to their beliefs about the Bible, and usually parallels their positions on other issues which divide [[conservatives]] from [[liberals]].<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.net/RevealingStatistics.html Revealing Statistics]</ref> {{Main|Homosexuality and Christianity}}

This article primarily deals with the phenomenon of pro-homosexual polemics regarding homosexuality in the Old Testament, and the examination of its conclusions in the light of traditional/historical Biblical [[exegesis]], that of the explanation of a text, based upon proven principals of [[hermeneutics]],<ref>[http://www.theologue.org/HERMENEUTICS-DMERKEL.html Hermeneutics - A Guide To Basic Bible Interpretation By Darryl M. Erkel]</ref> or rules of interpretation. See also [[New Testament and homosexuality]]

===Basic distinctions===

Those who hold strongly to the traditional position see the issue of homosexual relations being dealt with as part of the laws and doctrines on sexual partners which are universally applicable in all cultural contexts from the time they were given. As regards homosexuality, the Bible is shown establishing and consistently confirming that only the women was made for man (1Cor. 11:9), as his uniquely compatible and complementary "helpmeet," which no other physical creation could fulfill, with purposefully created complementary distinctions, and which preclude fulfillment by same gender unions. (Gn. 2:18-24; 1Cor. 11:1-12) This sexual union is alone evidenced as being explicitly sanctioned by God through marriage (Gn. 2:24; Mt. 19:4-6; Eph. 6:31), which sanction is never established for same gender unions. Instead, homosexual relations are manifest as excluded by both design and decrees, including same-sex unions being only condemned in places wherever they are explicitly dealt with. (Lv. 18:22; 20:13; Rm. 1:26,27)<ref>[http://www.neednotfret.com/content/view/124/89/ THE OLD TESTAMENT AND HOMOSEXUALITY, by Kevin L. Howard]</ref>

In contrast, most proponents of homosexual relations and [[same-sex marriage]] render these laws and principals as being culturally or contextually bound, and perceive homoeroticism within close same gender relationships, such as between [[David and Jonathan]]. (1Sam. 18; 2Sam. 1) A few concede that the Bible unconditionally forbids homosexual relations, but rejects it as applicable today. Many within the traditional camp see the revisionism of pro-homosexual polemicists as a manifestation of the attempts made from the beginning (Gn. 3:1-5) to both negate what God has commanded in the [[Bible]], as well as to otherwise drastically misconstrue its meanings. Those within the homosexual camp often charge their opponents with ignorance, and being motivated by [[homophobia]].

== Principal Sources ==

Sources of pro homosexual interpretations are abundant, such as former Jesuit priest John J. McNeill,<ref>Doctorate in Philosophy, Louvain University in Belgium; Former Jesuit priest</ref> Robin Scroggs,<ref>Professor of New Testament at Chicago Theological Seminary</ref> Episcopalian Professor L. William Countryman,<ref>Professor of New Testament, Church Divinity School of the Pacific</ref> Roman Catholic priest Daniel Helminiak,<ref>Assistant Professor of Psychology</ref> and other writers who usually reiterate their polemics. The revisionist scholar who is primarily noted for first (1955) advancing their novel view was the Anglican priest Derrick Sherwin Bailey. In addition to him, perhaps the basic primary source for most of the main pro-homosexual arguments represented here is John Eastburn Boswell. Born in Boston in 1947, and educated at Harvard, he was later made a full professor at Yale, where he founded the Lesbian and Gay Studies Center. Described as a devout Roman Catholic, Boswell was yet an openly announced homosexual. He wrote a number of books seeking to negate Biblical injunctions against homosexuality and to justify it. One of his last books was, "Dante and the Sodomites" (1994). After that Boswell died of complications from AIDS on December 24, 1994, at age 47.

It is noted that most of the pro-homosexual polemicists (charged with "turning the grace of God into lasciviousness": Jude 1:4<ref>http://www.takeheed.net/SEPTEMBER2004.htm</ref>) are by souls who yet profess to be Christians. Conservative Christians tend to such as a manifestation of that which the apostle Paul foretold, "Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them." (Acts 20:30)

Among evangelical responses to the above, the foremost contributor is Robert A. J. Gagnon,<ref>Associate Professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. B.A. degree from Dartmouth College; M.T.S. from Harvard Divinity School; Ph.D. from Princeton Theological Seminary. http://www.robgagnon.net</ref> ("The Bible and Homosexual Practice") although he is not a full Biblical inerrantist, and holds to the ''Documentary Source Hypothesis''<ref>http://www.ukapologetics.net/docu.htm</ref> in that regard is somewhat like his counterparts. Adding to his numerous and extensive reproofs of pro-homosexual claims<ref>http://www.robgagnon.net/ArticlesOnline.htm</ref> is Thomas E Schmidt<ref>Professor of New Testament Greek at Westmont College in Santa Barbara, California</ref> ("Straight and Narrow?"), Guenther Haas<ref>Associate Professor of Religion and Theology at Redeemer College</ref> ("Hermeneutical issues in the use of the Bible to justify the acceptance of homosexual practice), James B. de Young <ref>Professor of New Testament Language and Literature at Western Seminary in Portland, Oregon</ref> (Homosexuality: Contemporary Claims Examined in Light of the Bible and Other Ancient Literature and Law<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?idZXAVf8m_HKgC&pgPA244&lpgPA244&dqsodom+in+Mishnah&sourceweb&otsZjUCW3j8F9&sigF5r2UCKKoWPAAbUnK3kYO-VdgVE&hlen&saX&oibook_result&resnum4&ctresult#PPA245,M1]</ref>), Dave Miller Ph.D. (“Sodom—Inhospitality or Homosexuality?"), F. Earle Fox, David W. Virtue (Homosexuality, Good and right in the eyes of God?<ref>https://books.google.com/books?id=cbfVg_1qhe0C&pg=PP1&dq=Homosexuality,+Good+and+right+in+the+eyes+of+God+F.+Earle+Fox</ref>), apologist James Patrick Holding<ref>Tektonic.org</ref> ("Were David and Jonathan Gay Lovers?", and other apologists.

== Terms Defined ==

The term ''[[homosexual]]'' is a relatively recent one, with its first known occurrence apparently being in an 1869 pamphlet in the German language, and attributed to native Austrian Karl-Maria Kertbeny. Over time, this term, scorned by H. Havelock Ellis in ''Studies in Psychology'', in 1897 as a "a barbarously hybrid word"<ref>[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=homosexual]</ref> and which was used within the field of personality taxonomy, and could be used to denote any same gender environment, is now used almost exclusively in regards to sexual attraction as well as activity. This is as yet unsatisfactory, as such use lacks the distinction between homosexual social activity, denoted by the term "homosociality," versus same gender love, "homophilia," and which may be romantic, and that of homoeroticism (clinically MSM), denoting homosexual erotic activity, that of same gender sexual relations (also known as homo-genital relations, or more rarely, ''homosex''). As most of this article deals with the sexual practice of homosexuals, the term homosexual relations or homoeroticism will usually be used. ''Sodomy'' is also sometimes referred to as denoting the same, though this originally defined a temple prostitute. (''Sodom'' itself is derived from the word "scorch," or "burnt".) Some former homosexuals, such as Larry Houston, argue that homosexuality is what one does,<ref>[http://banap.net/ Behavior and Not a Person]</ref> while in the Bible, the motive or "orientation" of a person is not what determines the illicit nature of sex with an unlawful partner, and as since [[the Fall]], all humans are born with sinful proclivities, for which God gives grace to overcome, (Gn. 4:7; Rm. 8) inner inclinations are not allowed to justify such.

==Interpretive foundations and positions==

How one views the Bible - its inspiration and authority and the manner of interpreting it - is directly related to the conflicting positions on homosexuality. As Lionel Windsor observes, "the fundamental contention is about hermeneutics, about the interpretation and use of Scripture, in which two views are basically manifest."<ref>[http://www.lionelwindsor.net/bibleresources/topical/Bible_Homosexuality.htm The Bible and Homosexuality The Current Debate, by Lionel Windsor (2005])</ref> Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, regarding the side churches take on the issue of [[same-sex marriage]], commented that this "will expose a great divide over the authority of the Bible among many Christian churches and denominations — perhaps in a way exceeding any other issue."<ref>Will Gay Marriage Pit Church Against Church?, Time Magazine, Apr. 26, 2009</ref>

The study of homosexuality and biblical interpretation reveals that the revisionist school of homosexual [[apologetics]] operates out a radically different exegetical basis than which enduring historical Biblical scholarship has evidenced as a whole, and which sees such revisionism as foundationally faulty and aberrant. (Psa 11:2-3).<ref>[http://www.robgagnon.net/articles/homoAuthorityScripture.pdf Robert A. J. Gagnon, The Authority of Scripture in the 'Homosex' Debate"]</ref><ref>[http://www.catalystresources.org/issues/211schmidt.html Thomas E. Schmidt, THE HERMENEUTICS OF HOMOSEXUALITY: RECENT TRENDS]</ref>

James R. White and Jeffrey D. Niell contend that,
{{Cquote|The net effect of this revisionist approach is a novel and destructive twisting of Scripture...The Bible is being reinterpreted according to urges that are "against nature" and then said to support the homosexual agenda...Despite the revisionists' protests to the contrary, their position is in actuality based upon human desire rather than upon biblical authority and interpretation.<ref>[http://www.mtio.com/articles/bissar97.htm The Unthinkable Has Become Thinkable]</ref>}}

===Traditional/historical position===

Those who hold to the traditional position of unconditional prohibition of homoeroticism usually work from a strong adherence to the theological foundation of Biblical infallibility, in which God, as the author of [[Holy Scripture]], made His will for man evident and to be obeyed, especially as concerning basic doctrines and laws for attitude and behavior. This position holds that proper exegesis requires the consistent use of proven rules of interpretation ([[hermeneutics]]), and that such confirms the transcendent relevancy of the Bible, and that in particular its spiritual and basic [[moral]] laws are immutable. Rather than every man doing that which is right according to his judgment, (Dt. 12:8; Jdg. 17:6) man is to be subject to the holy, just and good laws of God, (Rm. 7:12) which are to His benefit when obeyed, and to man's detriment when forsaken. (Dt. 28) In so seeking to live by every word of God, (Mt. 4:4) it becomes evident that a basic literalistic approach to Biblical exegesis is required, so that while interpretations are understood within the context of their respective literary forms, a wide range of metaphorical meanings of the historical narratives, in particular, are disallowed. In addition, historically Christian theologians have overall seen the laws of God manifested as within different categories, basically those of immutable transcendent laws, out of which cultural applications were made, and ceremonial laws, which were typological of Christ and His working under the New Covenant. (Colossians 2:16,17; Hebrews 9:10)<ref>The Authority Of God's Law Today, Greg L. Bahnsen</ref>

In regards to the issue of sexual unions, this historical or traditional position, especially as substantiated by conservative Christians, holds that the Bible establishes and consistently confirms that only the women was created from man and for man, as his uniquely compatible and complementary "helpmeet". And that only this joining of two opposites halves is shown to be what God designed and decreed to make man (for those who so choose to marry) sexually complete, and which no other physical creation could fulfill. (Gn. 2:18-24; Mt. 19:4-6; 1Cor. 11:9; Eph. 5:31) It is furthermore seen that these uniquely created complementary distinctions (1Cor. 11:1-12) preclude fulfillment by same gender unions. In addition, the explicit and abundant evidence for the establishment of marriage for heterosexuals, by which sexual union is sanctified by God, is seen to stand in stark contrast to the lack of any establishment of marriage between "homosexuals". This conspicuous absence is not found to be constrained by cultural considerations, but rather is due to homosexual relations being foundationally contrary to the aforementioned foundational design and decrees of God.<ref>[http://s3.amazonaws.com/tgc-documents/journal-issues/21.1_Taylor.pdf The Bible and Homosexuality by J. Glenn Taylor (Assoc. Prof. Of to at Wycliff College. U. of Toronto]</ref>

As relates to prohibitions on sexual activity, consistent with the understanding that God made basic doctrines and laws for human behavior evident and to be obeyed, the laws and principals concerning human sexual partners are seen as moral, universal and transcendent from the time of their institution, and directly applicable to today's cultural contexts. In examining such, it is evidenced that from the beginning all sexual relations outside marriage were and are consistently categorized as fornication. (1Cor. 7:2). And in contrast to heterosexual unions, in the places where homoerotic relations are most explicitly dealt with (Lv. 18:22; 20:13; Rm. 1:26,27) they are only condemned, with this condemnation also being universal in scope, and not restricted to certain cultural, behavioral or motivational conditions.<ref>[http://www.ukapologetics.net/08/pannenberg1.htm Should We Support Gay Marriage? NO! Wolfhart Pannenberg]</ref><ref>[http://www.robgagnon.net/NewsweekMillerHomosexResp.htm Prof. Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon]</ref><ref>Straight or Narrow? Sexuality from the Beginning, Thomas E.Schmidt</ref><ref>http://www.seekingtruth.co.uk/homosex.htm</ref>

As stated by German theologian Wolfhart Pannenberg,

:[T]he biblical statements on this subject merely represent the negative corollary to the Bible's positive views on the creational purpose of men and women in their sexuality.<ref>[http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/10/32003b.asp One Flesh: Why Sodomy Can Never Depict the Relationship Between Christ and His Church, Agape Press]</ref>

The final report of the Baptist Union of Western Australia (BUWA) Task Force on Human Sexuality concludes that while all mankind is prone to sin,

:the Bible is clear that sin involves choice, and it unequivocally condemns homosexual behavior as sin.<ref>Life News, October 1997.</ref><ref>Final Report of the Task Force on Human Sexuality, Baptist Union of Western Australia, July 1997)</ref>[http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c040.html]

Evangelical Bible scholar Greg Bahnsen<ref>http://home.comcast.net/~webpages54/ap/biobahn.html</ref> sums up the position of traditional Biblical exegesis in stating,
{{Cquote|God’s verdict on homosexuality is inescapably clear. His law is a precise interpretation of the sexual order of creation for fallen man, rendering again His intention and direction for sexual relations. When members of the same sex (homo-sexual) practice intercourse with each other...they violate God’s basic creation order in a vile and abominable fashion.<ref>Bahnsen, Homosexuality: A Biblical View (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1978), p. 36.</ref>}}

In P. Michael Ukleja's summation,
<blockquote>
Only towering cynicism can pretend that there is any doubt about what the Scriptures say about homosexuality. The Bible has not even the slightest hint of ambiguity about what is permitted or forbidden in this aspect of sexual conduct.<ref>“Homosexuality and the Old Testament,” BSAC 140 (July 1983): 259.</ref>
</blockquote>

Calvin Smith concludes,
<blockquote>
the weak revisionist exegetical arguments, together with far more convincing traditionalist rebuttals, have led me to affirm the traditional view more firmly than ever.<ref>CONCLUDING REMARKS, Homosexuality Revisited in Light of the Current Climate</ref>
</blockquote>

=== Revisionist/Pro-Homosexual Position ===

Pro-homosexuals seeking to negate the universally enjoined Biblical injunctions against homosexual relations most typically attempt to relegate such to only a formal cultic context, or to [[pederasty]], or to heterosexuals acting contrary to the orientation. In addition, the homosexual intent of the Sodomites in Gn. 19 (cf. Jdg. 19) and Jude 1:7 are usually contended against. Conversely, homosexuality is often asserted to be taking place in the stories of most any close heterosexual relationship in the Bible.

Faced with the biblical establishment of the exclusive sanction of male and female sexual unions, and condemnation of homosexual relations, homosexuals almost seriously impugn the reliability of Scripture, most particularly when it conflicts with their desired conclusions. Countering this, conservative Christians contend for the reliability of the Bible,<ref>The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, by Bruce M. Metzger</ref><ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=wWDSR8y911kC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inerrancy+of+the+bible Inerrancy By Norman L. Geisler]</ref> and the meaning of those related to homosexuality,<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=WcyqvWfJnyYC&dq=Marriage+and+Family+in+the+Biblical+World+By+Ken+M.+Campbell&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=tdP-w02BMG&sig=JTDKQfOh_7OF_DO5Ejw7ZOZ12kQ&hl=en&ei=xClXSrrCFoGZtgfGrLzdCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1 Marriage and Family in the Biblical World By Ken M. Campbell]</ref><ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=Zeotd-ylKtwC&dq=Straight%2Band%2BNarrow%3F%2BCompassion%2Band%2BClarity%2Bin%2Bthe%2BHomosexuality%2BDebate&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=WOY_52R5Bm&sig=BUMeUZv6ocyWnysyKH5OUPoDLb4&hl=en&ei=8ClXSvKYKtWktwe_tLjdCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3 Straight & Narrow? By Thomas E. Schmidt]</ref><ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=ZXAVf8m_HKgC&pg=PT1&lpg=PT1&dq=Homosexuality++By+James+B.+De+Young&source=bl&ots=ZjVJVYi9Fb&sig=NAf_HeY1mb2l2fwdAj5lxnUx_Mw&hl=en&ei=GypXSonvK5mltgeVns3jDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1 Homosexuality By James B. De Young]</ref><ref>[http://www.robgagnon.net/ArticlesOnline.htm Robert A. J. Gagnon Articles Available Online]</ref> and see the diminishing of the authority of the Bible by many homosexual authors as being ideologically driven.<ref>[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0108a.html Authority of Scripture, by Joseph P. Gudel]</ref>

Those who seek to find support for sanctioned homoeroticism in Scripture typically view the Bible as a book that was not wholly inspired of God, and which allows a vast range of metaphorical interpretation, even within historical narratives, as well as tolerating a much broader range of interpretation of basic moral commands and their immutability, even to the point of such being determined by contemporary cultural morality. The Bible is almost universally held by them to be partly the work of ''[[homophobic]]'' editors.<ref>B.A. Robinson; Thomas Horner; Steven Greenberg</ref> Those who penned the Bible are sometimes essentially deemed to be too ignorant on the subject of homosexuality for their censure of it to be valid, thus impugning the Divine inspiration of Scripture, as well as demonstrable sound exegesis.<ref>Victor Paul Furnish, The Moral Teachings of Paul: Selected Issues (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985), p. 85.</ref> This effect may be seen as a desired one, and part of the [[homosexual agenda]], and a form of [[Homosexual Historical Revisionism|homosexual historical revisionism]].

Another solution to the problem of the universal condemnation of and lack of sanction for homosexual relations is that of Professor Walter Wink, who concedes, "I have long insisted that the issue is one of hermeneutics, and that efforts to twist the text to mean what it clearly does not say are deplorable. Simply put, the Bible is negative toward same-sex behavior, and there is no getting around it." And that "Paul wouldn't accept [a loving homosexual] relationship for a minute." However, he and similar revisionists view the Bible as offering no coherent sexual ethic ''for today'', especially as regards homoeroticism, which teaching Wink terms “interpretative quicksand”. Instead,such hold that people possess a right to sex that supersedes Biblical structural requirements for sexual unions, and essentially proposes that sexual ethics are best determined by one's own subjective understanding of Christian love.<ref>Walter Wink, "To hell with gays" and "the Bible and homosexuality"</ref> (contra. Dt. 12:8; Jdg. 17:6; Mt.4:4)) It is understood that this enables the objective immutable moral laws of the Bible to yield to a love that can actually rejoice in iniquity (contra. 1Cor. 13:6)<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.net/Homosexuality_and_the_Bible_Wink.html HOMOSEXUALITY AND THE Bible (WALTER WINK REFUTED)]</ref><ref>[http://www.robgagnon.net/Reviews.htm "No Universally Valid Sex Standards? A Rejoinder to Walter Wink's Views on the Bible and Homosexual Practice", Gagnon]</ref>

Daniel Helminiak's theory of ethics is similar, which Olliff and Hodges notes "is, at its very foundation, self-refuting. While he professes Christianity, he has adopted the autonomous man's position for the basis of his ethics." <ref>[http://www.reformed.org/social/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/social/response_to_helminiak_2.html A Further Look at Pro-Homosexual Theology], Derrick K. Olliff and Dewey H. Hodges</ref>

While few pro-homosexual writers concede with Wink that the Bible is contrary to same sex behavior, virtually all reject any Biblical censure of it. Author Robin Scroggs states, “Biblical judgments against homosexuality are not relevant to today’s debate.”<ref>Robin Scroggs, The New Testament and Homosexuality (Philadelphia: Fortress, l983) p. 127.</ref> William M. Kent, a member of the committee assigned by United Methodists to study homosexuality, explicitly denied the inspiration of any anti-homosex passages in the Bible, and their application today. Gary David Comstock, Protestant chaplain at Wesleyan University, termed it "dangerous" to fail to condemn the apostle Paul's condemnation of homoeroticism, and advocated removing such from the canon.<ref>Gary David Comstock, Gay Theology Without Apology (Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim Press, 1993), p. 43. http://www.albertmohler.com/article_read.php?cid=7</ref> Episcopalian professor L. William Countryman contends, “The gospel allows no rule against the following, in and of themselves: . .. bestiality, polygamy, homosexual acts,” or “pornography.”<ref>Dirt, Greed, and Sex (Fortress, 1988)</ref> Christine E. Gudorf flatly denies that the Bible is the primary authority for Christian ethics.<ref>Balch, Homosexuality, Science, and the "plain Sense" of Scripture p. 121</ref> Bishop (Ret.) John Shelby Spong denies all miracles, including the virgin conception and literal bodily resurrection of Christ, as well as the Divine inspiration of Scripture, and denies that there are any moral absolutes<ref>[http://www.ukapologetics.net/08/spongwrong2.htm Michael Bott and Jonathan Sarfati, "What’s Wrong With (Former) Bishop Spong?"]</ref>

In response to the various forms of pro-homosexual revisionism, Pastor Joseph P. Gudel notes,

:It is extremely revealing to note that almost every pro-gay group within the church shares one thing in common: they reject the Bible as being fully the Word of God...Likewise, the many pro-homosexual books that have come out almost all reject - or even ridicule - the church's historic stance on the inspiration and authority of Scripture.<ref>Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture, The Authority of Scripture, Christian Research Institute Journal</ref>

Likewise, Dr. Albert Mohler<ref>Master of Divinity and Ph.D. in "Systematic and Historical Theology;" president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky</ref> describes pro-homosexual polemics as contending that
<blockquote>
either the biblical texts do not proscribe homosexuality...or the texts do proscribe homosexuality, but are oppressive, heterosexist, and patriarchal in themselves, and thus must be rejected or radically re-interpreted in order to remove the scandal of oppression.
</blockquote>

He goes on to conclude that, “The passages are not merely re-interpreted in light of clear historical-grammatical exegesis - - they are subverted and denied by implication and direct assault.”<ref>Fact Sheet on Homosexuality, http://www.lifeway.com</ref>

Alex D. Montoya<ref>Associate Professor of Pastoral Ministries at The Masters Seminary</ref> concurs, prefacing his essay on the subject at hand by stating,
<blockquote>
Developments in the secular society in its acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle have put pressure on the [[evangelical]] church to respond in some way. [[Homosexual]] spokespersons have advocated varying principles of interpretation to prove from the Bible the legitimacy of their lifestyle. They have resorted to either subjectivism, historic-scientific evolving of society, or cultural biases of the Biblical writers to find biblical backing for their position. Scripture condemns homosexuality in such passages as Genesis 19; Lev 18:22; 20:13; Rom 1:18-32; 1 Cor 6:9; 1 Tim 1:10; 2 Pet 2:7; and Jude 7. The true biblical teaching on the subject requires the church to condemn the sin of homosexuality, convert the homosexual, confront erroneous teaching, and cleanse itself. The church must be careful not to adopt the customs of the world.<ref>The Master's Seminary Journal (TMSJ), 11/2 (Fall 2000), Homosexuality and the church,</ref>
</blockquote>

It may be noted that homosexuals in general tend to have a different view of God than the Biblical one, often indicated to be that of a pantheistic nature of deity which can refer to any of a variety of perspectives.<ref>http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/13-culture/282-spiritual-profile-of-homosexual-adults-provides-surprising-insights</ref> A few pro-homosexual apologists do present themselves as evangelical Christians, yet as with homosexual apologetics in general, certain hermeneutics and logic employed by them are seen as effectively allowing the negation of most any moral command, and the Bible itself as a moral authority. (See [[Leviticus 18]].)

== Genesis: the Unique Union of Man and Women ==

The Biblically established position is also known as ''[[complementarianism]]'', for which at least seven reasons are provided as to why "from the very beginning of the Bible we see that there is only one proper type of marriage: The union of a man and a woman."<ref>http://www.layhands.com/IsHomosexualityASin.htm</ref> (See also [[Complementarity]].)

(Gen 2:18-24) "And the LORD God said, 'It is not good that '''the man''' should be '''alone'''; I will make him an '''help meet''' for him. {19} And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. {20} And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but '''for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.''' {21} And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; {22} '''And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.''' {23} And Adam said, This is now '''bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman''', because '''she was taken out of Man'''. {24} '''Therefore''' shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall '''cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh."'

The Biblical texts which are primarily the subject of homosexual revisionism fall into two categories: those which prohibit or condemn homoeroticism, in principal or by precept, and those into which sanction for it is alleged. It is seen fitting<ref>Pastor Toby Brown, classicalpresbyterian.blogspot.com</ref>(Gn. 3:1-5) that these attempts begin in Genesis. In dealing with Gn. 1:27 and 2:18-24, efforts are made by pro-homosexual apologists to negate the uniqueness of God's choice to join man and women together, in order to read into Scripture an allowance for marriage between same genders (which, by implication, may be seen to also include animals). While the Bible only evidences explicit and consistent Biblical declarations of who is joined in marriage, this being heterosexuals, proponents of homoeroticism contend that a “man with man” sexual union can be valid. In attempting to negate the exclusivity of Gn. 2:24, the assertion is made by some proponents of homoeroticism that the joining of only opposite genders would be expected with an empty planet in need of population, and that this does not exclude same gender unions, as procreation is longer a primary need for the human race.<ref>The Bible and Same-Gender Marriage, Mary A. Tolbert</ref><ref>Richard Hasbany, Homosexuality and Religion, Procreation and the family</ref> Countryman supposes that the Genesis 2:24 passage "can equally well be read simply as an etiological story, telling how the institution of marriage came into being."

In response, the context of Gn. 2:18-23 is invoked as showing that it was only after other created beings were found unsuitable for Adam that the women was created. "The lonely Adam is provided not with a second Adam, but with Eve. She is the helper who corresponds to him. She is the one with whom he can relate in total intimacy and become one flesh.<ref>[http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_attitude_wenham.html Gordon J Wenham, The Old Testament Attitude to Homosexuality; Expository Times 1991]</ref>

Donald D. Binder also responds,

:Absent entirely from his [Countryman's] discussion, is the point that Jesus himself did not interpret the passage etiologically, but normatively (Mark 10:5-9, Matt 19:4-6), providing an ethical basis for the institution of monogamous, heterosexual marriage in the subsequent teachings of the Church.<ref>[http://www.pohick.org/gc2000letter.html A Letter to the Bishops and Deputies of the 73rd General Convention] Chaplain Donald D. Binder, PhD Adjunct Professor of New Testament, Southern Methodist University</ref>

Hilborn states,

:...the complementarity of woman and man is more than simply physical. Genesis 1:27 emphasizes that God created human beings in His own image - male and female together. The context shows that this divine image is expressed in a relationship which may be sexual, but which is also spiritual, emotional and psychological.<ref>[http://www.eauk.org/theology/key_papers/Homosexuality/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&pageid=1630 Homosexuality and Scripture], by Dr David Hilborn, Theological Adviser, Evangelical Alliance (UK)</ref>

Welch states that marriage is in essence,

:a covenant of companionship that is ordained by God. It is the bringing together as one flesh two people who are truly 'fit' for each other." And that in contrast, "Homosexual acts ''and'' homosexual ''desire'', by either male or female, are a violation of this creation ordinance and are thus sinful.<ref>Edward T. Welch, The Journal of Biblical Counseling</ref>

In addition, the Lord Jesus is shown in Matthew 19 to distinctly affirm that the Genesis union of opposite genders is the "what" of "what therefore God hath joined together":

(Mat 19:4-6) "And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them '''male and female''', And said, For '''this cause''' shall a man leave '''father and 'mother''', and shall cleave to '''his wife''': and '''they twain shall be one flesh'''? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. '''What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."''''

Gaiser adds that the legal materials in Genesis established boundaries for life as actually lived "outside the garden",<ref>Fred J. Gaiser, "Homosexuality and the Old Testament," Word & World 10 (1990): 161-165</ref> and here in the New Testament Jesus references both Gn. 1:27 and 2:14, in being distinctly stating that the union of the male with his female counterpart is what God sexually joins, and which union Scripture elsewhere establishes and consistently confirmes. "It was the women, not another man, that was created out of Adam's side to be at his side, being created from part of man to be uniquely joined together with man, sexually, in marriage."<ref name=peacebyjesus>[http://peacebyjesus.net/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html ''Homosexual relations and the Bible'', peacebyjesus.net]</ref> As Keil and Delitzsch state, “The woman was created, not of dust of the earth, but from a rib of Adam, because she was formed for an inseparable unity and fellowship of life with the man, and the mode of her creation was to lay the actual foundation for the moral ordinance of marriage." <ref>Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament; Johann (C.F.) Keil (1807-1888) & Franz Delitzsch (1813-1890)</ref>

Robert J. Gagnon explains,

:Genesis 2:18-24 portrays an originally binary human split down the side into two sexually differentiated counterparts. Clearly, marriage is imaged as a reconstitution, into “one flesh,” of the two constituent parts, male and female, that were the products of the splitting. One’s sexual “other half” can only be a person of the other sex. Men and women are complementary sexual beings whose (re-)merger brings about sexual wholeness in the sphere of erotic interaction.<ref>Gagnon’s response to Prof. L. William Countryman’s review in Anglican theological review: on careful scholarship. Though Gagnon holds to the problematic JEDP theory, his analysis is overall good</ref>

:The text states four times that the woman was “taken from” the “human” (adam, thereafter referred to as an ish or man), underscoring that woman, not another man, is the missing sexual “complement” or “counterpart” to man (so the Hebrew term negdo, which stresses both human similarity, “corresponding to him,” and sexual difference, “opposite him”). Within the story line man and woman may (re-)unite into “one flesh” precisely because together they reconstitute the sexual whole.<ref>http://www.robgagnon.net/NewsweekMillerHomosexResp.htm</ref>

The traditional position<ref name=peacebyjesus>[http://peacebyjesus.net/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html]</ref> thus sees that the physical compatibility of the male/female union, with her unique procreational ability, itself stands in clear contrast to same gender unions,<ref>God, Marriage, and Family, p. 48, by Andreas J. Kostenberger, David W. Jones</ref> and the procreational aspect is what Judaism's traditional opposition to homosexuality is primarily based upon.<ref>Norman Lamm, Judaism and the Modern Attitude Towards Homosexuality, p. 197-98</ref> Even on the basis of anatomical engineering, homosexual intercourse is seen to be a supreme insult to God and His power and wisdom, with unnecessary deleterious consequences.<ref>Straight and Narrow? Compassion and Clarity In The Homosexuality Debate, pp. 117-118, Thomas E. Schmidt</ref>
Yet it is also seen that the purpose of opposite gender marriage to being simply for procreation is untenable, as what Scripture reveals is that God also uniquely created the women in order to fill the need of man being alone, "that in addition to procreation, there is a unitive function of sexuality that has to do with fulfilling our need for companionship".<ref>[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0108a.html "That Which is Unnatural" Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture, Genesis 1-2], by Joseph P. Gudel, Christian Research Institute Journal</ref> Hilborn adds,

:Admittedly, the complementarity of woman and man is more than simply physical. Genesis 1:27 emphasises that God created human beings in His own image - male and female together. The context shows that this divine image is expressed in a relationship which may be sexual, but which is also spiritual, emotional and psychological\.<ref>[http://www.eauk.org/articles/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&pageid=29093 "Response to Rowan Williams". and "Homosexuality and Scripture", by David Hilborn, Former head of The Evangelical Alliance]</ref>

This joining is manifest as God's declared means of creating sanctioned sexual “oneness,” which other created beings could not fill (Gn. 2:18-20), to the glory of God.

The Song of Solomon is sometimes invoked as revealing that the women is uniquely designed to be man's compatible and complementary mate in more ways than just for procreation.<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.net/Song_of_Solomon.html Song of Solomon]</ref> (cf. Prov. 5:15-19) In addition, the sanctity of sex within marriage but apart from emphasis upon procreation also seen as being indicated in the New Testament, where celibate singleness is esteemed (1Cor. 7:7,8,24-43), and marriage between man and women is presented as the primary alternative to fornication, with conjugal relations being enjoined due to what their marriage union entails (1Cor. 7:1-5), with the marriage bed being undefiled. (Heb. 13:4) Jewish tradition also recognizes the importance of marital love and companionship.<ref>Ketubot, 61b-62b; Feldman, 168</ref>

In addition, the transcendent exclusivity of marriage being between male and female is seen as being throughout the Bible, in which whenever God gives instructions for sexual bonding it is always between opposite genders - even between animals, as seen in Noah's pairing (Gn. 7:9). The only marriages in the Bible are between man and women, with the Hebrew and Greek words for wife never denoting a male. In contrast to the abundant confirmation of God's sanction for heterosexual relations, it is pointed out that in all of the Bible there exists no establishment of any homosexual marriage by the people of God. “Indeed, every narrative, law, proverb, exhortation, metaphor, and piece of poetry in the Hebrew Bible having anything to do with sexual relations presupposes a male-female prerequisite.”<ref>http://www.robgagnon.net/NicholasKristofGodAndSex.htm</ref>

Jame B. De Young, in “Homosexuality,” writes,

:The creation of humans as male and female (Gn. 1) and the heterosexual union that constitutes marriage (Gn. 2) lie at the at the basis of the rest of Scripture and its comments about sexuality and marriage. A proper understanding of, and submission to, the record of Creation will guide the inquirer to the truth about homosexuality and heterosexuality. Genesis 1 — 3 clearly is foundational to other Bible texts.

In response to the need for a marriage precedent, pro-homosexual proponents attempt to make Jonathan and David's covenant a marriage, (see [[David and Jonathan]]) to which it is responded that covenants were common in in the Old Testament (the word occurs 285 times, and only once in regard to marriage) and Jonathan and David made 3 of them, and there is nothing in the description of their relationship that establishes such, or sex. It is also contended that same gender marriage must be allowed since there is no explicit command prohibiting it. In response, it is stated that this polemic possesses the same amount of legitimacy as saying that marriage between man and certain animals is allowed, as these also are not explicitly forbidden. Under traditional exegesis, homosexual marriage does needs to be explicitly forbidden, as God clearly specifies, and consistently confirms who is joined together in marriage, and unconditionally prohibits men laying with men as with women (Lv. 18:22), which “cleaving” is part of God's description of marriage. (Gn. 2:24; Mt. 19:4)

=== 1 Corinthians 11 ===

1 Cor. 11:1-12 explicitly confirms the unique bond of man and women in marriage, which is further seen as being contrary to same sex unions:

:But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. (1Cor 11:3)

An argument by pro-homosexual writers against this, is one which asserts that the injunctions against homoeroticism are based upon outdated male headship. "Increasing numbers of scholars— influenced by the sexual deconstruction of M. Foucault and by the feminist critique of biblical sexuality—freely acknowledge a biblical condemnation of homosexuality, but dismiss this condemnation on the ground that it is an arbitrary expression of an obsolete patriarchalism. Since, they maintain, power creates truth, new power structures will create new sexual mores based on mutuality.<ref>[http://www.catalystresources.org/issues/211schmidt.html THE HERMENEUTICS OF HOMOSEXUALITY: RECENT TRENDS]</ref>

Opposing this is the traditionalist's argument that from the beginning, God is the author of male headship, and maintains it without abrogation in the New Testament. (Gn. 3:16; 1Tim. 2:12,13) 1 Cor 11:1-16 is a primary text in this regard, in response to which a modern argument contends that this positional distinction (not simply its expression) is culturally caused. This is traditionally dealt with by contextually showing that this distinction is based upon the creational, ontological distinction between man and the women, in which the man is the head of the women, like as the Father is the head of the Son, and Christ is the head of the church.<ref>Jamieson, Fausset and Brown; 1Cor. 11:3</ref><ref>[http://peacebyjesus.net/WOMENPASTORS.html ARE WOMEN PASTORS BIBLICAL?]</ref>

Verse 8 is seen as showing that, while positional distinctions themselves do not require opposite genders, the reason for the headship of the male over the women is being directly due to her being created from the man:

:For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. (1Cor 11:8)

In addition, the next verse explicitly states that it was the women who was created for the man:

:Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. (v.9)

This statement of purpose references back to Gn. 2:18-24, which is the beginning of the establishment of the women as man's uniquely compatible and complementary helpmate, in marriage.

A further aspect of the complementary nature of the man and the women is seen in their mutual interdependence stated in vs. 11-12:

:Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God. (1 Cor 11:11-12)

In the light of these additional texts, to join man with man is further understood as being contrary to the sanctified union in marriage between man and women, in which opposite and uniquely compatible genders hold distinctive yet complimentary roles due to their creational differences, both in position and purpose.

Baker's states,

:From the beginning it is acknowledged that humankind is created in two genders that together bear God's image (Gen 1:27) and together constitute a unity of flesh (Gen 2:24). The reaffirmation of these two notions in key New Testament passages on sexuality (Matt 19:1-12; 1 Cor 7:12-20) demonstrates the continuity and importance of sexual differentiation in the construction of a normative biblical sexuality. More simply put, humankind is created to find human completion only in the (marital) union of two sexes.<ref>[http://www.studylight.org/dic/bed/view.cgi?number=T348 Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology]</ref>

=== Celibacy, polygamy, and procreation ===

While is it not a command that all men be sexually joined, the only other alternative is celibacy, as seen in the only alternative to fornication being marriage:

"Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband." (1Cor 7:2)

In response to the procreational aspect of complementarian position, some pro-homosexual revisionists charge them with making single persons less human,<ref>Myers and Scanzoni, What God Has Joined Together? p. 109</ref><ref>Hasbany, Homosexuality and Religion, p. 106</ref> while the conservative response is basically that, what sexual union in marriage enables and sanctifies is sexual completeness, "It is only in the heterosexual union of marriage that we find the fulfillment of God's intended order, both procreative and unitive."<ref>Gudel,"That Which is Unnatural"</ref> yet this is not required of all under the New Testament, and may be sacrificially forsaken, and which requires sexual abstinence. Gagnon states,

:First, to assert that male and female are two incomplete parts of a sexual whole is not the same as saying that all people must marry if they are to be whole persons. It is to say, rather, that if a person chooses to engage in sexual activity, that person always and only does so in his or her particularity as one part of a two-faceted sexual whole, as male or as female. Men and women have inherent integrity in their respective sexes: Men are wholly male and women are wholly female. They are not half-male and half-female, respectively (which, again, is the unfortunate logic of same-sex sexual bonds) The image in Gen 2:21-24 of a woman being formed from what is pulled from the man/human illustrates the point that the missing element from one sex is not another of the same sex but rather one from the only other sex."

It is also argued that as plant and animal food was specifically provided for man as his normal sustenance,(Gn. 9:2-6) but may be abstained from (1Cor. 7:5; 2Cor. 6:5) - if only for a time due to necessity - so sex can be abstained from for a time, and marriage permanently if one so chooses. But to engage in sexual relations contrary to the sanctified means for such (marriage), or to be joined in marriage with an unlawful partner, is seen to have less justification than cannibalism.<ref name=peacebyjesus>[http://peacebyjesus.net/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html]</ref>

In support of the traditional position it is understanding that the exhortation to celibacy in singleness (1Cor 7:7,8,25-35) is shown to be based upon the spiritual nature of the believers relationship with Christ and His kingdom and the attention it is worthy of, and (if only partly) due to "the present distress", (v. 26) and perhaps a sense of imminent trials,<ref>which surely did come, not only from opposition by Paul's own "kinsmen according to the flesh" (Rm. 9:3; cf. 1Ths. 2:16), and the turmoil following the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D., but from often intense persecutions from a procession of emperors, from Domitian (195) to Diocletian (284-305)</ref> but which in no way abrogates the restriction of sexual relations to being only between opposite genders in marriage.

Proponents of homoeroticism also argue that the allowance of polygamous marriages in the Old Testament (even concubines were wives: Gn. 25:1; cf. 1Ch. 1:32; Gn. 30:4; cf. Gn. 35:22; 2Sam. 16:21, 22, cf. 2Sam. 20:3) indicates a departure from the Genesis model, and thus sets a precedent that would allow same sex relations and marriages.<ref>Walter Wink, ibid</ref> In response, it is pointed out that there is no structural change here, as while union with more than one wife was allowed, and the New Testament restores that to the original of one wife, (Gn. 2:24; Mt. 19:5 Eph. 5:22-6:2)<ref>Matthew Henry, Mt. 19:8-12; Albert Barnes, 1.Cor. 7:2</ref><ref>Unlike children (Eph. 6:1), which is plural, when a individual husband is addressed, it is not "husband love your wives," but "let every one of you in particular so love his wife" (Eph. 5:33). Likewise "honor thy father and mother" are singular (Eph. 6:20) and presumes only one of each. A prime requirement for pastors, who are examples to be followed (2Ths. 3:7,9; Heb. 13:7), is that they only have one wife (1Tim. 3:2; Tts. 1:6; cf. 1Cor. 9:5). Likewise deacons (1Tim. 3:12) See also God, Marriage, and Family, pp. 43-45</ref><ref>The reformist Essene sect at Qumran rejected ‘taking two wives in their lives’ because ‘the foundation of creation is “male and female he created them” [Gen 1:27]' and because ‘those who entered (Noah’s) ark went in two by two into the ark [Gen 7:9]’ (CD 4.20-5.1). Gagnon, http://www.robgagnon.net/articles/homosexStacyJohnsonSJT2.pdf</ref> yet even an excess of wives is manifest as keeping with the creational design and directive in which the women was created for the man, with polygamy only differing from the Genesis model which Jesus affirmed in the number of female wives (as in too much of a good thing: Prv. 18:22), not their gender.

McNeill<ref>ref. by Richard Hasbany, The Church and the Homosexual, Cp. 2</ref> and others attempt to force marriage under the New Testament to include homosexuals due to its lower priority upon procreation. However, as related above, conservative Christians in particular see the Bible explicitly honoring romantic and erotic love between a man and his female spouse in places such as the Song of Solomon (cf. Prov. 5:15-19), and otherwise revealing the marriage bond as being far more than for procreation, with the women's uniqueness as the helpmeet of the man transcending that aspect (although the complementary aspect relative to procreation is held as important by conservative Jews and Christians, and which itself excludes same sex unions).<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.net/Homosexuality_and_the_Bible_Wink.html#Old A refutation of Dr. Walter Wink: Homosexuality and the Bible]</ref>

In additional support of the traditional position, it is argued that while under the New Covenant physical procreation is not seen as having the priority evidenced in the Old Testament, yet not only is the unique union of man and women in marriage (alone) affirmed, but rather than long term sexual abstinence in marriage being promoted (or sex only as part of procreation), regular benevolent conjugal relations are actually enjoined, which are based upon to the depth of the ordained marriage union (1Cor. 7:3-5; Heb. 13:4).

Another attempt in homosexual argumentation is to invoke Gal. 3:28 to order to negate the ontological argument against homomarriage.<ref>Walter Brueggemann, Lisa Miller, ref. in "More than “Mutual Joy”: Lisa Miller of Newsweek against Scripture and Jesus", (Gagnon) http://www.robgagnon.net/NewsweekMillerHomosexResp.htm</ref> Countering this is historical exegesis, which evidences that while all believers are spiritually one in Christ regardless of sexual and racial distinctions, and in the spiritual age to come even sexual unions will not exist between the elect, (Mt. 22:30; Lk. 20:34-36) yet it is also evident that this spiritual oneness does not negate positional/functional differences, (Heb. 13:17) including those based upon creational distinctions (1Cor. 11:1-3; Eph. 5:22-25; 1Pt. 3:1-7) or the effects of the Fall. (1Tim. 2:9-15)<ref>Albert Barnes, John Gill, 1Cor. 11:3; 14:34; 1Tim. 2:8-11</ref><ref>Note: "saved in childbearing" is generally held by traditionalists not as implying salvation due to works, but by obedient faith in Christ, which will saved her despite her travail of mothering (Gill, JFB), akin to being saved "as by fire", (1Cor. 3:15) if they continue in the faith. An alternative understanding is that generally women will be saved by a faith which was/is to be usually primarily expressed by women in raising children and maintaining the home. In other places Paul commends those women who helped Paul and others in the gospel work, (Rm. 16:1,2ff; Phil. 4:3) in addition to encouraging celibacy in singleness if so called.</ref> And that essential spiritual equality does not abrogate basic moral laws, including those against unlawful sexual partners, and the specifications of who is to be joined in marriage, which are seen as upheld in the New Testament.

=== Eunuchs===

(Mt. 19:9-12) "And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. {10} His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. {11} But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. {12} For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it."

Traditional this is understood as Jesus referring to ways in which men become eunuchs.

Based upon the O.T., the first way would be those who were born without the ability to procreate, exhibiting a mutilation of human nature,<ref>Gill comments that natural born eunuchs “were frequently called by the Jews, סריס המה, "an eunuch of the sun” (T. Bab. Yebamot, fol. 75. 1. 79. 2. & 80. 1. Maimon. Hilch. Ishot, c. 2. sect. 14), that is, as their doctors (Maimon & Bartenora in Misn. Yebamot, c. 8. sect. 4) explain it, one that from his mother's womb never saw the sun but as an eunuch; that is, one that is born so ... The signs of such an eunuch, are given by the Jewish writers (Bartenora, ibid. & Maimon. Hilch. Ishot, ut supra). This sort is sometimes called סריס בידי שמים "an eunuch by the hands of heaven" (T. Bab. Yebamot, fol. 80. 2) or God, in distinction from those who are so by the hands, or means of men.</ref> and possibly those who were asexual.

The second means are those who likewise cannot procreate due to men making them that way. Mathew is writing to the Jews, and these eunuchs find their Old Testament reference in Dt. 23:1, where such persons were forbidden from (at least) the Temple service (cf. Lv. 21:17-24). The second means is also confirmed in Isaiah 39:7, which foretells some Israelites being made eunuchs by the Babylonians, as part of Israel's punishment.

The last case of eunuchs are those who purposely choose to be single and celibate, as referred to in 1 Cor. 7:7,32-35, in order to better attend to the things that most directly pertain to the kingdom of God. Among the Essenes there were examples of this. But celibacy within marriage is actually forbidden by 1Cor. 7:5. (Note: The early church leader Origen castrated himself, literally following Matthew 19:12, perhaps to remove any hint of scandal as he taught young women their catechism. He later came to see his action as ill-advised and not to be taken as an example.)<ref>http://www.gospelcom.net/chi/GLIMPSEF/Glimpses/glmps054.shtml</ref>

However, here some more extreme pro-homosexual apologists, postulate or assert that at least some some of the eunuchs in the Bible, and those which Jesus referred to in Mt. 19:12, were natural born homosexuals, and sexual active, as in pagan nations.<ref>Faris Malik, "Eunuchs are Gay Men" (pro-homosexual)</ref> They then controvert “all cannot receive this saying” (v. 11) to refer to the uniqueness of the male/female union of Gn. 2, in order to conclude, “Jesus did not prohibit same sex marriage for born eunuchs”, asserting they are “exempt from the Adam and Eve style, heterosexual marriage paradigm”. Then, enlisting 1Cor. 1:8,9, and holding that abstinence is unreasonable for such eunuchs, the pro-homosexual apologist reasons that marriage must be allowed for them.<ref>Homosexual Eunuchs, Rick Brentlinger (pro-homosexual)</ref>

Is response it is argued that while it may be true that sometimes eunuchs could procreate,<ref>Homosexuality p. 122; James B. De Young</ref><ref>Digest of Justinian, Vol. 1, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, 1998, Book XXIII.3.39.1</ref> as the Hebrew word for "eunuch" can also refer to such men as the officer of Pharaoh who was married, yet this does not require that such were homosexuals.<ref>http://www.themoorings.org/prophecy/Daniel1/less1.html</ref> (Gn. 39:1ff; 2King. 25:19) And that the existence of sexually active homosexual eunuchs in pagan nations cannot provide sanction for such among the children of God, as both Israel and Christians are distinctly commanded not to like the pagans and unbelievers in practicing such behavior. (Lv. 18:24,27; Acts 17:30; Rm. 1:20-32; 1Cor. 6:11; Eph. 2:2-3; 4:17-19; 1Thes. 4:5; Titus 3:3; 1Pet. 1:14; 3:4,5) And which moral laws Jesus upheld, except to further intensify the Genesis marriage bond as regards is permanence. Therefore, it is held that to suppose that Jesus is referring to congenitally determined homosexual behavior as well as radically contradicting O.T. moral law and instituting homosexual marriage, is neither found warranted here or elsewhere.<ref>[http://www.robgagnon.net/articles/TranssexualityOrdination.pdf Transsexuality and Ordination by Robert A. J. Gagnon, Ph.D]</ref> As Gagnon notes, Not only in Scripture but ""every piece of evidence that we have about Jewish views of same-sex intercourse in the Second Temple period and beyond is unremittingly hostile to such behavior."<ref>Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice, pp. 159-83</ref>

Using established means of exegesis, it is further argued that the untenable nature of the pro homosexual argument is evident from the beginning and throughout.

Mt. 19:3-12 reveals Jesus restoring the original standard for marriage, referencing its institution in Gn. 2, and in which He affirms that the “what” of “what therefore God hath joined together” is the unique union of one man for one women for life, except that the fornication clause may negate its permanence, but which clause itself reaffirms that sex outside marriage is sin (cf. 1Cor. 7:2). Hearing the narrowness of the original standard, the disciples react that it is not good to get married. Jesus response is in recognition of the validity this statement, insofar as not all men can receive (or submit) to the disciples expressed conclusion, but only those to whom it is given, whom Jesus calls eunuchs, which refers to both physical and spiritual ones. This perfectly correlates to what the Holy Spirit establishes under the New Covenant, in which “every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that” in 1Cor. 7:7, in context referring to being either married or single and celibate. "Although marriage was normally expected of Jewish people, Jesus here acknowledged the value of a single life that includes abstinence, without making celibacy the norm for Christians."<ref>[http://www.augsburgchurches.org/Library/BibleSexualBoundaries.htm, The Bible and Sexual Boundaries, by Craig R. Koester] See also Robert H. Smith, Matthew (Augsburg New Testament Commentary; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989), 229-230</ref>

The pro-homosexual polemic opposes this, asserting that what Jesus was referencing to (“this saying”) was the ''kind'' of marriage, that being between male and female, to negate its exclusivity as a type, while traditional exegesis sees that Jesus was referring to the ''disciple's conclusion'' which had become the issue in response to the ''permanence'' of marriage, that being single was to be preferred.

The pro-homosexual argument next proposes that the advocation of marriage due to intense longing in 1Cor. 7:9 must also sanction same gender marriage. Countering this it is held that, fully consistent with all other teaching on marriage in the Bible, it is only opposite genders who can be joined in marriage, and not to anyone or anything contrary to what God has joined, nor to unscripturally separate what He has joined. The traditional argument holds that it is evidenced that the sanction of marriage in 1Cor. 7 does not abrogate the Biblical restrictions on marrying near kin, or another man's wife, or an animal, no matter how much one may long to do so, or between same genders. 1Cor. 7 also further establishes that “eunuchs” are those who are single and celibate. It is also held that simply desiring sex is not the real issue in 1Cor. 7:9, and in any case celibacy can also be chosen by persons who could be married if they so choose, and have as much or more drive than others, as like the passionate Paul, they can keep their body under subjection (1Cor. 9:27) as they seek and serve the LORD, who Himself was single and was tempted in all points as we are, yet without sin (Heb. 4:15).

Other aspects of this pro-homosexual polemic are further responded to,<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.net/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html#Eunuchs Homosexual relations and the Bible; Eunuchs ]</ref> with the conclusion that sanction for a radical new concept of marriage cannot be derived from the words of Jesus and Paul, and that instead the LORD reaffirmed the original unique union of opposite genders, in restoring the permanence of that bound. And that those who do not marry are considered eunuchs, able to be single, and required to be celibate, as the LORD as well as His apostle Paul were. (1Cor. 7:7,8).

=== Sexual orientation argument ===

The prior homosexual argument relates to one that posits that some men are born homosexual, and thus marriage must be allowed for them.<ref>http://www.robgagnon.net/NicholasKristofGodAndSex.htm</ref> This is countered by the traditional response which holds that premise for this is both unproven,<ref>Homosexuality By Stanton L. Jones, Mark A. Yarhouse</ref> and that its logic is Biblically untenable. Traditionalist argue that that no sound evidence exists that proves that homosexuals were born that way, and though this may be possible, and certainly one individual may be more prone to one type of sin that another, yet this is irrelevant as the Biblical fact is that all mankind is born with a proclivity to sin, but this in no way justifies acting it out. (Romans 6, 7; 1John 2:6). Every day men must resist sexual desire if it would be immoral as contrary the Creator's laws, which are good and necessary. (Rm. 7:12) The logical end of the homosexual argument is also seen as allowing all innate proclivity to sin to justify acting it out, yet God commands man to resist sin and overcome it. (Gn. 4:7; Rm. 8; Gal. 5; Col. 3)

In summary, traditionalists evidence that all marriage in Scripture is based upon its foundation in Genesis, in which God purposely created two different genders to be joined in a uniquely complementary and compatible sexual union, with distinctive positions patterned after the Divine order, for both procreational purposes as well as in sexual and non-sexual ways which transcend this. In contrast to homosexual attempts at eisegesis (2Pet. 3:16) nowhere is same-sex marriage evident or sanctioned, in principal or by precept. Rather, to join Adam (man) with one of his own (or an animal), is manifestly radically contrary to what God has specifically and transcendently ordained, by both design and decree. In the words of one apologist, as the "what" of "what therefore God hath joined together" is exclusively defined as male and female, (Gn. 2:24; Mt. 19:4), this conclusion may be summed up as, "What therefore God has placed (sexually) asunder, let no man join together."<ref name=peacebyjesus>[http://peacebyjesus.net/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html]</ref>

== Genesis 19 ==
[[Image:Martin destruction sodom640x422.jpg|thumbnail|300px|right|Destruction of [[Sodom]] by [[God]]]]
This background for story may be seen beginning in Genesis 13, in which Abraham and Lot have too many livestock for their present land. Abraham, seeking peace, offers Lot the first choice as to what land he shall choose. Lot sees and chooses the then verdant plain of Sodom. But the sober note of Scripture is, "But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the LORD exceedingly." (Gen 13:13). Later in chapter 18, the LORD and two angels visit Abraham in the plains of Mamre, appearing as men, with the two angels being sent on a mission of investigation and judgment to Sodom. Understanding the nature of judgment, Abraham most reverently intercedes for Lot and his kin, and is assured by God that even if there remains at little as 10 righteous souls in the city then God will not destroy it. The verdict of the investigation of the "very grievous" (or heavy) sin of Sodom is revealed in what happens to the angels appearing as men.

Gn. 18: "And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because '''their sin is very grievous'''; {21} I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know. {22} And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the LORD."

Gn. 19: "And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground; {2} And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night. {3} And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.

{4} But before they lay down, the men of the city, even '''the men of Sodom''', compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: {5} And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, '''that we may know them'''. {6} And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, {7} And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. {8} Behold now, I have two daughters which have '''not known man'''; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof. {9} And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door. {10} But the '''men''' put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door. {11} And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.

{12} And the men said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? son in law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whatsoever thou hast in the city, bring them out of this place: {13} For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it."

The issue here is not the forced manner of sexual relations that is evidenced, but the homosexual nature of it, which defines the practice from whence the term "sodomy" was derived. Jewish Ethics and Halakhah For Our Time (2002) states, “The paradigmatic instance of such aberrant behavior is found in the demand of the men of Sodom to “know” the men visiting Lot, the nephew of Abraham, thus lending their name to the practice of “sodomy” (homosexuality)<ref>(Cf. Genesis Rabbah 50:5, on Gen. 9:22 ff. More generally see M.Kasher, Torah Shlemah, vol. 3 to Gen 19:5.) http://www.jonahweb.org/sections.php?secId=183</ref> In the light of cultural attitudes toward homosexual relations, Gordon J Wenham concludes that the demand to know Lot's guest was sexual, and while this was a most grievous manner of inhospitality, yet "...undoubtedly the homosexual intentions of the inhabitants of Sodom adds a special piquancy to their crime. In the eyes of the writer of Genesis and his readers it showed that they fully deserve to be described as 'wicked, great sinners before the LORD' (13:13) and that the consequent total overthrow of their city was quite to be expected."<ref>[http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_attitude_wenham.htmlThe Old Testament Attitude to Homosexuality, Gordon J Wenham], Expository Times 102 (1991): (259-363)</ref>

As this story evidences that the most notable physical sin of Sodom had to do with homoerotic relations,<ref>Robert A. J. Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice, pp. 73-74</ref><ref>Why the Disagreement over the Biblical Witness on Homosexual Practice, pp. 46-50</ref><ref>[http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5702#fn3 What was the Sin of Sodom and Gomorrah? Gregory Koukl]</ref> and which “filthy” lifestyle resulted in Sodom becoming the foremost example of the judgment of God, and a warning to “those that after should live ungodly” (Pet. 2:6), pro-homosexual apologists most typically seek to disallow that the "very grievous" sin of Sodom here had anything to do with homoeroticism. Instead, they usually seek to attribute it to simply being "inhospitality,” albeit of a violent nature.<ref>D S. Bailey, Homosexuality and the Western Tradition, p. 8; John J. McNeil, the Church and the Homosexual, p. 50; Daniel Helminiak, http://www.neednotfret.com/content/view/124/89/</ref> Scroggs, while seeking to justify homosexual relations, states he finds it “difficult to deny the sexual intent of the Sodomites”, and that he believes “the traditional interpretation to be correct.”<ref>The New Testament and Homosexuality, by Robin Scroggs; p. 73</ref> In addition, conservative apologist Holding states, "I know of no evidence for the claim that Lot violated a custom by not getting permission to have a guest.<ref>"[http://tektonics.org/gk/genhom.html On Homosexuality and Rape in Genesis", James Patrick Holding]</ref> While Sodom certainly manifested “inhospitality,” it is the specific expression of it which is the issue.

===Grammatical contentions===

Two words focused upon in the attempt to remove homosexual abuse from Gn. 19 are "men" as in "the men of Sodom", and "know" as in "know them", which the men demanded Lot allow them to do regarding his guests. The first assertion is that the word for men used in Genesis 19:4, "'ĕnôsh" (Strong, #582), is not gender specific, but simply indicates mortals or people, and instead the word "'îysh" (or "eesh") (Strong, #376), would have been used in Gn. 19:4 if it specifically meant men.<ref>http://www.knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Sodom_and_Gomorrah</ref> However, upon examination of this and other word used for men, it is concluded that while 'ĕnôsh may often denote a multitude of people irrespective of gender, yet as it is used in cases where men are clearly the subject, its use in Gn. 19:4 to denote men as the particular subject cannot be disallowed. In the continuing context, Lot goes outside and entreats his "brethren" (a word ("'âch," H251) that most often denotes males), saying, "I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly", and proceeds to offer them his two daughters "which have not known man" (v. 8). This they refuse, and they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door." But the men ('ĕnôsh) angels rescue him (vs. 4-11). Lot's address and the nature of his appeal and their violent reaction best indicates men in particular.<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.net/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html#19 Homosexual relations and the Bible, Genesis 19]</ref>

The next word in contention, ''yâda‛'' (H3045) is more critical in determining the particular nature of the inhospitality of Sodom. While yâda‛ is used in many places in the Bible as a primary verb to denote sexually knowing a human, and its context here very strongly indicates a sexual knowing, most pro-homosexual apologists contend that since yada is used over 940 times to denote non-sexual knowing, then its use here only denotes interrogation, albeit of a violent nature. Countering this is the response that states that both violent interrogation as well as the use of yâda‛ to denote gaining information by such means is absent in the Bible (though some assert that this is what "knew her, and abused her all the night" means in Jdg. 19:25, which is examined below). And in addition, that the use of "yâda” to denote gaining non-sexual personal knowledge by close contact with another person is exceedingly rare (Gn. 45:1), while "yada" is clearly used 14 times in the Old Testament, besides Gn. 19:4, and an equivalent word 2 times in the New, to denote knowing sexually: Gn. 4:1,17,25; 24:16; 38:26 (premarital); Num. 31:17,18,35; Jdg. 11:39; 19:25; 21:11,12; 1Sam. 1:19; 1Ki. 1:4; cf. Mt. 1:25; Lk. 1:34. Another possible instance is one in which a non-consensual homosexual act is perceived by some, in Gn. 9:20-27 (v. 24)<ref>[http://tektonics.org/gk/genhom.html Holding, Homosexuality and Rape in Genesis]</ref>

The Bible, as in many languages and cultures, makes abundant use of euphemisms for sex, such as "know" or "lie with" or "uncover the nakedness of" or "go in into." Ancient languages which also used this allegorical use of “know” included Egyptian, Akkadian, and Ugaritic,<ref>(Botterweck, 1986, 5:455-456,460),</ref> as well as Syriac, Arabic, Ethiopic, and Greek <ref>(Gesenius, 1979, p. 334).</ref> Hebrew scholars defining 'know' as used in Genesis 19:5, used terminology like 'sexual perversion'<ref>(Harris, et al., 1980, p. 366),</ref> 'homosexual intercourse'<ref>(Botterweck, 5:464),</ref> and 'crimes against nature',<ref>(Gesenius, p. 334).</ref><ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/480</ref>

It is also seen that Lot's offer of his two daughters who “have not known [yâda] man” (Lot had married ones also, not with him) to the Sodomites in response to their demanded to “known” his guests, best indicates that Lot was offering substitute bodies for them to know sexually, rather than being sacrificed in pagan idolatry, as some pro-homosexual apologists assert. The latter position is seen as untenable by traditionalists in the light of the response of the men to the same offer in the parallel story in Judges 19. However, Bailey cannot see any sexual connection between Lot's offer and the Sodomites demand to know the men, while the pro-homosexual author Scroggs sees the traditional interpretation of Gn. 19 being correct.

As one commentator states,

In narrative literature of this sort it would be very unlikely to use one verb with two different meanings so close together unless the author made the difference quite obvious. In both verses 5 and 8 "yada" should be translated "to have sexual intercourse with." The context does not lend itself to any other credible interpretation.<ref>Derek Kidner, "Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary," Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Chicago: InterVarsity Press, 1963), p. 137. http://www.biblebb.com/files/HOMOSEX.HTM</ref>

Another misleading argument that the less ambiguous word ''shakhabh'' (H7901) would have been used instead of the word "yâda if sexual knowing was meant,<ref>G. A. Barton</ref> yet shakhabh even more often means sleep or rest, while (again) yâda is used instead of shakhabh to gain sexual knowledge 13 times in the Old Testament Bible, besides the disputed verses in Gn. 19.

In the quest to render yâda to be non-sexual, some point to the Greek [[Septuagint]] translation which renders yâda' in Gen 19:5 as ''synginomai'', which they suppose only means becoming acquainted, while v. 8 translates yâda' as ginosko ("know), which is clearly is sexual in that verse. Besides possible problems with the Septuagint<ref>which apparently has Methuselah dying after the flood in Gn. 9, http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Aegean/2444/chronology.html</ref> and the incongruity of the men of Sodom merely wanting to get acquainted with the strangers, that synginomai can have a sexual meaning is evidenced by Gen 39:10, in which synginomai is used to refer to Joseph's refusal to sleep with the wife of Potiphar. It also occurs in three places in the Apocrypha (Judith 12:16; Susanna 11, 39), with all conveying a sexual meaning. Among secular sources, synginomai is used to denote a sexual meaning in Xenophon's "Anabasis" 1.212, Plato's Republic 329c (5th to 4th century B.C.), and, among others, in writings of Epidaurus (4th cenury B.C), which indicates that the translators of the Septuagint knew of the use of the term for sexual meanings, which use preceded their translation.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=ZXAVf8m_HKgC&pg=PA118&lpg=PA118&dq=synginomai&source=bl&ots=ZjUG-_ibCa&sig=yx964LqkQifvfeU83dlUpqBLeMo&hl=en&ei=ZEOaSZ2RHJa5twf_oKi9Cw&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result Dr. James B. DeYoung, Homosexuality, pp. 118-122]</ref>

It is noted that prohomosexual polemicists who disallow a sexual meaning here are often not reluctant to read homoeroticism or a homosexual relationship into stories such as Ruth and Naomi, David and Jonathan, Daniel and Ashpenaz, the centurion and his servant, Jesus and John, and (some) Elijah and the son of the widow of Zarephath, and even resort to asserting that Paul was a repressed homosexual, while even more extreme examples can be seen.

As yâda is often used as a verb to refer to sex narratives, but in forbidding illicit sex, another attempt is made to disallow homoeroticism in Gn. 19 based upon the absence of yâda when the Bible mentions homosexual acts (in Lv. 18:22; 20:13; 23:17)<ref>Julie M. Smith, Sometimes a Cigar is Just a Cigar</ref> However, this argument fails, as it would also disallow yâda from denoting premarital sex, (Gn. 38:26) or forced sex, (Jdg. 19:25) which, like Gn. 19, is described in narratives by using the euphemism yâda, but when proscribed as a sin, it uses the euphemism “lie/lay” (Dt. 22:25-29). None of the laws against illicit sex use yâda.

===Judges 19===

Jdg. 19: "Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, ''that we may know him''. {23} And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, and said unto them, Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, ''do not so wickedly''; seeing that this man is come into mine house, ''do not this folly''. {24} Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and ''humble ye them'', and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man ''do not so vile a thing''. {25} But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and ''they knew her, and abused her'' all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go."

Judg 20: "And the men of Gibeah rose against me, and beset the house round about upon me by night, and thought to have slain me: and my concubine have they ''forced,'' that she is dead. {6} And I took my concubine, and cut her in pieces, and sent her throughout all the country of the inheritance of Israel: for they have committed ''lewdness and folly'' in Israel."

In this episode, beginning in Jdg. 19:1, a Levite (who is no model of virtue himself) is traveling back home after fetching his departed concubine (a wife: Jdg. 20:4; Gn. 30:4; 35:22; 2Sam. 16:21, 22), who played the whore against him and ran away. On his way back, and finding no one that would receive him in a strange city (Gibeah), he is taken in by an old man, a resident of the town. No sooner had they eaten, then "certain sons of Belial" came and demanded of the old man, "Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know [yada] him" (v. 22). Like unto Lot, the host beseeches them “do not so wickedly” (v. 23), adding, “do not this folly”, and then offers his own virgin daughter and the Levite's concubine to them to “humble, saying "unto this man do not so vile a thing." At first it appears they refused, hoping for the man, but being given the concubine by the man, "they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go."

Homosexual apologists sometimes contend that this abuse also was non-sexual, and they only wanted to kill the man by violent interrogation, but here again, that the crowd's desire to "know" the guest(s) was sexual is best indicated by the context and language. The only two choices for the manner of “knowing” are that the men wanted to non-sexually interrogate the men, or that they desired to know them sexually, both being in a violent way that could or would lead to death. Again, rather than the word “know” (yâda‛) meaning gaining intimate personal knowledge by interrogation, it is clearly used is many places for gaining sexual knowledge by physical intimacy, as shown under the Gn. 19 section. And as there, the offer of virgins by the resident host (who like Lot, would know what his fellow countrymen were after) is best understood as an offer of substitute bodies for immediate gratification by sex, even if it was abusively. This is in contrast to the idea that the offer of the women was for a pagan sacrifice, which is contrary to their response and th fact that the men of the city were Benjaminites (19:14; 20:4; cf. Josh. 18:24; 21:17). The Levite did fear they would kill him (Jdg. 20:5), and the concubine did die, but not until after they “knew her, and abused her” and let her go (vs. 25-28). The Levite further stated that they “forced” (KJV) her, that she was dead (Jdg. 20:5). He then states that they “committed lewdness and folly (same word as vile) in Israel" (Jdg. 20:6).

Grammatically, the Hebrew word used for humble (“‛ânâh” , H6031), as in “humble ye them” (19:24), usually means afflict, but it is also often used for humbling someone sexually (Gn. 34:2; Ex. 22:10,11; Dt. 21:14; 22:21,24;29;. 2Sam.13:12,14,32), while “folly” and "vile", as in “do not this folly”, and “do not so vile a thing” (Jdg. 19:23,24), are from the same Hebrew word (“nebâlâh,” H5039), which is mostly used in sexual sense when referring to a specific sin of action (Gn. 34:7; Dt. 22:21;. 2Sam.13:12; Jer. 29:23). Likewise, “lewdness” (“zimmâh/zammâh,” H2154), as in “they have committed lewdness and folly in Israel” (20:6), is used more in a sexual sense than for any other type of sin (Lv. 18:17; 19:29; 20:14; Jer. 3:27; Ezek. 16:43,58; 22:11; 23:21,27,29,3544, 48). “Abused” (“‛âlal,” H5953) as in “they knew her and abused her all the night” (v. 25) offers no other precise meaning other here than what the context indicates.

Taken together, it is most evident that the abuse the women suffered was violently sexual, and which best defines the type of “knowing that “certain sons of Belial” (a term used for fornicators in 1Sam. 2:12, cf. v.22) sought to have, and which would result in death. And which serves to define the manner of “knowing” which was sought in Gn. 19. The only real difference between this and Gn. 19 is that these men finally took the substitute offer of the women (which was also sin). And though both Gn. 19 and Jdg. 19 specifically show homosexual rape itself to be sin, it was not simply the manner in which they sought relations (such as the women suffered) that was called vile, but the homosexual aspect of it. Even prohomosex author Robin Scroggs also concurs that in Jdg. 19 "the verb [yada] almost surely refers to a sexual desire for homosexual rape", and that the traditional interpretation of Gn. 19 is correct.<ref>The New Testament and Homosexuality, by Robin Scroggs, pp. 73-75</ref>

Finally, that the sin of Sodom was attempted homosexual rape hardly needs any of the above for confirmation, as Jude 7 (see below) clearly tells us that not only was Sodom and company given to fornication, but that this included a perverse kind.

===The book of Jude===

Jude is a book dealing with the manifestations and consequences of spiritual and moral declension, in contrast to the purity and power of the holy love of God. Verse 7 come after examples of men and angels who went backwards in rebellion against God, and suffered certain judgment, and which then declares, "Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." (KJV)

Here, it is explicitly stated that not only Sodom but also Gomorrha and the cities about them in like manner “gave themselves over to fornication.” with a specific form of it being the culmination of such surrender to sensuality. The Greek (which the New Testament was written in) word from which the emphasized phrase comes from, is “ekporneuō” (G1608), and is only Biblically used here, but it is a combination of “ek,” denoting motion, as in “giving themselves,” and “porneuō,” meaning fornication. Ekporneuō also occurs in the [[Septuagint]] to denote whoredom in Genesis 38:24 and Exodus 34:15. Realizing this, most homosexual apologists again seek to deny homoeroticism from being the primary physical sin of Sodom by proposing or contending that as the word for “strange” basically means “another,” “other,” “altered” or even “next,” then the meaning is unclear, and if the condemnation of Sodom was sexual, then it is likely that it was because women sought to commit fornication with “other than human” angels,<ref>Bailey, pp. 11-16; Boswell, p. 97</ref> perhaps referring to Genesis 6 and or the apocryphal book of Enoch. However, if the “sons of God” in Gn. 6 are fallen angels, or if Enochian legends are being alluded to,<ref>there are sound reasons for the Book of Enoch being rejected from the Jewish canon, the Septuagint and Vulgate, and the Apocrypha (http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Wolves/book_of_enoch.htm), including tales of approx. 443 foot height angelic offspring, or angels (stars) procreating with oxen to produce elephants, camels and donkeys, (86:1-5) if taken literally</ref> then it is about them going after the daughters of men, not the other way around. And if homosexual advocates must give the Book of Enoch more veracity above the portion which Jude uses,<ref>or simply Enoch. Jude would be following the Biblical practice of quoting an inspired utterance from a source that is not wholly inspired, just as Paul did in quoting a pagan prophet (Acts 17:28)</ref> then its condemnation of "sodomitic" sex (10:3; 34:1)<ref>http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/enoch/2enoch01-68.htm</ref> indicates that was the prevalent sin of Sodom. As Jude connects the judgment of Sodom with their going after strange flesh, then the connection to Gn. 19 is intimated. Additional evidence indicative of Jude 7 and 2 Peter 2:6-7,10 possessing a homoerotic dimension is found in the nearest parallels in early extra Biblical Jewish texts: Philo of Alexandria (Abraham 133-41; Questions on Genesis 4.37), Josephus (Antiquities 1.194-95, 200-201; Jewish War 4.483-5; 5.566) and the Testament of Naphtali (3:4).<ref>Robert A. J. Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice pp. 87-89.</ref>

As for “other,” as in “strange flesh,” the Greek for the phrase, “strange flesh” is “heteros” and “sarx,” with the former basically meaning “other/another,” while “sarx” denotes the nature of man, or (once) a class of laws from God which deal with earthly matters as washings (Heb. 9:10). Heteros could easily refer to "other than normal, lawful or right," as in Rm. 7:3 or Gal. 1:6, that being contrary to God's law and design, and rebellion has been the context prior to this, and is the real issue, not angels, as some suppose. Dave Miller states this pertains to the indulgence of passions that are “contrary to nature” (Barnes, 1949, p. 393)—“a departure from the laws of nature in the impurities practiced” (Salmond, 1950, 22:7).<ref>Dave Miller, Ph.D. http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/480</ref>

Some assert that Jude is referring to the Sodomites seeking sex with angels,<ref>W. Countryman</ref> but that is further militated against by the fact that the fornication was an ongoing and regional issue, not simply isolated to Sodom, and in Gn. 19 it is highly unlikely that the Sodomites knew that the men were angels. The angels appearance as men was in order to find out whether the cry of Sodomy was true, and it is certain that this cry was not that of seeking sex with angels. Gagnon contends, "Not only is it not required by the wording of the Greek text that ekporneusasai (“having committed sexual immorality”) refer exclusively to copulation with angels, there are also at least six indications that ekporneusasai alludes, at least in part, to attempted male-male intercourse.<ref>[http://www.robgagnon.net/RevCountryman.htm RESPONSE TO PROF. L. WILLIAM COUNTRYMAN’S REVIEW IN ANGLICAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW; On Careless Exegesis and Jude 7]</ref> Taken together, it is unreasonable to hold that that the particular primary physical sin of Sodom, leading to their destruction, was not sexual, while the most warranted understanding is that it was widespread regional fornication, including that of a most perverse manner, that of men seeking to sexually “know” men, albeit unknowingly it was with angels, and but which attempt positively confirmed the investigation of their grievous sin.

===Ezekiel 16:49 and inhospitality texts===

A final attempt by homosexual apologists to disallow the most particular sin of Sodom from being sexual is to assert that other summations of the iniquity of Sodom do not mention sexual sin but shows it to be inhospitality to strangers,<ref>Bailey, Homosexuality and Western Tradition, pp. 1-28; McNeil, Church and the Homosexual, pp. 42-50; Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, pp. 92-97</ref> for which cause they invoke Ezek 16:49: "Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy." However, widespread promotion of sensuality and homoeroticism in particular, tends to be a product of and concomitant with, pride, abundance of food, idleness, and selfishness. And as will be shown, Sodom is associated more for sexual sins than with inhospitality or any other physical type of sin. But first we should notice that while verse 49 states overall sins, the next verse He states, "And they [Sodomites] were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good." The word for “abomination” here is tô‛êbah, and (contrary to many homosexual assertions) it is not the word often used for ritual uncleanness, but is often used for sexual sin (Lv.18:22; 26-27,29,30; 20:13; Dt. 23:18; 24:4 1Ki. 14:24; Ezek. 22:11; 33:26), including in this chapter (vs. 22, 58). And that the context in this chapter is that of fornication by Israel, and while the Hebrew is sparse in vs. 47-48, contextually the LORD was comparing Israel with Sodom (even calling it “thy sister”), and yet revealing that Israel was different, not in the sense that Sodom's physical sins were different, or those of Samaria, but that the Israelites went beyond them in scope and degree, and by idolatry violated their covenant with God and thus faced certain judgment. Thus Sodom is once again listed in connection with sexual sins.<ref>cf. Straight & Narrow?: Compassion and Clarity in the Homosexuality Debate, Thomas E. Schmidt</ref>

Sins to which Sodom is linked to elsewhere include,

#adultery and lies (Jer. 23:14);
#unrepentance (Mt. 11:20-24; Mk. 6:11, 12);
#careless living (Lk. 17:29);
#shameless sinning (Is. 3:9);
#and overall “filthy conversation” (G766), which means sexual sins (lasciviousness: 2Pet. 2:7; cf. Mk. 7:22; 2Co_12:21; Eph. 4:19; 1Pet. 4:3; Jud_1:4; or wantonness: Rm. 13:13, 2Pe_2:18).

In regards to this, homosexual apologists also claim Jesus did not invoke Sodom as an warning to cities because they were merely generally inhospitable, rather He foretold that cities which would not repent would be judged more severely than Sodom (Mt. 10:14; 11:20-24), as that was the cause behind their specific “inhospitality” toward His disciples, who “went out, and preached that men should repent” (Mk. 6:11,12), which rejection Biblically was and is the ultimate sin of damnation.

Jewish Ethics and Halakhah For Our Time (2002), confirms, “The paradigmatic instance of such aberrant behavior is found in the demand of the men of Sodom to “know” the men visiting Lot, the nephew of Abraham, thus lending their name to the practice of “sodomy” (homosexuality) (Cf. Genesis Rabbah 50:5, on Gen. 9:22 ff. More generally see M.Kasher, Torah Shlemah, vol. 3 to Gen 19:5.)<ref>http://www.jonahweb.org/sections.php?secId=183</ref>

====Extra Biblical historical sources====

These sources do not have the authority of the Bible, and are of varying historical value, but which. serve to provide historical opinion. These references include historians, extra Biblical books (apocryphal and pseudepigraphical) and Jewish commentary.

=====Historians=====

Hellenistic Jewish philosopher Philo (20 BC - 50 AD) described the inhabitants of Sodom,

"As men, being unable to bear discreetly a satiety of these things, get restive like cattle, and become stiff-necked, and discard the laws of nature, pursuing a great and intemperate indulgence of gluttony, and drinking, and unlawful connections; for not only did they go mad after other women, and defile the marriage bed of others, but also those who were men lusted after one another, doing unseemly things, and not regarding or respecting their common nature, and though eager for children, they were convicted by having only an abortive offspring; but the conviction produced no advantage, since they were overcome by violent desire; and so by degrees, the men became accustomed to be treated like women, and in this way engendered among themselves the disease of females, and intolerable evil; for they not only, as to effeminacy and delicacy, became like women in their persons, but they also made their souls most ignoble, corrupting in this way the whole race of men, as far as depended on them" [133-34; ET Jonge 422-23] (The Sodom tradition in Romans Biblical Theology Bulletin, Spring, 2004 by Philip F. Esler).

In summarizing the Genesis 19 account, the Jewish historian Josephus stated: “About this time the Sodomites grew proud, on account of their riches and great wealth; they became unjust towards men, and impious towards God, in so much that they did not call to mind the advantages they received from him: they hated strangers, and abused themselves with Sodomitical practices” “Now when the Sodomites saw the young men to be of beautiful countenances, and this to an extraordinary degree, and that they took up their lodgings with Lot, they resolved themselves to enjoy these beautiful boys by force and violence” (''Antiquities'' 1.11.1 — circa A.D. 96).

=====Pseudepigrapha=====

The apocryphal Testament of Benjamin, part of Books of Twelve Patriarchs (circa 2nd century BC) warned in regard to Sodom,

"that ye shall commit fornication with the fornication of Sodom," (Concerning a Pure Mind, 9:1) http://<ref>http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.iii.xiv.html</ref>

Anther book within the same collection, the Testament of Naphtali, states,

"But ye shall not be so, my children, recognizing in the firmament, in the earth, and in the sea, and in all created things, the Lord who made all things, that ye become not as Sodom, which changed the order of nature." (3.5.) <ref>http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.iii.x.html</ref>

The Book of the Secrets of Enoch (Slavonic Apocalypse of) Enoch, warned:

"And those men said to me: This place, O Enoch, is prepared for those who dishonour God, who on earth practise sin against nature, which is child-corruption after the ''sodomitic fashion'', magic-making, enchantments and devilish witchcrafts, and who boast of their wicked deeds, stealing, lies, calumnies, envy, rancour, fornication, murder, ...." (10:4; in J recension Ch. I.118); Late 1st cent. AD.)<ref>http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/fbe/fbe117.htm</ref>

The Old Testament apocrypha, Testament of Isaac. Probably originally from Egyptian Judaism, but shows pronounced Christian elements. "The angel said to me, 'Look at the bottom to observe those whom you see at the lowest depth. They are the ones who have committed the sin of Sodom; truly, they were due a drastic punishment." (5.27. Ch. I.909; Second century AD) <ref>http://www.ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/SODOMY.TXT</ref>

=====Mishnah=====

The "Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer" compilation of the [[Mishnah]], portrays the sin of Sodom as being crass inhospitality, including that of fencing in the top of trees so that even birds could not eat of their fruit.

The Babylonian Talmud (which contains many odd fables) also does not explicitly mention sexual sins in regards to Sodom, but attributes cruelty and greed to it, including that if one cut off the ear of his neighbor's donkey, they would order, “Give it to him until it grows again.” — Sanhedrin 109b

However, it also clearly condemns homoeroticism:

“He Who commits sodomy with a male or a beast, and a woman that commits bestiality are stoned. — Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 54a Soncino 1961 Edition, page 367

Several texts in the Midrashic literature written in the early Christian centuries, such as Beresheth Rabbah 26:5 commenting on Genesis 6:2, also asserted that God is patient with all sins except fornication, and which included homoeroticism.

===Summation===

An examination of both grammar and context in Gn. 19 best indicates a homoerotic intent on the part of the Sodomites. The sexual connotation in this story is further evidenced in the parallel story of the Levite and his concubine in Judge 19, whom men of Belial “knew” and abused all the night.<ref>Derek Kidner, "Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary," Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Chicago: InterVarsity Press, 1963), p. 137.</ref> To this is added the confirmation in the Book of Jude that Sodom's most notable physical sin was fornication, culminating in a perverse kind. While prohomsex polemicists attempt to render this as referring to Sodomites knowingly seeking sex with angels, Jude 1:7 reveals that fornication was a regional issue which preceded the angelic visit, and Gn. 18:20-22 indicates that Sodom was practicing their damnable sin prior to the arrival of Lot's angelic guests. In addition, it is most unlikely that the Sodomites knew then what manner of men his guests were (or that they would go after angels if they did), until the angels smote them with blindness and pulled Lot inside and shut the door. This would have been impossible for ordinary men, and the Sodomites would then have realized that the men whom they sought were no ordinary men.

==Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13==

(Lev 18:22) "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." (KJV)

(Lev 20:13) "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." (KJV)

While most pro-homosexual polemicists admit that sexual moral codes are transcultural and transhistorical, attempts are made to find grammatical, categorical, cultural and motivatonal aspects that would disallow the injunctions which prohibit homosexual relations. These attempts here, as others, manifest a foundational position on the Bible contrary to its own statements relative to both its Divine inspiration and transcendent coherent moral relevance and authority. As stated by prohomsex author Richard Hasbany,

"Here again, two interpretive foundations are opposed, that of traditional Judaism which holds that the law of God as understood through the Talmudic literature is immutable, and ultimately higher than man's full comprehension (Ps. 40:5; 92:5), and those who hold that present Western values should influence man's moral interpretation of the Bible."<ref>Hasbany, Homosexuality and Religion, p. 50,51</ref> (cf. Dt. 12:8)

===Universal, Cultural and Ceremonial laws===
{{See also|Leviticus 18}}

Arguments against the Levitical injunctions being universal and transcendent almost always attempt to relegate them to being ceremonial in nature, and therefore not binding upon Christians. In approaching these arguments therefore, it is necessary to understand that in traditional Christian doctrine the Bible is recognized as evidencing three types of [[Mosaic Law|laws]]: moral, civil/judicial, and ceremonial/ritual.<ref>[The Bible As Law, Gerald R. Thompson http://www.lonang.com/foundation/1/f17.htm]</ref><ref>Greg L. Bahnsen, Theonomy in Christian Ethics (Nutley, NJ: Craig Press, 1977), p. 214.</ref> (Col. 2:14-17; Heb. 9:10; Gal. 4:10) Bahnsen points out that the early third century church document Didascalia Apostolorum clearly distinguished between the Decalogue and the temporary ceremonies.<ref>http://www.reformedonline.com/view/reformedonline/law.htm</ref>

Within the first category are those which deal with basic human actions and heart attitudes which are directly applicable to mankind in general. Idolatry is the first command, (Ex. 20:2,3) and whatever holds our ultimate allegiance, or is our ultimate object of affect or source of security is our god, at least at that time,(Dt. 10:20; Ezek. 6:9; 14:3-7; 20:16; Rm. 6:16; 14:4; 1Cor. 10:31; 16:22) and all willful sin against what one knows God has ordained is idolatry. (Rm. 6:16) Also within this first category are moral laws which deal with mans behavior toward others which likewise transcend historical and cultural boundaries, such as honoring parents, unjust killing, illicit sexual unions, etc. as seen in the [[10 Commandments]].

Civil laws and judicial penalties (judgments) which are based upon foundational moral laws. Both the judgments and certain aspects of laws are often culture specific, yet what they enjoin is usually literally applicable to all cultures and times, by way of modification in accordance with the principal behind them, though some controversy exists regarding details of such. (Dr. Greg L. Bahnsen, For Whom Was God's Law Intended?) (Moses' Law for Modern Government)

The final category is that of ceremonial laws, which mainly deal with practices which are not inherently moral, and which the New Testament reveals were typological, serving as physical examples of Christ and realities realized under the promised (Jer. 31:31-34) New Covenant instituted in Christ's blood (Lk. 22:20; Heb. 9:16). These consist of laws on sacrifices, the liturgical calendar, diet and washings (Lv. 1-16,25; Is. 53; Jn. 1:29; 1Pt. 1:18,19; Col. 2:16,17; Heb. 4:3; 9:10; 10:1-22; Gal. 4:10).

In contrast to ceremonial laws, the New Testament is seen explicitly reincorporating many basic moral commands of the Mosaic code into the New Covenant code,<ref>Homosexuality and the Old Testament, P. Michael Ukleja</ref> upholding basic universal moral laws by type and often individually.<ref>[http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hildebrandt/OTeSources/03-Leviticus/Text/Articles/Ukleja-Homsex-BS.htm Charles C. Ryrie, "The End of the Law," Bibliotheca Sacra 124 (July-September 1967):246]</ref> Unlawful sex between outlawed partners or outside marriage is particularly abundantly prohibited in the N.T. (Mat. 5:32; 15:19; 19:9; Mk. 7:21; Jn. 8:41; Acts 15:20; 15:29; 21:25; Rom. 1:29; 1Co_5:1; 1Co. 6:9,13, 18; 7:2; 2Co. 12:21; Gal. 5:19; Eph. 5:3; Col. 3:5; 1Ths. 4:3; Heb. 12:16; 13:4; 1Pet. 4:3; Rev. 9:21; 14:8, 17:2, 4; 18:3; 19:2) The prohibitions against homosexual relations are seen to clearly fit in this category by type, and are condemned in the New Testament where they are explicitly mentioned in [[Romans 1]]:24-27. In contrast, accompaniments such as simply where to worship or eat would only be contextually wrong. (1Cor. 8,10) Gudel concludes,

:The Holiness Code contained different types of commands. Some were related to dietary regulations or to ceremonial cleanliness, and these have been done away with in the New Testament (Col. 2:16-17; Rom. 14:1-3). Others, though, were moral codes, and as such are timeless. Thus incest, child sacrifice, homosexuality, bestiality, adultery, and the like, are still abominations before God.<ref>["http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0108a.html That Which is Unnatural" Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture by Joseph P. Gudel (ICR)]</ref>

===Contextual and categorical arguments===

An early and ongoing attempt<ref>such as by David Bartlett, professor at Yale Divinity School</ref> to negate the Levitical condemnation of homosexual relations is based upon the texts which invoke the surrounding pagan culture as examples of behavior which is forbidden to Israel. (Lv. 18:3,27,28) It then concludes that the Holiness Code was not about personal morality, but about forming community definition. In response it is evidenced that the whole of Scripture reveals unbelievers are often used, in both Testaments, as behavioral examples who are contrary to the laws on heart attitude and actions which God is instituting. (Exo. 20:2; 23:24; Lev. 20:23; Dt. 12:4; 12:30-31; Jer. 10:2-3; Acts 17:30; Rm. 1:20-32; 1Cor. 6:11; Eph. 2:2-3; 4:17-19; 1Thes. 4:5; Titus 3:3; 1Pet. 1:14; 3:4,5) Moreover, such admonitions were often given in the immediate context of moral laws, but not clearly ceremonial ones. Considering their nature, (Psa. 106:35-38) and the reiteration of such in the New Testament, in particular those against fornications,<ref>Mat. 5:32; 15:19; 19:9; Mk. 7:21; Jn. 8:41; Acts 15:20; 15:29; 21:25; Rom. 1:29; 1Co_5:1; 1Co. 6:9,13, 18; 7:2; 2Co. 12:21; Gal. 5:19; Eph. 5:3; Col. 3:5; 1Ths. 4:3; Heb. 12:16; 13:4; 1Pet. 4:3; Rev. 9:21; 14:8, 17:2, 4; 18:3; 19:2</ref> it is held to be untenable to relegate such laws, and in particular those against illicit sexual partners, to being for purposes of establishing cultural distinction.

Another argument by pro-homosexual proponents is to assign a radical significance to (what is stated to be) only one prescription in the Old Testament for the death penalty for homosexual relations, in contrast to most of the other sins of Lv. 20 being repeated elsewhere, mainly in Dt. 27:15-26. Upon which basis they restrict Lv. 18:22 to only prohibiting male homosexual temple prostitutes.<ref>A Defense Theory, by Royce Buehler</ref> (Dt. 23:17)

The errors of this argument and those related, are seen as multiple, in that,

*1. The sentence of death for homosexual relations is essentially listed twice (collectively with all laws in Lv. 18:29, and specifically in 20:13), while elsewhere death is not mandated for some forms of incest. (Lev 18:12,14,16,18; Lv. 20:19,20,21) In addition, it is doubtful that ''cursed'' in Dt. 27 always denotes death, (Dt. 28:19ff Gn. 9:25) which would further negate disparities between reiterative quantities. Conversely, if ''cursed'' does always denote death, then it increases the number of moral offenses for which death is apparently assigned only once (Dt. 27:17,18). Or twice, as all infractions of the law of Moses would be capital sins. (Dt. 27:26)

*2. No certain conclusion can be arrived at as to what category a law belongs based upon the number of times the death penalty is mentioned for it. Some forms of incest have no [[Capital punishment]] individually mandated for them, nor do all violations of the [[ten commandments]], while the death penalty for breaking the sabbath, which most pro-homosexual advocates would categorize as ceremonial, is thrice mentioned (Ex. 31:14,15; 35:2; Num.16:32-36)<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.net/TheDeathPenalty.html The Death Penalty in the Old Testament]</ref> (It appears the sin for which death is most mentioned in the Old Testament is unholy presumption, that of approaching holy things which only sanctified Levites were allowed to do, and for which there are eight occurrences of the capital penalty being attached to it,: Num. 1:51; 3:10,38; 4:20; 18:3,7,15,22, with three examples of this consequence: 1Sam. 6:19; 1Chr. 13:9,10; cf. 2Chr. 26:16-20; but which examples indicate capital punishment was always death by supernatural execution, as it was for unjustly afflicting a widow or fatherless child: Ex. 22:22-24)

*3. The number of repetitions of the death penalty for a sin is not a consistent criteria by which its severity is determined. According to the principal behind Gal. 3:19, the greater the need (when the law was being given), for Israel to be deterred by a law and its capital offenses, then the more likely it should be expected to be reiterated in the recorded Mosaic code. Cannibalism is not even specifically outlawed, but like homosexual relations, and perhaps even less unconditionally wrong, it is contrary to foundational law. (Gn. 9:2,3) Likewise, Gagnon notes, "The only form of consensual sexual behavior that was regarded by ancient Israel, early Judaism, and early Christianity as more egregious than same-sex intercourse was bestiality. It is no accident that bestiality receives even less attention in the Bible than same-sex intercourse—it is mentioned only in Exod 22:19; Lev 18:23 and 20:15-16; and Deut 27:21<ref>Gagnon, Zenit Interview http://www.robgagnon.net/ZenitInterview.htm</ref>

*4. The phrase, ''put to death'' or similar explicit phrase is used for manifestly moral sins,<ref>Ex. 21:29; Lev.20:2,6,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,27; 24:16,17; Dt. 17:6; 13:5,9; 17:12; 21:21</ref> sometimes in combination with ''cut off'' (Lv. 18:29; 20:17), and only for the most serious ceremonial sins (Ex. 35:2; Num. 1:51), while "cut off" is used by itself for most of the ceremonial sins Exo 12:15; 30:33; Lev 7:20,21,25,27; 17:3-4; 19:8,13; 20:18; 22:3; 23:29; Num 9:13; 15:30-31)<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.net/TheDeathPenalty.html]</ref>

*5. Homosexual relations is not only included with other capital sins, but is seen as distinguished as a first-tier sexual offense in Lev 20:10-16, along with adultery, incest with one's stepmother or daughter-in-law, and bestiality. As such, it is distinguished from lesser capital sexual offenses in 20:17-21.<ref>[http://www.robgagnon.net/NicholasKristofGodAndSex.htm Gagnon, "God and Sex" or "Pants on Fire"? The "Irrelevance of Levitical Prohibitions" Argument]</ref>

*6. Lv. 18:22 is contrary in type to mere ceremonial/typological laws, such as deal with ritual cleansing. The purely religious practice of male homosexual relations is dealt with separately in Dt. 23:17,<ref>and are mentioned as working in Judah, under Rehoboam (1Ki. 14:24), whom Asa largely purged (1Ki. 15:12), and which his son Jehoshaphat finished (1Ki. 22:46), but was later needed to be repeated under king Josiah</ref> and is based upon the general command of Lv. 18:22, which itself is evidenced as being based upon foundational design and decrees. The pro-homosexual attempt here is seen as akin to limiting the like general prohibition against prostitution in Lv. 19:29 only to its religious practice.<ref>See Keil & Delitzsch on Dt. 23:17,18</ref> (Dt. 23:17,18; 2Chrn. 21:11; Jer. 3:6; Ezek. 23:44; Hos. 4:13-15)

*7. It is duplicitous for pro-homsoexual polemicists to assert more repetitions of the death penalty are expected if it were inherently sinful, while seeking to justify homosexuality despite the utter absence of the establishment of homosexual marriage, in stark and consistent contrast to heterosexual relations. It is inconceivable that no evident sanction would not be given in the law for homosexual relations if only a religious prostitutional practice was proscribed.

A different strategy used in attempting to negate the universal nature of the other laws against illicit partners, is to seek to create a categorical division between Lv. 18:20, which prohibits adultery, and the next verse, which forbids child sacrifice to Molech, with this signifying a new division rendering the next law (v. 22) as only forbidding homosexual relations in that type of idolatrous context. In response it is argued that, as most in both camps hold v. 19 to be ceremonial (sex during menstruation), this same logic would relegate adultery (v. 20) to that category. In addition, only Molech in v. 21 is seen as being a culture-specific aspect of that law, while being universally applicable otherwise. In regard to this, it is understood by conservative Christians that children are sacrificed today to destructive ideals and selfish lusts, as to a god.<ref>The Sin of Silence, by Dr. Laurence White</ref>

====Linguistical polemics====

=====Tōʻēḇā and zimmâh=====
As Lv. 18:22 declares homosexual relations between men to be an "abomination", Boswell and most other polemicists promoting such contend that the Hebrew word ''tōʻēḇā'', usually translated ''abomination'', seldom refers to something intrinsically evil, like rape or theft, but something which is ritually unclean for Jews, like eating pork or printing marks on one's flesh, or against mixed fabrics. Helminiak for instance, claims that tōʻēḇā, means "dirty" or "impure", and was wrong merely "because it offended sensitivities".<ref>[http://www.reformed.org/social/index.html?mainframehttp://www.reformed.org/social/hodges_response_helminiak.html Quoted in ''A Reformed Response to Daniel Helminiak's Gay Theology'']</ref>

Rather than prohibiting same gender sex in general like other laws against illicit partners, Boswell and like revisionists generally assert that these Levitical injunctions against homosexual relations (and even all the sins of Lv. 18 and 20) were only given to make Israel distinctive (akin to “team colors”), and only prohibit pagan temple prostitution. Or that they were concerned with the wasting of reproductive seed,<ref>Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality. pp 100-01</ref><ref>Jesus, the Bible, and Homosexuality By Jack Bartlett Rogers, p. 72</ref><ref>Horner, David loved Jonathan, p.73,85</ref> though even pro-homosexual author Robin A. Scroggs thinks these latter ideas are conjecture which is best not to speculate about.<ref>The New Testament and Homosexuality, p. 73</ref>

Instead of tô‛êbah, Boswell asserts that the Hebrew word ''zimmâh'' would have been used if the prohibitions of Lv. 18:22; were not a mere form of "ethnic contamination,",<ref>Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality. p. 100</ref> like laws against unclean foods, or that of strange haircuts.

However, in support of the traditional position, examination of the use of tōʻēḇā in the original language text is shown to evidence that it is not used in Leviticus for dietary violations, and is only used 2 or 3 times elsewhere to refer to the such things being abominable for Israel (versus the Egyptians), and in contrast, tōʻēḇā is the word most often used for abomination in reference to grave moral sins, including those which are unmistakably universally sinful. Collectively it is used for all the sins of Lv. 18 + 20. (vs. 27,29) As idolatry is the mother of all sins, tōʻēḇā can be directly used for such. (Dt. 32:16, etc.)<ref>[http://ariyl.com/AbominationOfDesolation.swf Anchor Bible Dictionary, Abomination of Desolation]</ref>

The word, which, when used, always denotes ceremonial abominations is ''sheqets'' (Lev. 7:21; 11:10-13,20,23,41,42; Is. 66:17; Ezek. 8:10), and then ''shâqats,'' from which it is derived, which itself is only used in Leviticus for dietary violations, (Lev. 11:11,13,43; 20:25) and a "cursed thing in Dt. 7:26, and an abhorred cry in Prv. 22:24.

Majority of specific sins which are said to be tōʻēḇā

*1. idolatry or idols (Dt. 7:25,26; 13, 2 kg. 21:2-7; 23:13; 2Chr. 33:2,3; Is. 44:19)
*2. empty, vain worship (Is. 1:13)
*3. witchcraft; occultism (Dt. 18:9-12)
*4. illicit sex (Ezek. 16:22,58; 22:11; 33:26)
*5. remarrying divorced women (Dt. 24:2-4)
*6. marriage with unbelievers (Ezra 9:1,2)
*7. male homosexual and (collectively) heterosexual immorality (Lv. 18:22; 18:26,27,29,30; 20:13)
*8. temple prostitution (1 kg. 14:24; 21:2,11)
*9. offerings from the above (Dt. 23:18)
*10. cross-dressing (Dt. 22:5)
*11. child sacrifice to idols (2Ki. 16:3; Jer. 32:35)
*12. cheating in the market by using rigged weights (Dt. 25:13-19, Prov. 11:1)
*13. dishonesty (Prov. 12:22)
*14. dietary violations (Dt. 14:3; Jer. 16:18)
*15. stealing, murder, and adultery, breaking covenants, (Jer. 7:10),
*16. violent robbery, murder, oppressing the poor and needy, etc. (Ezek. 18:10-13)
*17. bringing unbelievers into the holy sanctuary of God, and forsaking the holy charge (Ezek. 44:78)

As regards ''zimmâh'', when used sexually, it is usually used in a general manner to describe the vile nature of universally sinful sexual immorality, such as are also specifically or broadly categorized as tōʻēḇā, (Lv. 18:17, 19:29; Jer. 13:27; Ezek. 22:9,11; 23:21,27,29,35,44,48,49) yet the use of the latter shows that the list of universal sinful things extends to more than those referred to as being zimmâh. Paradoxically, zimmâh also works to confirm the sexual nature of the sin of Sodom in Gn. 19, due to its use in the parallel story to describe the offense of the men of Gibeah. (Judges 20:6)

*Use in the Septuagint

Boswell and Helminiak look to the Greek [[Septuagint]] (LXX), an interpretive work of many Greek translators, for support here, arguing that its use of ''βδέλυγμα'' (''bdelygma'' or ''bdelugma'') in translating tōʻēḇā in Lv. 18:22 and other places,<ref>[http://www.studylight.org/isb/bible.cgi?query=abomination&section=0&it=kjv&oq=Jer. 16:18&ot=lxx&nt=tr&new=1&nb=jer&ng=16&ncc=16 studylight.org; abomination]</ref> indicates that the Leviticus passage should be interpreted as a violation of ceremonial impurity. They further postulate that a Greek word, ''anomia'',<ref>[http://www.preceptaustin.org/romans_618-20.htm preceptaustin.org]</ref> would likely be used if it were a violation of moral law<ref>Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality. pp. 100-102</ref><ref>What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality, Daniel Helminiak, pp. 64-65</ref>

Countering this, James B. De Young and others show the inconsistency and invalidity of this argument in the light of more extensive research.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=ZXAVf8m_HKgC&printsec=toc&dq=online+lxx+bdelygma&source=gbs_summary_s&cad=0 Homosexuality, Contemporary Claims Examined in Light of the Bible and Other Ancient Literature and Law, pp. 65-69]</ref><ref>[http://peacebyjesus.net/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html#Septuagint1 Homosexual relations and the Bible; The Septuagint]</ref><ref>http://pursuegod.wordpress.com/2008/12/03/homosexuality-an-abomination</ref>

Regarding ''anomia,'' 24 Hebrew words are seen to be variously rendered in the LXX as this, and while is a word that describes violations of law, it is most always used in a general sense, often like the Hebrew word ‛âvôn, and is rarely used to specify a particular sin, which in contrast is often the case with tōʻēḇā in the Torah. Yet anomia is used in many verses where tōʻēḇā later occurs in the Hebrew, and which iniquity is usually of a moral nature, such as illicit sex partners. (Eze. 8:6,9,13,17; 12:16; 16:2,47,51,58; 18:13,24; 20:4; 22:2; 23:36) As it is normally used in a general sense, when anomia is used in passages as Lv. 16:21; Is. 53:5, anomia is referring to all the transgressions of Israel, not simply those in the moral class. Yet in passages such as Lev. 22:16 it refers to things which Boswell and most traditionalists classify as mere ceremonial purity. To support his polemic, Boswell classifies idolatry, such as making idols to worship, or offering one's child as a literal sacrifice to a false god (Jer. 32:35; Boswell cites 2Ki. 16:3), as merely being part of ceremonial laws of separation, rather than being practices which are universally and immutably evil and forbidden, which the whole of the Bible testifies to. (1Cor. 10:20,21; Rv. 14:11) In contrast to prohomosex proponents, the traditionalist argument manifests that homosexual relations are not a corruption of a practice such as eating, for whereas the latter is contextually sanctioned, the sanctioned context for homosexual relations is (conspicuously) never established. As right worship is seen as being established by having the God of the Bible as its object, so likewise sanctified sexual relations is also seen to be established as being between eligible opposite genders, while homosexual relation is revealed as a consequence of making God into an image of one's own liking, formal or informal. (see [[Romans 1]])

=====Zakhar=====

Another attempt to relegate Lv. 18:22 and 20:13 to a unique cultic context is one that strives to attach a radical significance to the use of zakhar [H2145], which is the Hebrew word normally translated male/males throughout the OT, or the lesser used word for such, zekhur [H2138], by noting that in 90% of the occurrences it signifies those who have a special sacred significance (newborn sons, circumcised males, Levites, soldiers, sacrificial animals, returning exiles, etc.). By which he concludes that this signifies that the Levitical injunctions against homosex only pertains to sex with priests!<ref>http://epistle.us/hbarticles/zakhar1.html</ref>

In support of the traditional position,<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.net/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html#Zakhar Homosexual relations and the Bible; Zakhar ]</ref> it is evidenced that all Israelite males fell into a special class of people, while the only special significance the strictly gender specific words zakhar/zekhur most often provides is to differentiate between male and females in general, and, and therefore they are used for those in special classes of people. It is seen that the reason for the most prevalent use of zakhar within special classes of males is simply because that is most often the subject, from sacrificed animals to Jews returning from exile. While zakhar is used for the descendants of Levi, (Lv. 6:18,29) it is also used for Adam, (Gn. 1:27) and in contrast with Eve, (Gn. 5:2) and for all the men of Shechem, (Gn. 34:22,24,25) for Midianite males, (Num. 31:7,17,18,35; Jdg. 21:11) for idolatrous male images, (Ezek. 16:17) for male men of Manasseh, (Josh. 17:2) for slain male Edomites (1Ki. 11:15) for male children, (Lv. 12:2; Is. 66:7; Jer. 20:15) for fearful men, (Jer. 30:6) for circumscribed males, (Gn. 17:23), and for all the men of Israel, (Num. 1:2), as does zekhur (Ex. 23:17; Dt. 16:16) and for male enemies (Dt. 20:13) or male children (Ex. 34:23). Thus the pro-homosexual distinction is manifest as one which makes no difference in what the Levitical injunctions apply to. Moreover, in no place in Scripture are these words used to distinctly signify pagan male priests, with the common word for men ('îysh [H376]) being used for such. (Jdg 6:28,30; 1Ki 18:22)

===Additional arguments===

====Restriction to gender and manner====
Some pro-homosexuals apologists, such as Stacy Johnson, contend or postulate that the grammar in Lv. 18:22 and 20:13 indicates only a prohibition of actual male intercourse, and only condemns the active party, not the passive one, with procreation being causative of the injunction, and or being due to the need for male dominance, but not forbidding lesbian eroticism.<ref>Wrestling with God and Men, pp. 80-93, by Steven Greenberg</ref> Or that it only targets coercive male intercourse<ref>A Time to Embrace, Stacy Johnson</ref>

The focus here is on the words, ''îysh'' (man) ''shâkab'' (lieth) ''êth'' (with) ''zâkâr'' (mankind) ''mishkâb'' (lieth) '''ishshâh'' ''nâshîym'' (women), with mishkâb, usually meaning ''bed'', which the pro-homosexual polemic restricts to only intercourse. Countering this is the traditionalists response which argues that while that intercourse is prohibited, (cf. Num. 31:17–18,35; Judges 21:11–12) yet restricting "the "bed of love" (Ezek. 23:17; cf. 7:17) to only actual intercourse would to be too narrow. It is seen as unreasonable that euphemisms such as "uncover the nakedness, or "lieth with", would only forbid adulterous or incestuous intercourse while allowing all else. Though the sin of Reuben was that he went up to his father's bed (Gn. 49:4) inferring adultery/incest with his mother, certainly lesser forms of eroticism would not be sanctioned. Gagnon concludes that the idea that ancient Israel would have accepted other aspects of male with male erotic sex is preposterous, which apparently even Johnson is compelled to admit.<ref>[http://www.robgagnon.net/articles/homosexStacyJohnsonMoreReasonsCritique.pdf More Reasons Why Stacy Johnson’s A Time to Embrace Should Not Be Embraced: Part II]</ref><ref>"God and Sex" or "Pants on Fire"? - by Robert Gagnon</ref>

In response to the idea that only the active partner is targeted in 18:22, it is understood that simply because the man is specified does not mean the recipient is not culpable, and a distinction is made in jurisprudence when the latter is not. (Dt. 23:23-29) Likewise in verses before and after 20:13 the male is specified, though it addresses a consensual act. (Lv. 20:10-12,14)

David Hilborn (Theological Adviser to the UK Evangelical Alliance) states that,

"the same root text also deploys the generic term ‘male’ rather than any more specific word for ‘man’ or ‘youth’ - a detail which also points to a more comprehensive understanding of homoerotic activity. Furthermore, the death penalty in Leviticus 20:13 applies equally to the active and the passive partner: there is no implication of rape, in which case the rapist alone would have been executed (cf. Deut. 22:22-5). Nor is there any hint of coercion. The context, rather, would seem to include homosexual intercourse by mutual consent. Comparative literary study has revealed that the Assyrians outlawed forcible same-sex intercourse; it has also shown that the Egyptians banned pederasty; Israel, however, appears to have stood alone in viewing homosexual acts in general with this degree of severity.<ref>[http://www.eauk.org/articles/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&pageid=29093 Hilborn vs. Rowan Williams and Homosexuality] These points are based on Wright, David F. ‘Homosexuals or Prostitutes? The meaning of arsenokoitai (1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:10), Vigiliae Christianae 38 (1984), pp. 125-53, Wenham, Gordon, ‘Homosexuality in the Bible’, in Higton, Tony (ed.) Sexuality and the Church. Hawkwell: ABWON, 1987, and Hays, Richard B., The Moral Vision of the New Testament. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, pp.382-3.)</ref>

====Priority of procreation====
Countering the aspect of the above polemic which charges that procreation is the only cause of the prohibition against homosexual relations, it is argued that reproduction is not the sole or determining basis for the foundational premise which 18:22 is based upon, as the Bible in its entirety evidences as that the basis for the complementary nature of the union of opposite genders transcends simply procreation, (Gn. 2:18; Prov. 5:15-19) and that even when that is not a critical issue, then sex is enjoined only between male and female, due to the nature of their marital union, and of human nature. (1Cor. 7:2-5) Additionally, in no place is marriage afforded between same genders, with Jesus and the N.T. distinctly affirming "what God hath joined" as being male and female.

====Lesbian sexual relations====
As regards the issue of lesbian sexual relations, it is likewise seen that to presuppose that condemnation of same-sex relations between males does not apply to same gender female sexual unions lacks Scriptural warrant, as these are also contrary in nature to the union of opposite genders originally established and uniquely affirmed throughout Scripture, with no principal or precept affording the contrary. In addition, though a phrase like "women lying with women with womenkind" is not specified in the Old Testament, commands and texts which are given to the ''male'' ('îysh) in Lv. 20:13 also can include women, such as in Lv. 20:9; Is. 53:6,11; Jer. 11:8; 16:12; 18:12. It is also understood that most likely sexual relations between females was not a known (or a prevalent) practice then, and thus did not warrant a specific injunction. However, under the New Covenant, both male and female consensual homoeroticism is condemned in Romans 1, as being contrary to the creational design of God, and ordained normality, and thus is a manifestation of idolatry ("the mother of all sins").

In response to the argument that male dominance was the cause for 18:22, it is evidenced that it is God, not society, that established and upholds the headship of the male, and this functional distinction is an intrinsic part of his unique union with the women, based upon creational distinctions, (1Cor. 11:1-12) and which also excludes same gender marriage.

===Psychologically based polemics===

An even more imaginative psychologically based argument on Lv. 20:13 is advanced by Rabbi Arthur Waskow, who renders that to only forbid male with male intercourse when they pretend one is a women, and or that this verse is really mandating a parallel set of institutions for dealing with male with male sex.<ref>http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh5.htm</ref> That this is an egregious example of "wresting" of Scriptures (cf. 2Pet. 3:16) should be obvious, but such is evidenced elsewhere in prohomosex apologetics. In no place do emotions or imaginations, motives or mental attitude play a part in the prohibitions of sex with illicit partners, whereas when it does within laws regarding marriage (Dt. 24:3; Num. 6:12-31) or killing (Dt. 19:11,12) then it is made explicit. Likewise, the idea that a fundamental prohibition against male homosex, which is manifestly contrary to what God has sanctioned and established by design and decree, is somehow mandating a like means of sanction for it, is seen as utterly without warrant. And that is makes a mockery of the Bible as a coherent authority for even basic human behavior.

Nor is it indicated that "as he lieth with a woman" is making a distinction between an effeminate versus masculine internal disposition of the partner. Rather the simile and euphemism serves to identify the sexual nature (intercourse) of laying down, and would distinguish it from simply sharing the same real estate to lay down on, as with women.

=== Summation ===

The following summation, while not inclusive, provides reasons for the position that no grammatical, categorical, cultural or motivation argument warrants relegating the Levitical injunctions against homosex to merely being prohibitory of idolatrous temple homosex, or belonging to the class of ceremonial laws (which are not the same), or are only motive-specific, but that instead they are universal and immutable.

* 1. The reasons why literal obedience to ceremonial laws is not enjoined now is based upon like evidence for why the laws against homosex are upheld. While the New Testament defines the class of laws which were ceremonial/typological, it even more abundantly upholds laws against illicit sexual partners as a class. While literal obedience to the former is not mandated under the New Covenant, sex with illicit partners and any possible mention of homosex only finds unconditional condemnation therein.

* 2. The injunctions against homosex are based upon creational, not cultural differences, as is manifest by design and decrees, and are upheld in principle and by precepts, in which only the women is created for the man, with purposeful complementary physical, functional, and positional distinctions. Which, as decreed, only opposite opposite gender unions between humans could fulfill, in marriage. (Gn. 2:18-24; 1Cor. 11:3-15)

*3. All sex outside marriage is classed as fornication, and outlawed marriage partners are determined by a violation of marriage bond (adultery), or of nearness of kin (incest), or of nearness of kind (homosex), as well as being other than humankind (bestiality). These prohibitions are based upon what God has joined together, (Mt. 19:4-6), which incest being added later, and upheld in the N.T. (1Cor. 5:1) showing a progression toward greater strictness, not lesser.

* 4. Motive (love, hate, consensuality) does not play a part in determining the forbiddance of homosex,<ref>Homosexuality in the Church, Richard B. Hays, Lev. 18:22; 20:13</ref> nor whether sex outside marriage or with any unlawful partner is valid in either Testament, in contrast with sexual legislation which stipulates such, (Dt. 22:13; 24:3; Num. 35:20; Dt. 22:23-29). Neither the mention of such or lack of mention of it establishes a factor which may sanctify an otherwise illicit union (adultery, incest etc., and all fornications are unequivocally sinful: cf. Gn. 34; Mk. 7:21-23).

* 5. Lv. 18:22 finds no abrogation elsewhere, nor is the Biblical context (marriage) established in which the practice of homosex is sanctified, as is explicitly provided for heterosexual relations, but which provision is likewise absent for illicit unions such as adultery and bestiality. Nor does the allowance or the use of polygamy, concubines or Levirate marriage set a precedent for homosexual marriage, as the only variance with the Genesis original is in the number of times a man takes a wife, not the gender of the wife, which is clearly manifest

* 6. The issue of sexual unions (with valid partners) is dealt with from the beginning to the end of the Bible as part of moral separation (Gn. 20; 26; 34; 38; Rv. 21:8; 22:15), whereas ceremonial violations are different by nature than moral offenses, being basically that of defilement by touching, tasting, or handling unclean things, including diseased persons (Col. 2:21), and do not deal with sex except insofar as contact with including blood or semen is involved, (Lv. 15:24,33). There is nothing ritually “unclean” about the males in 18:22, anymore than an illicit partner in adultery or incest, rather, any form of fornication makes one morally defiled. (Lv. 18:24; Mk. 7:21-23)

* 7. Attempts to relegate 18:22 and 20:13 to only temple idolatry are unwarranted, as the grammar of Lv. 18:22 is universal, and entirely consistent with other transcultural immutable commands given here which forbid sex with the spouse of another, or near kin, that of the flesh of one's own flesh. Homosex is structurally similar, that of sex with an illicit partner, one's own gender.<ref>Gagnon, "God and Sex" or "Pants on Fire"?</ref> To restrict v. 22 to only targeting male temple prostitution is unwarranted like as doing the same to Lv. 19:29 is.

* 8. When homosex or illicit heterosexual sex as a formal part of idolatrous activity is possibly targeted, then the context makes that evident (Dt. 23:17,18), (“with dogs” likely referring to the manner of homosex relations). The historical fact is that in Canaanite culture, homosexuality was practiced as both a religious rite and a personal perversion...Israel's pagan neighbours knew both secular and sacred homosexuality."<ref>Greg Bahnsen p 45</ref> Though some argue that there is no evidence to suggest these texts even refer to Canaanite cultic practices<ref>[http://www.theologicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/homosexuality_revisited.pdf Homosexuality Revisited in Light of the Current Climate, by Calvin Smith]</ref>

* 9. While types of laws are grouped often together, ancient laws codes are not strict categories of laws. The attempt to negate the universality and transcendence v. 22 due to the culturally specific aspect of v. 21 (child sacrifice to Molech) fails, as that law is not restricted to child sacrifice to only one specific idol, and cannot be relegated to merely being ceremonial. Rather, it is based upon foundational moral law (Gn. 9:5,6; Ex. 20:2; 34:15) and is literally applicable in principal and by modification to all cultures and times. In addition, consistent with the hermeneutic behind their categorical argument, v.19 (intercourse during menstruation, which is more akin to ceremonial law) would disallow the intrinsic sinfulness of the next verse (adultery).

* 10. While the sentence of death for homosex is listed twice (collectively in Lv. 18:29, and specifically in 20:13), (and which is only prescribed once for some moral sins, if "cursed" does or does not mandate death in Dt. 27), yet there is no radical significance to the lack of more mandates for the death penalty for homosex that would lessen its severity, contrary to prohomosex statements<ref>A Defense Theory, by Royce Buehler</ref> Rather according to the principal behind Gal. 3:19, the more likelihood of a capital transgression occurring then the more likely the reiteration of its prohibition and penalty. Thus the absence of a law against cannibalism, and sparse mention of some other sins. The duplicity of prohomsoex polemicists here is manifested by their assertion that more repetitions of the death penalty would be expected if it were inherently sinful, while it is the establishment of homosex marriage that is what would be most expected, but which is no where established, in stark contrast to the that which God originally and consistently decreed.

* 11. As Lv. 18:22 is substantially evidenced as being based upon foundational design and decree, just as the forbiddance of bestiality is in the next verse is, in principal its application is not restricted to only male homosex but same gender sex as well. Male sex with another male represents an illicit partner, contrary to all Biblical marriages, just as Molech represents an illicit object of worship, contrary to all statements relative to such, and the respective injunctions against both are universal based upon inherent qualities which disallow the forbidden functions. The injunctions against homosex physically parallel laws against idolatry. The latter forbids worship of and spiritual union with an illicit god, which is not created to be such, or able to truly be as God. The former forbids union with a same gender object of sexual union, which was not created for that purpose, or able to truly fulfill their God designed and decreed union.

* 12. The forbiddance of idolatry is itself a universal and immutable command, which is manifest not only in formal worship of idols, but by any deliberate act contrary to the laws of God (Mt. 6:24; Rm. 6:16). Homosex by nature, not simply context, is an expression of idolatry, not simply an abuse by it.

* 13. Ceremonial violations are stated to “be an abomination [sheqets] unto you” (Lv. 11:10), male homosex is stated to be tô‛êbah itself (Lv. 18:22), as other illicit sex sins are, (vs. 27,29,30), and contrary to prohomsex arguments concerning tô‛êbah, that is the word most translated as “abomination” to denote grave moral offenses of universal sins, and is rarely used for ceremonial offenses. (Note: idolatry does it not stop with graven images.)

* 14. Attempts to extrapolate other grammatical differences in favor of the prohomosex position critically fall short. Zakhar (mankind) in Lv. 18:22 and 20:13 only distinguishes between genders, and does not signify idolatrous priests are targeted here, while mishkâb (lieth) is a metaphor for sexual intercourse, using the place or manner in which it usually takes place, (Ezek. 23:17) And as 20:13 shows, both are guilty.

* 15. Male homosex is classified as a first tier offense requiring the death penalty, that stipulates that they shall “be put to death”, which wording is used for other immutable grave sins (though the penalties may require Israel's theocracy), and not for ceremonial/purity laws, except for unholy presumption, and for breaking the Sabbath, the gravest of such. The term usually used by itself for punishment for ritual purity offenses by Israel, such as dietary violations, (Lv. 7:21,25,27) is “cut off” though it is used in combination which "put to death" for grave moral sins, such as in Lv. 18:29 for all the sins of that chapter.

* 16. Hermeneutics are employed by those seeking to negate the Levitical injunctions, if applied consistently, would effectively disallow a coherent sexual ethic in the Bible, yet the laws on sexual partners are presented as universal commands and reiterated as a class in a way that presumes they can be understood and obeyed by all, without being open to a vast degree of interpretation which effectively allows them to be negated.

*17. Lev. 18:22 is “part of an interconnected Old Testament witness.” “There is no evidence to suggest that ancient Israelite society, acting in fidelity to Yahweh, would ever have approved of any form of homosexual practice.”

*18. Lv. 18:22 is appropriated by the New Testament. The term arsenokoitai (“men who lie with a male”) in 1 Corinthians 6:9 is formulated from the Septuagint translation of Lev 18:22 and 20:13, which refers to not ‘lying’ (koite) with a ‘male’ (arsen). Paul’s critique of homosexual relations in Romans 1:24-27 also echoes Lev 18 and 20 by using two terms that appear in Septuagint translation of these chapters: akatharsia (“uncleanness, impurity” in Romans 1:24 and Lev 18:19; 20:21, 25) and aschemosune (“indecency, indecent exposure” in Rom 1:27 and twenty-four times in Lev 18:6-19; 20:11, 17-21).<ref>Gagnon, Why the disagreement over the Biblical witness on homosexual practice?</ref>

Joseph P. Gudel states, Letha Scanzoni and Virginia Ramey Mollenkott assert that "consistency and fairness would seem to dictate that if the Israelite Holiness Code is to be invoked against twentieth-century homosexuals, it should likewise be invoked against such common practices as eating rare steak, wearing mixed fabrics, and having marital intercourse during the menstrual period." Much effort need not be expended answering these objections. First, God did not condemn certain behavior for the Israelites only because Israel was to be kept separate from Canaanite practice. Otherwise, if the Canaanites did not practice child sacrifice and bestiality, would these then have been all right for the Israelites? Of course not! Having sexual relations with an animal and killing one's child are inherently wrong and evil, even when they are not related to pagan worship; they are abominations before God. And yet, these specific prohibitions also are listed in this passage, both immediately before and after the condemnation of homosexuality (Lev. 18:21-23).<ref>[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0108a.html "That Which is Unnatural" Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture, Leviticus 18 and 20, by Joseph P. Gudel, Christian Research Institute Journal]</ref>

Bailey, while seeking to justify homosex, stated, "It is hardly open to doubt that both the laws in Leviticus relate to ordinary homosexual acts between men, and not to ritual or other acts performed in the name of religion."<ref>Bailey, Homosexuality, p. 30</ref>

[[Category:Homosexuality]]

==[[New Testament and homosexuality]]==

In [[Mark]] 7:21, the Lord [[Jesus Christ]] condemns all forms of fornication, and in [[Matthew]] 19:4 He specifies that it was male and female that constitutes the "what" of "what therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder."

In Romans 1, God, through the apostle Paul, condemns both male and female homoeroticism, which, as a cultural practice, is shown to be a manifestation and a result of idolatry, in which man progressively acted contrary to that which God has revealed by creation, by design and normality.

This morality is confirmed by the Law, as the next chapter declares. As a result of this continued rebellion, which was partly manifest in God being reduced to an image like unto corruptible creatures (like as today with homosexuals construing Christ to be homosexual, or sanctioning it, as well as nature effectively being worshiped), "God gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves." (v. 24)

While some seek to render this chapter as condemning homosexual relations only when it is done as part of idolatry, the condemnation here is not due to its association with paganism, rather as it inherently contrary to that which God ordained, then it is a manifestation of idolatry, regardless of its form, though in ancient times in which religion was an inseparable part of culture, then formal idolatry was what was more manifested. Romans 1 proceeds to show that homosexuality is not alone as a fruit of idolatry, but that this particular pernicious physical sin is one of many inherently evil things. (Rm. 1:28-32)

1 Corinthians 6:9 also places the effeminate and abusers of themselves with mankind (KJV) as sinners outside the [[Kingdom of God]], while and 1 Timothy 1:10 condemns those who "defile themselves with mankind."

'''''For more information please see''':'' [[New Testament and homosexuality]].

== See also ==
*[[Homosexuality]]
*[[Atheism and homosexuality]]
*[[David and Jonathan]]
*[[New Testament and homosexuality]]

== References ==
{{reflist|2}}

== External links ==

* [http://www.robgagnon.net/ArticlesOnline.htm Robert A. J. Gagnon, Articles Available Online]
* [http://www.leaderu.com/theology/biblehomosex_overview.html Dr. Robert Gagnon, ''The Bible and Homosexual Practice: An Overview of Some Issues'']
*[http://thegoodpoliticalshepherd.com/is-homosexuality-still-a-sin-what-does-the-bible-say-about-homosexuality.html Is Homosexuality Still a Sin? What does the Bible Say About Homosexuality?]
* [http://www.aletheiacollege.net/dbb/11-21.htm Duncan Heaster, ''Gay Christian Arguments Considered'']
* [https://books.google.com/books?id=Zeotd-ylKtwC&pg=PA13&lpg=PA13&dq=quotes+Straight+and+Narrow?+Compassion+and+Clarity+in+the+Homosexuality+Debate&source=web&ots=WOXT85Pbxk&sig=8W9pkL8rcJ_7PS6oXbZ1QQBWCxQ&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result#PPA1,M1 Thomas E. Schmidt, ''Straight & Narrow?'']
* [https://books.google.com/books?id=ZXAVf8m_HKgC&pg=PA244&lpg=PA244&dq=sodom+in+Mishnah&source=web&ots=ZjUCW3j8F9&sig=F5r2UCKKoWPAAbUnK3kYO-VdgVE&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result#PPA245,M1 James B. De Young, ''Homosexuality'']
* [http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/romans_malick.pdf David E. Malick, ''The Condemnation of Homosexuality in Romans 1:26-27'']
*[https://books.google.com/books?id=2nNr3T38tw0C&pg=PA401&lpg=PA401&dq=Wright,+David.+Homosexuality:+the+relevancy+of+the+Bible&source=web&ots=BOBmFIow3g&sig=dRBleeIEChVOkTpSznb6qWfcMe8&hl=en&ei=pBiaSYSxDMe_tgfZhKCgCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result#PPA46,M1 Andreas J. Kostenberger, David W. Jones, ''God, Marriage, and Family'']
*[http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=18-10-036-f R. V. Young, ''The Gay Invention: Homosexuality is a Linguistic as Well as a Moral Error'']
* [https://books.google.com/books?id=WcyqvWfJnyYC&pg=PA242&dq=Homosexuality+By+James+B.+De+Young#PPA243,M1 Ken M. Campbell, ''Marriage and Family in the Biblical World'']
* [http://www.reformed.org/social/hodges_response_helminiak.html Derrick K. Olliff and Dewey H. Hodges, ''A Reformed Response to Daniel Helminiak's Gay Theology'']
* [http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/21220.htm Dennis Prager'', Judaism's Sexual Revolution: Why Judaism Rejected Homosexuality'']

Homosexuality and the Bible

2020-09-15T17:29:32Z

Daniel1212: update links from http://witnesstoday.org (defunct) to http://peacebyjesus.net/

[[Image:FacProfilemontoya.jpg‎|right|150px|thumb|[[Alex D. Montoya]]]]
''See also: [[Homosexuality and biblical interpretation]], and [[conversion therapy]]''

In respect to '''homosexuality and the Bible''', sound [[Bible Exegesis|Bible exegesis]] and Bible exposition demonstrates that the Bible condemns [[homosexuality]].<ref>[http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/romans_malick.pdf David E. Malick, "The Condemnation of Homosexuality in Romans 1:26-27," Bibliotheca Sacra 150: 599(1993): 327-340]</ref><ref>[http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/homosexuality_corinthians6.pdf David E. Malick, “The Condemnation of Homosexuality in 1 Corinthians 6:9,” Bibliotheca Sacra 150: 600 (1993): 479-492]</ref><ref>[http://www.trinitysem.edu/journal/haas_hermen.html HERMENEUTICAL ISSUES IN THE USE OF THE BIBLE TO JUSTIFY THE ACCEPTANCE OF HOMOSEXUAL PRACTICE, Guenther Haas, Redeemer College]</ref><ref>[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj11h.pdf The Master's Seminary Journal (TMSJ), 11/2 (Fall 2000) 155-168 HOMOSEXUALITY AND THE CHURCH, Alex D. Montoya (Associate Professor of Pastoral Ministries)]</ref> In addition, [[Christianity|Christian]] apologist [[JP Holding]] refutes various arguments that assert that the [[Bible]] does not condemn homosexuality.<ref>http://www.tektonics.org/qt/romhom.html</ref><ref>http://tektonics.org/gk/genhom.html</ref><ref>http://www.tektonics.org/lp/lev18.html</ref><ref>http://www.tektonics.org/gk/gayjude.html</ref><ref>http://www.tektonics.org/gk/gaydavid.html</ref> In his essay which examines [[Bible]] passages regarding homosexuality, Pastor and Associate Professor of Pastoral Ministries at [[The Master's Seminary]] [[Alex D. Montoya]] states that "The Christian needs to befriend and witness to the
homosexual with such love, compassion, and wisdom that such will respond to the saving [[grace]] of [[God]]."<ref>[http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj11h.pdf The Master's Seminary Journal (TMSJ), 11/2 (Fall 2000), page 169, HOMOSEXUALITY AND THE CHURCH, Alex D. Montoya (Associate Professor of Pastoral Ministries)]</ref>
== Homosexuality and the Bible - specific verses in the Bible ==
[[Image:Moses.jpg|thumb|150px|right|The prophet [[Moses]] authored the book of [[Leviticus]].]]
Homosexuality is condemned in the [[Bible]]. The most comprehensive, general passage against homosexual conduct is at [[Epistle to the Romans|Romans]] 1:18-32. Below are additional specific Bible verses that condemn homosexuality:
* [[Leviticus]] 18:22 - You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.
* [[Leviticus]] 20:13 - If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.
* [[Romans]] 1:26-27 - For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
* [[Romans]] 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
* [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%206:9;&version=31; I Corinthians 6:9](NIV) - Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
*[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Timothy%201:8-11;&version=49; I Timothy 1:8-11 (NASB)] - "But we know that the [[Mosaic Law|Law]] is good, if one uses it lawfully, realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and [[sin]]ners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious [[gospel]] of the blessed [[God]], with which I have been entrusted."
*2 Peter 2:6 (ESV): - ... by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes [God] condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly
*[[Jude]] 1:6-7 (NASB) - And [[angel]]s who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day, just as [[Sodom]] and [[Gomorrah]] and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire.

=== Biblical References Against [[Same-sex marriage|Homosexual "Marriage"]] ===

Many passages in the [[Bible]] implicitly condemn homosexual "marriage":<ref>ESV is quoted here.</ref>
*[[Genesis]] 2:24 (“Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.”)
*[[Mark]] 10:6-8 (“But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’”)
*[[Epistle to the Hebrews]] 13:4 ("Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.").

=== Biblical Requirement to Disapprove of Homosexuality by Others ===

The Bible condemns those who approve of homosexual conduct:

*Romans 1:32: "Though they know God's righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them."<ref>[[ESV]]</ref>

*Proverbs 24:24–25: "He who says to the wicked, 'You are righteous,'
Peoples will curse him, nations will abhor him; But to those who rebuke the wicked will be delight, And a good blessing will come upon them."<ref>[[NASB]]</ref>

==Homosexuality and the Bible and the City of Sodom==
Jesus referred to [[Sodom]] at Matthew 10:15 ("Truly, I say to you, it will be more bearable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah than for that town.").<ref>The quotation is from the ESV version.</ref> The Bible also mentions Sodom in other biblical books.

Genesis warns in the strongest terms possible against the evil that occurs when homosexuality becomes prevalent in a society.
[[Image:Martin destruction sodom640x422.jpg|thumbnail|200px|right|Destruction of [[Sodom]] by [[God]]]]
[[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] Dr. Phil Fernandes states the following regarding the judgment of Sodom by [[God]]:
{{Cquote|The Bible tells us of the wickedness of Sodom and Gomorrah. Though homosexuality was not the only vice of these cities, the Bible makes it clear that this sin was one of the main reasons why God judged them. [[Genesis]] 19:1-11 speaks of the men of Sodom gathering at Lot's house and calling out to [[Lot]], saying, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations with" (Genesis 19:5). Lot's two visitors were actually angels who manifested themselves as men. Lot's carnal attempt to rescue his visitors was his offer to provide the men of Sodom with his two virgin daughters (Genesis 19:8). But, the men of Sodom rejected Lot's offer. Finally, the angels miraculously struck the immoral men with blindness (Genesis 19:11). Jude, commenting on the destruction of Sodom and [[Gomorrah]], wrote, "Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example, in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire" (Jude 7).<ref>http://www.biblicaldefense.org/Writings/Biblical-Perspective-of-Homosexuality.html</ref>}}

==Pro-homosexual polemics ==
{{main|Homosexuality and biblical interpretation}}

Historically, the conclusion of established Bible scholars has been that the Jewish and Christian Scriptures only allow sexual relations within heterosexual marriage, while requiring celibacy outside marriage, with homosexual acts always being intrinsically immoral.<ref>Norman Lamm, Judaism and the Modern Attitude Towards Homosexuality; http://www.jonahweb.org/sections.php?secId=88</ref><ref>Adam Clarke, Albert Barnes, John Gill, Keil and Delitzsch, Matthew Henry, etc.</ref> This is also the conclusion of traditional scholars today, such as hold that all Scripture is inspired of God, (2Tim. 3:16) such as Thomas E Schmidt,<ref>Professor of New Testament Greek at Westmont College in Santa Barbara, California "Straight and Narrow?"</ref> Guenther Haas,<ref>Associate Professor of Religion and Theology at Redeemer College, "Hermeneutical issues in the use of the Bible to justify the acceptance of homosexual practice</ref> James B. de Young,<ref>Professor of New Testament Language and Literature at Western Seminary in Portland, Oregon, Homosexuality: Contemporary Claims Examined in Light of the Bible and Other Ancient Literature and Law</ref> Dave Miller Ph.D.,<ref>“Sodom—Inhospitality or Homosexuality?"</ref> as well as of the overwhelming majority of Christians. However, as a product of Biblical revisionism, and primarily coinciding with the moral rebellion of the modern [[sexual revolution]], a host of pro homosex polemicists have sought to disallow the traditionally held universal injunctions against homosex, as well as find sanction for the same, attempting what one apologist asserts, to "force sex into Biblical passages where it does not belong"<ref>[http://peacebyjesus.net/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONS and the BIBLE]</ref>

Pro-homosexual revisionists labor to find ways of restricting the Levitical prohibitions against male homosex to the context of formal idolatry, rather than male and female homosex being a result of idolatry in general (Rm. 1:16-26), as illicit sex also can be, (1Cor. 10:7,8) while also striving to equate these general prohibitions to ceremonial laws, such as forbid eating such things as bacon,<ref>Countrymen, Dirt, Greed and Sex, pp. 98-123</ref> though laws against illicit sexual partners are seen as confirmed as a class under both Old and New Testaments. Another recourse is to contend that these sexual prohibitions were based upon male dominance, which is held to be wrong and must be disallowed,<ref>E. Schussler, "Toward a Feminist Biblical Heremenutics: Biblical Interpretation and Liberation Theology, ref. by The Challenge of Liberation Theology (Maryknoll, N. Y.: Orbis 1981), p. 108</ref> rather than such being established and confirmed by God as historically transcendent. (1Cor. 11:3-12) Additionally, the condemnation of homosex is sometimes partly attributed to ignorance on the part of Biblical writers,<ref>Walter Wink, Homosexuality and the Bible http://www.robgagnon.net/articles/homoWinkHBTResp.pdf</ref><ref>http://peacebyjesus.net/Homosexuality_and_the_Bible_Wink.html</ref><ref>Victor Paul Furnish, The Moral Teachings of Paul: Selected Issues (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985), p. 85.</ref> thus denying their particular Divine inspiration. Another common polemic is to dismiss opposing scholarship as being due to [[homophobia]]<ref>Richard Hasbany, Homosexuality and Religion</ref>

In response, traditional scholars evidence that the injunctions against homosex are foundationally based upon the uniquely established sexual union of the man with the women, which alone is sanctioned by marriage.(Gn. 1:26,27; Mt. 19:4-6; 1Cor. 11:11,12; Eph. 5:31) And that the laws and principals concerning human sexual partners are not culturally bound, but instead are universal and transcendent, with homosexual relations being fundamentally contrary to God's design and decrees, with homosex being only condemned in wherever they are explicitly dealt with, (Lv. 18:22; 23:13; Rm. 1:26,27) and being just as universally applicable and immutable as those against illicit heterosexual partners.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=Zeotd-ylKtwC&pg=PA13&lpg=PA13&dq=quotes+Straight+and+Narrow%3F+Compassion+and+Clarity+in+the+Homosexuality+Debate&source=web&ots=WOXT85Pbxk&sig=8W9pkL8rcJ_7PS6oXbZ1QQBWCxQ&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result#PPA36,M1 Straight & Narrow? By Thomas E. Schmidt]</ref><ref>[http://www.robgagnon.net/ArticlesOnline.htm Prof. Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon]</ref><ref>[http://www.neednotfret.com/content/view/124/89/ THE OLD TESTAMENT AND HOMOSEXUALITY, by Kevin L. Howard]</ref><ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=ZXAVf8m_HKgC&pg=PA244&lpg=PA244&dq=sodom+in+Mishnah&source=web&ots=ZjUCW3j8F9&sig=F5r2UCKKoWPAAbUnK3kYO-VdgVE&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result#PPA245,M1 Homosexuality By James B. De Young]</ref><ref>[http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_attitude_wenham.html The Old Testament Attitude to Homosexuality Gordon J Wenham]</ref><ref>[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0108a.html "That Which is Unnatural" Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture by Joseph P. Gudel -ICR]</ref><ref>[http://www.reformed.org/social/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/social/hodges_response_helminiak.html A Reformed Response to Daniel Helminiak's Gay Theology by Derrick K. Olliff and Dewey H. Hodges]</ref><ref>[http://www.aletheiacollege.net/dbb/11-21.htm Duncan Heaster, Gay Christian Arguments Considered]</ref><ref>[http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hildebrandt/OTeSources/03-Leviticus/Text/Articles/Ukleja-Homsex-BS.htm Homosexuality and the Old Testament P. Michael Ukleja]</ref>

Premier pro-homosex polemicist D.S. Bailey confessed, "It is hardly open to doubt that both the laws in Leviticus relate to ordinary homosexual acts between men, and not to ritual or other acts performed in the name of religion,"<ref>Bailey, Homosexuality, p. 30</ref> while his compatriot Robin Scroggs states, "It might seem that only a series of verbal pyrotechnics could eliminate the seemingly obvious reference to homosexuality in Romans 1,"<ref>The New Testament and Homosexuality, p. 14</ref> though he himself attempts to do so. Noted Bible scholar [[Greg Bahnsen]] stated, "God’s verdict on homosexuality is inescapably clear. His law is a precise interpretation of the sexual order of creation for fallen man, rendering again His intention and direction for sexual relations. When members of the same sex (homo-sexual) practice intercourse with each other...they violate God’s basic creation order in a vile and abominable fashion."<ref>Bahnsen, Homosexuality: A Biblical View (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1978), p. 36.</ref> Calvin Smith objectively concludes, "the weak revisionist exegetical arguments, together with far more convincing traditionalist rebuttals, have led me to affirm the traditional view more firmly than ever.<ref>CONCLUDING REMARKS, Homosexuality Revisited in Light of the Current Climate</ref>

In addition to being held as unwarranted and specious, an additional problem seen is that the degree of revisionism and spurious exegesis which pro-homosex arguments require effectively negates the Bible as a coherent moral authority as a whole. This is understood by some as a desired effect, and few of these revisionists hold that that the Bible is wholly inspired by God, and see taking the Bible literally in this regard as resulting in disallowing their claims.<ref>Spong, Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalists, p. 154</ref> Gary David Comstock, Protestant chaplain at Wesleyan University, called it "dangerous" to not condemn the apostle Paul's condemnation of homosex, and advocated removing such from the canon.<ref>Gary David Comstock, Gay Theology Without Apology (Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim Press, 1993), p. 43. http://www.albertmohler.com/article_read.php?cid=7</ref> Pastor and CRI contributor Joseph P. Gudel notes, "It is extremely revealing to note that almost every pro-gay group within the church shares one thing in common: they reject the Bible as being fully the Word of God...Likewise, the many pro-homosexual books that have come out almost all reject - or even ridicule - the church's historic stance on the inspiration and authority of Scripture."<ref>Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture, The Authority of Scripture, Christian Research Institute Journal</ref>

Another argument often given by pro-homosexual polemicists is that since most Christians do not faithfully follow the entire Bible, but instead [[Cafeteria Christianity|pick and choose]] which parts to follow, they have no ground to tell homosexuals to [[hypocrisy|do otherwise]]. However, that argument is based on the ''[[tu quoque]]'' fallacy. Correct Biblical interpretation is not a popularity contest (Matthew 7:13-14); the truth is based on the Bible, not on what most so-called Christians think or do.

==Ex-Homosexuals and the Bible==
The [[Paul|Apostle Paul]] wrote of the existence [[Ex-Homosexuals|ex-homosexuals]] in the early [[Christianity|Christian]] church in a letter of his to the [[Corinth]]ian church. ([http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%206:9-11;&version=49; I Corinthians 6:9-11 (NASB)])

==Bible, Homosexuality, and Sound Health Practices==
Given the [[Homosexuality and health|many diseases associated with homosexuality]], the Bible prohibition against homosexuality is arguably one of the many examples where the [[Bible scientific foreknowledge|Bible exhibited knowledge that was ahead of its time]].

==The Bible and the origin of homosexuality==
While secular people may debate over whether [[homosexuality and choice|people choose to become homosexuals]], the first chapter of the [[Epistle to the Romans]]<ref>[http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rom/Rom001.html?q=romans%201#top Romans chapter 1 (KJV)]</ref> makes clear the origin of homosexuality. According to that chapter, God's eternal power is manifest in His [[creation]] (Romans 1:18-20). Nonetheless, certain people chose to worship the creature more than the Creator (Romans 1:21-25). Therefore, God gave them up to homosexuality and other sins and gave them over to a reprobate mind (Romans 1:26-32). As an example of the truth of this teaching, [[feminist]]s, wishing to deny the [[Women#New Testament statements on the role of women|God-given role of women]], often engage in [[goddess]] worship and other forms of [[idolatry]]<ref>[http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/goddess.html "Probe Ministries: Goddess Worship," by Russ Wise]</ref> and as a consequence are often given up to lesbianism.<ref>[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56458 Hetero woman: Feminism turned me into a lesbian], from [[WorldNetDaily]]</ref>

==See also==
*[[Homosexuality]]
*[[Homosexuality and Revelation controversy]]

==External links==

*[http://thegoodpoliticalshepherd.com/is-homosexuality-still-a-sin-what-does-the-bible-say-about-homosexuality.html Is Homosexuality Still a Sin? What does the Bible Say About Homosexuality?]
*[http://www.evangelicalbible.com/homosexual.htm Homosexuality: A Christian perspective] An evangelical approach.
*[http://peacebyjesus.net/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

{{homosexualityb}}
[[Category:Homosexuality]]
[[Category:Bible]]

User:Daniel1212

2020-04-05T11:30:56Z

Daniel1212: update home page

Web site home page: http://www.peacebyjesus.net/

Joe Biden

2020-03-14T02:43:49Z

Daniel1212: /* 2020 Presidential campaign */ Health care

{{Officeholder
|name=Joseph Biden
|image=JoeBiden.jpg
|party=[[Democratic party|Democrat]]
|spouse=[[Jill Biden]]
|religion=[[Roman Catholic]]
|offices=
{{Officeholder/vice president
|country=the United States
|number=47th
|terms=January 20, 2009 – January 20, 2017
|president=[[Barack Obama]]
|preceded=[[Dick Cheney]]
|former=Hopefully
|succeeded=[[Mike Pence]]
}}
{{Officeholder/senator
|state=Delaware
|terms=January 3, 1973 – January 15, 2009
|preceded=[[Cale Boggs]]
|former=y
|succeeded=[[Ted Kaufman]]
}}
}}
'''Joe Biden''' or '''#JoeMentia''' (born<ref>his birth name was Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.</ref>November 20, 1942, see: [[Biden's age]]) was the [[Vice President of the United States]] and served as [[President Barack Obama]]'s token [[segregation]]ist. On April 25, 2019, Biden announced his candidacy against President Trump in 2020 and was the immediate [[Democratic party]] frontrunner.<ref>Biden is considered the [[Konstantin Chernenko]] of the modern [[Left]].</ref> He's known as "Architect of Mass Incarceration." Prior to being Obama's pick for vice president, Biden never garnered 2% of Democratic primary voters in any of his presidential bids. Biden promises to cure [[cancer]],<ref>https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/joe-biden-says-hes-going-130151675.html</ref> [[AIDS]] and [[climate change]] while giving out free [[drug]]s and tuition. Biden also vows to raise [[tax]]es.<ref>https://twitter.com/TimRunsHisMouth/status/1234334186846248961?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw</ref>

Biden [[obstruction of justice|obstructed justice]] when he threatened a ''[[quid pro quo]]'' to withhold money unless a prosecutor was fired who was investigating his son. Biden publicly admitted that he threatened Ukrainian leaders to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aide unless a prosecutor looking into kickbacks his son, [[Hunter Biden]], was receiving from a Ukrainian oil and gas company.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urTk6O4c0mU&feature=youtu.be</ref><ref>https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/27/1853703/-Worse-Than-Sniffing-Hair</ref> Biden's campaign was near collapse in September 2019 when it became known that he is currently under investigation by Ukrainian prosecutors for misusing his power as U.S. Vice President to interfere in a [[money-laundering]] investigation of his son,<ref>https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1175392716110401543</ref> [[Hunter Biden]].<ref name="thehill.com">https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived</ref> Biden's family has a reputation for corruption.<ref>Alic, Haris (August 14, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/08/14/eight-things-biden-familys-culture-orruption/ Eight Things to Know About the Biden Family’s Culture of Corruption]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved August 15, 2019.</ref>

In the 1970s, twenty years after ''[[Brown vs. Board of Education]]'', Biden embraced the "[[separate but equal]]" doctrine. Biden told [[NPR]] that segregation was "a matter of black pride." Biden amassed a coalition of liberals and [[George Wallace]] supporters to oppose racial integration,<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/1975/12/21/archives/busing-the-solution-that-has-failed-to-solve.html</ref> and considered a [[Constitutional Amendment]] to outlaw court-ordered school desegregation.<ref>https://soundcloud.com/user-391839060/npr-1975-interview-with-sen-joe-biden</ref><ref>https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook-pm/2019/06/19/what-team-biden-says-about-joes-segregationist-comment-448372</ref><ref>https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/19/joe-biden-segregationist-senators-1370223</ref> Biden wrote an Amendment that gutted portions of the [[1964 Civil Rights Act]].

Biden authored the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.<ref name="nytimes.com">https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/22/us/politics/joe-bidens-role-in-90s-crime-law-could-haunt-any-presidential-bid.html</ref> His [[New Jim Crow]] bill incarcerated 2.5 million Black males, one-tenth of the Black male population,<ref>https://www.sentencingproject.org/news/could-joe-bidens-role-in-90s-crime-law-haunt-a-presidential-bid/</ref> destroying lives and families. The bill included the notoriously racist hundred-to-one sentencing disparity between crack and powder [[cocaine]],<ref name="c-span.org">https://www.c-span.org/video/?18528-1/violent-crime-control-act-1991</ref> and added more than forty federal [[death penalty]] crimes. Biden boasted “we do everything but hang people for jaywalking.”<ref name="books.google.com">''[https://books.google.com/books?id=AK_DAwAAQBAJ&lpg=PA141&dq=we%20do%20everything%20but%20hang%20people%20for%20jaywalking&pg=PA141#v=onepage&q=we%20do%20everything%20but%20hang%20people%20for%20jaywalking&f=false The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America]'', Naomi Murakawa, Oxford University Press, Jul 10, 2014, p. 141.</ref>

Biden's [[racist]], [[sexist]], and [[bigot]]ted handling of [[Anita Hill]] left him widely ostracized until Obama rehabilitated him as his vice presidential pick.,<ref>https://www.essence.com/news/politics/joe-biden-anita-hill-comment-2020-presidential-run/</ref><ref>https://youtu.be/sM19YOqs7hU</ref> He ha earned the nicknames of "Gropin' Joe" for his scandalous groping of women and even little girls, and ''QuidProQuo Joe'' for [[obstructing justice]] by firing a prosecutor and a Billion dollar payoff as a bribe. Multiple women have described and complained about his bizarre, unwanted touching of them and even sniffing their hair. His penchant for unwanted groping of women and young girls was ignored by party loyalists who made him the Democrat frontrunner.<ref>https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2015/02/18/what-are-we-going-to-do-about-creepy-uncle-joe-biden/</ref> ''[[The Washington Post]]'' reported that Biden likes to get nude in front of female [[Secret Service]] Agents when his wife isn't around.<ref>https://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/ct-joe-biden-media-balancing-20140804-column.html</ref> The female agents were afraid to report the incidents because, as Vice President, Biden couldn't be disciplined under [[civil service system]] rules and the women would be simply reassigned elsewhere - effectively demoted - a gross violation of women's equal rights and abuse of power inequities. Anita Hill found her private conversation with Biden shortly before entering the 2020 presidential race "deeply unsatisfying."<ref name="pbs.org">https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/anita-hill-says-recent-conversation-with-joe-biden-was-deeply-unsatisfying</ref>

Biden has embraced every wrong foreign policy view in existence since the 1980s, including supporting the [[Kremlin]] directed "nuclear freeze" movement, opposing the First Gulf War, supporting the 2003 Iraq War, and opposing the operation that killed Osama bin Laden.<ref>https://twitter.com/brithume/status/1121430027327954945</ref> On immigration, Biden claimed in 2014 that [[illegal immigrants]] were "already American citizens."<ref>Binder, John (April 25, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/25/flashback-joe-biden-in-2014-illegal-aliens-are-already-american-citizens/ Flashback–Joe Biden in 2014: Illegal Aliens are ‘Already American Citizens’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved April 25, 2019.</ref> He supports far-left, [[open borders]] positions on immigration.<ref>Arthur, Andrew R. (January 6, 2020). [https://cis.org/Arthur/Myth-Moderate-Joe-Biden The Myth of Moderate Joe Biden]. ''Center for Immigration Studies''. Retrieved January 6, 2020.</ref> He strongly supports the [[homosexual agenda]],<ref>Harvey, Linda (May 29, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/joe-biden-is-no-moderate-demorat-hes-an-lgbt-extremist Joe Biden is no ‘moderate Democrat.’ He’s an LGBT extremist]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved May 30, 2019.</ref> and he has flip-flopped on numerous issues including [[abortion]].<ref>Pollak, Joel B. (June 6, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/06/06/joe-biden-flip-flop-flip-abortion-hyde-amendment/ Joe Biden’s ‘Flip-Flop-Flip’ on Federal Funding for Abortion Is Latest Reversal]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 7, 2019.</ref> Biden has also made numerous false statements.<ref>Multiple references:
*Goodman, Alana (August 19, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/six-times-biden-described-major-events-in-his-life-that-never-happened Six times Biden described major events in his life that never happened]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved August 19, 2019.
*Boyle, Matthew (January 6, 2020). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/06/exclusive-trump-campaign-exposes-six-separate-foreign-policy-lies-by-democrat-joe-biden/ Exclusive — Trump Campaign Exposes Six Separate Foreign Policy Lies by Democrat Joe Biden]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved January 6, 2020.
*Kirkwood, R. Cort (January 7, 2020). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/34553-breitbart-details-six-foreign-policy-fibs-from-sleepy-joe Breitbart Details Six Foreign Policy Fibs From Sleepy Joe]. ''The New American''. Retrieved January 7, 2020.</ref>

Biden is the first [[Roman Catholic]] Vice President and is popularly known as a [[gaffe]] machine. As Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden was a strong supporter of [[President George W. Bush]] and helped shepherd the [[Iraq War]] resolution through Congress. Biden voted for the repeal of the Glass Steagall Act which led to the financial [[Crash of 2008]].

==2020 Presidential campaign==

===Policies===
What Biden proposes and vows is essentially not much different than radical Sanders, as in part they promote death and perversion, and implement politically correct policies and inculcate liberal "values," and increase dependence upon government from Pre-K on up, with this expensive expansion of government being funded via the economy that it will work to distress.

*LGBTQ
Biden promises to make enactment of the [[Equality Act]] during his first 100 days as President a top legislative priority, under which faithful Christians will be persecuted for obeying God and conscience. Biden states that while religious freedom is a fundamental American value, he opposes broad religious exemptions to existing nondiscrimination laws and policies across federal agencies and which he promises to reverse.

Biden intends to ban so-called “conversion therapy,” which is akin to Islamic outlawing of conversion, while promising to work to end suicide among young LGBTQ+ individuals. who are five times more likely to attempt suicide than their heterosexual peers.

Biden also charges that Donald Trump and Mike Pence have given "hate against LGBTQ+ individuals" safe harbor, and sites such policies are requiring transgender "women" to sleep and use bathrooms according to what they biologically are.

In addition, Biden promises to decriminalize HIV exposure and transmission laws, under which such failures as not informing a partner of their positive HIV status, or in donating blood, or intentionally attempting to transmit HIV is a crime. However, although sodomy is the means of HIV transmission in over 80% of cases among men (2017),<ref>[https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/gender/men/index.html HIV and Men] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved 03/11/20 </ref> yet Biden asserts that there is simply no “scientific basis” for HIV exposure and transmission laws.

Moreover, Biden believes every "transgender or non-binary person" should be able to change their "gender marker to “M,” “F,” or “X” on government identifications, passports, and other documentation," as well as use whatever facilities they feel corresponds to their gender identity. Including transgender students playing sports and using bathrooms and locker rooms.

Biden will also not permit adoption and foster care agencies that choose not to allow adoption by LGBTQ+ families to receive government funding.

Biden further promises to "ensure coverage for comprehensive care for LGBTQ+ Americans...to all appropriate health care treatments and resources...including gender confirmation surgery." As well as for HIV treatment and prevention, that of PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis) which cost about $2,000 a day, and would include coverage for lifetime treatment for HIV, which coast approximately 400,000 dollars, both of which Medicaid coverage presently includes.<ref>[https://peacebyjesuscom.blogspot.com/2019/10/negative-effects-of-homosexual.html Negative effects of homosexual relations] Retrieved 03/11/20</ref> Currently PrEP will be covered without cost-sharing starting in 2021.

Biden will also reverse the transgender military ban and rescind the prohibition against LGBTQ+ Muslims from entering the country, and permanently make upholding LGBTQ+ rights a priority of the foreign policy of the United States.

In addition, Biden intends to "advance culturally appropriate public information campaigns to promote LGBTQ+ human rights and reduce biases," and "develop and institute implicit bias training programs for federal workers and contractors to address discrimination based on race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression."
<ref>[https://joebiden.com/lgbtq/ Joe's Vision for America: LGBTQ+] Retrieved March 11, 2020</ref><ref>[http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3823392/posts Joe Biden's delusions: excerpts from his campaign's "vision" pages] Free Republic. Retrieved March 11, 2020</ref>

*Health care
Expanding free preventive care (contraception) and protecting abortion as a constitutional right [to murder], doing everything in his administration's power to stop state laws that hider that, including parental notification requirements, working to codify Roe v. Wade.

Restore federal funding for Planned Parenthood, preventing states from refusing Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood and other providers that refer for abortions,and from obtaining Title X funds.

Make health care a right. Ensure health care protections regardless of gender identity, or sexual orientation at taxpayer expense.

Expand access to mental health care at taxpayer expense.<ref>[https://joebiden.com/healthcare/ Joe's Vision for America: Health care] Retrieved March 11, 2020</ref>

===Criticism===
[[File:Biden-pervert-600x399.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Joementum: Protesters moved quickly to greet Biden on the campaign trail after his historic comeback.]]
:{{See also|Joseph Biden 2020 presidential campaign|United States presidential election, 2020‎‎|Biden-Ukraine scandal}}
Early polls in August 2015 showed Biden's favorability ratings beating both [[Sec. Hillary Clinton]] and [[Bernie Sanders]]. When ''[[The New York Times]]'' began investigating the [[Biden-Ukraine scandal]], Biden dropped out of the race in October 2015.<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/21/politics/joe-biden-not-running-2016-election/index.html</ref> ''The New York Times'' reported details of the scandal in December 2015.<ref>https://archive.is/EyhQ7</ref>

A CNN focus group of registered Democrats in March 2019 roundly rejected Biden as a serious contender.<ref>https://thehill.com/homenews/media/432611-cnn-focus-group-rejects-biden</ref> [[Biden's age]] and being out of touch seemed to be major factors. Biden launched his campaign anyway on April 25, 2019, by promoting the anti-Trump Charlottesville hoax and praising violent [[Antifa]] members.<ref>Multiple references:
*Scarry, Eddie (April 25, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/joe-biden-is-running-on-the-medias-charlottesville-lie-about-trump Joe Biden is running on the media's Charlottesville lie about Trump]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved April 25, 2019.
*Spiering, Charlie (April 25, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/25/joe-biden-announces-2020-campaign-warning-about-rise-of-white-nationalism/ Joe Biden Kicks Off 2020 Campaign by Spreading Charlottesville ‘Fine People’ Hoax]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved April 25, 2019.
*Shaw, C. Mitchell (April 26, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/32138-broad-brush-biden-attacks-thomas-jefferson-donald-trump-in-fallacious-video-announcing-candidacy Biden Attacks Thomas Jefferson, Donald Trump, Using Lies to Announce Candidacy]. ''The New American''. Retrieved April 27, 2019.
See also:
*Shaw, C. Mitchell (May 1, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/32173-fbi-report-shows-biden-s-courageous-americans-in-antifa-planned-an-armed-rebellion-at-u-s-border FBI Report Shows Biden's "Courageous Americans" in Antifa Planned an "Armed Rebellion" at U.S. Border]. ''The New American''. Retrieved May 1, 2019.</ref> The mother of Heather Heyer, who was killed by a lone nutcase in a melee between protesters, condemned Biden for exploiting her daughter's death for political gain.<ref>https://www.thedailybeast.com/heather-heyers-mom-susan-bro-breaks-silence-on-biden-invoking-charlottesville-for-2020</ref> Biden's promises his first act as president would be to defeat Donald Trump. While claiming to want to unite the country, Biden did the exact opposite in his statements.<ref>Shaw, C. Mitchell (May 1, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/32165-in-first-campaign-speech-biden-promises-to-unify-america-sows-seeds-of-division Biden Promises to Unify America, Sows Seeds of Division]. ''The New American''. Retrieved May 1, 2019.</ref> President Trump noted the rigged insider support again, this time for Biden over Bernie Sanders.<ref>https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2019/04/trump-tweet-crazy-bernie-vs-sleepy-joe.jpg</ref>

While Biden largely is running on Obama's legacy, Obama machine aides told reporters that Biden is "too old, too out of touch."<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/obama-thinks-bidens-closest-advisers-are-too-old-out-of-touch/</ref> Former Obama [[Defense Secretary]] [[Robert Gates]] said that Biden had {{quotebox|been wrong on nearly every major [[foreign policy]] and [[national security]] issue over the past four decades.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/obamas-former-defense-secretary-slams-bidens-foreign-policy-credentials-age/</ref>}}
[[File:2019.04.25-01.40-thepoliticalinsider-5cc1b8cdefd1a-768x676.jpg|left|thumb|350px|Joe Biden kicked off his presidential campaign with an easily debunked lie.]]
Within the first three weeks of his campaign, Biden twice denied assessments by the U.S. [[intelligence community]] of the threat posed by China to the U.S.<ref>Larsen, Emily (May 13, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/biden-downplays-china-again-after-bowing-to-pressure-last-time Biden downplays China again after bowing to pressure last time]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved May 13, 2019. See also:
*Tapscott, Mark (May 16, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/warners-tough-china-stance-points-to-biden-weakness_2926578.html Warner’s Tough China Stance Points to Biden’s Weakness]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved May 16, 2019.
*Caplan, Joshua (June 4, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2019/06/04/joe-biden-again-scoffs-at-asias-rise-what-are-we-worried-about/ Joe Biden Scoffs at Competition with ‘Asia’: ‘What Are We Worried About?’] ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 5, 2019.</ref> Biden's son, Hunter Biden, has extensive business ties<ref>https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/28/hunter-biden-china-business-drawing-new-scrutiny/</ref> with the Chinese military.

After the Democrat's First Debate Biden suffered an across the board decline in his support. He lost ground with white Democrats (from 32% to 18%) and voters of color (from 33% to 19%), among voters without a college degree (from 35% to 18%) and college graduates (from 28% to 20%), with both men (from 38% to 24%) and women (from 29% to 16%), and among voters under 50 years old (from 21% to 6%) as well as voters aged 50 and over (from 42% to 33%). Most of Biden’s lost support in these groups shifted almost equally toward [[Bernie Sanders]] and [[Elizabeth Warren]].

[[Progressive]]s claim at the age of 76, Biden "needs to grow" to overcome his racism and bigoted treatment of women.<ref>https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-black-female-democrats-may-respond-to-bidens-candidacy</ref> Anita Hill remarked that her private conversation with Joe Biden shortly before Biden entered the race was "deeply unsatisfying." Biden hired Bernie Sanders 2016 campaign press secretary, [[CNN]] political analyst Symone Sanders, as a senior adviser to play the [[race card]]. Symone Sanders donated money to [[Pete Buttigieg]] a month before taking the job with Biden. Symone Sanders is famous for her "we don't need white people" remark on CNN.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1rslAgK8uM&feature=youtu.be</ref>

Biden called the [[impeachment]] of [[Bill Clinton]] on 11 felony charges a "partisan lynching".<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/politics/biden-1998-impeach-kfile/index.html</ref>

Biden is known for flip-flopping his political positions.<ref>Pollak, Joel B. (May 28, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2019/05/28/joe-biden-fifty-years-flip-flops/ Pollak: Joe Biden’s Fifty Years of Flip-Flops]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved May 29, 2019.</ref> Commentator David Harsanyi remarked, {{quotebox|at his present political trajectory, Biden may end up promising to perform late-term abortions on transgendered Guatemalan migrants with his bare hands by the time the debate rolls around.<ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/27/first-debate-proved-democratic-party-gone-loco/</ref>}}

As a serial groper, Biden promised a "hands-on" approach to governing.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkREGzfSCAY</ref> With a reputation as a street fighter, Biden was KO'd in the first round of debates by a girl in a performance unworthy of even [[Dan Quayle]]. Reeling from the knock out blow, Biden warned his competitors that, after eight years in the Obama administration, he had the 'dirt' on all of them.<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/biden-warns-democratic-rivals-hes-got-all-this-information-about-other-peoples-pasts</ref> [[Michelle Obama]] refused to defend Biden's stance on segregation.<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/07/michelle-obama-silent-on-bidens-praise-for-segregationists/</ref> His poll numbers crashed after being outed as a racist.

Biden's campaign suffered a serious blow in September 2019 when it became known that he is currently under investigation by Ukrainian prosecutors for misusing his power as U.S. Vice President to interfere in a [[money-laundering]] investigation of his son,<ref>https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1175392716110401543</ref> [[Hunter Biden]].<ref name="thehill.com">https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived</ref> Biden displayed his contempt and disrespect when questioned at a townhall meeting, calling ordinary citizens and voters "damn liars."<ref>https://twitter.com/MollyNagle3/status/1202648690302869505</ref>

Biden stated he opposed moving the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem despite previously claiming to support such an action.<ref>Rambaran, Vivian (November 7, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bidens-opposition-to-moving-israel-embassy-in-direct-conflict-with-past-statements Biden's opposition to moving Israel embassy in direct conflict with past statements]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved November 7, 2019.</ref>

====Panicmongering====
One of Biden's first actions as Vice President was to set off a national panic over the [[Swine flu]] which the White House was forced to walk back. Biden warned Americans to stay out of confined spaces such as subways and airplanes.<ref>https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=7470281&page=1</ref>

===Biden-Ukraine collusion scandal===
[[File:Obama, Groppin Joe and Hunter.jpg|right|250px|thumb|Obama (left) appointed Joe Biden (center) to dole out $1 Billion to the Ukraine for which the Biden Family, thru Hunter Biden (right) received $50,000 a month in [[kickback]]s.<ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/23/like-russian-collusion-ukraine-hysteria-is-pure-projection-by-media-and-democrats/ https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/21/trump-ukraine-biden-1507051</ref> ]]
:{{See also|Biden-Ukraine scandal}}
As Vice President, Biden oversaw the disbursement of $1 billion allocated by the U.S. to the new government of Ukraine. In 2014, Biden's son [[Hunter Biden]], was appointed to the board of directors of Burisma Holdings, the largest oil and gas company in Ukraine. Hunter Biden was hired by [[Mykola Zlochevsky]], who served as Ukraine's ecology minister in the previous administration. Hunter Biden was paid $166,000 per month. The money was split with the nephew of [[Whitey Bulger]].

Zlochevsky came under investigation by the new administration for alleged embezzlement of $5 Billion while ecology minister. The prosecutor traced payments made to Hunter Biden. Vice President Biden threatened the new Ukrainian administration to withhold $1 Billion in U.S. allocated funds unless the prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden was fired.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/09/world/europe/corruption-ukraine-joe-biden-son-hunter-biden-ties.html</ref>

Biden bragged about having caused the firing of the [[Ukraine]] prosecutor to a [[CFR]] conference.

U.S. banking records show Hunter Biden's firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, received regular transfers — usually more than $166,000 a month — from Burisma from spring 2014 through fall 2015, during a period when Joe Biden was the main U.S. official dealing with Ukraine. Biden threatened Ukrainian President [[Petro Poroshenko]] that the [[Obama administration]] would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending Ukraine toward insolvency, if it didn't immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin who was investigating his son, Hunter. Biden recounted, {{quotebox|"'You’re not getting the billion'. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money'...Well, [SOB], he got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time."<ref name="thehill.com">https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived</ref><ref>https://www.cfr.org/event/foreign-affairs-issue-launch-former-vice-president-joe-biden</ref>}}
Yuriy Lutsenko, who replaced Shokin as the prosecutor looking into Burisma, said the evidence in the Burisma case he'd like to present to William Barr, particularly the vice president's intervention.

Between April 2014 and October 2015, more than $3 million was paid out by Burisma to an account linked to Biden's and Devon Archer's Rosemont Seneca firm, according to the financial records placed in a federal court file in Manhattan in another case against Archer. The bank records show that, on most months when Burisma money flowed, two wire transfers of $83,333.33 each were sent to the Rosemont Seneca–connected account on the same day. The same Rosemont Seneca–linked account typically then paid Hunter Biden one or more payments ranging from $5,000 to $25,000 each. Ukrainian prosecutors reviewed internal company documents and wanted to interview Hunter Biden and Archer about why they had received such payments, but couldn't because of Joe Biden's intervention.

On September 4, 2019, former Prosecutor General [[Victor Shokin]] made a sworn affidavit outlining Joe Biden's shakedown.<ref>https://www.scribd.com/document/427618359/Shokin-Statement</ref>

Biden was needed for [[Deep State coup 2.0]]. When he was no longer needed he was dispatched to the ash-heap of history.
[[File:Biden blood eye.jpg|x180px|right|thumb|Many have expressed concern if Biden is up to the rigors of campaigning, let alone the duties of office.]]

===Eric Ciaramella===
[[Deep State]] informant [[Eric Ciaramella]] was assigned to the Obama [[White House]] by [[Russia collusion hoax]] mastermind [[John Brennan]]..He was detailed to the staff of [[National Security Council]] [[Susan Rice]] and Vice President [[Joe Biden]].<ref>http://www.ukrweekly.com/uwwp/wp-content/uploads/current-pdf/The_Ukrainian_Weekly_2015-47.pdf</ref> Ciaramella worked on Ukrainian issues for Biden in 2015 and 2016 during the time Biden was the "point man" handing out U.S. taxpayer cash to Ukraine.

Ciaramella worked with [[Democratic National Committee]] operative [[Alexandra Chalupa]] to dig up dirt on the [[2016 Trump campaign|Trump campaign]] during the [[2016 presidential election]]. Ciarmella invited Chalupa into the [[Obama]] White House for meetings.<ref>https://archive.usukraine.org/coalition/report-wh-press-conf-events.shtml</ref> Chalupa a key figure behind manufacturing the [[Russia collusion hoax]] and in the [[Ukrainian collusion scandal]] with the [[Atlantic Council]] and [[Crowdstrike]]. Ciaramella set the Trump [[impeachment inquiry]] in motion.

In May 2017, Ciaramella was instrumental in helping generate the “Putin fired Comey” narrative. A Ciaramella email the day after Comey's firing ended up in the media, which is reported to have allegedly called Comey “crazy, a real nut job.” Ciaramella is said to have argued that “[[President Putin]] suggested that President Trump fire Comey.” In the days after Comey’s firing, this presidential action was used to further political and media calls for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate supposed ‘Russia collusion.’ Ciaramella was dismissed from the Trump White House in June 2917 and accused of illegal [[leak]]s and working against the interests of the [[United States]] government. Ciaramella returned to the CIA.

In August 2019 The Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG), [[Michael Atkinson]], referred to Ciaramella as one who has
:“some indicia of an arguable political bias … in favor of a rival political candidate"
The ICIG was severely criticized for changing the rules at the last minute and allowing a third-party "[[whistleblower]]" [[hearsay]] complaint.

===Primaries===
With the [[Impeachment sham]] over, Biden's usefulness was over, too. Biden's poor finish in the Iowa caucus demonstrated to many that he never was a viable candidate, and that support for his campaign was not very deep.

The Democrats rigged Iowa caucus fiasco to [[Stop Bernie]] landed Biden in fourth place. Many days after the charade, Biden press spokesperson Symone Sanders, speaking on behalf of the campaign, refused to officially acknowledge if the DNC's posted results were legitimate.<ref>https://hotair.com/archives/john-s-2/2020/02/05/biden-spokesperson-symone-sanders-refuses-say-results-iowa-caucus-legitimate/</ref> Biden himself became increasingly testy over questions concerning his durability as a candidate. At a campaign event in Hampton, [[New Hampshire]] on February 9, when asked by a female college student if he could turn his campaign around after Iowa, Biden snapped and called her "a lying dog-faced pony soldier."<ref>https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/02/biden-lashes-out-at-female-new-hampshire-voter-asking-about-his-poor-performance-in-iowa-youre-a-lying-dog-faced-pony-soldier-video/</ref> This came days after Biden belittled another woman asking about his policy on coal. Such incidents only increased doubts about Biden's mental fitness to be President.

====Iowa caucuses====
Biden ran forth, as expected.

====New Hampshire primary====
Biden ran fifth in a filed of ten, slightly worse than expected.

====Nevada caucuses====
Biden ran second with 17% to Sanders, who failed to achieve a majority; the other 49% was spread among 5 remaining candidates.

====Super Tuesday - March 3, 2020====
:{{See also|Bernie Derangement Syndrome|Joe Biden's mental decline}}
Biden's campaign donations dried up as corruption allegations were revealed in the [[Ukrainegate scandal]] during the Democrats' impeachment sham, and he didn't spend anytime or money in any Super Tuesday state. In reaction to Bernie's sweep of early primaries, the DNC establishment's [[Stop Bernie]] movement went into full swing.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/27/us/politics/democratic-superdelegates.html</ref> 1344 delegates were up for grabs on Super Tuesday with an unknown number to win as [[Superdelegates]] have yet to decide to intervention was necessary to Stop Bernie and thwart the will of the people.<ref>.https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/31/dnc-superdelegates-110083</ref> Former DNC chair [[Donna Brazile]] scolded [[RNC]] chair Ronna McDaniel to "stay the hell out" for publicly commenting on DNC internal delegate vote rigging processes and speaking "Russian talking points". Steyer was out on Friday, Buttigieg cut a deal on Sunday, and both Klobuchar and [[Beto O'Rourke|Beto]] backed Biden on Monday. In accepting Buttigieg's endorsement, Biden who at the time was under investigation in the Ukrainegate scandal,<ref>https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/ukraine-court-forces-probe-into-biden-role-in-firing-of-prosecutor-viktor-shokin/2020/02/27/92710222-5983-11ea-8efd-0f904bdd8057_story.html</ref> told a throng of adoring Democrats that Buttigieg reminded him of his son.<ref>https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/03/03/he-reminds-me-of-my-son-biden-buttigieg-love-fest-joined-by-beto-klobuchar-in-last-minute-panic-to-stop-bernie-893278</ref> Biden's son, [[Hunter Biden]], was accused of [[money laundering]] millions of dollars from the Ukrainian firm [[Burisma]] for the Biden family and asked an Arkansas court to delay disclosing how much money he made from Burisma and Chinese sources in a paternity suit until after Super Tuesday.<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/hunter-biden-wants-to-delay-child-support-deposition-until-after-key-primaries</ref> The court denied the request.<ref>https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/feb/27/judge-tells-hunter-biden-to-show-up-nex/?news-arkansas#.XlfN9s2Jm-Y.twitter</ref>

On election eve MSNBC reported that former President Obama confirmed 'the signal has been sent in the past 36 hours' to engage the [[Stop Bernie movement]].<ref>https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1234660535079067649?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw</ref> Biden encouraged voters to get out for 'Super Thursday.'<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5y3XHIyLRM</ref>

With the 100% of the popular vote counted at 12:00 PM EST Wednesday, Democrats had not yet published final allocation of 444 delegates from California and Texas.<ref>https://www.politico.com/2020-election/delegate-count-tracker-democratic-primary/</ref> Partial results posted by the DNC indicated Biden had 453 delegates, Sanders 382, Warren 50, and [[Gabbard]] 1. Bloomberg quit, accounting for 46 [[Zombie]] delegates, Buttigieg 26, and Klobuchar 7. With the insiders work done, the likelihood of moving the goalposts to allow Superdelegates to vote in the first round was reduced. Meanwhile Biden and the [[liberal media]] took a victory lap.

Far left [[animal rights]]/[[Green New Deal|cow flatulence]] activists Sarah Segal and Ashley Froud disrupted Biden's victory speech,<ref>https://monkeyviral.com/what-is-let-dairy-die-and-why-is-it-all-over-the-democratic-race/</ref><ref>https://www.trendsmap.com/twitter/tweet/1235047072421703680</ref> Bernie trashed Biden on the [[Iraq War]] and his support for [[NAFTA]] trade deals which destroyed [[middle class]] America and manufacturing jobs. Warren ran 3rd in her home state of [[Massachusetts]]. In 10 debate appearances since June 2019, [[Elizabeth Warren]] was never asked once by the [[fake news]] media complex about her false claims of [[Native American]] heritage.<ref>https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/03/06/warren-went-all-10-debates-without-one-question-about-her-native-american-claims-894450</ref>

====Texas primary====
Five days after the voting, Dallas County Elections Administrator discovered her office did not count about 10% of the total ballots that voters cast in [[Texas]]' Super Tuesday primary.<ref>https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/politics/dallas-county-asks-to-recount-election-after-44-thumb-drives-discovered/287-84e19400-81bc-4256-bcb3-e25df380d699</ref> She discovered 44 thumb drives containing ballots that were not included in the final results. Biden was alleged to have been the winner.

Biden nonetheless was declared the winner, and without Texas Sanders' hopes evaporated. The scandal, of course, garnered no national media coverage.

====Michigan and the blue collar working class vote====
At a [[Michigan]] autoplant, an autoworker asked about Biden's promise to take [[gun]]s away and put [[Beto O'Rourke]] in charge of confiscation. The discussion got heated, Biden crouched up close and wagged his finger in the face of a [[labor union]] member and traditional Democrat voter. The voter told Biden he didn't appreciated Biden sticking his finger in his face and Biden's [[bullying]] tactics. Biden told the voter, "you're full of s---",<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/youre-full-of-shit-biden-snaps-at-voter-over-second-amendment</ref> and threatened, "you wanna take this outside?" Biden's handlers intervened and whisked Biden away.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTLuFlHm4c8&feature=youtu.be</ref>

The contest in Michigan, which Sanders won in 2016, is said to be test of who commands the blue collar and [[working class] vote, Biden or Sanders. Biden was greeted at the auto plant with cheers of “Trump! Trump! Trump!”'<ref>https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/03/trump-trump-trump-trump-detroit-auto-workers-cheer-president-trump-during-joe-bidens-plant-visit/</ref>

===Debates===
Biden attempted to clarify some of his positions on segregation and race in the pre-primary Third Debate. By the time he finished he had insinuated that black parents didn’t know how to raise their children.<ref>https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2019/09/13/bidens-answer-inequality-one-explicitly-racist-moments-time-democratic-debate/</ref>
{{quotebox|'''Linsey Davis:''' Mr. Vice President, I want to talk to you about inequality in schools and race. In a conversation about how to deal with segregation in schools back in 1975, you told a reporter, “I don’t feel responsible for the sins of my father and grandfather. I feel responsible for what the situation is today, for the sins of my own generation, and I’ll be damned if I feel responsible to pay for what happened 300 years ago.” You said that some 40 years ago, but as you stand here tonight, what responsibility do you think that Americans need to take to repair the legacy of slavery in our country?

'''Joe Biden:''' Well, they have to deal with the … Look, there is institutional segregation in this country. And from the time I got involved, I started dealing with that. Redlining, banks, making sure that we are in a position where—

Look, we talk about education. I propose that what we take is those very poor schools, the Title 1 schools, triple the amount of money we spend from $15 to $45 billion a year. Give every single teacher a raise to the equal of … A raise of getting out of the $60,000 level.

No. 2, make sure that we bring in to the help with the stud—the teachers deal with the problems that come from home. The problems that come from home, we need… We have one school psychologist for every 1,500 kids in America today. It’s crazy. The teachers are required—I’m married to a teacher. My deceased wife is a teacher. They have every problem coming to them.

Make sure that every single child does, in fact, have three, four, and five-year-olds go to school. School! Not day care, school. We bring social workers into homes of parents to help them deal with how to raise their children. It’s not that they don’t want to help. They don’t know what— They don’t know what quite what to do. Play the radio. Make sure the television—excuse me, make sure you have the record player on at night. The phone—make sure the kids hear words. A kid coming from a very poor school—er, a very poor background will hear 4 million words fewer spoken by the time they get there.

'''Davis:''' Thank you, Mr. Vice President.

'''Biden:''' No, I’m going to go like the rest of them do, twice over, OK? Because here’s the deal. The deal is that we’ve got this a little backwards. And by the way, in Venezuela, we should be allowing people to come here from [[Venezuela]]. I know [[Nikolas Maduro|Maduro]]. I’ve confronted Maduro. No. 2, you talk about the need to do something in Latin America. I’m the guy that came up with $740 million to see to it those three countries, in fact, change their system so people don’t have to chance to leave. You’re all acting like we just discovered this yesterday! Thank you very much.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7Tpx5WMFio&feature=youtu.be</ref>}}
Even ''[[The Young Turks]]'' slammed Biden for his racist answer in blaming parents for not knowing how to raise their children rather than answering question.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZzt4HNR1bE</ref>

===Racism===
In addition to Biden's longstanding alliance with fellow Democrat segregationists in the U.S. Senate, Biden is known for a history of making racially insensitive remarks.

====Segregation====
[[File:Biden segregation.png 1718483346.png|left|350px|thumb|Biden called segregation "a matter of Black pride" and pushed for a [[Constitutional Amendment]] to outlaw Court ordered de-segregation.<ref name="politico.com">https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/joe-biden-integration-school-busing-120968_full.html</ref>]]
Biden reopened the debate over the crimes of the Democrats [[slave power]]<ref name="zerohedge.com">https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-20/biden-doubles-down-after-reminding-everyone-democrats-owned-slaves</ref> at a time some far leftists were pushing for [[slave reparations]].<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/05/30/book-joe-biden-1973-lectured-cleveland-what-good-negro/</ref> In 1972 Biden argued that segregation was good for Blacks and was what they wanted. {{Quotebox|“I think the concept of busing … that we are going to [[integrate]] people so that they all have the same access and they learn to grow up with one another and all the rest, is a rejection of the whole movement of black pride, a rejection of the entire black awareness concept, where black is beautiful, black culture should be studied; and the cultural awareness of the importance of their own identity, their own individuality.”<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/read-the-transcript-of-the-october-1975-npr-interview-with-sens-joe-biden-and-edward-brooke</ref>}} Biden led a coalition of segregationists that was opposed by Republican Sen. [[Edward Brooke]], the first [[African American]] senator elected since Democrats forced the end of [[Reconstruction]] after the [[American Civil War|Civil War]]. National Public Radio's David Ensor asked Biden, "What about a constitutional amendment? Isn’t that what you’re gonna have to end up supporting if you want to stop court ordered busing, too?" Biden responded, {{Quotebox|"That would clearly do it. I’m hopeful, and I have — now that I have some sort of new allies in this area, it’s become respectable now for [[liberal]]s to at least say publicly what they’ve been saying in private, that busing doesn’t work. We are trying to figure out whether or not we can come up with an innovative piece of legislation which would limit the remedy, and I don’t — honestly don’t know whether we can come up with something constitutional. And if we can’t, I will not in an attempt to eliminate busing violate the Constitution. I won’t do that. The only way, if I’m gonna go at it, I’m gonna go at it through a Constitutional Amendment if it can’t be done through a piece of legislation."}} Ensor reported that Biden proposed renewing segregation because busing wasn't working, and Biden was afraid that older liberal colleagues were blind to how Black separatists felt about their children being bused to [[white]] schools. {{Quotebox|"There are those of we [[social experiment|social planner]]s who think somehow that if we just [[subrogate]] man’s individual characteristics and traits by making sure that a presently heterogeneous society becomes a totally homogeneous society, that somehow we’re going to solve our social ills. Quite to the contrary."}}

Title VI of the [[1964 Civil Rights Act]] prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.<ref>https://quizlet.com/45411923/ethical-and-legal-issues-2-flash-cards/</ref> By 1975, Biden authored an amendment to gut Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. ''[[Politico]]'' writes of the whole sordid affair, {{quotebox|Biden morphed into a leading anti-busing crusader—all the while continuing to insist that he supported the goal of school desegregation, he only opposed busing as the means to achieve that end. This stance, which many of Biden’s liberal and moderate colleagues also held, was clever but disingenuous. It enabled Biden to choose votes over principles, while acting as if he was not doing so....In a seminal moment, the Senate thus turned against desegregation. The Senate had supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act, [[1965 Voting Rights Act]] and 1968 Fair Housing Act....the Senate remained the last bastion for those who supported strong integration policies. Biden stormed that bastion...<ref name="politico.com">https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/joe-biden-integration-school-busing-120968_full.html</ref>}} Sen. James Abourezk of [[South Dakota]] related how Biden reacted when Abrourezek tried to block the amendment: {{quotebox|‘Abourezk, you **********, if I ever vote for another one of your bills, it'll be a cold day in hell.'

‘Calm down, Joe,' I told him, ‘You're eventually gonna thank me for doing this.'

‘Like hell I will you dirty *******.'

A few days later, Biden came into the scheduled committee meeting, this time with a broad, friendly grin aimed directly at me.

‘Jesus, Abourezk, you were right,' he said. ‘I am gonna thank you. You should see the Delaware newspapers—big front-page headlines saying, ‘Biden Battles Liberals in Washington.' He was unabashedly elated. ‘They love me back home, how did you know this would happen?'<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/biden-exploded-at-dem-colleague-over-busing-called-him-dirty-bastard/</ref>}} Republican Sen. [[Edward Brooke]], the first black senator ever to be popularly elected, called Biden's amendment “the greatest symbolic defeat for [[civil rights]] since 1964.” Brooke accused Biden of leading an assault on integration.

Prof. Ronnie Dunn said opposition to busing was motivated by [[racism]] and that without the court-ordered policy Biden probably would not have become vice president in 2009. “What I find ironic is that [Biden] was the vice president under a president who, if it hadn’t been for the social interaction that occurred during the era of busing, I argue we likely would not have seen the election of Barack Obama." Dunn, an Urban Studies professor at Cleveland State University and author of the book ''Boycotts, Busing, & Beyond'', said Biden made the case in favor of maintaining segregation. "That was an argument against desegregation.” Dunn said Biden must address the issue if he runs for president. “People have to be held accountable."<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/joe-biden-embraced-segregation-in-1975-claiming-it-was-a-matter-of-black-pride</ref>

Biden's opposition to integration didn't stop there. ''HuffPo'' reported: {{quotebox|In 1977, two black men nominated for key Justice Department posts by [[President Jimmy Carter]] easily won approval from the Senate Judiciary Committee. After confirmation by the full Senate, Drew Days III became the nation’s first black head of the department’s civil rights division and Wade McCree became the second black solicitor general. Only one member of the committee voted against them. It wasn’t segregationists [[Strom Thurmond]] (R-S.C.) or James Eastland (D-Miss.). It wasn’t even former [[Ku Klux Klan]] member [[Robert Byrd]] (D-W.Va.). The lone Judiciary Committee vote against the two men was Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.).<ref>https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-busing-nominees_n_5ca3c03de4b03174b92904f7</ref>}}

In 1981 Biden said in a Senate hearing, “sometimes even [[George Wallace]] is right about some things.” Wallace is famous for saying in 1963, “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.”<ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/09/biden-sometimes-even-george-wallace-is-right/</ref>

In a farewell address to retiring Democrat segregationist Sen. John Stennis in 1986 Biden said: {{quotebox|"To think that I would be one day on the floor of the United States Senate, being paid such accolades by such a man of character and courage as John Stennis is beyond my wildest dreams. And I mean that sincerely."<ref>https://youtu.be/9X6Y2CLqgDM</ref>}}

When Biden announced his candidacy ''Politico'' attempted to poo-poo and explain away Biden and liberal Democrat racism with a back-handed slap at [[school vouchers]] for minority students, which liberal elites have strenuously opposed ever since the Biden Amendment passed:
{{quotebox|School desegregation, as part of a broader suite of civil rights reforms, was once as a vital component of the Democratic Party platform. Yet since the 1970s, Democrats, in the face of concerted white backlash, have largely accommodated themselves to increasing segregation in public schools across the nation. Party leaders, even the most progressive among them, rarely propose serious solutions to this vexing problem. A sincere critique of Biden’s busing record would require a broader reckoning of the Democratic Party’s—and by extension the nation’s—abandonment of this central goal of the [[civil rights movement]]. And it’s hard to see that happening anytime soon.<ref>https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/05/05/joe-biden-busing-problem-226791</ref>}}

Sen. [[Cory Booker]] of [[New Jersey]] condemned the [[2020 Democrat primary]] frontrunner at the Juneteenth annual commemoration of [[Republican]] [[Abraham Lincoln]] ending [[slavery]] in the United States. {{quotebox|You don’t joke about calling black men 'boys'...frankly, I’m disappointed that he hasn’t issued an immediate apology for the pain his words are dredging up for many Americans. He should.<ref name="zerohedge.com">https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-20/biden-doubles-down-after-reminding-everyone-democrats-owned-slaves</ref>}}

====Superpredators====
In a 1993 Senate floor speech, Biden warned of "predators on our streets" who were "beyond the pale" and said they must be cordoned off from the rest of society because the justice system did not know how to rehabilitate them. Biden described a {{quotebox|"cadre of young people, tens of thousands of them, born out of wedlock, without parents, without supervision, without any structure, without any conscience developing because they literally ... because they literally have not been socialized, they literally have not had an opportunity."}} Biden went on in the same breath, {{quotebox|"It doesn't matter whether or not the person that is accosting your son or daughter or my son or daughter, my wife, your husband, my mother, your parents, it doesn't matter whether or not they were deprived as a youth. It doesn't matter whether or not they had no background that enabled them to become socialized into the fabric of society. It doesn't matter whether or not they're the victims of society. The end result is they're about to knock my mother on the head with a lead pipe, shoot my sister, beat up my wife, take on my sons."}} Biden said, that he didn't care "why someone is a malefactor in society" and that criminals needed to be "away from my mother, your husband, our families." Biden added "we should focus on them now" because "if we don't, they will, or a portion of them, will become the predators 15 years from now."

Biden's 1993 "predator" remarks are similar to comments then made by first lady [[Hillary Clinton]] where she warned of "Superpredators" who had "no conscience, no empathy" and who need to be brought "to heel."

====Biden Crime Bill====
:{{Main article|The New Jim Crow}}
Biden was a staunch opponent of school desegregation in the 1970s and leading crusader for mass incarceration in the 1980s and 1990s. Biden described [[African American]] felons in the aftermath of the Central Park 5 jogger case as 'predators' too [[sociopath]]ic to rehabilitate,<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/07/politics/biden-1993-speech-predators/index.html</ref> and [[white supremacist]] senators as his friends.

Biden boasts as one of his greatest legislative achievements passage of the 1994 Crime bill which locked up 10% of the Black adult male population of the United States.<ref name="nytimes.com"/><ref>http://www.prisonpolicy.org/research/incarceration_rates_growth_causes/</ref>

When [[President George H.W. Bush]] asked for a record increase in funding to fight the [[War on Drugs]], Biden told a TV interviewer {{Quotebox|"In a nutshell, the President's plan does not include enough police officers to catch the violent thugs, enough prosecutors to convict them, enough judges to sentence them or enough prison cells to put them away for a long time."<ref>http://articles.latimes.com/1989-09-06/news/mn-1646_1_drug-war</ref><ref>http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/12/first-step-act-skepticism.html</ref>}} [[File:1994 Superpredator Act.jpg|right|350px|thumb|The Superpredator Act of 1994. Feinstein, Kerry and Biden are clearly visible with President Clinton. The bill is known for its sentencing disparities which led to mass incarceration of Blacks.<ref>https://fair.org/home/senate-crime-bill-unscrutinized-by-the-press/</ref>]] Biden, [[Ted Kennedy]], and [[Strom Thurmond]] worked on proposals that raised maximum penalties, removed a directive requiring the US Sentencing Commission to take into account prison capacity, and created the cabinet-level “drug czar” position. In 1984, they passed the Comprehensive Crime Control Act, which, among other things, abolished [[parole]], imposed a less generous cap on “good time” sentence reductions, and allowed the Sentencing Commission to issue more punitive guidelines.

Biden bragged on the Senate floor that it was under his and Thurmond's leadership that Congress passed a law sending anyone caught with a rock of cocaine the size of a quarter to jail for a minimum of five years - the notoriously racist hundred-to-one sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine. In the same speech Biden took credit for [[civil asset forfeiture]] and seizure laws, and demanded to know why [[Papa Bush]] hadn't sentenced more drug dealers to life in prison or exercise the [[death penalty]] once Congress had given him that power.<ref name="c-span.org"/>

Biden's version of a new crime bill added more than forty crimes that would be eligible for the [[death penalty]]. Biden boasted “we do everything but hang people for jaywalking.”<ref name="books.google.com"/> The [[NAACP]] and other groups lobbied against the bill.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/27/us/civil-libertarians-go-after-crime-bills.html</ref> Although the 1991 crime bill was defeated by Republicans, the 1994 Biden/Clinton crime bill was passed.<ref>''[https://books.google.com/books?id=SGUJBAAAQBAJ&lpg=PT142&dq=biden%20strongly%20believes%20the%20administration%20needs%20to%20seize%20control%20of%20the%20issue%20by%20upping%20the%20ante&pg=PT142#v=onepage&q=biden%20strongly%20believes%20the%20administration%20needs%20to%20seize%20control%20of%20the%20issue%20by%20upping%20the%20ante&f=false The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America]'', Naomi Murakawa.</ref>

By 2001, the United States had the highest rate of incarceration in the world. [[Human Rights Watch]] reported that in seven states, African Americans constituted 80 to 90 percent of all drug offenders even though they were no more likely than whites to use or sell illegal drugs. Prison admissions for drug offenses reached a level in 2000 for African Americans more than 26 times the level they had been under [[Ronald Reagan]].<ref>[https://www.thenation.com/article/hillary-clinton-does-not-deserve-black-peoples-votes/ Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote], Michelle Alexander, ''The Nation'', February 10, 2016</ref> Biden's "social planning" had proven effective.

In May 2019 journalist and historian Shaun King observed, {{Quotebox|I’ve heard a very dangerous lie being told about how the systems of mass incarceration were built in this nation. I didn’t expect to have to respond this way because I didn’t expect Joe Biden to lie about the 1994 Crime Bill. He wrote it. He fought for it. And the results were devastating. Every single expert on this topic agrees. This week Joe Biden took the stance that not only is he not sorry for the Crime Bill, but that it didn’t even increase mass incarceration. And it’s shameful because either he’s willfully lying, which is horrible, or he’s just plain ignorant about the true impact of the bill, which is also horrible. Either way, I have a major problem with it because these laws are still in effect and they are doing damage in our communities every single day, 24 hours a day.<ref>https://www.facebook.com/shaunking/videos/688203931610804/</ref>}}

The Leftist ''Jacobin'' magazine summed up Biden's record: {{Quotebox|"It’s not as if Biden didn’t know what he was doing.... He just didn’t care. Biden had made a calculated decision that the elections he would win were worth the damage he inflicted.... But even if Biden has subsequently learned the error of his ways, the rank cynicism and callousness involved in his two-decade-long championing of carceral policies should be more than enough to give anyone pause about his qualities as a leader, let alone a [[progressive]] one."<ref>https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/08/biden-crime-mass-incarceration-police-prisons</ref>}}

====Mass incarceration====
Sen. [[Cory Booker]] told the the NAACP convention in [[Detroit]] in response to another so-called "criminal justice reform" proposal by Biden: {{quotebox|For a guy who helped to be an architect of mass incarceration, this in an inadequate solution to what is a raging crisis in our country.<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/cory-booker-calls-joe-biden-an-architect-of-mass-incarceration</ref>}}

Biden now advocates for a man sentenced to prison to choose to be incarcerated in a women's prison.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0ovc0BAUYo&feature=youtu.be</ref>

====Sexual harassment====
[[File:Creepy Uncle Joe.jpg|left|thumb|350px|''The Washington Post'' calls Biden "Creepy Uncle Joe" for his habit of groping wives and children.]]
''See also:'' [[Creepy Uncle Joe]]
According to the ''[[Washington Post]]'', female [[Secret Service]] agents did not want to work with Biden. Whenever Biden's wife was not home, Biden stripped naked. The female Secret Service agents where afraid to report incidents to their superiors in fear for their jobs.<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2015/02/18/what-are-we-going-to-do-about-creepy-uncle-joe-biden/?utm_term=.b4c0f48017a7 What are we going to do about Creepy Uncle Joe Biden?, ''WaPo'']</ref> In the days just prior to his announcement to run, no less than 8 women of the [[MeToo movement]] complained of Biden's inappropriate grabbing and touching. Even Biden's wife, Jill, has been visibly seen creeped-out by Biden's awkward attempts at public displays of affection.<ref>https://thepoliticalinsider.com/watch-even-joe-bidens-wife-wants-him-to-keep-his-hands-to-himself/</ref> Biden responded by admitting America has become more conservative and then mocked critics and victims in a speech before firefighters. Biden told ''[[The View]]'' he needs to be more "cognizant" about groping women and children.<ref>https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/joe-biden-joins-view-president-trump-beat-easily/story?id=62638945</ref> Even Rep. [[Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez]] remained unconvinced of Biden's alleged flip on his touchy-feelly approach to women in politics.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/ocasio-cortez-bidens-answers-on-touching-havent-convinced-all-women/</ref>

For years, Biden failed to apologize to [[Anita Hill]] personally for the way she was treated when she testified in the 1991 confirmation of [[Clarence Thomas]]..<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/26/us/politics/anita-hill-biden-clarence-thomas.html</ref><ref>https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/440833-biden-on-anita-hill-i-dont-think-i-treated-her-badly</ref><ref>https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/26/biden-apology-accusers-anita-hill-1290843</ref><ref>https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2019/apr/26/trump-news-today-live-biden-anita-hill-view-2020-democrats-updates-us-politics</ref>

Upon his announcement Biden immediately secured the endorsement of prominent sleaze lawyer and former Democratic hopeful [[Michael Avenatti]]. Avenatti shares many of Biden's core precepts, including his racist agenda remarking that the Democratic nominee "had better be a white male."<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/joe-biden-michael-avenatti/</ref> Avenatti, a chief critic of President Trump, dropped out of the race after being arrested for felonious assault and battery on a woman and extortion. An unrepentant racist, Biden says immigrants should have to speak [[English]].<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kgxq3Va9Lpc&feature=youtu.be</ref>

Biden said enshrining [[LGBT+]] protections into labor and civil rights laws would be his priority. Passing the [[Equality Act]] “will be the first thing” he would ask for.<ref>https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/joe-biden-gay-waiter-comments-democratic-election-seattle-medina-a8981351.html</ref>

Campaign staffers physically block reporters when asking Biden questions, then photographing anyone who objects.

Biden's mental faculties have been called into question: he confused UK prime minister [[Theresa May]] with [[Margaret Thatcher]].<ref>https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1123250/theresa-may-trump-news-margaret-thatcher-joe-biden-us-president-2020</ref> According to mental health experts, Biden's slurring of words and phrases and verbal inarticulateness marks a decline in mental abilities.

===Trump-Russia conspiracy===
[[File:Biden and Flood.jpg|right|350px|thumb|Biden and Flood with their wives.<ref>[https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/02/loaded-for-guccifer-aims-for-a-romanian-guccifer-2-0/ Say “Hi” To Guccifer 2.0], Adam Carter, ''Disobedient Media'', February 24, 2018.</ref>]]
:{{See also|Hillary Clinton email scandal|Trump-Russia collusion hoax}}
[[Warren Flood]] was Vice President Biden's information technology ([[IT]]) director at the [[White House]].

According to the metadata, on June 15, 2016, three days after [[Julian Assange]] announced [[WikiLeaks]] was about to publish “emails related to Hillary Clinton,” the first Guccifer 2.0 document was created by Warren Flood on the East coast at 13:38 EDT, and was modified thirty minutes later by [[Феликс Эдмундович]], or Felix Edmunovich, the Russian patronymic of [[Felix Edmunovich Dzerzhinsky]],<ref>In Russian, the middle name is taken from the father, and the last name from the grandfather. Use of a patronymic expresses deep affection and emotion ([[Vladimir Ilyich]] or [[Joseph Vissarionovich]], for example) and is generally reserved for family members or close friends.</ref> founder of the [[KGB]] - a blatantly amateurish attempt to create [[Russia]]n fingerprints.

A document that Warren Flood authored in 2008, and was attached to one of [[John Podesta]]'s leaked emails, was used by Guccifer 2.0 as a template into which he then copied the contents of the DNC's ''Trump Opposition Research'' document. It was copied from this file: https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/fileid/26562/7365 which is also attached to [https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/26562 this leaked email]. It is Flood's document that the "CONFIDENTIAL" text in the background derives from.

Guccifer 2.0 was a [[2016 Hillary Clinton campaign]] [[false flag]] operation set up to discredit the [[DNC]] revelations at [[Wikileaks]]. Adam Carter writes, {{quotebox|"one particular group would have been particularly desperate precisely at that time, for the emergence of a narrative about Russian hackers to discredit proper leaks / justify claims that all leaks are 'probably doctored' and they will have very likely known [Warren] Flood too. That group is the Clinton Campaign. As of June 12th, [2016] they were in a position where [[Julian Assange]] had just announced WikiLeaks' upcoming release of [[Hillary Clinton email scandal|Hillary's emails]], she was still under [[FBI]] investigation, and [[Trump]] was attacking Hillary for her use of a private server with his supporters frequently chanting "lock her up!" at rallies. The campaign was in a desperate position and really needed something similar to a Russian hacker narrative and one where they would be fortunate to have a seemingly clumsy hacker that leaves lots of 'fingerprints' tainting files and bringing the reputation of leaks into question... Sure enough, 2-3 days later, Guccifer2.0 - the world's weirdest hacker - was spawned and started telling lies in an effort to attribute himself to the malware discoveries, etc."<ref>http://g-2.spac/#7</ref>}}

[[National Security Advisor]] [[Susan Rice]] sent an email to herself about a secret [[Oval Office]] meeting where the ''[[Clinton-Steele dossier]]'' was discussed.<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/donald-trump-intelligence-report-russia/index.html</ref><ref>https://apnews.com/152579d488a740b2a8d39fbe2f34506d</ref><ref>https://apnews.com/a82309544e9e465fa2ad4f83e5a48540</ref> The email was written and sent to herself 15 minutes after Donald Trump was sworn in on January 20, 2017:<ref>https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-graham-uncover-unusual-email-sent-susan-rice-herself-president-trump-s</ref> {{Quotebox|"On January 5, following a briefing by [[IC]] leadership on Russian hacking during the [[2016 Presidential election]], President Obama had a brief follow-on conversation with FBI Director [[Jim Comey]] and Deputy Attorney General [[Sally Yates]] in the Oval Office. Vice President Biden<ref>[https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/03/08/doj-political-surveillance-from-the-irs-in-2011-to-the-fisa-court-in-2016/ DOJ Political Surveillance – From the IRS in 2011 to the FISA Court in 2016], Posted on March 8, 2020 by sundance. theconservativetreehouse.com </ref> and I were also present. President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities "by the book". The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book. From a national security perspective, however, President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the [[Trump transition|incoming team]], we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia. '''[Redacted section]''' The President asked Comey to inform him if anything changes in the next few weeks that should affect how we share classified information with the incoming team. Comey said he would."<ref>[https://nobsopus.blogspot.com/2019/03/grassley-to-rice.html Grassley to Rice], February 8, 2018. [https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-02-08%20CEG%20LG%20to%20Rice%20(Russia%20Investigation%20Email).pdf Original].</ref>}}

The following day [[DNI]] [[James Clapper]] released a public version of the ''Intelligence Community Assessment'' on Russian election interference, a joint [[John Brennan]], Clapper and Comey document consisting of recycled reports on [[RT]] with two pages of [[sexual]] innuendo from the Clinton opposition research ''Steele dossier''.<ref>The notorious "pee-pee memo."</ref> NSA Dir. [[Adm. Mike Rogers]] dissented from the conclusions and did not attend the days' prior Oval Office meeting.<ref>https://www.theepochtimes.com/why-are-the-brennan-comey-and-rogers-transcripts-being-withheld_2677629.html</ref><ref>[https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf ]</ref>

''[[The Washington Post]]'' was assured by Comey, Brennan and Clapper that "the sources involved in the [Clinton-Steele dossier's] reporting were credible enough to warrant inclusion in the highly classified [presidential] report.”<ref>http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-trump-russia-allegations-20170110-story.html</ref> Brennan however, in public Congressional testimony months later, said the dossier and its sources ''were not'' credible enough to incorporate in the joint ''Intelligence Community Assessment'' on Russian election interference. Brennan swore the Clinton-Steele dossier'' did not “in any way” factor into the CIA's assessment that Russia interfered in the election to help Trump.

Clapper [[leak]]ed the substance of the ''Clinton-Steele dossier'' to [[Jake Tapper]] of [[CNN]] before Comey briefed President-elect Trump, providing the "news hook" in Comey's words, that CNN was looking for to publicize the dossier's unverified contents after Trump was briefed. This was the beginning of the bogus pee-memo rumor designed to smear President-elect Trump, with Obama, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Biden, Rice and Sally Yates colluding together. And the purpose was to hoax the [[FISA court]] into granting an extension of surveillance beyond Trump's swearing in. It is also a prime example of "circular journalism" and [[fake news]] [[collusion]] between [[mainstream media]] and [[Democrat]] operatives.<ref>https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/susan-rice-email-president-obama-russia-investigation/</ref>

Biden claims that if he had been president rather than Barack Obama in 2015 and 2016, the Russians would not have interfered in the 2016 election.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfhqT3zre20&feature=youtu.be</ref>

===Anti-2nd Amendment===
Immediately after [[Deep State coup 2.0]] was announced to thwart the will of voters and [[subvert]] American [[democracy]], Biden rolled out his gun seizure plan.<ref>https://townhall.com/tipsheet/juliorosas/2019/10/02/joe-biden-rolls-out-his-extensive-gun-control-plan-n2554041</ref> In accepting [[Beto O'Rourke]]'s support as part of the Texas deal that excluded Sanders, Biden vowed to put Beto in charge of the gun seizure program.<ref>https://www.ammoland.com/2020/03/beto-will-be-bidens-gun-grabbing-point-man-its-war-says-ccrkba/</ref>

===Marijuana===
Biden authored legislation increasing mandatory minimum sentences for marijuana possession. Nearly 20 million people have been arrested and incarcerated for marijuana possession since Biden wrote the bill.<ref>http://www.drugpolicy.org/issues/drug-war-statistics</ref> Mandatory minimums give the judge no discretion in handing out a sentence. Marijuana arrests outnumber arrests for [[violent]] [[crime]].<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/us/marijuana-arrests.html</ref> President Trump has taken the lead in sentencing and prison reform.<ref>https://grabien.com/story.php?id=237403</ref> Biden wrote the legislation which established the Office of National Drug Control Policy, also known as the "drug czar."

When a big money donor who favors decriminalization held a fundraiser for Biden in May 2019, Biden "evolved" his 30-plus year stance on marijuana mandatory minimum sentencing which has caused so much hardship and suffering to families, particularly minorities who have been Biden's targets.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/joe-bidens-shift-on-marijuana-came-days-before-fundraiser-with-pro-legalization-donor/</ref> Biden suddenly showed no concern about exposing children to a gateway drug.

===Atlantic Council===
:{{See also|Military industrial complex}}
In 2011 Biden delivered the keynote address at the [[Atlantic Council]]’s distinguished leadership awards. He did so again in 2014 at its “Toward A Europe Whole and Free” conference,<ref>https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/commentary/transcript/remarks-by-vice-president-joe-biden-at-the-atlantic-council-s-toward-a-europe-whole-and-free-conference/</ref> which was dedicated to expanding NATO’s influence and countering “Russian aggression.” Speakers like [[Zbigniew Brzezinski]], a former U.S. [[national security adviser]], sniped at Barack Obama for an insufficiently bellicose posture toward Russia, while former Secretary of State [[Madeleine Albright]] fretted over polls showing low public support for U.S. [[interventionism]] overseas. Biden emphasized the need to power [[Europe]] with non-Russian sources of natural gas. This provided a prime opportunity to Ukrainian suppliers like Burisma and U.S. energy titans. Many of these energy companies, from [[Chevron]] to Noble Energy, also happen to be top donors to the Atlantic Council.

After the [[Maidan Revolt]], ''Foreign Policy'' magazine wrote, “No one in the U.S. government has wielded more influence over Ukraine than Vice President Joe Biden."<ref>https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/10/30/what-will-ukraine-do-without-joe-biden-putin-war-kiev-clinton-trump/</ref> The Atlantic Council described Biden as “the point person on Ukraine in the Obama administration.”<ref>https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/explainer-five-things-about-the-ukraine-controversy-you-need-to-know-plus-a-freebie/</ref> “Ukraine was the top, or one of the top three, foreign policy issues we were concentrating on,” said [[Michael Carpenter]], Biden’s foreign policy adviser. “[Biden] was front and center.”<ref>https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/10/05/bidens-visits-to-ukraine-draw-scrutiny/</ref>

===Plagiarism, again===
In giving lip service to [[climate change]], Biden has been accused of plagiarizing content from climate activist websites for his own fundraising site. Biden's alleged climate policy appears to be cut and pasted from non-profit websites to solicit donations for his campaign.

Josh Nelson noted, "The paragraph in Joe Biden's climate plan about carbon capture and sequestration includes language that is remarkably similar to items published previously by the Blue Green Alliance and the Carbon Capture Coalition...Biden's goal is to make CCUS a widely available, cost-effective, and rapidly scalable solution to reduce carbon emissions to meet mid-century climate goals," reads the Biden website. The website for the Carbon Capture Coalition states, "[our] goal is to make carbon capture, use and storage (CCUS) a widely available, cost-effective, and rapidly scalable solution to reduce carbon emissions to meet mid-century climate goals."

Biden's website also claims that, "carbon capture, use, and storage (CCUS) is a rapidly growing technology that has the potential to create economic benefits for multiple industries while significantly reducing carbon dioxide emissions." The language mirrors the language of a 2017 letter to the Senate from the Blue Green Alliance: "Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is a rapidly growing technology that has potential to create economic benefits for multiple industries while significantly reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions."<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/joe-bidens-climate-platform-appears-to-plagiarize-from-nonprofits/</ref><ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/04/joe-bidens-global-warming-plan-repeatedly-plagiarizes-sources/</ref>

[[CNN]]'s John King didn't buy the staff flub excuse. "This is a leadership issue," King said.<ref>https://dailycaller.com/2019/06/05/leadership-issue-cnn-john-king-biden-plagiarism/</ref>

===Biden's age and voters===
''See also:'' [[Biden's age]] and [[Joe Biden's mental decline]] and [[Joe Biden's eye filling with blood during a town hall]]

Biden is reported to have suffered two brain aneurysms, the first a near death experience in 1988.

Joe Biden is turning 77 in November 2019. He will be nearly 78 years old on [[Election Day]] 2020. Biden hasn’t disclosed his medical history since 2008, when physicians found he had an irregular heartbeat.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bidens-eye-fills-with-blood-during-cnn-climate-town-hall Biden's eye fills with blood during CNN climate town hall], Washington Examiner</ref> Biden has long been plagued by health issues.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/surgeon-who-operated-on-joe-biden-hes-better-now-than-before-brain-surgery Surgeon who operated on Biden: He's better now than before brain surgery], Washington Examiner, 2019</ref><ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bidens-eye-fills-with-blood-during-cnn-climate-town-hall Biden's eye fills with blood during CNN climate town hall], Washington Examiner</ref> and appears to be medicated. See also: [[Biden's age]] and [[Joe Biden's eye filling with blood during a town hall]].

Nate Silver of ''FiveThirtyEight'' wrote about Biden's age:
{{Cquote|A lot of rank-and-file voters do have concerns about Biden’s age. An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll in February found that 62 percent of voters had reservations about voting for someone aged 75 or older. [https://news.gallup.com/poll/254120/less-half-vote-socialist-president.aspx Other polls] have also shown advanced age to be a concern among Democrats, Republicans and independents alike.<ref>[https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-bidens-opponents-being-too-coy-in-making-age-an-issue/ Voters Care About Biden’s Age — Not About His Gaffes] by Nate Silver,''FiveThirtyEight''</ref>}}

Biden says he met with survivors of the Stoneman Douglas Parkland shooing while he was vice president; the Stoneman Douglas shooting occurred more than one year after Biden left office.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYOBkzU6VcI</ref> Whatever the concerns, Biden would likely be a one-term president.

===Taxes===
[[File:CCP Biden.png|right|300px|thumb|]]
Biden has vowed to raise taxes on the American people.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWqL7nM4T-s</ref>

===Fundraising===
Biden accepted the maximum contribution allowed from former HBO chief executive officer Chris Albrecht. Albrecht resigned as chief executive officer at HBO ain 2007 after being arrested and charged with assaulting his girlfriend. In 1991 Time Warner Inc. paid a $400,000 settlement to a female worker allegedly assaulted by Albrecht while on the job. The victim reported directly to Albrecht at the time as senior vice president at HBO Independent Productions.

=== Joe Biden and his controversies related to the military ===

Joe Biden has faced a couple of controversies related the military. Below is some information related to those controversies.

*[[Joe Biden and the military]]

==2009–2017: Vice presidency==
As he assumed office, Biden's responsibilities as vice president were not made clear. He had no specific portfolio of responsibilities. He alarmed the nation on April 30, 2009, by going on network television to warn Americans to stay out of confined spaces such as subways and airplanes, lest they catch Swine Flu. Health officials rejected his scare tactics and the White House immediately repudiated them.

Under President Obama the budget [[deficit]] reached over $1 trillion for the first time in history. When asked over the fate of the United States' going into bankruptcy, Biden stated at an [[AARP]] meeting, "Now, people when I say that look at me and say, "What are you talking about, Joe? You’re telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?’" Biden said. "The answer is yes, that's what I’m telling you."<ref name=bankrupt />

Biden eventually was placed in charge of promoting the [[Obama administration]]'s [[Recovery Summer]] in 2010, an attempt to highlight the Democratic Congress's [[American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009]], or "[[economic stimulus]] program. During Recovery Summer, the workforce shrank, [[unemployment]] swelled, and [[economic growth]] slowed to less than 2%. More Americans fell victim to Democrat economic policy and by the [[2010 Midterm election]] sweep no less than 27,000,000 people were unemployed or underemployed.

===Seal Team 6===
In killing Osama bin Laden, Obama transformed the [[War on Terror]] from a preventative war against terrorism to a war of vengeance and retribution to enhance Obama's re-election prospects.

The families of Navy Seal Team 6 blame Vice President Biden for revealing the identity of the Navy Seal Team that killed [[Osama bin Laden]].<ref>https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/03/bidens_betrayal_of_seals_should_doom_presidential_run.html</ref> Seal Team 6 is a covert action force, and all its members are sworn to secrecy to never reveal the actions they participate in. The government likewise is bound to protect their identities. In boasting of the killing, Biden named Seal Team 6 by name as the unit that found bin Laden.

On August 6, 2011, the [[Taliban]] ambushed a Chinook helicopter carrying 30 U.S. service members — including 15 SEAL Team 6 members — in [[Afghanistan]].<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2013/05/09/military-families-allege-muslim-cleric-damned-dead-navy-seals-at-ceremony/</ref> Everyone on board was killed.<ref>https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/7/the-betrayal-of-the-navys-seal-team-6/</ref> In a show of [[multiculturalism]], the [[Obama administration]] insisted a [[Muslim]] cleric be present when the bodies were recovered.<ref>http://joemiller.us/2013/05/seal-team-6-press-conference-obama-at-fault-muslim-cleric-prayed-at-funeral-damned-them-to-hell/</ref>

Families of the slain SEAL members held a news conference at the National Press Club demanding an investigation into why their sons had been identified, despite specific assurances by the Obama administration their identities would be protected.<ref>http://joemiller.us/2013/05/navy-seal-team-vi-families-to-reveal-obama-admin-s-culpability-in-death-of-sons/</ref> To add insult, the families complained about the Muslim cleric that the Obama administration required to preside in a ceremony over their remains, damned their souls to hell as infidels in an Islamic prayer proclaiming victory.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S7h5PO3r-w</ref>

===Cronyism and influence peddling===
Five months into the [[Obama administration]] in June 2009 Biden's son, [[Hunter Biden]] and Chris Heinz, stepson of Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair [[John Kerry]] formed Rosemount Seneca. The firm partnered with the Thornton Group run by Devon Archer, and the Bank of China, to form Bohai Harvest RST (BHR) in China. Devon Archer is the nephew of [[Whitey Bulger]], head of the [[Boston]] Irish [[mafia]] who enjoyed federal protection under FBI director [[Robert Mueller]] as an informant. Bulger was convicted of 19 murders that occurred while under Mueller's protection; some have linked the Bulger klan to as many as 52 murders while Mueller was the United States Attorney in Boston. The Bank of China is owned by the Chinese government and closely connected with the Chinese military and intelligence services. Biden, Heinz, and Archer transferred and sold "duel use" technology to the Chinese military which was used to create the Chinese [[drone]] program and replicate the Chinese version of the [[F-15]] fighter.<ref>https://nypost.com/2018/03/15/inside-the-shady-private-equity-firm-run-by-kerry-and-bidens-kids/</ref> Unsurprisingly, Joe Biden disregards the assessment of U.S. intelligence agencies and doesn't regard China as a strategic threat.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD9d3TUYHNo&feature=youtu.be</ref><ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/05/02/bidens-alleged-financial-ties-u-s-enemy-china-overshadow-2020-bid/</ref>

In April 2014, Hunter Biden joined the Board of Directors of Burisma, a [[Ukrainian]] oil and gas company despite having no experience in the oil and gas industry.<ref>http://burisma.com/en/board-of-directors/</ref><ref>http://www.dw.com/en/who-are-hunter-bidens-ukrainian-bosses/a-17642254</ref> The status of an independent Ukraine became the focus of much [[fake news]] reporting during the 2016 election and the [[Trump-Russia collusion hoax]].

Joseph Biden is a supporter of the [[Trans Pacific Partnership]] TPP.

==Past campaigns==
[[Liberal]] Biden, notorious for his long-winded speeches and his foot-in-mouth moments, as illustrated by his declaration that "we have to go spend money to keep from going [[bankrupt]]."<ref name=bankrupt>[http://cnsnews.com/news/article/joe-biden-we-have-go-spend-money-keep-going-bankrupt Joe Biden: ‘We Have to Go Spend Money to Keep From Going Bankrupt’], [[Cybercast News Service]]</ref> A favorite of the [[liberal media]], Biden avoids the mockery that greeted a less gaffe-prone predecessor, [[Dan Quayle]].

He ran for President in 1988 but dropped out of the race after admitting he had [[plagiarism#Joe Biden|plagiarized]] a speech by the leader of the British [[Labour Party]].<ref>[http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history_lesson/2008/08/the_write_stuff.html Why Biden's plagiarism shouldn't be forgotten.] - [[Slate Magazine]] - Aug. 25, 2008</ref>

Biden considered running as a Presidential candidate for the 2004 elections, but then decided against it, saying that it would be "now too much of a long shot.".<ref>[https://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/special/president/candidates/whos.in.out.html Who is in, who is out 2004], [[CNN]]</ref> He was later mentioned as a possible running mate for Democratic Senator [[John Kerry]], but he instead urged Kerry to chose Senator John McCain.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4961694/ McCain urged to join Kerry ticket], [[MSNBC]]</ref>

He won few votes when running for [[2008 Presidential election|president in 2008]]; he dropped out after placing fifth in Iowa in January, 2008. Biden became [[Barack Obama]]'s vice-presidential running mate. His campaign stressed his Irish Catholic roots in appeals to working class [[Democrat]]s, who had deserted Obama in the primaries but returned in the fall.

===1988 Presidential campaign===
Joe Biden announced his candidacy for President in 1987. He ran on his experience, saying in an campaign advertisement "The [[White House]] isn't the place to learn how to deal with international crisis, the balance of power, war and peace, and the economic future of the next generation." <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121919956426355701.html Biden's Foreign Policy Background Carries Growing Cachet], [[Wall Street Journal]]</ref> His campaign was short-lived due to controversies. While campaigning in [[New Hampshire]] in 1987, a civilian asked about his grades in college, to which Biden yelled, "I think I have a much higher I.Q. than you do." He went on to say that he "went to law school on a full academic scholarship - the only one in my class to have a full academic scholarship" adding that he "ended up in the top half" of his class (Biden graduated 76th in a class of 85) and "graduated with three degrees from college."

Biden explained his comments "I did not graduate in the top half of my class at law school and my recollection of this was inaccurate...I graduated from the University of Delaware with a double major in history and political science. My reference to degrees at the Claremont event was intended to refer to these majors - I said 'three' and should have said 'two'." <ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/22/us/biden-admits-errors-and-criticizes-latest-report.html Biden Admits Errors and Criticizes Latest Report], [[The New York Times]]</ref>

Later in the campaign he was found to have plagiarized a speech from British [[Labour Party]] leader [[Neil Kinnock]]. The plagiarism was considered all the more serious, because it included details of Kinnock's life which were not true in Biden's case. Biden dropped out of the race in December 1987, and did not participate in the 1988 Democratic caucuses and primaries.

===2008 Presidential campaign===
:{{Main article|2008 Presidential election}}
Biden declared his candidacy for [[President]] on January 31, 2007 but withdrew in January 2008 after coming 5th in the [[Iowa Caucus]], receiving only 1% of the vote.<ref>[http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/01/04/chris-dodd-abandons-presidential-campaign-after-poor-showing-in-iowa/ Biden, Dodd Bow Out of Presidential Race After Poor Showings in Iowa], [[Fox News]]</ref> He ran on his foreign policy experience and credentials in the Senate. Biden voted for the [[Operation Iraqi Freedom]] - the [[War in Iraq]]. On November 15, 2007, during the CNN presidential debate, he said {{Cquote|''This is not about experience. It's not about change. It's about action. Who among us is going to be able to, on Day 1, step in and end the war?.''}}

In a presidential debate, when asked, “Would you call for [[tariff]]s to protect American consumers from unsafe products from [[China]]? Are you willing to go there?” Biden answered, “I’m not. No, I’m not willing to go there."<ref>https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/biden-was-a-much-better-candidate-when-he-wasnt-running/</ref>

During an ABC Democratic presidential debate, Biden was asked about the statement he made regarding [[Barack Obama]]. Biden said: {{Cquote|''I think he can be ready but right now, I don’t believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training. I think that I stand by the statement.''<ref>[http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/23/mccain-launches-tv-ad-using-bidens-words-against-obama/ McCain Launches TV Ad Using Biden’s Words Against Obama], [[Fox News]], August 23, 2008</ref>}}

===2008 Vice presidential campaign===
[[Image:0.jpg|right|thumb|250px|Biden campaigning for Barack Obama, 09/24/08]] Biden had been mentioned as a Vice Presidential candidate for Senator [[Barack Obama]], in that he would add foreign policy experience to the ticket. When asked in June over the speculation, Biden stated, "I'd make a great president. I'd make a great [[Secretary of State]]. I'd make a great vice president." <ref>The Hill's Blog Briefing Room: [http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2008/06/17/biden-id-make-a-great-president-secretary-of-state-vice-president/ Biden: I'd Make a Great President, Secretary of State, Vice President]</ref> On August 19, Biden was asked by reporters of his VP status, to which he replied "Hey guys, I'm not the guy. See ya." <ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/08/biden-on-obamas.html?cid=127045696 Biden on Obama's VP Pick: 'I'm Not The Guy'] [[ABC News]], August 19, 2008</ref> It was Joe Biden's son, Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden, who issued an arrest warrant on fabricated charges to attempt to discredit Larry Sinclair's National Press Club news conference where he alleged a [[gay]] affair with Obama and claimed he was using [[cocaine]] at the time.<ref>http://archive.is/8a4xF</ref> Biden was nominated by Obama choice for vice president a week later.<ref>https://larrysinclair.com/blog/a-reminder-from-lame-cherry/</ref>

In August 2005 Biden paradoxically and nonsensically said, "[[John McCain]] is a personal friend, a great friend, and I would be honored to run with or against John McCain, because I think the country would be better off."<ref>[http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NGRhNzJlMWY5NjdiNzhjMTRkYjMzNjYwOGJmYzNjMTY= 'Just Words' That Joe Biden Would Like To Forget], [[National Review Online]]</ref>

However, on August 23 it was announced that Biden would be Obama's 2008 running mate. They appeared together in [[Springfield]], [[Illinois]]. Obama proudly introduced Senator Biden,
''

:''"Let me introduce to you, the next president — the next vice president of the United States of America, Joe Biden."''

Biden took the stage and endorsed Obama, saying,
''

:''"In this election year the choice is clear, one man stands ready to deliver change we desperately need, a man I'm proud to call my friend, a man who will be the next President of the [[United States]], Barack America."''
''

Obama hoped Biden would help the ticket in multiple ways:

* Biden has extensive foreign policy experience in the United States Senate and as such could have helped to bolster Obama's comparative lack of experience in this area.
* Biden is [[Catholic]], and Obama was weak with that key voting bloc; however, the [[Catholic Church]] may have taken offense at Biden's pro-[[abortion]] positions (see below).
* Biden was born in [[Pennsylvania]], a must-win state for Obama where he was thought to be weak;<ref>[[Hillary Clinton]] defeated Obama by a wide margin in the [[Pennsylvania]] primary; in August polls show Obama leading McCain by an average of only 5.8% in [[Pennsylvania]] [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/pa/pennsylvania_mccain_vs_obama-244.html RealClearPolitics Pennsylvania Tracking]</ref>
* Biden's son is going to [[Iraq]], which may have helped to rehabilitate Obama's image as anti-military; however, Biden himself never served.

Almost immediately after his selection, the conflict between his pro-[[abortion]] position and that of his church surfaced:<ref>[https://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS29316+23-Aug-2008+PRN20080823 Choice of Biden Re-Opens Catholic Wound], [[Reuters]]</ref>

:Biden has said: "I am a long-standing supporter of ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' and a woman's right to choose." But Biden's own bishop, Bishop Michael Saltarelli of Wilmington, Del., has ... denounced the notion that politicians can 'personally oppose' abortion, but refuse to pass laws protecting the unborn. He made clear that pro-abortion Catholic politicians should refrain from receiving the Eucharist:

:"The promotion of abortion by any Catholic is a grave and serious matter. Objectively, according to the constant teaching of the Scriptures and the Church, it would be more spiritually beneficial for such a person to refrain from receiving the Body and Blood of Christ. I ask Catholics in this position to have the integrity to respect the Eucharist, Catholic teaching and the Catholic faithful."

In September of the campaign Biden asked [[Missouri]] State Senator Chuck Graham, who has [[paralysis]], to "Stand up, Chuck, let 'em see you. Oh, God love you. What am I talking about? I tell you what, you're making everybody else stand up, though, pal. I tell you what, stand up for Chuck." <ref name=standupchuck />

Biden's [[Republican]] opponent for the Vice Presidency was [[Alaska]] [[Governor]] [[Sarah Palin]]. They participated in their first and only Vice Presidential debate on October 2 in [[St. Louis]], [[Missouri]]. Biden was elected the 47th Vice President of the United States on November 4, 2008.

===2012 Vice presidential campaign===
Biden got a pass from fellow [[liberal]]s in the media despite acting like a rude clown during his vice presidential debate with [[Paul Ryan]] in October 2012. Biden repeatedly interrupted Ryan and engaged in other offensive behavior, and even complained about not getting more time despite talking more than Ryan did. At one point Biden even nonsensically interjected, "so now you're Jack Kennedy?" in interrupting a valid point being made by Ryan.

==1973–2009: U.S. Senate==
[[Image:Biden_on_Meet_the_Press.jpg|right|thumb|250px|Biden on Meet The Press, 09/09/07]] In 1972, Biden unseated the liberal Republican Senator [[Cale Boggs]]. In 1973, he hence became the fifth-youngest U.S. senator in U.S. history. He was later reelected six times.

Biden, as a senator from [[Delaware]] from 1973-2009, served on the Senate Judiciary Committee and subsequently the Committee on Foreign Relations, alternating as the chair or ranking member on both committees. Biden in 2007 was ranked as the third most liberal Senator by the non-partisan ''National Journal''.<ref>[http://www.nationaljournal.com/conventions/co_20080823_9669.php Biden's Senate Vote Record], ''National Journal''</ref>

Biden has close ties with lobbyists, receiving $5,133,072 in contributions from [[lawyer]]s and [[lobbyist]]s since 2003.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12735.html Statesman known for slips of his tongue], [[Politico]]</ref> Biden requested 116 congressional [[earmark]]s in 2008 alone, resulting in $342 million in taxpayer money.<ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/23/biden.earmarks/?iref=hpmostpop Biden, Obama helped keep 'Bridge to Nowhere' alive], [[CNN]]</ref>

During a late-night marathon debate over President George W. Bush's tax cut bill, 98-year-old Sen. [[Strom Thurmond]] began ailing. Biden told the ''New York Daily News'' "I saw Strom sitting in his seat, he looked awful. I said, 'Strom, you should go home'. He's an old buddy."<ref>https://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/storm-concern-strom-article-1.901327</ref>

Biden was for the Iraq War before he was against it.

===Abortion===
On the [[abortion issue]], Biden is [[pro-abortion]] and opposed President [[George W. Bush]]'s two nominees to the U.S. [[Supreme court]]. On ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' he said, "I strongly support Roe v. Wade....That’s why I led the fight to defeat [Robert] Bork. Thank [[God]] he is not in the Court or Roe v. Wade would be gone by now."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20130312002759/http://nrlc.org/Election2008/comparison0909084c.pdf Where Do the Candidates Stand on Abortion?], [[National Right to Life Committee]]</ref> He received a 100% rating from [[NARAL Pro-Choice America]] in 2001, 2004, 2005 and 2006,<ref>http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=53279</ref> but not in other years because of his opposition to [[partial-birth abortion]] and public funding for abortions.<ref>http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Joe_Biden_Abortion.htm</ref>

===2nd Amendment===
He is a strong opponent of 2nd-amendment rights, earning an F by the [[National Rifle Association]]. Biden has also voted to give [[Social Security]] benefits and citizenship to [[illegal aliens]]. On energy, he opposes increased domestic oil production, saying proponents of offshore drilling want to "rape" the Outer Continental Shelf.<ref>http://www.votesmart.org/speech_detail.php?sc_id=400058</ref>

===Judiciary committee===
Biden was a long-time member of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, which he chaired from 1987 until 1995 and served as ranking minority member from 1981 until 1987 and again from 1995 until 1997. He almost never supported a supreme court nominee who was not in his party and presided over two of the more contentious [[U.S. Supreme Court]] confirmation hearings ever, [[Robert Bork]] in 1987 and the [[racism|racially motivated]] hearings for [[Clarence Thomas]]<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egTyaIAaqz8 Clarence Thomas High-Tech Lynching]</ref> in 1991.

Sen. [[Arlen Specter]], who jumped to the Democrats in 2009, wrote in his memoirs that Biden admitted to him that Biden believed Anita Hill was lying.

===Biden crime bill===
[[File:Joe Biden.jpg|250px|right|thumb|Biden [[collude]]d with segregationists to undermine the Supreme Court decision of ''Brown vs. Board''.]]
The [[Biden Crime Bill of 1994]], also known as the Superpredator Act, came in response to the Central Park jogger case and trial of the Central Park Five. On its twentieth anniversary the Brennan Center observed, {{quotebox|It expanded the death penalty, creating 60 new death penalty offenses under 41 federal capital statutes. It eliminated education funding for incarcerated students, effectively gutting prison education programs. Despite a wealth of research showing education increases post-release employment, reduces recidivism, and improves outcomes for the formerly incarcerated and their families, this change has not been reversed.

And the bill created a wave of change toward harsher state sentencing policy. That change was driven by funding incentives: the bill’s $9.7 billion in federal funding for prison construction went only to states that adopted truth-in-sentencing (TIS) laws, which lead to defendants serving far longer prison terms. Within 5 years, 29 states had TIS laws on the books, 24 more than when the bill was signed. New York State received over $216 million by passing such laws. By 2000 the state had added over 12,000 prison beds and incarcerated 28 percent more people than a decade before.}}

===War on sovereignty===
:{{Main article|War on sovereignty}}
In 1992, Joe Biden penned a piece for the ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'' entitled, "''How I Learned to Love the New World Order''," in which he extolled "collective security" through the [[United Nations]] and called for a “permanent commitment of forces for use by the Security Council.”

On July 14, 1993, a little over a year after writing the Journal op-ed cited above, Senator Biden introduced Senate Joint Resolution 112 urging the new president, [[Bill Clinton]], to initiate discussions to establish a standing United Nations army. Under his proposal, United States bases and facilities would be made available to train UN forces, and the president would not “be deemed to require the authorization of Congress” to make American troops, facilities, or other assistance “available to the [[Security Council]] on its call.”

He also called for the creation of a “[[new world order]]” at the Export-Import Bank conference in Washington on April 5, 2013. “The affirmative task we have now is to actually create a new world order,” he exclaimed.

===Foreign policy===
As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden voted against aid to the government of [[South Vietnam]] leading to its collapse in 1975.

He called the rise of the [[Ayatollah Khomeini]] in the [[Iranian Revolution]] in 1979 a step forward for [[human rights]].

Biden opposed [[Ronald Reagan]]'s development of the [[missile defense system|Missile Defense System]] and ending the doctrine of [[Mutual Assured Destruction]].

He voted against the [[Persian Gulf War]] in 1991.

Biden voted for the [[Iraq War]] in 2002. In a 2005 interview with ''Meet the Press'', Biden advocated a troop surge saying, "I’ve been calling for more troops [in Iraq] for over two years, along with [[John McCain]] and others subsequent to my saying that." On July 23, 2007, Biden said, "there's not a single [[military]] man in this [[audience]], who will tell this Senator he can get those troops out in six months if the order goes today, let's start telling the truth."<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wylferBh3IA</ref> He advocated Iraqi [[federal]]ism based on [[nation]]al and [[religious]] differences for [[Kurd]]s, [[Shiite]]s and [[Sunni]]s.

==Early life==
Biden was born at Scranton State General Hospital in Scranton, [[Pennsylvania]]<ref name="timeline">[http://biden.senate.gov/senator/timeline/ Joe Biden Timeline]</ref> and grew up in New Castle County, Delaware,<ref name="bio">[http://biden.senate.gov/senator/ Joe Biden Biography]</ref> in a middle-class family. His father was a white-collar businessman who did well but had fallen on hard times when Biden was a youth.<ref name="bluecollar">[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/08/joe_bidens_mythical_bluecollar.html Joe Biden's Mythical Blue-Collar Roots], [[Real Clear Politics]]</ref> Biden attended Archmere Academy, a private Catholic college-preparatory high school in the Wilmington, Delaware area, graduating in 1961.<ref name="bio" /> Biden took a summer job as a life guard where faced down the notorious Corn Pop of the mean streets of Wilmington to help his family pay for his schooling.<ref>https://www.theroot.com/joe-biden-s-corn-pop-story-is-a-parable-about-how-white-1838161871</ref><ref>Archmere Academy [http://www.archmereacademy.com/Default.aspx?tabid=74] Tuition for 2008-2009 is $18,450.</ref> Biden received 5 [[Vietnam war]] draft deferments. He graduated from the University of Delaware in 1965, and from the Syracuse University College of Law in 1968 where he was a member of ''Non Compos Mentis'' and graduated near the bottom of his class<ref name="bio" /> After finishing law school Biden worked in the Wilmington, Del. public defenders office where he claims to have represented a member of the [[Black Panthers]];<ref>https://www.aaihs.org/the-1968-occupation-of-black-wilmington/#fnref-43519-4</ref> no evidence has ever been produced to support Biden's claim he ever represented a member of the Black Panthers.

Biden is a serial plagiarizer.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zPl7Ncs8AI</ref> He was accused of, and ultimately admitted to plagiarism while a student at Syracuse Law School.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/17/us/biden-was-accused-of-plagiarism-in-law-school.html Biden Was Accused of Plagiarism in Law School], [[The New York Times]]</ref> He submitted a paper in which he plagiarized from a law review article. After receiving a grade of F, he was permitted to retake the course.<ref>[http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE3DB143FF93BA2575AC0A961948260 Biden Admits Plagiarism in School But Says It Was Not 'Malevolent'], By E. J. DIONNE JR., SPECIAL TO [[The New York Times|THE NEW YORK TIMES]], Published: September 18, 1987</ref>

In 1966, while still in law school, Biden married Neilia Hunter.<ref name="timeline" /> They had three children together: Joseph R. "Beau" Dien, III, Robert Hunter, and Naomi. Shortly after his election to the Senate in 1972, his wife and infant daughter were killed in a car accident, and his two sons were seriously injured.<ref name="timeline" /> He eventually remarried to Dr. Jill Biden (née Jacobs), an educator in Delaware's schools.<ref name="bio" /> She currently is an instructor<ref>[http://www.dtcc.edu/catalog/pdf/personnel.pdf Delaware Technical Community College - College Catalog]</ref> teaching at Delaware Technical Community College. Together, the couple added a daughter, Ashley Biden, to the family.<ref name="bio" />

Biden was elected to the U.S Senate from Delaware in 1972. Delaware was a slave state. It did not join the [[Confederacy]] partially because President [[Abraham Lincoln]] suborned the Maryland state legislature and would not permit it to leave the union. Delaware, separated from the south by Maryland, could not secede on its own. Delaware voters in fact rejected Lincoln's plan to compensate for emancipation of its slaves, paid for by the federal government. Delawares Democrat and racist traditions were still very strong when Biden was elected.,<ref>https://www.westernjournal.com/dick-morris-biden-eastland-perfect-together/</ref>

Since 1991, Biden has been an [[adjunct professor]] at the Widener University School of Law, where he teaches a seminar on constitutional law.<ref name="bio" />

Biden's son, Hunter Biden, was thrown out of the [[US Navy]] for [[cocaine]] use. Hunter Biden has been a Washington [[lobbyist]] since 2001.<ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-08-24-Biden-son_N.htm Biden's son a registered lobbyist since 2001], [[USA Today]]</ref>

=== Joe Biden, his struggles with grief and his unresolved emotional wounds ===
[[File:Bill Clinton and officials on Air Force One.jpg|thumbnail|200px|[[Bill Clinton]], Joe Biden and other Clinton administration officials.]]

''See also:'' [[Joe Biden, grief and cognitive decline|Joe Biden and grief]]

Politico in an article entited ''How Grief Became Joe Biden’s ‘Superpower’'' indicates:
{{Cquote|There is no person in American politics today whose life has been so shaped by loss and grief. The long arc of Biden’s career is all but bracketed by tragedy. In 1972, his wife and baby daughter were killed in a car accident; in 2015, one of his two sons who had survived the crash died of a rare strain of brain cancer. These wretched tentpoles are not only tragedies the 76-year-old Biden has had to endure. They influenced major decisions he made about his political career—first, his priorities in the Senate; later, his decision to opt out of the presidential election of 2016. And they defined him as a person as well, according to longtime friends, former aides and veteran politicos in his home state of Delaware.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/01/25/joe-biden-2019-profile-grief-beau-car-accident-224178 How Grief Became Joe Biden’s ‘Superpower’]</ref>}}

The ''Washington Post'' states concerning Biden: "In a candid 2012 speech to military families and friends who had lost a loved one in action, Biden spoke about the anger, crisis of faith and wounds that don't really ever heal."<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/05/31/joe-bidens-heartfelt-thoughts-on-grief/ Joe Biden’s heartfelt speech on grief], Washington Post</ref>

The Associated Press indicates concerning Biden:
{{Cquote|After the accident, Biden had no interest in the Senate anymore. No ambition for anything, really. His world view shrank to taking care of his boys.

“For the first time in my life, I understood how someone could consciously decide to commit suicide,” he would later reveal.

Biden didn’t just have to deal with grief. He had the added burden of processing it in public.
<ref>[https://www.apnews.com/e5a1e70314eb44219448eeb850c65f1e Biden’s prism of loss: A public man, shaped by private grief], Associated Press</ref>}}

==Embarrassing or silly remarks==
[[File:Bidenbeforeafter.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Biden had a hair transplant, where hairs were removed from his buttocks and placed on his head.<ref>''[http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2008/08/bidens_hair.html Does Joe Biden Have Butt Hair on His Head?]'', By Jessica Pressler, ''The Intelligencer'', Aug. 25, 2008.</ref>]]
*Biden earned the nickname '''Butthead Biden''' in 1989 when he began having hair follicle transplants from his buttocks to his scalp to relieve pressure on his [[vanity]].
*In attempting to quote the the [[Declaration of Independence]] before [[Super Tuesday]], Biden misquoted, "all men and women created by" and then stumbled saying, "go, you know, you know the thing."<ref> Dominick Mastrangelo, March 02, 2020 [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/you-know-the-thing-biden-botches-declaration-of-independence-quote-during-campaign-stop 'You know, the thing': Biden botches Declaration of Independence quote during campaign stop] The Washington Examiner. Retrieved March 03, 2020</ref><ref>https://twitter.com/SteveGuest/status/1234579299652554753</ref>
*When Representative [[Gabrielle Giffords]] returned to Congress after a long hiatus (which was the result of her being shot in the head), Biden (who had a brain surgery in the past) remarked to her that "Now we're both members of the Cracked Head Club".<ref>[http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/08/gabrielle-giffords-joe-biden-cracked-head-club-/1 Biden jokes Giffords is in 'Cracked Head Club' ], [[USA Today]]</ref>

*When he met Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen, Biden said "God rest her soul" in reference to Cowen's mother. However, it was Cowen's father that died, not his mother.<ref>[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7469323/Joe-Biden-loses-the-gift-of-the-gab-on-St-Patricks-Day.html Joe Biden loses the gift of the gab on St Patrick's Day - The Daily Telegraph], [[The Daily Telegraph]]</ref>

===Hostile comments===
*At one 2005 political event he said, ''"The next [[Republican]] that tells me I'm not religious, I'm going to shove my rosary down their throat."'' <ref>[http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1840965,00.html#ixzz0xxjisdkg Does Biden Have a Catholic Problem?], [[Time Magazine]]</ref>

*In March 2007, Biden was criticizing President [[George W. Bush]] for vetoing a bill that would set a timeline for troops to be removed from Iraq, saying that [[Congress]] should "shove it down his throat."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20080903080136/http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/5/1/144042.shtml?s=us Biden on Iraq Bill: 'Shove It Down His Throat'], [[Newsmax]]</ref>

*In February 2019, Biden criticized U.S. President [[Donald Trump]] in Germany, breaking a longstanding tradition of not criticizing the current commander-in-chief in foreign countries.<ref>Gehrke, Joel (February 16, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/biden-tells-europeans-in-munich-that-america-is-an-embarrassment Biden tells Europeans in Munich that America is 'an embarrassment']. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved February 16, 2019.</ref>

===Quotations about guns===
* During a February 2013 interview, Biden said that if there was a “problem” that his wife should “walk out on the balcony here, walk out, put that double-barrel shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house.” <ref>[https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/20/biden-shotgun-advice-draws-quizzical-response/ Biden Shotgun Advice Draws Quizzical Response], [[The New York Times]]</ref> Doing so is of course, illegal, and would leave his wife holding an empty shotgun while dealing with the “problem”.

* In another February 2013 interview, Biden said "[if] you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door." Coincidently, a man from Virginia Beach had done just that a few days before, and was arrested.<ref>[https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/02/28/biden-advises-shooting-shotgun-through-door Biden Advises Shooting Shotgun Through Door], [[U.S. News & World Report]]</ref>

===Remarks about race or ethnicity===
*In July 2006, while speaking to a group of Indian-Americans in Delaware, Biden stated, "You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I'm not joking." His comment was caught on C-SPAN.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13757367/ Biden explains Indian-American remarks], [[MSNBC]]</ref>

*In August 2006, Biden was on [[Fox News]] Sunday and bragged about his state being a former [[slave]] state. "You don't know my state. My state was a slave state. My state is a border state. My state is the eighth largest black population in the country. My state is anything from a northeast liberal state." <ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFduMuP7v-k</ref>

*Talking about his fellow Democratic presidential candidate [[Barack Obama]] he said in January 2007, "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy, ... I mean, that's a storybook, man." <ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/31/biden.obama/ Biden's description of Obama draws scrutiny], [[CNN]]</ref>

*Thanks To Japan’s [[Xenophobia]], Women Are Encouraged To Stay In The Workforce.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7u1d_1V1Ekc</ref>

===Erroneous comments===
*Joe Biden once told voters that his [[helicopter]] was "forced down" on "the superhighway of terror" by Afghan extremists. When actually, snow forced the helicopter pilot to land and wait out a [[storm]].<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,431604,00.html Fact Check: Biden's Chopper Was 'Forced Down' by Snowflakes], [[Fox News]]</ref>

*In the Oct. 2008 VP debate, Biden made numerous misstatements, on topics ranging from the Constitution to the Mideast.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,433314,00.html Did Biden Get It Wrong? You Betcha], [[Fox News]]</ref>

*He said he was second in line to be President when he was first and Nancy Pelosi was second at the time.<ref>[http://michellemalkin.com/2010/09/20/bozo-the-vp-botches-line-of-succession/ Bozo the VP botches line of succession], [[Michelle Malkin]]</ref>

*During the 2008 presidential campaign, Biden said that "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed. He said, 'look, here's what happened.'"<ref>[https://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/22/eveningnews/main4470063.shtml Behind The Scenes With Joe Biden], [[CBSNews]]</ref> In actuality television wasn't in use for another twenty years and the president during the 1929 stock market crash was [[Herbert Hoover]], not [[Franklin Roosevelt]].

*In another erroneous remark made during the presidential campaign, Biden referred to [[Sarah Palin]] as lieutenant Governor of Alaska, when in fact she the state's Governor at the time.<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1643290_1643292_1841625,00.html Biden's Palin Demotion], [[Time Magazine]]</ref>

*Biden made yet another deceptive claim during the 2008 presidential campaign in which he asserted that "This guy is brain-dead," referring to then-President [[George W. Bush]] .<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2007/aug/24/joe-biden/irresponsible-claim-and-wrong-medical-diagnosis/ Irresponsible claim (and wrong medical diagnosis)], [[PolitiFact]]</ref> This absurd claim was completely unfounded and demonstrably false.

===Other quotations===
*During the 2008 presidential elections Joe Biden gave a speech in Springfield, Illinois in which he introduced the Democratic nominee for president as "Barack America".<ref>[https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2008/0823/barack-america-and-president-biden-ooops Barack America and President Biden? Ooops...], [[Christian Science Monitor]]</ref>

*Biden remarked about the 2010 Midterm “I was amazed at the amount of money, this $200 billion of money that is — where there’s no accountability.” Clearly he meant $200 million says the New York Times.<ref>[https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/200-billion-in-ads-mr-biden-thats-real-money/?ref=politics $200 Billion in Ads, Mr. Biden? That’s Real Money], [[The New York Times]], October 22, 2010</ref> Though just a moment later. “So it really — I’ve never seen this before, so the only caveat I’d put in terms of the House is how much impact this $200 billion are going to mean.”

*During the 2005 confirmation hearings for Justice [[John Roberts]], Biden asked Roberts, "Can a microscopic tag be planted in someones body to track his every move, you will rule on that." <ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbPvWm9ZkYw</ref>

*In 2008 Biden told a wheelchair bound State Senator from [[Missouri]] to "stand up".<ref name=standupchuck>[http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2008/09/10/joe_biden_to_man_in_wheechair_stand_up_chuck_let_em_see_ya Joe Biden to Man in Wheechair: "Stand Up, Chuck. Let 'Em See Ya!"], [[Rush Limbaugh]]</ref>

*He said "Its easy being Vice President." Then a lawmaker said "It's like being the grandpa and not the parent," to which he responded "Yeah, that's it!"<ref>[http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/26/biden-its-easy-being-vice-president/ Biden - "It's Easy Being Vice President"], [[Fox News]]</ref>

*After [[ObamaCare]] was signed into law, Biden was caught swearing on camera while expressing his joy.<ref>[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/7508111/US-health-care-Joe-Biden-swears-after-Barack-Obama-signs-historic-reforms.html US health care: Joe Biden swears after Barack Obama signs historic reforms], [[Daily Telegraph]]</ref>

*Biden was caught swearing again while speaking to a former Senate colleague.<ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2015/01/06/politics/biden-swearing-in/ Joe Biden swearing in senators makes great TV], [[Fox News]]</ref>

Read more: [http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/26/biden-its-easy-being-vice-president/#ixzz1X7ju3pUC Biden - "It's Easy Being Vice President"], [[Fox News]]

==In popular culture==
*[http://www.cc.com/video-clips/yfmksi/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-the-audacity-of-grope The Audacity of Grope]
*https://joebiden.info/ A collection of cringworthy moments from Biden's career
*Oliver Stone documentary [https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1180915084522078208?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw ''Ukraine on Fire'' trailer].

==See also==
*[[Ukrainian collusion timeline]]
*[[Race baiting]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Joe_Biden.htm Biden On the Issues]
*[http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/b000444/ Voting Record], [[Washington Post]]
*[http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=B000444, Biography at the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress]
*[http://www.joebiden.com/ Presidential Race Site]
*[https://twitter.com/todosconbiden/status/1187125647644286976?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Todos Con Biden]
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BM8uLOOUz3I Joe Biden - Here's the Deal]
{{USVicePresidents}}{{liberalism}}{{DEFAULTSORT:Biden, Joseph}}

[[Category:Joe Biden]]
[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Former United States Senators]]
[[Category:2008 Presidential Candidates]]
[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Black History]]
[[Category:Liberals]]
[[Category:Reagan Era]]
[[Category:Vice Presidents of the United States]]
[[Category:Catholic Politicians]]
[[Category:Irish-Americans]]
[[Category:Abortion Advocates]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Anti-Constitutionalists]]
[[Category:Trump-Russia Collusion Hoax]]
[[Category:Hillary Clinton email scandal]]
[[Category:United States Presidential Election, 2020]]
[[Category:Socialists]]
[[Category:Leftists]]
[[Category:Corruption]]
[[Category:Racism]]
[[Category:1970s]]
[[Category:1980s]]
[[Category:1990s]]
[[Category:2000s]]
[[Category:2010s]]
[[Category:2020s]]

Joe Biden

2020-03-11T14:44:42Z

Daniel1212: /* Policies */

{{Officeholder
|name=Joseph Biden
|image=JoeBiden.jpg
|party=[[Democratic party|Democrat]]
|spouse=[[Jill Biden]]
|religion=[[Roman Catholic]]
|offices=
{{Officeholder/vice president
|country=the United States
|number=47th
|terms=January 20, 2009 – January 20, 2017
|president=[[Barack Obama]]
|preceded=[[Dick Cheney]]
|former=Hopefully
|succeeded=[[Mike Pence]]
}}
{{Officeholder/senator
|state=Delaware
|terms=January 3, 1973 – January 15, 2009
|preceded=[[Cale Boggs]]
|former=y
|succeeded=[[Ted Kaufman]]
}}
}}
'''Joe Biden''' (born<ref>his birth name was Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.</ref> '''non compos mentis''' November 20, 1942, see: [[Biden's age]]) was the [[Vice President of the United States]] and served as [[President Barack Obama]]'s token [[segregation]]ist. On April 25, 2019, Biden announced his candidacy against President Trump in 2020 and was the immediate [[Democratic party]] frontrunner.<ref>Biden is considered the [[Konstantin Chernenko]] of the modern [[Left]].</ref> He's known as "Architect of Mass Incarceration." Prior to being Obama's pick for vice president, Biden never garnered 2% of Democratic primary voters in any of his presidential bids. Biden promises to cure [[cancer]],<ref>https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/joe-biden-says-hes-going-130151675.html</ref> [[AIDS]] and [[climate change]] while giving out free [[drug]]s and tuition. Biden also vows to raise [[tax]]es.<ref>https://twitter.com/TimRunsHisMouth/status/1234334186846248961?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw</ref>

Biden [[obstruction of justice|obstructed justice]] when he threatened a ''[[quid pro quo]]'' to withhold money unless a prosecutor was fired who was investigating his son. Biden publicly admitted that he threatened Ukrainian leaders to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aide unless a prosecutor looking into kickbacks his son, [[Hunter Biden]], was receiving from a Ukrainian oil and gas company.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urTk6O4c0mU&feature=youtu.be</ref><ref>https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/27/1853703/-Worse-Than-Sniffing-Hair</ref> Biden's campaign was near collapse in September 2019 when it became known that he is currently under investigation by Ukrainian prosecutors for misusing his power as U.S. Vice President to interfere in a [[money-laundering]] investigation of his son,<ref>https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1175392716110401543</ref> [[Hunter Biden]].<ref name="thehill.com">https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived</ref> Biden's family has a reputation for corruption.<ref>Alic, Haris (August 14, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/08/14/eight-things-biden-familys-culture-orruption/ Eight Things to Know About the Biden Family’s Culture of Corruption]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved August 15, 2019.</ref>

In the 1970s, twenty years after ''[[Brown vs. Board of Education]]'', Biden embraced the "[[separate but equal]]" doctrine. Biden told [[NPR]] that segregation was "a matter of black pride." Biden amassed a coalition of liberals and [[George Wallace]] supporters to oppose racial integration,<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/1975/12/21/archives/busing-the-solution-that-has-failed-to-solve.html</ref> and considered a [[Constitutional Amendment]] to outlaw court-ordered school desegregation.<ref>https://soundcloud.com/user-391839060/npr-1975-interview-with-sen-joe-biden</ref><ref>https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook-pm/2019/06/19/what-team-biden-says-about-joes-segregationist-comment-448372</ref><ref>https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/19/joe-biden-segregationist-senators-1370223</ref> Biden wrote an Amendment that gutted portions of the [[1964 Civil Rights Act]].

Biden authored the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.<ref name="nytimes.com">https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/22/us/politics/joe-bidens-role-in-90s-crime-law-could-haunt-any-presidential-bid.html</ref> His [[New Jim Crow]] bill incarcerated 2.5 million Black males, one-tenth of the Black male population,<ref>https://www.sentencingproject.org/news/could-joe-bidens-role-in-90s-crime-law-haunt-a-presidential-bid/</ref> destroying lives and families. The bill included the notoriously racist hundred-to-one sentencing disparity between crack and powder [[cocaine]],<ref name="c-span.org">https://www.c-span.org/video/?18528-1/violent-crime-control-act-1991</ref> and added more than forty federal [[death penalty]] crimes. Biden boasted “we do everything but hang people for jaywalking.”<ref name="books.google.com">''[https://books.google.com/books?id=AK_DAwAAQBAJ&lpg=PA141&dq=we%20do%20everything%20but%20hang%20people%20for%20jaywalking&pg=PA141#v=onepage&q=we%20do%20everything%20but%20hang%20people%20for%20jaywalking&f=false The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America]'', Naomi Murakawa, Oxford University Press, Jul 10, 2014, p. 141.</ref>

Biden's [[racist]], [[sexist]], and [[bigot]]ted handling of [[Anita Hill]] left him widely ostracized until Obama rehabilitated him as his vice presidential pick.,<ref>https://www.essence.com/news/politics/joe-biden-anita-hill-comment-2020-presidential-run/</ref><ref>https://youtu.be/sM19YOqs7hU</ref> He ha earned the nicknames of "Gropin' Joe" for his scandalous groping of women and even little girls, and ''QuidProQuo Joe'' for [[obstructing justice]] by firing a prosecutor and a Billion dollar payoff as a bribe. Multiple women have described and complained about his bizarre, unwanted touching of them and even sniffing their hair. His penchant for unwanted groping of women and young girls was ignored by party loyalists who made him the Democrat frontrunner.<ref>https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2015/02/18/what-are-we-going-to-do-about-creepy-uncle-joe-biden/</ref> ''[[The Washington Post]]'' reported that Biden likes to get nude in front of female [[Secret Service]] Agents when his wife isn't around.<ref>https://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/ct-joe-biden-media-balancing-20140804-column.html</ref> The female agents were afraid to report the incidents because, as Vice President, Biden couldn't be disciplined under [[civil service system]] rules and the women would be simply reassigned elsewhere - effectively demoted - a gross violation of women's equal rights and abuse of power inequities. Anita Hill found her private conversation with Biden shortly before entering the 2020 presidential race "deeply unsatisfying."<ref name="pbs.org">https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/anita-hill-says-recent-conversation-with-joe-biden-was-deeply-unsatisfying</ref>

Biden has embraced every wrong foreign policy view in existence since the 1980s, including supporting the [[Kremlin]] directed "nuclear freeze" movement, opposing the First Gulf War, supporting the 2003 Iraq War, and opposing the operation that killed Osama bin Laden.<ref>https://twitter.com/brithume/status/1121430027327954945</ref> On immigration, Biden claimed in 2014 that [[illegal immigrants]] were "already American citizens."<ref>Binder, John (April 25, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/25/flashback-joe-biden-in-2014-illegal-aliens-are-already-american-citizens/ Flashback–Joe Biden in 2014: Illegal Aliens are ‘Already American Citizens’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved April 25, 2019.</ref> He supports far-left, [[open borders]] positions on immigration.<ref>Arthur, Andrew R. (January 6, 2020). [https://cis.org/Arthur/Myth-Moderate-Joe-Biden The Myth of Moderate Joe Biden]. ''Center for Immigration Studies''. Retrieved January 6, 2020.</ref> He strongly supports the [[homosexual agenda]],<ref>Harvey, Linda (May 29, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/joe-biden-is-no-moderate-demorat-hes-an-lgbt-extremist Joe Biden is no ‘moderate Democrat.’ He’s an LGBT extremist]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved May 30, 2019.</ref> and he has flip-flopped on numerous issues including [[abortion]].<ref>Pollak, Joel B. (June 6, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/06/06/joe-biden-flip-flop-flip-abortion-hyde-amendment/ Joe Biden’s ‘Flip-Flop-Flip’ on Federal Funding for Abortion Is Latest Reversal]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 7, 2019.</ref> Biden has also made numerous false statements.<ref>Multiple references:
*Goodman, Alana (August 19, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/six-times-biden-described-major-events-in-his-life-that-never-happened Six times Biden described major events in his life that never happened]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved August 19, 2019.
*Boyle, Matthew (January 6, 2020). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/06/exclusive-trump-campaign-exposes-six-separate-foreign-policy-lies-by-democrat-joe-biden/ Exclusive — Trump Campaign Exposes Six Separate Foreign Policy Lies by Democrat Joe Biden]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved January 6, 2020.
*Kirkwood, R. Cort (January 7, 2020). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/34553-breitbart-details-six-foreign-policy-fibs-from-sleepy-joe Breitbart Details Six Foreign Policy Fibs From Sleepy Joe]. ''The New American''. Retrieved January 7, 2020.</ref>

Biden is the first [[Roman Catholic]] Vice President and is popularly known as a [[gaffe]] machine. As Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden was a strong supporter of [[President George W. Bush]] and helped shepherd the [[Iraq War]] resolution through Congress. Biden voted for the repeal of the Glass Steagall Act which led to the financial [[Crash of 2008]].

==2020 Presidential campaign==

===Policies===
What Biden proposes and vows is essentially not much different than radical Sanders, as in part they promote death and perversion, and implement politically correct policies and inculcate liberal "values," and increase dependence upon government from Pre-K on up, with this expensive expansion of government being funded via the economy that it will work to distress.

*LGBTQ
Biden promises to make enactment of the [[Equality Act]] during his first 100 days as President a top legislative priority, under which faithful Christians will be persecuted for obeying God and conscience. Biden states that while religious freedom is a fundamental American value, he opposes broad religious exemptions to existing nondiscrimination laws and policies across federal agencies and which he promises to reverse.

Biden intends to ban so-called “conversion therapy,” which is akin to Islamic outlawing of conversion, while promising to work to end suicide among young LGBTQ+ individuals. who are five times more likely to attempt suicide than their heterosexual peers.

Biden also charges that Donald Trump and Mike Pence have given "hate against LGBTQ+ individuals" safe harbor, and sites such policies are requiring transgender "women" to sleep and use bathrooms according to what they biologically are.

In addition, Biden promises to decriminalize HIV exposure and transmission laws, under which such failures as not informing a partner of their positive HIV status, or in donating blood, or intentionally attempting to transmit HIV is a crime. However, although sodomy is the means of HIV transmission in over 80% of cases among men (2017),<ref>[https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/gender/men/index.html HIV and Men] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved 03/11/20 </ref> yet Biden asserts that there is simply no “scientific basis” for HIV exposure and transmission laws.

Moreover, Biden believes every "transgender or non-binary person" should be able to change their "gender marker to “M,” “F,” or “X” on government identifications, passports, and other documentation," as well as use whatever facilities they feel corresponds to their gender identity. Including transgender students playing sports and using bathrooms and locker rooms.

Biden will also not permit adoption and foster care agencies that choose not to allow adoption by LGBTQ+ families to receive government funding.

Biden further promises to "ensure coverage for comprehensive care for LGBTQ+ Americans...to all appropriate health care treatments and resources...including gender confirmation surgery." As well as for HIV treatment and prevention, that of PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis) which cost about $2,000 a day, and would include coverage for lifetime treatment for HIV, which coast approximately 400,000 dollars, both of which Medicaid coverage presently includes.<ref>[https://peacebyjesuscom.blogspot.com/2019/10/negative-effects-of-homosexual.html Negative effects of homosexual relations] Retrieved 03/11/20</ref> Currently PrEP will be covered without cost-sharing starting in 2021.

Biden will also reverse the transgender military ban and rescind the prohibition against LGBTQ+ Muslims from entering the country, and permanently make upholding LGBTQ+ rights a priority of the foreign policy of the United States.

In addition, Biden intends to "advance culturally appropriate public information campaigns to promote LGBTQ+ human rights and reduce biases," and "develop and institute implicit bias training programs for federal workers and contractors to address discrimination based on race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression."
<ref>[https://joebiden.com/joes-vision/ Joe's Vision for America] Retrieved March 11, 2020</ref><ref>[http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3823392/posts Joe Biden's delusions: excerpts from his campaign's "vision" pages] Free Republic. Retrieved March 11, 2020</ref>

===Criticism===
[[File:Biden-pervert-600x399.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Joementum: Protesters moved quickly to greet Biden on the campaign trail after his historic comeback.]]
:{{See also|Joseph Biden 2020 presidential campaign|United States presidential election, 2020‎‎|Biden-Ukraine scandal}}
Early polls in August 2015 showed Biden's favorability ratings beating both [[Sec. Hillary Clinton]] and [[Bernie Sanders]]. When ''[[The New York Times]]'' began investigating the [[Biden-Ukraine scandal]], Biden dropped out of the race in October 2015.<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/21/politics/joe-biden-not-running-2016-election/index.html</ref> ''The New York Times'' reported details of the scandal in December 2015.<ref>https://archive.is/EyhQ7</ref>

A CNN focus group of registered Democrats in March 2019 roundly rejected Biden as a serious contender.<ref>https://thehill.com/homenews/media/432611-cnn-focus-group-rejects-biden</ref> [[Biden's age]] and being out of touch seemed to be major factors. Biden launched his campaign anyway on April 25, 2019, by promoting the anti-Trump Charlottesville hoax and praising violent [[Antifa]] members.<ref>Multiple references:
*Scarry, Eddie (April 25, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/joe-biden-is-running-on-the-medias-charlottesville-lie-about-trump Joe Biden is running on the media's Charlottesville lie about Trump]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved April 25, 2019.
*Spiering, Charlie (April 25, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/25/joe-biden-announces-2020-campaign-warning-about-rise-of-white-nationalism/ Joe Biden Kicks Off 2020 Campaign by Spreading Charlottesville ‘Fine People’ Hoax]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved April 25, 2019.
*Shaw, C. Mitchell (April 26, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/32138-broad-brush-biden-attacks-thomas-jefferson-donald-trump-in-fallacious-video-announcing-candidacy Biden Attacks Thomas Jefferson, Donald Trump, Using Lies to Announce Candidacy]. ''The New American''. Retrieved April 27, 2019.
See also:
*Shaw, C. Mitchell (May 1, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/32173-fbi-report-shows-biden-s-courageous-americans-in-antifa-planned-an-armed-rebellion-at-u-s-border FBI Report Shows Biden's "Courageous Americans" in Antifa Planned an "Armed Rebellion" at U.S. Border]. ''The New American''. Retrieved May 1, 2019.</ref> The mother of Heather Heyer, who was killed by a lone nutcase in a melee between protesters, condemned Biden for exploiting her daughter's death for political gain.<ref>https://www.thedailybeast.com/heather-heyers-mom-susan-bro-breaks-silence-on-biden-invoking-charlottesville-for-2020</ref> Biden's promises his first act as president would be to defeat Donald Trump. While claiming to want to unite the country, Biden did the exact opposite in his statements.<ref>Shaw, C. Mitchell (May 1, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/32165-in-first-campaign-speech-biden-promises-to-unify-america-sows-seeds-of-division Biden Promises to Unify America, Sows Seeds of Division]. ''The New American''. Retrieved May 1, 2019.</ref> President Trump noted the rigged insider support again, this time for Biden over Bernie Sanders.<ref>https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2019/04/trump-tweet-crazy-bernie-vs-sleepy-joe.jpg</ref>

While Biden largely is running on Obama's legacy, Obama machine aides told reporters that Biden is "too old, too out of touch."<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/obama-thinks-bidens-closest-advisers-are-too-old-out-of-touch/</ref> Former Obama [[Defense Secretary]] [[Robert Gates]] said that Biden had {{quotebox|been wrong on nearly every major [[foreign policy]] and [[national security]] issue over the past four decades.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/obamas-former-defense-secretary-slams-bidens-foreign-policy-credentials-age/</ref>}}
[[File:2019.04.25-01.40-thepoliticalinsider-5cc1b8cdefd1a-768x676.jpg|left|thumb|350px|Joe Biden kicked off his presidential campaign with an easily debunked lie.]]
Within the first three weeks of his campaign, Biden twice denied assessments by the U.S. [[intelligence community]] of the threat posed by China to the U.S.<ref>Larsen, Emily (May 13, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/biden-downplays-china-again-after-bowing-to-pressure-last-time Biden downplays China again after bowing to pressure last time]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved May 13, 2019. See also:
*Tapscott, Mark (May 16, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/warners-tough-china-stance-points-to-biden-weakness_2926578.html Warner’s Tough China Stance Points to Biden’s Weakness]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved May 16, 2019.
*Caplan, Joshua (June 4, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2019/06/04/joe-biden-again-scoffs-at-asias-rise-what-are-we-worried-about/ Joe Biden Scoffs at Competition with ‘Asia’: ‘What Are We Worried About?’] ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 5, 2019.</ref> Biden's son, Hunter Biden, has extensive business ties<ref>https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/28/hunter-biden-china-business-drawing-new-scrutiny/</ref> with the Chinese military.

After the Democrat's First Debate Biden suffered an across the board decline in his support. He lost ground with white Democrats (from 32% to 18%) and voters of color (from 33% to 19%), among voters without a college degree (from 35% to 18%) and college graduates (from 28% to 20%), with both men (from 38% to 24%) and women (from 29% to 16%), and among voters under 50 years old (from 21% to 6%) as well as voters aged 50 and over (from 42% to 33%). Most of Biden’s lost support in these groups shifted almost equally toward [[Bernie Sanders]] and [[Elizabeth Warren]].

[[Progressive]]s claim at the age of 76, Biden "needs to grow" to overcome his racism and bigoted treatment of women.<ref>https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-black-female-democrats-may-respond-to-bidens-candidacy</ref> Anita Hill remarked that her private conversation with Joe Biden shortly before Biden entered the race was "deeply unsatisfying." Biden hired Bernie Sanders 2016 campaign press secretary, [[CNN]] political analyst Symone Sanders, as a senior adviser to play the [[race card]]. Symone Sanders donated money to [[Pete Buttigieg]] a month before taking the job with Biden. Symone Sanders is famous for her "we don't need white people" remark on CNN.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1rslAgK8uM&feature=youtu.be</ref>

Biden called the [[impeachment]] of [[Bill Clinton]] on 11 felony charges a "partisan lynching".<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/politics/biden-1998-impeach-kfile/index.html</ref>

Biden is known for flip-flopping his political positions.<ref>Pollak, Joel B. (May 28, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2019/05/28/joe-biden-fifty-years-flip-flops/ Pollak: Joe Biden’s Fifty Years of Flip-Flops]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved May 29, 2019.</ref> Commentator David Harsanyi remarked, {{quotebox|at his present political trajectory, Biden may end up promising to perform late-term abortions on transgendered Guatemalan migrants with his bare hands by the time the debate rolls around.<ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/27/first-debate-proved-democratic-party-gone-loco/</ref>}}

As a serial groper, Biden promised a "hands-on" approach to governing.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkREGzfSCAY</ref> With a reputation as a street fighter, Biden was KO'd in the first round of debates by a girl in a performance unworthy of even [[Dan Quayle]]. Reeling from the knock out blow, Biden warned his competitors that, after eight years in the Obama administration, he had the 'dirt' on all of them.<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/biden-warns-democratic-rivals-hes-got-all-this-information-about-other-peoples-pasts</ref> [[Michelle Obama]] refused to defend Biden's stance on segregation.<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/07/michelle-obama-silent-on-bidens-praise-for-segregationists/</ref> His poll numbers crashed after being outed as a racist.

Biden's campaign suffered a serious blow in September 2019 when it became known that he is currently under investigation by Ukrainian prosecutors for misusing his power as U.S. Vice President to interfere in a [[money-laundering]] investigation of his son,<ref>https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1175392716110401543</ref> [[Hunter Biden]].<ref name="thehill.com">https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived</ref> Biden displayed his contempt and disrespect when questioned at a townhall meeting, calling ordinary citizens and voters "damn liars."<ref>https://twitter.com/MollyNagle3/status/1202648690302869505</ref>

Biden stated he opposed moving the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem despite previously claiming to support such an action.<ref>Rambaran, Vivian (November 7, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bidens-opposition-to-moving-israel-embassy-in-direct-conflict-with-past-statements Biden's opposition to moving Israel embassy in direct conflict with past statements]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved November 7, 2019.</ref>

===Biden-Ukraine collusion scandal===
[[File:Obama, Groppin Joe and Hunter.jpg|right|250px|thumb|Obama (left) appointed Joe Biden (center) to dole out $1 Billion to the Ukraine for which the Biden Family, thru Hunter Biden (right) received $50,000 a month in [[kickback]]s.<ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/23/like-russian-collusion-ukraine-hysteria-is-pure-projection-by-media-and-democrats/ https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/21/trump-ukraine-biden-1507051</ref> ]]
:{{See also|Biden-Ukraine scandal}}
As Vice President, Biden oversaw the disbursement of $1 billion allocated by the U.S. to the new government of Ukraine. In 2014, Biden's son [[Hunter Biden]], was appointed to the board of directors of Burisma Holdings, the largest oil and gas company in Ukraine. Hunter Biden was hired by [[Mykola Zlochevsky]], who served as Ukraine's ecology minister in the previous administration. Hunter Biden was paid $166,000 per month. The money was split with the nephew of [[Whitey Bulger]].

Zlochevsky came under investigation by the new administration for alleged embezzlement of $5 Billion while ecology minister. The prosecutor traced payments made to Hunter Biden. Vice President Biden threatened the new Ukrainian administration to withhold $1 Billion in U.S. allocated funds unless the prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden was fired.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/09/world/europe/corruption-ukraine-joe-biden-son-hunter-biden-ties.html</ref>

Biden bragged about having caused the firing of the [[Ukraine]] prosecutor to a [[CFR]] conference.

U.S. banking records show Hunter Biden's firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, received regular transfers — usually more than $166,000 a month — from Burisma from spring 2014 through fall 2015, during a period when Joe Biden was the main U.S. official dealing with Ukraine. Biden threatened Ukrainian President [[Petro Poroshenko]] that the [[Obama administration]] would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending Ukraine toward insolvency, if it didn't immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin who was investigating his son, Hunter. Biden recounted, {{quotebox|"'You’re not getting the billion'. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money'...Well, [SOB], he got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time."<ref name="thehill.com">https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived</ref><ref>https://www.cfr.org/event/foreign-affairs-issue-launch-former-vice-president-joe-biden</ref>}}
Yuriy Lutsenko, who replaced Shokin as the prosecutor looking into Burisma, said the evidence in the Burisma case he'd like to present to William Barr, particularly the vice president's intervention.

Between April 2014 and October 2015, more than $3 million was paid out by Burisma to an account linked to Biden's and Devon Archer's Rosemont Seneca firm, according to the financial records placed in a federal court file in Manhattan in another case against Archer. The bank records show that, on most months when Burisma money flowed, two wire transfers of $83,333.33 each were sent to the Rosemont Seneca–connected account on the same day. The same Rosemont Seneca–linked account typically then paid Hunter Biden one or more payments ranging from $5,000 to $25,000 each. Ukrainian prosecutors reviewed internal company documents and wanted to interview Hunter Biden and Archer about why they had received such payments, but couldn't because of Joe Biden's intervention.

On September 4, 2019, former Prosecutor General [[Victor Shokin]] made a sworn affidavit outlining Joe Biden's shakedown.<ref>https://www.scribd.com/document/427618359/Shokin-Statement</ref>

Biden was needed for [[Deep State coup 2.0]]. When he was no longer needed he was dispatched to the ash-heap of history.
[[File:Biden blood eye.jpg|x180px|right|thumb|Many have expressed concern if Biden is up to the rigors of campaigning, let alone the duties of office.]]

===Eric Ciaramella===
[[Deep State]] informant [[Eric Ciaramella]] was assigned to the Obama [[White House]] by [[Russia collusion hoax]] mastermind [[John Brennan]]..He was detailed to the staff of [[National Security Council]] [[Susan Rice]] and Vice President [[Joe Biden]].<ref>http://www.ukrweekly.com/uwwp/wp-content/uploads/current-pdf/The_Ukrainian_Weekly_2015-47.pdf</ref> Ciaramella worked on Ukrainian issues for Biden in 2015 and 2016 during the time Biden was the "point man" handing out U.S. taxpayer cash to Ukraine.

Ciaramella worked with [[Democratic National Committee]] operative [[Alexandra Chalupa]] to dig up dirt on the [[2016 Trump campaign|Trump campaign]] during the [[2016 presidential election]]. Ciarmella invited Chalupa into the [[Obama]] White House for meetings.<ref>https://archive.usukraine.org/coalition/report-wh-press-conf-events.shtml</ref> Chalupa a key figure behind manufacturing the [[Russia collusion hoax]] and in the [[Ukrainian collusion scandal]] with the [[Atlantic Council]] and [[Crowdstrike]]. Ciaramella set the Trump [[impeachment inquiry]] in motion.

In May 2017, Ciaramella was instrumental in helping generate the “Putin fired Comey” narrative. A Ciaramella email the day after Comey's firing ended up in the media, which is reported to have allegedly called Comey “crazy, a real nut job.” Ciaramella is said to have argued that “[[President Putin]] suggested that President Trump fire Comey.” In the days after Comey’s firing, this presidential action was used to further political and media calls for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate supposed ‘Russia collusion.’ Ciaramella was dismissed from the Trump White House in June 2917 and accused of illegal [[leak]]s and working against the interests of the [[United States]] government. Ciaramella returned to the CIA.

In August 2019 The Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG), [[Michael Atkinson]], referred to Ciaramella as one who has
:“some indicia of an arguable political bias … in favor of a rival political candidate"
The ICIG was severely criticized for changing the rules at the last minute and allowing a third-party "[[whistleblower]]" [[hearsay]] complaint.

===Primaries===
With the [[Impeachment sham]] over, Biden's usefulness was over, too. Biden's poor finish in the Iowa caucus demonstrated to many that he never was a viable candidate, and that support for his campaign was not very deep.

The Democrats rigged Iowa caucus fiasco to [[Stop Bernie]] landed Biden in fourth place. Many days after the charade, Biden press spokesperson Symone Sanders, speaking on behalf of the campaign, refused to officially acknowledge if the DNC's posted results were legitimate.<ref>https://hotair.com/archives/john-s-2/2020/02/05/biden-spokesperson-symone-sanders-refuses-say-results-iowa-caucus-legitimate/</ref> Biden himself became increasingly testy over questions concerning his durability as a candidate. At a campaign event in Hampton, [[New Hampshire]] on February 9, when asked by a female college student if he could turn his campaign around after Iowa, Biden snapped and called her "a lying dog-faced pony soldier."<ref>https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/02/biden-lashes-out-at-female-new-hampshire-voter-asking-about-his-poor-performance-in-iowa-youre-a-lying-dog-faced-pony-soldier-video/</ref> This came days after Biden belittled another woman asking about his policy on coal. Such incidents only increased doubts about Biden's mental fitness to be President.

====Iowa caucuses====
Biden ran forth, as expected.

====New Hampshire primary====
Biden ran fifth in a filed of ten, slightly worse than expected.

====Nevada caucuses====
Biden ran second with 17% to Sanders, who failed to achieve a majority; the other 49% was spread among 5 remaining candidates.

====Super Tuesday - March 3, 2020====
:{{See also|Bernie Derangement Syndrome|Joe Biden's mental decline}}
Biden's campaign donations dried up as corruption allegations were revealed in the [[Ukrainegate scandal]] during the Democrats' impeachment sham, and he didn't spend anytime or money in any Super Tuesday state. In reaction to Bernie's sweep of early primaries, the DNC establishment's [[Stop Bernie]] movement went into full swing.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/27/us/politics/democratic-superdelegates.html</ref> 1344 delegates were up for grabs on Super Tuesday with an unknown number to win as [[Superdelegates]] have yet to decide to intervention was necessary to Stop Bernie and thwart the will of the people.<ref>.https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/31/dnc-superdelegates-110083</ref> Former DNC chair [[Donna Brazile]] scolded [[RNC]] chair Ronna McDaniel to "stay the hell out" for publicly commenting on DNC internal delegate vote rigging processes and speaking "Russian talking points". Steyer was out on Friday, Buttigieg cut a deal on Sunday, and both Klobuchar and [[Beto O'Rourke|Beto]] backed Biden on Monday. In accepting Buttigieg's endorsement, Biden who at the time was under investigation in the Ukrainegate scandal,<ref>https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/ukraine-court-forces-probe-into-biden-role-in-firing-of-prosecutor-viktor-shokin/2020/02/27/92710222-5983-11ea-8efd-0f904bdd8057_story.html</ref> told a throng of adoring Democrats that Buttigieg reminded him of his son.<ref>https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/03/03/he-reminds-me-of-my-son-biden-buttigieg-love-fest-joined-by-beto-klobuchar-in-last-minute-panic-to-stop-bernie-893278</ref> Biden's son, [[Hunter Biden]], was accused of [[money laundering]] millions of dollars from the Ukrainian firm [[Burisma]] for the Biden family and asked an Arkansas court to delay disclosing how much money he made from Burisma and Chinese sources in a paternity suit until after Super Tuesday.<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/hunter-biden-wants-to-delay-child-support-deposition-until-after-key-primaries</ref> The court denied the request.<ref>https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/feb/27/judge-tells-hunter-biden-to-show-up-nex/?news-arkansas#.XlfN9s2Jm-Y.twitter</ref>

On election eve MSNBC reported that former President Obama confirmed 'the signal has been sent in the past 36 hours' to engage the [[Stop Bernie movement]].<ref>https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1234660535079067649?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw</ref> Biden encouraged voters to get out for 'Super Thursday.'<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5y3XHIyLRM</ref>

With the 100% of the popular vote counted at 12:00 PM EST Wednesday, Democrats had not yet published final allocation of 444 delegates from California and Texas.<ref>https://www.politico.com/2020-election/delegate-count-tracker-democratic-primary/</ref> Partial results posted by the DNC indicated Biden had 453 delegates, Sanders 382, Warren 50, and [[Gabbard]] 1. Bloomberg quit, accounting for 46 [[Zombie]] delegates, Buttigieg 26, and Klobuchar 7. With the insiders work done, the likelihood of moving the goalposts to allow Superdelegates to vote in the first round was reduced. Meanwhile Biden and the [[liberal media]] took a victory lap.

Far left [[animal rights]]/[[Green New Deal|cow flatulence]] activists Sarah Segal and Ashley Froud disrupted Biden's victory speech,<ref>https://monkeyviral.com/what-is-let-dairy-die-and-why-is-it-all-over-the-democratic-race/</ref><ref>https://www.trendsmap.com/twitter/tweet/1235047072421703680</ref> Bernie trashed Biden on the [[Iraq War]] and his support for [[NAFTA]] trade deals which destroyed [[middle class]] America and manufacturing jobs. Warren ran 3rd in her home state of [[Massachusetts]]. In 10 debate appearances since June 2019, [[Elizabeth Warren]] was never asked once by the [[fake news]] media complex about her false claims of [[Native American]] heritage.<ref>https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/03/06/warren-went-all-10-debates-without-one-question-about-her-native-american-claims-894450</ref>

====Texas primary====
Five days after the voting, Dallas County Elections Administrator discovered her office did not count about 10% of the total ballots that voters cast in [[Texas]]' Super Tuesday primary.<ref>https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/politics/dallas-county-asks-to-recount-election-after-44-thumb-drives-discovered/287-84e19400-81bc-4256-bcb3-e25df380d699</ref> She discovered 44 thumb drives containing ballots that were not included in the final results. Biden was alleged to have been the winner.

Biden nonetheless was declared the winner, and without Texas Sanders' hopes evaporated. The scandal, of course, garnered no national media coverage.

====Michigan and the blue collar working class vote====
At a [[Michigan]] autoplant, an autoworker asked about Biden's promise to take [[gun]]s away and put [[Beto O'Rourke]] in charge of confiscation. The discussion got heated, Biden crouched up close and wagged his finger in the face of a [[labor union]] member and traditional Democrat voter. The voter told Biden he didn't appreciated Biden sticking his finger in his face and Biden's [[bullying]] tactics. Biden told the voter, "you're full of s---",<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/youre-full-of-shit-biden-snaps-at-voter-over-second-amendment</ref> and threatened, "you wanna take this outside?" Biden's handlers intervened and whisked Biden away.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTLuFlHm4c8&feature=youtu.be</ref>

The contest in Michigan, which Sanders won in 2016, is said to be test of who commands the blue collar and [[working class] vote, Biden or Sanders. Biden was greeted at the auto plant with cheers of “Trump! Trump! Trump!”'<ref>https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/03/trump-trump-trump-trump-detroit-auto-workers-cheer-president-trump-during-joe-bidens-plant-visit/</ref>

===Debates===
Biden attempted to clarify some of his positions on segregation and race in the pre-primary Third Debate. By the time he finished he had insinuated that black parents didn’t know how to raise their children.<ref>https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2019/09/13/bidens-answer-inequality-one-explicitly-racist-moments-time-democratic-debate/</ref>
{{quotebox|'''Linsey Davis:''' Mr. Vice President, I want to talk to you about inequality in schools and race. In a conversation about how to deal with segregation in schools back in 1975, you told a reporter, “I don’t feel responsible for the sins of my father and grandfather. I feel responsible for what the situation is today, for the sins of my own generation, and I’ll be damned if I feel responsible to pay for what happened 300 years ago.” You said that some 40 years ago, but as you stand here tonight, what responsibility do you think that Americans need to take to repair the legacy of slavery in our country?

'''Joe Biden:''' Well, they have to deal with the … Look, there is institutional segregation in this country. And from the time I got involved, I started dealing with that. Redlining, banks, making sure that we are in a position where—

Look, we talk about education. I propose that what we take is those very poor schools, the Title 1 schools, triple the amount of money we spend from $15 to $45 billion a year. Give every single teacher a raise to the equal of … A raise of getting out of the $60,000 level.

No. 2, make sure that we bring in to the help with the stud—the teachers deal with the problems that come from home. The problems that come from home, we need… We have one school psychologist for every 1,500 kids in America today. It’s crazy. The teachers are required—I’m married to a teacher. My deceased wife is a teacher. They have every problem coming to them.

Make sure that every single child does, in fact, have three, four, and five-year-olds go to school. School! Not day care, school. We bring social workers into homes of parents to help them deal with how to raise their children. It’s not that they don’t want to help. They don’t know what— They don’t know what quite what to do. Play the radio. Make sure the television—excuse me, make sure you have the record player on at night. The phone—make sure the kids hear words. A kid coming from a very poor school—er, a very poor background will hear 4 million words fewer spoken by the time they get there.

'''Davis:''' Thank you, Mr. Vice President.

'''Biden:''' No, I’m going to go like the rest of them do, twice over, OK? Because here’s the deal. The deal is that we’ve got this a little backwards. And by the way, in Venezuela, we should be allowing people to come here from [[Venezuela]]. I know [[Nikolas Maduro|Maduro]]. I’ve confronted Maduro. No. 2, you talk about the need to do something in Latin America. I’m the guy that came up with $740 million to see to it those three countries, in fact, change their system so people don’t have to chance to leave. You’re all acting like we just discovered this yesterday! Thank you very much.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7Tpx5WMFio&feature=youtu.be</ref>}}
Even ''[[The Young Turks]]'' slammed Biden for his racist answer in blaming parents for not knowing how to raise their children rather than answering question.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZzt4HNR1bE</ref>

===Racism===
In addition to Biden's longstanding alliance with fellow Democrat segregationists in the U.S. Senate, Biden is known for a history of making racially insensitive remarks.

====Segregation====
[[File:Biden segregation.png 1718483346.png|left|350px|thumb|Biden called segregation "a matter of Black pride" and pushed for a [[Constitutional Amendment]] to outlaw Court ordered de-segregation.<ref name="politico.com">https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/joe-biden-integration-school-busing-120968_full.html</ref>]]
Biden reopened the debate over the crimes of the Democrats [[slave power]]<ref name="zerohedge.com">https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-20/biden-doubles-down-after-reminding-everyone-democrats-owned-slaves</ref> at a time some far leftists were pushing for [[slave reparations]].<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/05/30/book-joe-biden-1973-lectured-cleveland-what-good-negro/</ref> In 1972 Biden argued that segregation was good for Blacks and was what they wanted. {{Quotebox|“I think the concept of busing … that we are going to [[integrate]] people so that they all have the same access and they learn to grow up with one another and all the rest, is a rejection of the whole movement of black pride, a rejection of the entire black awareness concept, where black is beautiful, black culture should be studied; and the cultural awareness of the importance of their own identity, their own individuality.”<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/read-the-transcript-of-the-october-1975-npr-interview-with-sens-joe-biden-and-edward-brooke</ref>}} Biden led a coalition of segregationists that was opposed by Republican Sen. [[Edward Brooke]], the first [[African American]] senator elected since Democrats forced the end of [[Reconstruction]] after the [[American Civil War|Civil War]]. National Public Radio's David Ensor asked Biden, "What about a constitutional amendment? Isn’t that what you’re gonna have to end up supporting if you want to stop court ordered busing, too?" Biden responded, {{Quotebox|"That would clearly do it. I’m hopeful, and I have — now that I have some sort of new allies in this area, it’s become respectable now for [[liberal]]s to at least say publicly what they’ve been saying in private, that busing doesn’t work. We are trying to figure out whether or not we can come up with an innovative piece of legislation which would limit the remedy, and I don’t — honestly don’t know whether we can come up with something constitutional. And if we can’t, I will not in an attempt to eliminate busing violate the Constitution. I won’t do that. The only way, if I’m gonna go at it, I’m gonna go at it through a Constitutional Amendment if it can’t be done through a piece of legislation."}} Ensor reported that Biden proposed renewing segregation because busing wasn't working, and Biden was afraid that older liberal colleagues were blind to how Black separatists felt about their children being bused to [[white]] schools. {{Quotebox|"There are those of we [[social experiment|social planner]]s who think somehow that if we just [[subrogate]] man’s individual characteristics and traits by making sure that a presently heterogeneous society becomes a totally homogeneous society, that somehow we’re going to solve our social ills. Quite to the contrary."}}

Title VI of the [[1964 Civil Rights Act]] prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.<ref>https://quizlet.com/45411923/ethical-and-legal-issues-2-flash-cards/</ref> By 1975, Biden authored an amendment to gut Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. ''[[Politico]]'' writes of the whole sordid affair, {{quotebox|Biden morphed into a leading anti-busing crusader—all the while continuing to insist that he supported the goal of school desegregation, he only opposed busing as the means to achieve that end. This stance, which many of Biden’s liberal and moderate colleagues also held, was clever but disingenuous. It enabled Biden to choose votes over principles, while acting as if he was not doing so....In a seminal moment, the Senate thus turned against desegregation. The Senate had supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act, [[1965 Voting Rights Act]] and 1968 Fair Housing Act....the Senate remained the last bastion for those who supported strong integration policies. Biden stormed that bastion...<ref name="politico.com">https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/joe-biden-integration-school-busing-120968_full.html</ref>}} Sen. James Abourezk of [[South Dakota]] related how Biden reacted when Abrourezek tried to block the amendment: {{quotebox|‘Abourezk, you **********, if I ever vote for another one of your bills, it'll be a cold day in hell.'

‘Calm down, Joe,' I told him, ‘You're eventually gonna thank me for doing this.'

‘Like hell I will you dirty *******.'

A few days later, Biden came into the scheduled committee meeting, this time with a broad, friendly grin aimed directly at me.

‘Jesus, Abourezk, you were right,' he said. ‘I am gonna thank you. You should see the Delaware newspapers—big front-page headlines saying, ‘Biden Battles Liberals in Washington.' He was unabashedly elated. ‘They love me back home, how did you know this would happen?'<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/biden-exploded-at-dem-colleague-over-busing-called-him-dirty-bastard/</ref>}} Republican Sen. [[Edward Brooke]], the first black senator ever to be popularly elected, called Biden's amendment “the greatest symbolic defeat for [[civil rights]] since 1964.” Brooke accused Biden of leading an assault on integration.

Prof. Ronnie Dunn said opposition to busing was motivated by [[racism]] and that without the court-ordered policy Biden probably would not have become vice president in 2009. “What I find ironic is that [Biden] was the vice president under a president who, if it hadn’t been for the social interaction that occurred during the era of busing, I argue we likely would not have seen the election of Barack Obama." Dunn, an Urban Studies professor at Cleveland State University and author of the book ''Boycotts, Busing, & Beyond'', said Biden made the case in favor of maintaining segregation. "That was an argument against desegregation.” Dunn said Biden must address the issue if he runs for president. “People have to be held accountable."<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/joe-biden-embraced-segregation-in-1975-claiming-it-was-a-matter-of-black-pride</ref>

Biden's opposition to integration didn't stop there. ''HuffPo'' reported: {{quotebox|In 1977, two black men nominated for key Justice Department posts by [[President Jimmy Carter]] easily won approval from the Senate Judiciary Committee. After confirmation by the full Senate, Drew Days III became the nation’s first black head of the department’s civil rights division and Wade McCree became the second black solicitor general. Only one member of the committee voted against them. It wasn’t segregationists [[Strom Thurmond]] (R-S.C.) or James Eastland (D-Miss.). It wasn’t even former [[Ku Klux Klan]] member [[Robert Byrd]] (D-W.Va.). The lone Judiciary Committee vote against the two men was Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.).<ref>https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-busing-nominees_n_5ca3c03de4b03174b92904f7</ref>}}

In 1981 Biden said in a Senate hearing, “sometimes even [[George Wallace]] is right about some things.” Wallace is famous for saying in 1963, “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.”<ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/09/biden-sometimes-even-george-wallace-is-right/</ref>

In a farewell address to retiring Democrat segregationist Sen. John Stennis in 1986 Biden said: {{quotebox|"To think that I would be one day on the floor of the United States Senate, being paid such accolades by such a man of character and courage as John Stennis is beyond my wildest dreams. And I mean that sincerely."<ref>https://youtu.be/9X6Y2CLqgDM</ref>}}

When Biden announced his candidacy ''Politico'' attempted to poo-poo and explain away Biden and liberal Democrat racism with a back-handed slap at [[school vouchers]] for minority students, which liberal elites have strenuously opposed ever since the Biden Amendment passed:
{{quotebox|School desegregation, as part of a broader suite of civil rights reforms, was once as a vital component of the Democratic Party platform. Yet since the 1970s, Democrats, in the face of concerted white backlash, have largely accommodated themselves to increasing segregation in public schools across the nation. Party leaders, even the most progressive among them, rarely propose serious solutions to this vexing problem. A sincere critique of Biden’s busing record would require a broader reckoning of the Democratic Party’s—and by extension the nation’s—abandonment of this central goal of the [[civil rights movement]]. And it’s hard to see that happening anytime soon.<ref>https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/05/05/joe-biden-busing-problem-226791</ref>}}

Sen. [[Cory Booker]] of [[New Jersey]] condemned the [[2020 Democrat primary]] frontrunner at the Juneteenth annual commemoration of [[Republican]] [[Abraham Lincoln]] ending [[slavery]] in the United States. {{quotebox|You don’t joke about calling black men 'boys'...frankly, I’m disappointed that he hasn’t issued an immediate apology for the pain his words are dredging up for many Americans. He should.<ref name="zerohedge.com">https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-20/biden-doubles-down-after-reminding-everyone-democrats-owned-slaves</ref>}}

====Superpredators====
In a 1993 Senate floor speech, Biden warned of "predators on our streets" who were "beyond the pale" and said they must be cordoned off from the rest of society because the justice system did not know how to rehabilitate them. Biden described a {{quotebox|"cadre of young people, tens of thousands of them, born out of wedlock, without parents, without supervision, without any structure, without any conscience developing because they literally ... because they literally have not been socialized, they literally have not had an opportunity."}} Biden went on in the same breath, {{quotebox|"It doesn't matter whether or not the person that is accosting your son or daughter or my son or daughter, my wife, your husband, my mother, your parents, it doesn't matter whether or not they were deprived as a youth. It doesn't matter whether or not they had no background that enabled them to become socialized into the fabric of society. It doesn't matter whether or not they're the victims of society. The end result is they're about to knock my mother on the head with a lead pipe, shoot my sister, beat up my wife, take on my sons."}} Biden said, that he didn't care "why someone is a malefactor in society" and that criminals needed to be "away from my mother, your husband, our families." Biden added "we should focus on them now" because "if we don't, they will, or a portion of them, will become the predators 15 years from now."

Biden's 1993 "predator" remarks are similar to comments then made by first lady [[Hillary Clinton]] where she warned of "Superpredators" who had "no conscience, no empathy" and who need to be brought "to heel."

====Biden Crime Bill====
:{{Main article|The New Jim Crow}}
Biden was a staunch opponent of school desegregation in the 1970s and leading crusader for mass incarceration in the 1980s and 1990s. Biden described [[African American]] felons in the aftermath of the Central Park 5 jogger case as 'predators' too [[sociopath]]ic to rehabilitate,<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/07/politics/biden-1993-speech-predators/index.html</ref> and [[white supremacist]] senators as his friends.

Biden boasts as one of his greatest legislative achievements passage of the 1994 Crime bill which locked up 10% of the Black adult male population of the United States.<ref name="nytimes.com"/><ref>http://www.prisonpolicy.org/research/incarceration_rates_growth_causes/</ref>

When [[President George H.W. Bush]] asked for a record increase in funding to fight the [[War on Drugs]], Biden told a TV interviewer {{Quotebox|"In a nutshell, the President's plan does not include enough police officers to catch the violent thugs, enough prosecutors to convict them, enough judges to sentence them or enough prison cells to put them away for a long time."<ref>http://articles.latimes.com/1989-09-06/news/mn-1646_1_drug-war</ref><ref>http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/12/first-step-act-skepticism.html</ref>}} [[File:1994 Superpredator Act.jpg|right|350px|thumb|The Superpredator Act of 1994. Feinstein, Kerry and Biden are clearly visible with President Clinton. The bill is known for its sentencing disparities which led to mass incarceration of Blacks.<ref>https://fair.org/home/senate-crime-bill-unscrutinized-by-the-press/</ref>]] Biden, [[Ted Kennedy]], and [[Strom Thurmond]] worked on proposals that raised maximum penalties, removed a directive requiring the US Sentencing Commission to take into account prison capacity, and created the cabinet-level “drug czar” position. In 1984, they passed the Comprehensive Crime Control Act, which, among other things, abolished [[parole]], imposed a less generous cap on “good time” sentence reductions, and allowed the Sentencing Commission to issue more punitive guidelines.

Biden bragged on the Senate floor that it was under his and Thurmond's leadership that Congress passed a law sending anyone caught with a rock of cocaine the size of a quarter to jail for a minimum of five years - the notoriously racist hundred-to-one sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine. In the same speech Biden took credit for [[civil asset forfeiture]] and seizure laws, and demanded to know why [[Papa Bush]] hadn't sentenced more drug dealers to life in prison or exercise the [[death penalty]] once Congress had given him that power.<ref name="c-span.org"/>

Biden's version of a new crime bill added more than forty crimes that would be eligible for the [[death penalty]]. Biden boasted “we do everything but hang people for jaywalking.”<ref name="books.google.com"/> The [[NAACP]] and other groups lobbied against the bill.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/27/us/civil-libertarians-go-after-crime-bills.html</ref> Although the 1991 crime bill was defeated by Republicans, the 1994 Biden/Clinton crime bill was passed.<ref>''[https://books.google.com/books?id=SGUJBAAAQBAJ&lpg=PT142&dq=biden%20strongly%20believes%20the%20administration%20needs%20to%20seize%20control%20of%20the%20issue%20by%20upping%20the%20ante&pg=PT142#v=onepage&q=biden%20strongly%20believes%20the%20administration%20needs%20to%20seize%20control%20of%20the%20issue%20by%20upping%20the%20ante&f=false The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America]'', Naomi Murakawa.</ref>

By 2001, the United States had the highest rate of incarceration in the world. [[Human Rights Watch]] reported that in seven states, African Americans constituted 80 to 90 percent of all drug offenders even though they were no more likely than whites to use or sell illegal drugs. Prison admissions for drug offenses reached a level in 2000 for African Americans more than 26 times the level they had been under [[Ronald Reagan]].<ref>[https://www.thenation.com/article/hillary-clinton-does-not-deserve-black-peoples-votes/ Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote], Michelle Alexander, ''The Nation'', February 10, 2016</ref> Biden's "social planning" had proven effective.

In May 2019 journalist and historian Shaun King observed, {{Quotebox|I’ve heard a very dangerous lie being told about how the systems of mass incarceration were built in this nation. I didn’t expect to have to respond this way because I didn’t expect Joe Biden to lie about the 1994 Crime Bill. He wrote it. He fought for it. And the results were devastating. Every single expert on this topic agrees. This week Joe Biden took the stance that not only is he not sorry for the Crime Bill, but that it didn’t even increase mass incarceration. And it’s shameful because either he’s willfully lying, which is horrible, or he’s just plain ignorant about the true impact of the bill, which is also horrible. Either way, I have a major problem with it because these laws are still in effect and they are doing damage in our communities every single day, 24 hours a day.<ref>https://www.facebook.com/shaunking/videos/688203931610804/</ref>}}

The Leftist ''Jacobin'' magazine summed up Biden's record: {{Quotebox|"It’s not as if Biden didn’t know what he was doing.... He just didn’t care. Biden had made a calculated decision that the elections he would win were worth the damage he inflicted.... But even if Biden has subsequently learned the error of his ways, the rank cynicism and callousness involved in his two-decade-long championing of carceral policies should be more than enough to give anyone pause about his qualities as a leader, let alone a [[progressive]] one."<ref>https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/08/biden-crime-mass-incarceration-police-prisons</ref>}}

====Mass incarceration====
Sen. [[Cory Booker]] told the the NAACP convention in [[Detroit]] in response to another so-called "criminal justice reform" proposal by Biden: {{quotebox|For a guy who helped to be an architect of mass incarceration, this in an inadequate solution to what is a raging crisis in our country.<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/cory-booker-calls-joe-biden-an-architect-of-mass-incarceration</ref>}}

Biden now advocates for a man sentenced to prison to choose to be incarcerated in a women's prison.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0ovc0BAUYo&feature=youtu.be</ref>

====Sexual harassment====
[[File:Creepy Uncle Joe.jpg|left|thumb|350px|''The Washington Post'' calls Biden "Creepy Uncle Joe" for his habit of groping wives and children.]]
''See also:'' [[Creepy Uncle Joe]]
According to the ''[[Washington Post]]'', female [[Secret Service]] agents did not want to work with Biden. Whenever Biden's wife was not home, Biden stripped naked. The female Secret Service agents where afraid to report incidents to their superiors in fear for their jobs.<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2015/02/18/what-are-we-going-to-do-about-creepy-uncle-joe-biden/?utm_term=.b4c0f48017a7 What are we going to do about Creepy Uncle Joe Biden?, ''WaPo'']</ref> In the days just prior to his announcement to run, no less than 8 women of the [[MeToo movement]] complained of Biden's inappropriate grabbing and touching. Even Biden's wife, Jill, has been visibly seen creeped-out by Biden's awkward attempts at public displays of affection.<ref>https://thepoliticalinsider.com/watch-even-joe-bidens-wife-wants-him-to-keep-his-hands-to-himself/</ref> Biden responded by admitting America has become more conservative and then mocked critics and victims in a speech before firefighters. Biden told ''[[The View]]'' he needs to be more "cognizant" about groping women and children.<ref>https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/joe-biden-joins-view-president-trump-beat-easily/story?id=62638945</ref> Even Rep. [[Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez]] remained unconvinced of Biden's alleged flip on his touchy-feelly approach to women in politics.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/ocasio-cortez-bidens-answers-on-touching-havent-convinced-all-women/</ref>

For years, Biden failed to apologize to [[Anita Hill]] personally for the way she was treated when she testified in the 1991 confirmation of [[Clarence Thomas]]..<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/26/us/politics/anita-hill-biden-clarence-thomas.html</ref><ref>https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/440833-biden-on-anita-hill-i-dont-think-i-treated-her-badly</ref><ref>https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/26/biden-apology-accusers-anita-hill-1290843</ref><ref>https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2019/apr/26/trump-news-today-live-biden-anita-hill-view-2020-democrats-updates-us-politics</ref>

Upon his announcement Biden immediately secured the endorsement of prominent sleaze lawyer and former Democratic hopeful [[Michael Avenatti]]. Avenatti shares many of Biden's core precepts, including his racist agenda remarking that the Democratic nominee "had better be a white male."<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/joe-biden-michael-avenatti/</ref> Avenatti, a chief critic of President Trump, dropped out of the race after being arrested for felonious assault and battery on a woman and extortion. An unrepentant racist, Biden says immigrants should have to speak [[English]].<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kgxq3Va9Lpc&feature=youtu.be</ref>

Biden said enshrining [[LGBT+]] protections into labor and civil rights laws would be his priority. Passing the [[Equality Act]] “will be the first thing” he would ask for.<ref>https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/joe-biden-gay-waiter-comments-democratic-election-seattle-medina-a8981351.html</ref>

Campaign staffers physically block reporters when asking Biden questions, then photographing anyone who objects.

Biden's mental faculties have been called into question: he confused UK prime minister [[Theresa May]] with [[Margaret Thatcher]].<ref>https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1123250/theresa-may-trump-news-margaret-thatcher-joe-biden-us-president-2020</ref> According to mental health experts, Biden's slurring of words and phrases and verbal inarticulateness marks a decline in mental abilities.

===Trump-Russia conspiracy===
[[File:Biden and Flood.jpg|right|350px|thumb|Biden and Flood with their wives.<ref>[https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/02/loaded-for-guccifer-aims-for-a-romanian-guccifer-2-0/ Say “Hi” To Guccifer 2.0], Adam Carter, ''Disobedient Media'', February 24, 2018.</ref>]]
:{{See also|Hillary Clinton email scandal|Trump-Russia collusion hoax}}
[[Warren Flood]] was Vice President Biden's information technology ([[IT]]) director at the [[White House]].

According to the metadata, on June 15, 2016, three days after [[Julian Assange]] announced [[WikiLeaks]] was about to publish “emails related to Hillary Clinton,” the first Guccifer 2.0 document was created by Warren Flood on the East coast at 13:38 EDT, and was modified thirty minutes later by [[Феликс Эдмундович]], or Felix Edmunovich, the Russian patronymic of [[Felix Edmunovich Dzerzhinsky]],<ref>In Russian, the middle name is taken from the father, and the last name from the grandfather. Use of a patronymic expresses deep affection and emotion ([[Vladimir Ilyich]] or [[Joseph Vissarionovich]], for example) and is generally reserved for family members or close friends.</ref> founder of the [[KGB]] - a blatantly amateurish attempt to create [[Russia]]n fingerprints.

A document that Warren Flood authored in 2008, and was attached to one of [[John Podesta]]'s leaked emails, was used by Guccifer 2.0 as a template into which he then copied the contents of the DNC's ''Trump Opposition Research'' document. It was copied from this file: https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/fileid/26562/7365 which is also attached to [https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/26562 this leaked email]. It is Flood's document that the "CONFIDENTIAL" text in the background derives from.

Guccifer 2.0 was a [[2016 Hillary Clinton campaign]] [[false flag]] operation set up to discredit the [[DNC]] revelations at [[Wikileaks]]. Adam Carter writes, {{quotebox|"one particular group would have been particularly desperate precisely at that time, for the emergence of a narrative about Russian hackers to discredit proper leaks / justify claims that all leaks are 'probably doctored' and they will have very likely known [Warren] Flood too. That group is the Clinton Campaign. As of June 12th, [2016] they were in a position where [[Julian Assange]] had just announced WikiLeaks' upcoming release of [[Hillary Clinton email scandal|Hillary's emails]], she was still under [[FBI]] investigation, and [[Trump]] was attacking Hillary for her use of a private server with his supporters frequently chanting "lock her up!" at rallies. The campaign was in a desperate position and really needed something similar to a Russian hacker narrative and one where they would be fortunate to have a seemingly clumsy hacker that leaves lots of 'fingerprints' tainting files and bringing the reputation of leaks into question... Sure enough, 2-3 days later, Guccifer2.0 - the world's weirdest hacker - was spawned and started telling lies in an effort to attribute himself to the malware discoveries, etc."<ref>http://g-2.spac/#7</ref>}}

[[National Security Advisor]] [[Susan Rice]] sent an email to herself about a secret [[Oval Office]] meeting where the ''[[Clinton-Steele dossier]]'' was discussed.<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/donald-trump-intelligence-report-russia/index.html</ref><ref>https://apnews.com/152579d488a740b2a8d39fbe2f34506d</ref><ref>https://apnews.com/a82309544e9e465fa2ad4f83e5a48540</ref> The email was written and sent to herself 15 minutes after Donald Trump was sworn in on January 20, 2017:<ref>https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-graham-uncover-unusual-email-sent-susan-rice-herself-president-trump-s</ref> {{Quotebox|"On January 5, following a briefing by [[IC]] leadership on Russian hacking during the [[2016 Presidential election]], President Obama had a brief follow-on conversation with FBI Director [[Jim Comey]] and Deputy Attorney General [[Sally Yates]] in the Oval Office. Vice President Biden<ref>[https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/03/08/doj-political-surveillance-from-the-irs-in-2011-to-the-fisa-court-in-2016/ DOJ Political Surveillance – From the IRS in 2011 to the FISA Court in 2016], Posted on March 8, 2020 by sundance. theconservativetreehouse.com </ref> and I were also present. President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities "by the book". The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book. From a national security perspective, however, President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the [[Trump transition|incoming team]], we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia. '''[Redacted section]''' The President asked Comey to inform him if anything changes in the next few weeks that should affect how we share classified information with the incoming team. Comey said he would."<ref>[https://nobsopus.blogspot.com/2019/03/grassley-to-rice.html Grassley to Rice], February 8, 2018. [https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-02-08%20CEG%20LG%20to%20Rice%20(Russia%20Investigation%20Email).pdf Original].</ref>}}

The following day [[DNI]] [[James Clapper]] released a public version of the ''Intelligence Community Assessment'' on Russian election interference, a joint [[John Brennan]], Clapper and Comey document consisting of recycled reports on [[RT]] with two pages of [[sexual]] innuendo from the Clinton opposition research ''Steele dossier''.<ref>The notorious "pee-pee memo."</ref> NSA Dir. [[Adm. Mike Rogers]] dissented from the conclusions and did not attend the days' prior Oval Office meeting.<ref>https://www.theepochtimes.com/why-are-the-brennan-comey-and-rogers-transcripts-being-withheld_2677629.html</ref><ref>[https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf ]</ref>

''[[The Washington Post]]'' was assured by Comey, Brennan and Clapper that "the sources involved in the [Clinton-Steele dossier's] reporting were credible enough to warrant inclusion in the highly classified [presidential] report.”<ref>http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-trump-russia-allegations-20170110-story.html</ref> Brennan however, in public Congressional testimony months later, said the dossier and its sources ''were not'' credible enough to incorporate in the joint ''Intelligence Community Assessment'' on Russian election interference. Brennan swore the Clinton-Steele dossier'' did not “in any way” factor into the CIA's assessment that Russia interfered in the election to help Trump.

Clapper [[leak]]ed the substance of the ''Clinton-Steele dossier'' to [[Jake Tapper]] of [[CNN]] before Comey briefed President-elect Trump, providing the "news hook" in Comey's words, that CNN was looking for to publicize the dossier's unverified contents after Trump was briefed. This was the beginning of the bogus pee-memo rumor designed to smear President-elect Trump, with Obama, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Biden, Rice and Sally Yates colluding together. And the purpose was to hoax the [[FISA court]] into granting an extension of surveillance beyond Trump's swearing in. It is also a prime example of "circular journalism" and [[fake news]] [[collusion]] between [[mainstream media]] and [[Democrat]] operatives.<ref>https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/susan-rice-email-president-obama-russia-investigation/</ref>

Biden claims that if he had been president rather than Barack Obama in 2015 and 2016, the Russians would not have interfered in the 2016 election.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfhqT3zre20&feature=youtu.be</ref>

===Anti-2nd Amendment===
Immediately after [[Deep State coup 2.0]] was announced to thwart the will of voters and [[subvert]] American [[democracy]], Biden rolled out his gun seizure plan.<ref>https://townhall.com/tipsheet/juliorosas/2019/10/02/joe-biden-rolls-out-his-extensive-gun-control-plan-n2554041</ref> In accepting [[Beto O'Rourke]]'s support as part of the Texas deal that excluded Sanders, Biden vowed to put Beto in charge of the gun seizure program.<ref>https://www.ammoland.com/2020/03/beto-will-be-bidens-gun-grabbing-point-man-its-war-says-ccrkba/</ref>

===Marijuana===
Biden authored legislation increasing mandatory minimum sentences for marijuana possession. Nearly 20 million people have been arrested and incarcerated for marijuana possession since Biden wrote the bill.<ref>http://www.drugpolicy.org/issues/drug-war-statistics</ref> Mandatory minimums give the judge no discretion in handing out a sentence. Marijuana arrests outnumber arrests for [[violent]] [[crime]].<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/us/marijuana-arrests.html</ref> President Trump has taken the lead in sentencing and prison reform.<ref>https://grabien.com/story.php?id=237403</ref> Biden wrote the legislation which established the Office of National Drug Control Policy, also known as the "drug czar."

When a big money donor who favors decriminalization held a fundraiser for Biden in May 2019, Biden "evolved" his 30-plus year stance on marijuana mandatory minimum sentencing which has caused so much hardship and suffering to families, particularly minorities who have been Biden's targets.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/joe-bidens-shift-on-marijuana-came-days-before-fundraiser-with-pro-legalization-donor/</ref> Biden suddenly showed no concern about exposing children to a gateway drug.

===Atlantic Council===
:{{See also|Military industrial complex}}
In 2011 Biden delivered the keynote address at the [[Atlantic Council]]’s distinguished leadership awards. He did so again in 2014 at its “Toward A Europe Whole and Free” conference,<ref>https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/commentary/transcript/remarks-by-vice-president-joe-biden-at-the-atlantic-council-s-toward-a-europe-whole-and-free-conference/</ref> which was dedicated to expanding NATO’s influence and countering “Russian aggression.” Speakers like [[Zbigniew Brzezinski]], a former U.S. [[national security adviser]], sniped at Barack Obama for an insufficiently bellicose posture toward Russia, while former Secretary of State [[Madeleine Albright]] fretted over polls showing low public support for U.S. [[interventionism]] overseas. Biden emphasized the need to power [[Europe]] with non-Russian sources of natural gas. This provided a prime opportunity to Ukrainian suppliers like Burisma and U.S. energy titans. Many of these energy companies, from [[Chevron]] to Noble Energy, also happen to be top donors to the Atlantic Council.

After the [[Maidan Revolt]], ''Foreign Policy'' magazine wrote, “No one in the U.S. government has wielded more influence over Ukraine than Vice President Joe Biden."<ref>https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/10/30/what-will-ukraine-do-without-joe-biden-putin-war-kiev-clinton-trump/</ref> The Atlantic Council described Biden as “the point person on Ukraine in the Obama administration.”<ref>https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/explainer-five-things-about-the-ukraine-controversy-you-need-to-know-plus-a-freebie/</ref> “Ukraine was the top, or one of the top three, foreign policy issues we were concentrating on,” said [[Michael Carpenter]], Biden’s foreign policy adviser. “[Biden] was front and center.”<ref>https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/10/05/bidens-visits-to-ukraine-draw-scrutiny/</ref>

===Plagiarism, again===
In giving lip service to [[climate change]], Biden has been accused of plagiarizing content from climate activist websites for his own fundraising site. Biden's alleged climate policy appears to be cut and pasted from non-profit websites to solicit donations for his campaign.

Josh Nelson noted, "The paragraph in Joe Biden's climate plan about carbon capture and sequestration includes language that is remarkably similar to items published previously by the Blue Green Alliance and the Carbon Capture Coalition...Biden's goal is to make CCUS a widely available, cost-effective, and rapidly scalable solution to reduce carbon emissions to meet mid-century climate goals," reads the Biden website. The website for the Carbon Capture Coalition states, "[our] goal is to make carbon capture, use and storage (CCUS) a widely available, cost-effective, and rapidly scalable solution to reduce carbon emissions to meet mid-century climate goals."

Biden's website also claims that, "carbon capture, use, and storage (CCUS) is a rapidly growing technology that has the potential to create economic benefits for multiple industries while significantly reducing carbon dioxide emissions." The language mirrors the language of a 2017 letter to the Senate from the Blue Green Alliance: "Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is a rapidly growing technology that has potential to create economic benefits for multiple industries while significantly reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions."<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/joe-bidens-climate-platform-appears-to-plagiarize-from-nonprofits/</ref><ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/04/joe-bidens-global-warming-plan-repeatedly-plagiarizes-sources/</ref>

[[CNN]]'s John King didn't buy the staff flub excuse. "This is a leadership issue," King said.<ref>https://dailycaller.com/2019/06/05/leadership-issue-cnn-john-king-biden-plagiarism/</ref>

===Biden's age and voters===
''See also:'' [[Biden's age]] and [[Joe Biden's mental decline]] and [[Joe Biden's eye filling with blood during a town hall]]

Biden is reported to have suffered two brain aneurysms, the first a near death experience in 1988.

Joe Biden is turning 77 in November 2019. He will be nearly 78 years old on [[Election Day]] 2020. Biden hasn’t disclosed his medical history since 2008, when physicians found he had an irregular heartbeat.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bidens-eye-fills-with-blood-during-cnn-climate-town-hall Biden's eye fills with blood during CNN climate town hall], Washington Examiner</ref> Biden has long been plagued by health issues.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/surgeon-who-operated-on-joe-biden-hes-better-now-than-before-brain-surgery Surgeon who operated on Biden: He's better now than before brain surgery], Washington Examiner, 2019</ref><ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bidens-eye-fills-with-blood-during-cnn-climate-town-hall Biden's eye fills with blood during CNN climate town hall], Washington Examiner</ref> and appears to be medicated. See also: [[Biden's age]] and [[Joe Biden's eye filling with blood during a town hall]].

Nate Silver of ''FiveThirtyEight'' wrote about Biden's age:
{{Cquote|A lot of rank-and-file voters do have concerns about Biden’s age. An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll in February found that 62 percent of voters had reservations about voting for someone aged 75 or older. [https://news.gallup.com/poll/254120/less-half-vote-socialist-president.aspx Other polls] have also shown advanced age to be a concern among Democrats, Republicans and independents alike.<ref>[https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-bidens-opponents-being-too-coy-in-making-age-an-issue/ Voters Care About Biden’s Age — Not About His Gaffes] by Nate Silver,''FiveThirtyEight''</ref>}}

Biden says he met with survivors of the Stoneman Douglas Parkland shooing while he was vice president; the Stoneman Douglas shooting occurred more than one year after Biden left office.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYOBkzU6VcI</ref> Whatever the concerns, Biden would likely be a one-term president.

===Taxes===
[[File:CCP Biden.png|right|300px|thumb|]]
Biden has vowed to raise taxes on the American people.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWqL7nM4T-s</ref>

===Fundraising===
Biden accepted the maximum contribution allowed from former HBO chief executive officer Chris Albrecht. Albrecht resigned as chief executive officer at HBO ain 2007 after being arrested and charged with assaulting his girlfriend. In 1991 Time Warner Inc. paid a $400,000 settlement to a female worker allegedly assaulted by Albrecht while on the job. The victim reported directly to Albrecht at the time as senior vice president at HBO Independent Productions.

=== Joe Biden and his controversies related to the military ===

Joe Biden has faced a couple of controversies related the military. Below is some information related to those controversies.

*[[Joe Biden and the military]]

==2009–2017: Vice presidency==
As he assumed office, Biden's responsibilities as vice president were not made clear. He had no specific portfolio of responsibilities. He alarmed the nation on April 30, 2009, by going on network television to warn Americans to stay out of confined spaces such as subways and airplanes, lest they catch Swine Flu. Health officials rejected his scare tactics and the White House immediately repudiated them.

Under President Obama the budget [[deficit]] reached over $1 trillion for the first time in history. When asked over the fate of the United States' going into bankruptcy, Biden stated at an [[AARP]] meeting, "Now, people when I say that look at me and say, "What are you talking about, Joe? You’re telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?’" Biden said. "The answer is yes, that's what I’m telling you."<ref name=bankrupt />

Biden eventually was placed in charge of promoting the [[Obama administration]]'s [[Recovery Summer]] in 2010, an attempt to highlight the Democratic Congress's [[American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009]], or "[[economic stimulus]] program. During Recovery Summer, the workforce shrank, [[unemployment]] swelled, and [[economic growth]] slowed to less than 2%. More Americans fell victim to Democrat economic policy and by the [[2010 Midterm election]] sweep no less than 27,000,000 people were unemployed or underemployed.

===Seal Team 6===
In killing Osama bin Laden, Obama transformed the [[War on Terror]] from a preventative war against terrorism to a war of vengeance and retribution to enhance Obama's re-election prospects.

The families of Navy Seal Team 6 blame Vice President Biden for revealing the identity of the Navy Seal Team that killed [[Osama bin Laden]].<ref>https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/03/bidens_betrayal_of_seals_should_doom_presidential_run.html</ref> Seal Team 6 is a covert action force, and all its members are sworn to secrecy to never reveal the actions they participate in. The government likewise is bound to protect their identities. In boasting of the killing, Biden named Seal Team 6 by name as the unit that found bin Laden.

On August 6, 2011, the [[Taliban]] ambushed a Chinook helicopter carrying 30 U.S. service members — including 15 SEAL Team 6 members — in [[Afghanistan]].<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2013/05/09/military-families-allege-muslim-cleric-damned-dead-navy-seals-at-ceremony/</ref> Everyone on board was killed.<ref>https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/7/the-betrayal-of-the-navys-seal-team-6/</ref> In a show of [[multiculturalism]], the [[Obama administration]] insisted a [[Muslim]] cleric be present when the bodies were recovered.<ref>http://joemiller.us/2013/05/seal-team-6-press-conference-obama-at-fault-muslim-cleric-prayed-at-funeral-damned-them-to-hell/</ref>

Families of the slain SEAL members held a news conference at the National Press Club demanding an investigation into why their sons had been identified, despite specific assurances by the Obama administration their identities would be protected.<ref>http://joemiller.us/2013/05/navy-seal-team-vi-families-to-reveal-obama-admin-s-culpability-in-death-of-sons/</ref> To add insult, the families complained about the Muslim cleric that the Obama administration required to preside in a ceremony over their remains, damned their souls to hell as infidels in an Islamic prayer proclaiming victory.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S7h5PO3r-w</ref>

===Cronyism and influence peddling===
Five months into the [[Obama administration]] in June 2009 Biden's son, [[Hunter Biden]] and Chris Heinz, stepson of Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair [[John Kerry]] formed Rosemount Seneca. The firm partnered with the Thornton Group run by Devon Archer, and the Bank of China, to form Bohai Harvest RST (BHR) in China. Devon Archer is the nephew of [[Whitey Bulger]], head of the [[Boston]] Irish [[mafia]] who enjoyed federal protection under FBI director [[Robert Mueller]] as an informant. Bulger was convicted of 19 murders that occurred while under Mueller's protection; some have linked the Bulger klan to as many as 52 murders while Mueller was the United States Attorney in Boston. The Bank of China is owned by the Chinese government and closely connected with the Chinese military and intelligence services. Biden, Heinz, and Archer transferred and sold "duel use" technology to the Chinese military which was used to create the Chinese [[drone]] program and replicate the Chinese version of the [[F-15]] fighter.<ref>https://nypost.com/2018/03/15/inside-the-shady-private-equity-firm-run-by-kerry-and-bidens-kids/</ref> Unsurprisingly, Joe Biden disregards the assessment of U.S. intelligence agencies and doesn't regard China as a strategic threat.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD9d3TUYHNo&feature=youtu.be</ref><ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/05/02/bidens-alleged-financial-ties-u-s-enemy-china-overshadow-2020-bid/</ref>

In April 2014, Hunter Biden joined the Board of Directors of Burisma, a [[Ukrainian]] oil and gas company despite having no experience in the oil and gas industry.<ref>http://burisma.com/en/board-of-directors/</ref><ref>http://www.dw.com/en/who-are-hunter-bidens-ukrainian-bosses/a-17642254</ref> The status of an independent Ukraine became the focus of much [[fake news]] reporting during the 2016 election and the [[Trump-Russia collusion hoax]].

Joseph Biden is a supporter of the [[Trans Pacific Partnership]] TPP.

==Past campaigns==
[[Liberal]] Biden, notorious for his long-winded speeches and his foot-in-mouth moments, as illustrated by his declaration that "we have to go spend money to keep from going [[bankrupt]]."<ref name=bankrupt>[http://cnsnews.com/news/article/joe-biden-we-have-go-spend-money-keep-going-bankrupt Joe Biden: ‘We Have to Go Spend Money to Keep From Going Bankrupt’], [[Cybercast News Service]]</ref> A favorite of the [[liberal media]], Biden avoids the mockery that greeted a less gaffe-prone predecessor, [[Dan Quayle]].

He ran for President in 1988 but dropped out of the race after admitting he had [[plagiarism#Joe Biden|plagiarized]] a speech by the leader of the British [[Labour Party]].<ref>[http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history_lesson/2008/08/the_write_stuff.html Why Biden's plagiarism shouldn't be forgotten.] - [[Slate Magazine]] - Aug. 25, 2008</ref>

Biden considered running as a Presidential candidate for the 2004 elections, but then decided against it, saying that it would be "now too much of a long shot.".<ref>[https://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/special/president/candidates/whos.in.out.html Who is in, who is out 2004], [[CNN]]</ref> He was later mentioned as a possible running mate for Democratic Senator [[John Kerry]], but he instead urged Kerry to chose Senator John McCain.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4961694/ McCain urged to join Kerry ticket], [[MSNBC]]</ref>

He won few votes when running for [[2008 Presidential election|president in 2008]]; he dropped out after placing fifth in Iowa in January, 2008. Biden became [[Barack Obama]]'s vice-presidential running mate. His campaign stressed his Irish Catholic roots in appeals to working class [[Democrat]]s, who had deserted Obama in the primaries but returned in the fall.

===1988 Presidential campaign===
Joe Biden announced his candidacy for President in 1987. He ran on his experience, saying in an campaign advertisement "The [[White House]] isn't the place to learn how to deal with international crisis, the balance of power, war and peace, and the economic future of the next generation." <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121919956426355701.html Biden's Foreign Policy Background Carries Growing Cachet], [[Wall Street Journal]]</ref> His campaign was short-lived due to controversies. While campaigning in [[New Hampshire]] in 1987, a civilian asked about his grades in college, to which Biden yelled, "I think I have a much higher I.Q. than you do." He went on to say that he "went to law school on a full academic scholarship - the only one in my class to have a full academic scholarship" adding that he "ended up in the top half" of his class (Biden graduated 76th in a class of 85) and "graduated with three degrees from college."

Biden explained his comments "I did not graduate in the top half of my class at law school and my recollection of this was inaccurate...I graduated from the University of Delaware with a double major in history and political science. My reference to degrees at the Claremont event was intended to refer to these majors - I said 'three' and should have said 'two'." <ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/22/us/biden-admits-errors-and-criticizes-latest-report.html Biden Admits Errors and Criticizes Latest Report], [[The New York Times]]</ref>

Later in the campaign he was found to have plagiarized a speech from British [[Labour Party]] leader [[Neil Kinnock]]. The plagiarism was considered all the more serious, because it included details of Kinnock's life which were not true in Biden's case. Biden dropped out of the race in December 1987, and did not participate in the 1988 Democratic caucuses and primaries.

===2008 Presidential campaign===
:{{Main article|2008 Presidential election}}
Biden declared his candidacy for [[President]] on January 31, 2007 but withdrew in January 2008 after coming 5th in the [[Iowa Caucus]], receiving only 1% of the vote.<ref>[http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/01/04/chris-dodd-abandons-presidential-campaign-after-poor-showing-in-iowa/ Biden, Dodd Bow Out of Presidential Race After Poor Showings in Iowa], [[Fox News]]</ref> He ran on his foreign policy experience and credentials in the Senate. Biden voted for the [[Operation Iraqi Freedom]] - the [[War in Iraq]]. On November 15, 2007, during the CNN presidential debate, he said {{Cquote|''This is not about experience. It's not about change. It's about action. Who among us is going to be able to, on Day 1, step in and end the war?.''}}

In a presidential debate, when asked, “Would you call for [[tariff]]s to protect American consumers from unsafe products from [[China]]? Are you willing to go there?” Biden answered, “I’m not. No, I’m not willing to go there."<ref>https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/biden-was-a-much-better-candidate-when-he-wasnt-running/</ref>

During an ABC Democratic presidential debate, Biden was asked about the statement he made regarding [[Barack Obama]]. Biden said: {{Cquote|''I think he can be ready but right now, I don’t believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training. I think that I stand by the statement.''<ref>[http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/23/mccain-launches-tv-ad-using-bidens-words-against-obama/ McCain Launches TV Ad Using Biden’s Words Against Obama], [[Fox News]], August 23, 2008</ref>}}

===2008 Vice presidential campaign===
[[Image:0.jpg|right|thumb|250px|Biden campaigning for Barack Obama, 09/24/08]] Biden had been mentioned as a Vice Presidential candidate for Senator [[Barack Obama]], in that he would add foreign policy experience to the ticket. When asked in June over the speculation, Biden stated, "I'd make a great president. I'd make a great [[Secretary of State]]. I'd make a great vice president." <ref>The Hill's Blog Briefing Room: [http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2008/06/17/biden-id-make-a-great-president-secretary-of-state-vice-president/ Biden: I'd Make a Great President, Secretary of State, Vice President]</ref> On August 19, Biden was asked by reporters of his VP status, to which he replied "Hey guys, I'm not the guy. See ya." <ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/08/biden-on-obamas.html?cid=127045696 Biden on Obama's VP Pick: 'I'm Not The Guy'] [[ABC News]], August 19, 2008</ref> It was Joe Biden's son, Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden, who issued an arrest warrant on fabricated charges to attempt to discredit Larry Sinclair's National Press Club news conference where he alleged a [[gay]] affair with Obama and claimed he was using [[cocaine]] at the time.<ref>http://archive.is/8a4xF</ref> Biden was nominated by Obama choice for vice president a week later.<ref>https://larrysinclair.com/blog/a-reminder-from-lame-cherry/</ref>

In August 2005 Biden paradoxically and nonsensically said, "[[John McCain]] is a personal friend, a great friend, and I would be honored to run with or against John McCain, because I think the country would be better off."<ref>[http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NGRhNzJlMWY5NjdiNzhjMTRkYjMzNjYwOGJmYzNjMTY= 'Just Words' That Joe Biden Would Like To Forget], [[National Review Online]]</ref>

However, on August 23 it was announced that Biden would be Obama's 2008 running mate. They appeared together in [[Springfield]], [[Illinois]]. Obama proudly introduced Senator Biden,
''

:''"Let me introduce to you, the next president — the next vice president of the United States of America, Joe Biden."''

Biden took the stage and endorsed Obama, saying,
''

:''"In this election year the choice is clear, one man stands ready to deliver change we desperately need, a man I'm proud to call my friend, a man who will be the next President of the [[United States]], Barack America."''
''

Obama hoped Biden would help the ticket in multiple ways:

* Biden has extensive foreign policy experience in the United States Senate and as such could have helped to bolster Obama's comparative lack of experience in this area.
* Biden is [[Catholic]], and Obama was weak with that key voting bloc; however, the [[Catholic Church]] may have taken offense at Biden's pro-[[abortion]] positions (see below).
* Biden was born in [[Pennsylvania]], a must-win state for Obama where he was thought to be weak;<ref>[[Hillary Clinton]] defeated Obama by a wide margin in the [[Pennsylvania]] primary; in August polls show Obama leading McCain by an average of only 5.8% in [[Pennsylvania]] [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/pa/pennsylvania_mccain_vs_obama-244.html RealClearPolitics Pennsylvania Tracking]</ref>
* Biden's son is going to [[Iraq]], which may have helped to rehabilitate Obama's image as anti-military; however, Biden himself never served.

Almost immediately after his selection, the conflict between his pro-[[abortion]] position and that of his church surfaced:<ref>[https://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS29316+23-Aug-2008+PRN20080823 Choice of Biden Re-Opens Catholic Wound], [[Reuters]]</ref>

:Biden has said: "I am a long-standing supporter of ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' and a woman's right to choose." But Biden's own bishop, Bishop Michael Saltarelli of Wilmington, Del., has ... denounced the notion that politicians can 'personally oppose' abortion, but refuse to pass laws protecting the unborn. He made clear that pro-abortion Catholic politicians should refrain from receiving the Eucharist:

:"The promotion of abortion by any Catholic is a grave and serious matter. Objectively, according to the constant teaching of the Scriptures and the Church, it would be more spiritually beneficial for such a person to refrain from receiving the Body and Blood of Christ. I ask Catholics in this position to have the integrity to respect the Eucharist, Catholic teaching and the Catholic faithful."

In September of the campaign Biden asked [[Missouri]] State Senator Chuck Graham, who has [[paralysis]], to "Stand up, Chuck, let 'em see you. Oh, God love you. What am I talking about? I tell you what, you're making everybody else stand up, though, pal. I tell you what, stand up for Chuck." <ref name=standupchuck />

Biden's [[Republican]] opponent for the Vice Presidency was [[Alaska]] [[Governor]] [[Sarah Palin]]. They participated in their first and only Vice Presidential debate on October 2 in [[St. Louis]], [[Missouri]]. Biden was elected the 47th Vice President of the United States on November 4, 2008.

===2012 Vice presidential campaign===
Biden got a pass from fellow [[liberal]]s in the media despite acting like a rude clown during his vice presidential debate with [[Paul Ryan]] in October 2012. Biden repeatedly interrupted Ryan and engaged in other offensive behavior, and even complained about not getting more time despite talking more than Ryan did. At one point Biden even nonsensically interjected, "so now you're Jack Kennedy?" in interrupting a valid point being made by Ryan.

==1973–2009: U.S. Senate==
[[Image:Biden_on_Meet_the_Press.jpg|right|thumb|250px|Biden on Meet The Press, 09/09/07]] In 1972, Biden unseated the liberal Republican Senator [[Cale Boggs]]. In 1973, he hence became the fifth-youngest U.S. senator in U.S. history. He was later reelected six times.

Biden, as a senator from [[Delaware]] from 1973-2009, served on the Senate Judiciary Committee and subsequently the Committee on Foreign Relations, alternating as the chair or ranking member on both committees. Biden in 2007 was ranked as the third most liberal Senator by the non-partisan ''National Journal''.<ref>[http://www.nationaljournal.com/conventions/co_20080823_9669.php Biden's Senate Vote Record], ''National Journal''</ref>

Biden has close ties with lobbyists, receiving $5,133,072 in contributions from [[lawyer]]s and [[lobbyist]]s since 2003.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12735.html Statesman known for slips of his tongue], [[Politico]]</ref> Biden requested 116 congressional [[earmark]]s in 2008 alone, resulting in $342 million in taxpayer money.<ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/23/biden.earmarks/?iref=hpmostpop Biden, Obama helped keep 'Bridge to Nowhere' alive], [[CNN]]</ref>

During a late-night marathon debate over President George W. Bush's tax cut bill, 98-year-old Sen. [[Strom Thurmond]] began ailing. Biden told the ''New York Daily News'' "I saw Strom sitting in his seat, he looked awful. I said, 'Strom, you should go home'. He's an old buddy."<ref>https://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/storm-concern-strom-article-1.901327</ref>

Biden was for the Iraq War before he was against it.

===Abortion===
On the [[abortion issue]], Biden is [[pro-abortion]] and opposed President [[George W. Bush]]'s two nominees to the U.S. [[Supreme court]]. On ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' he said, "I strongly support Roe v. Wade....That’s why I led the fight to defeat [Robert] Bork. Thank [[God]] he is not in the Court or Roe v. Wade would be gone by now."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20130312002759/http://nrlc.org/Election2008/comparison0909084c.pdf Where Do the Candidates Stand on Abortion?], [[National Right to Life Committee]]</ref> He received a 100% rating from [[NARAL Pro-Choice America]] in 2001, 2004, 2005 and 2006,<ref>http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=53279</ref> but not in other years because of his opposition to [[partial-birth abortion]] and public funding for abortions.<ref>http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Joe_Biden_Abortion.htm</ref>

===2nd Amendment===
He is a strong opponent of 2nd-amendment rights, earning an F by the [[National Rifle Association]]. Biden has also voted to give [[Social Security]] benefits and citizenship to [[illegal aliens]]. On energy, he opposes increased domestic oil production, saying proponents of offshore drilling want to "rape" the Outer Continental Shelf.<ref>http://www.votesmart.org/speech_detail.php?sc_id=400058</ref>

===Judiciary committee===
Biden was a long-time member of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, which he chaired from 1987 until 1995 and served as ranking minority member from 1981 until 1987 and again from 1995 until 1997. He almost never supported a supreme court nominee who was not in his party and presided over two of the more contentious [[U.S. Supreme Court]] confirmation hearings ever, [[Robert Bork]] in 1987 and the [[racism|racially motivated]] hearings for [[Clarence Thomas]]<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egTyaIAaqz8 Clarence Thomas High-Tech Lynching]</ref> in 1991.

Sen. [[Arlen Specter]], who jumped to the Democrats in 2009, wrote in his memoirs that Biden admitted to him that Biden believed Anita Hill was lying.

===Biden crime bill===
[[File:Joe Biden.jpg|250px|right|thumb|Biden [[collude]]d with segregationists to undermine the Supreme Court decision of ''Brown vs. Board''.]]
The [[Biden Crime Bill of 1994]], also known as the Superpredator Act, came in response to the Central Park jogger case and trial of the Central Park Five. On its twentieth anniversary the Brennan Center observed, {{quotebox|It expanded the death penalty, creating 60 new death penalty offenses under 41 federal capital statutes. It eliminated education funding for incarcerated students, effectively gutting prison education programs. Despite a wealth of research showing education increases post-release employment, reduces recidivism, and improves outcomes for the formerly incarcerated and their families, this change has not been reversed.

And the bill created a wave of change toward harsher state sentencing policy. That change was driven by funding incentives: the bill’s $9.7 billion in federal funding for prison construction went only to states that adopted truth-in-sentencing (TIS) laws, which lead to defendants serving far longer prison terms. Within 5 years, 29 states had TIS laws on the books, 24 more than when the bill was signed. New York State received over $216 million by passing such laws. By 2000 the state had added over 12,000 prison beds and incarcerated 28 percent more people than a decade before.}}

===War on sovereignty===
:{{Main article|War on sovereignty}}
In 1992, Joe Biden penned a piece for the ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'' entitled, "''How I Learned to Love the New World Order''," in which he extolled "collective security" through the [[United Nations]] and called for a “permanent commitment of forces for use by the Security Council.”

On July 14, 1993, a little over a year after writing the Journal op-ed cited above, Senator Biden introduced Senate Joint Resolution 112 urging the new president, [[Bill Clinton]], to initiate discussions to establish a standing United Nations army. Under his proposal, United States bases and facilities would be made available to train UN forces, and the president would not “be deemed to require the authorization of Congress” to make American troops, facilities, or other assistance “available to the [[Security Council]] on its call.”

He also called for the creation of a “[[new world order]]” at the Export-Import Bank conference in Washington on April 5, 2013. “The affirmative task we have now is to actually create a new world order,” he exclaimed.

===Foreign policy===
As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden voted against aid to the government of [[South Vietnam]] leading to its collapse in 1975.

He called the rise of the [[Ayatollah Khomeini]] in the [[Iranian Revolution]] in 1979 a step forward for [[human rights]].

Biden opposed [[Ronald Reagan]]'s development of the [[missile defense system|Missile Defense System]] and ending the doctrine of [[Mutual Assured Destruction]].

He voted against the [[Persian Gulf War]] in 1991.

Biden voted for the [[Iraq War]] in 2002. In a 2005 interview with ''Meet the Press'', Biden advocated a troop surge saying, "I’ve been calling for more troops [in Iraq] for over two years, along with [[John McCain]] and others subsequent to my saying that." On July 23, 2007, Biden said, "there's not a single [[military]] man in this [[audience]], who will tell this Senator he can get those troops out in six months if the order goes today, let's start telling the truth."<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wylferBh3IA</ref> He advocated Iraqi [[federal]]ism based on [[nation]]al and [[religious]] differences for [[Kurd]]s, [[Shiite]]s and [[Sunni]]s.

==Early life==
Biden was born at Scranton State General Hospital in Scranton, [[Pennsylvania]]<ref name="timeline">[http://biden.senate.gov/senator/timeline/ Joe Biden Timeline]</ref> and grew up in New Castle County, Delaware,<ref name="bio">[http://biden.senate.gov/senator/ Joe Biden Biography]</ref> in a middle-class family. His father was a white-collar businessman who did well but had fallen on hard times when Biden was a youth.<ref name="bluecollar">[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/08/joe_bidens_mythical_bluecollar.html Joe Biden's Mythical Blue-Collar Roots], [[Real Clear Politics]]</ref> Biden attended Archmere Academy, a private Catholic college-preparatory high school in the Wilmington, Delaware area, graduating in 1961.<ref name="bio" /> Biden took a summer job to help his family pay for his schooling.<ref name="bluecollar" /><ref>Archmere Academy [http://www.archmereacademy.com/Default.aspx?tabid=74] Tuition for 2008-2009 is $18,450.</ref> Biden received 5 [[Vietnam war]] draft deferments. He graduated from the University of Delaware in 1965, and from the Syracuse University College of Law in 1968 near the bottom of his class.<ref name="bio" /> After finishing law school Biden worked in the Wilmington, Del. public defenders office where he claims to have represented a member of the [[Black Panthers]];<ref>https://www.aaihs.org/the-1968-occupation-of-black-wilmington/#fnref-43519-4</ref> no evidence has ever been produced to support Biden's claim he ever represented a member of the Black Panthers.

Biden is a serial plagiarizer.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zPl7Ncs8AI</ref> He was accused of, and ultimately admitted to plagiarism while a student at Syracuse Law School.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/17/us/biden-was-accused-of-plagiarism-in-law-school.html Biden Was Accused of Plagiarism in Law School], [[The New York Times]]</ref> He submitted a paper in which he plagiarized from a law review article. After receiving a grade of F, he was permitted to retake the course.<ref>[http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE3DB143FF93BA2575AC0A961948260 Biden Admits Plagiarism in School But Says It Was Not 'Malevolent'], By E. J. DIONNE JR., SPECIAL TO [[The New York Times|THE NEW YORK TIMES]], Published: September 18, 1987</ref>

In 1966, while still in law school, Biden married Neilia Hunter.<ref name="timeline" /> They had three children together: Joseph R. "Beau" Dien, III, Robert Hunter, and Naomi. Shortly after his election to the Senate in 1972, his wife and infant daughter were killed in a car accident, and his two sons were seriously injured.<ref name="timeline" /> He eventually remarried to Dr. Jill Biden (née Jacobs), an educator in Delaware's schools.<ref name="bio" /> She currently is an instructor<ref>[http://www.dtcc.edu/catalog/pdf/personnel.pdf Delaware Technical Community College - College Catalog]</ref> teaching at Delaware Technical Community College. Together, the couple added a daughter, Ashley Biden, to the family.<ref name="bio" />

Biden was elected to the U.S Senate from Delaware in 1972. Delaware was a slave state. It did not join the [[Confederacy]] partially because President [[Abraham Lincoln]] suborned the Maryland state legislature and would not permit it to leave the union. Delaware, separated from the south by Maryland, could not secede on its own. Delaware voters in fact rejected Lincoln's plan to compensate for emancipation of its slaves, paid for by the federal government. Delawares Democrat and racist traditions were still very strong when Biden was elected.,<ref>https://www.westernjournal.com/dick-morris-biden-eastland-perfect-together/</ref>

Since 1991, Biden has been an [[adjunct professor]] at the Widener University School of Law, where he teaches a seminar on constitutional law.<ref name="bio" />

Biden's son, Hunter Biden, was thrown out of the [[US Navy]] for [[cocaine]] use. Hunter Biden has been a Washington [[lobbyist]] since 2001.<ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-08-24-Biden-son_N.htm Biden's son a registered lobbyist since 2001], [[USA Today]]</ref>

=== Joe Biden, his struggles with grief and his unresolved emotional wounds ===
[[File:Bill Clinton and officials on Air Force One.jpg|thumbnail|200px|[[Bill Clinton]], Joe Biden and other Clinton administration officials.]]

''See also:'' [[Joe Biden, grief and cognitive decline|Joe Biden and grief]]

Politico in an article entited ''How Grief Became Joe Biden’s ‘Superpower’'' indicates:
{{Cquote|There is no person in American politics today whose life has been so shaped by loss and grief. The long arc of Biden’s career is all but bracketed by tragedy. In 1972, his wife and baby daughter were killed in a car accident; in 2015, one of his two sons who had survived the crash died of a rare strain of brain cancer. These wretched tentpoles are not only tragedies the 76-year-old Biden has had to endure. They influenced major decisions he made about his political career—first, his priorities in the Senate; later, his decision to opt out of the presidential election of 2016. And they defined him as a person as well, according to longtime friends, former aides and veteran politicos in his home state of Delaware.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/01/25/joe-biden-2019-profile-grief-beau-car-accident-224178 How Grief Became Joe Biden’s ‘Superpower’]</ref>}}

The ''Washington Post'' states concerning Biden: "In a candid 2012 speech to military families and friends who had lost a loved one in action, Biden spoke about the anger, crisis of faith and wounds that don't really ever heal."<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/05/31/joe-bidens-heartfelt-thoughts-on-grief/ Joe Biden’s heartfelt speech on grief], Washington Post</ref>

The Associated Press indicates concerning Biden:
{{Cquote|After the accident, Biden had no interest in the Senate anymore. No ambition for anything, really. His world view shrank to taking care of his boys.

“For the first time in my life, I understood how someone could consciously decide to commit suicide,” he would later reveal.

Biden didn’t just have to deal with grief. He had the added burden of processing it in public.
<ref>[https://www.apnews.com/e5a1e70314eb44219448eeb850c65f1e Biden’s prism of loss: A public man, shaped by private grief], Associated Press</ref>}}

==Embarrassing or silly remarks==
[[File:Bidenbeforeafter.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Biden had a hair transplant, where hairs were removed from his buttocks and placed on his head.<ref>''[http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2008/08/bidens_hair.html Does Joe Biden Have Butt Hair on His Head?]'', By Jessica Pressler, ''The Intelligencer'', Aug. 25, 2008.</ref>]]
*Biden earned the nickname '''Butthead Biden''' in 1989 when he began having hair follicle transplants from his buttocks to his scalp to relieve pressure on his [[vanity]].
*In attempting to quote the the [[Declaration of Independence]] before [[Super Tuesday]], Biden misquoted, "all men and women created by" and then stumbled saying, "go, you know, you know the thing."<ref> Dominick Mastrangelo, March 02, 2020 [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/you-know-the-thing-biden-botches-declaration-of-independence-quote-during-campaign-stop 'You know, the thing': Biden botches Declaration of Independence quote during campaign stop] The Washington Examiner. Retrieved March 03, 2020</ref><ref>https://twitter.com/SteveGuest/status/1234579299652554753</ref>
*When Representative [[Gabrielle Giffords]] returned to Congress after a long hiatus (which was the result of her being shot in the head), Biden (who had a brain surgery in the past) remarked to her that "Now we're both members of the Cracked Head Club".<ref>[http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/08/gabrielle-giffords-joe-biden-cracked-head-club-/1 Biden jokes Giffords is in 'Cracked Head Club' ], [[USA Today]]</ref>

*When he met Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen, Biden said "God rest her soul" in reference to Cowen's mother. However, it was Cowen's father that died, not his mother.<ref>[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7469323/Joe-Biden-loses-the-gift-of-the-gab-on-St-Patricks-Day.html Joe Biden loses the gift of the gab on St Patrick's Day - The Daily Telegraph], [[The Daily Telegraph]]</ref>

===Hostile comments===
*At one 2005 political event he said, ''"The next [[Republican]] that tells me I'm not religious, I'm going to shove my rosary down their throat."'' <ref>[http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1840965,00.html#ixzz0xxjisdkg Does Biden Have a Catholic Problem?], [[Time Magazine]]</ref>

*In March 2007, Biden was criticizing President [[George W. Bush]] for vetoing a bill that would set a timeline for troops to be removed from Iraq, saying that [[Congress]] should "shove it down his throat."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20080903080136/http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/5/1/144042.shtml?s=us Biden on Iraq Bill: 'Shove It Down His Throat'], [[Newsmax]]</ref>

*In February 2019, Biden criticized U.S. President [[Donald Trump]] in Germany, breaking a longstanding tradition of not criticizing the current commander-in-chief in foreign countries.<ref>Gehrke, Joel (February 16, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/biden-tells-europeans-in-munich-that-america-is-an-embarrassment Biden tells Europeans in Munich that America is 'an embarrassment']. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved February 16, 2019.</ref>

===Quotations about guns===
* During a February 2013 interview, Biden said that if there was a “problem” that his wife should “walk out on the balcony here, walk out, put that double-barrel shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house.” <ref>[https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/20/biden-shotgun-advice-draws-quizzical-response/ Biden Shotgun Advice Draws Quizzical Response], [[The New York Times]]</ref> Doing so is of course, illegal, and would leave his wife holding an empty shotgun while dealing with the “problem”.

* In another February 2013 interview, Biden said "[if] you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door." Coincidently, a man from Virginia Beach had done just that a few days before, and was arrested.<ref>[https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/02/28/biden-advises-shooting-shotgun-through-door Biden Advises Shooting Shotgun Through Door], [[U.S. News & World Report]]</ref>

===Remarks about race or ethnicity===
*In July 2006, while speaking to a group of Indian-Americans in Delaware, Biden stated, "You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I'm not joking." His comment was caught on C-SPAN.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13757367/ Biden explains Indian-American remarks], [[MSNBC]]</ref>

*In August 2006, Biden was on [[Fox News]] Sunday and bragged about his state being a former [[slave]] state. "You don't know my state. My state was a slave state. My state is a border state. My state is the eighth largest black population in the country. My state is anything from a northeast liberal state." <ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFduMuP7v-k</ref>

*Talking about his fellow Democratic presidential candidate [[Barack Obama]] he said in January 2007, "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy, ... I mean, that's a storybook, man." <ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/31/biden.obama/ Biden's description of Obama draws scrutiny], [[CNN]]</ref>

*Thanks To Japan’s [[Xenophobia]], Women Are Encouraged To Stay In The Workforce.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7u1d_1V1Ekc</ref>

===Erroneous comments===
*Joe Biden once told voters that his [[helicopter]] was "forced down" on "the superhighway of terror" by Afghan extremists. When actually, snow forced the helicopter pilot to land and wait out a [[storm]].<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,431604,00.html Fact Check: Biden's Chopper Was 'Forced Down' by Snowflakes], [[Fox News]]</ref>

*In the Oct. 2008 VP debate, Biden made numerous misstatements, on topics ranging from the Constitution to the Mideast.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,433314,00.html Did Biden Get It Wrong? You Betcha], [[Fox News]]</ref>

*He said he was second in line to be President when he was first and Nancy Pelosi was second at the time.<ref>[http://michellemalkin.com/2010/09/20/bozo-the-vp-botches-line-of-succession/ Bozo the VP botches line of succession], [[Michelle Malkin]]</ref>

*During the 2008 presidential campaign, Biden said that "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed. He said, 'look, here's what happened.'"<ref>[https://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/22/eveningnews/main4470063.shtml Behind The Scenes With Joe Biden], [[CBSNews]]</ref> In actuality television wasn't in use for another twenty years and the president during the 1929 stock market crash was [[Herbert Hoover]], not [[Franklin Roosevelt]].

*In another erroneous remark made during the presidential campaign, Biden referred to [[Sarah Palin]] as lieutenant Governor of Alaska, when in fact she the state's Governor at the time.<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1643290_1643292_1841625,00.html Biden's Palin Demotion], [[Time Magazine]]</ref>

*Biden made yet another deceptive claim during the 2008 presidential campaign in which he asserted that "This guy is brain-dead," referring to then-President [[George W. Bush]] .<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2007/aug/24/joe-biden/irresponsible-claim-and-wrong-medical-diagnosis/ Irresponsible claim (and wrong medical diagnosis)], [[PolitiFact]]</ref> This absurd claim was completely unfounded and demonstrably false.

===Other quotations===
*During the 2008 presidential elections Joe Biden gave a speech in Springfield, Illinois in which he introduced the Democratic nominee for president as "Barack America".<ref>[https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2008/0823/barack-america-and-president-biden-ooops Barack America and President Biden? Ooops...], [[Christian Science Monitor]]</ref>

*Biden remarked about the 2010 Midterm “I was amazed at the amount of money, this $200 billion of money that is — where there’s no accountability.” Clearly he meant $200 million says the New York Times.<ref>[https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/200-billion-in-ads-mr-biden-thats-real-money/?ref=politics $200 Billion in Ads, Mr. Biden? That’s Real Money], [[The New York Times]], October 22, 2010</ref> Though just a moment later. “So it really — I’ve never seen this before, so the only caveat I’d put in terms of the House is how much impact this $200 billion are going to mean.”

*During the 2005 confirmation hearings for Justice [[John Roberts]], Biden asked Roberts, "Can a microscopic tag be planted in someones body to track his every move, you will rule on that." <ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbPvWm9ZkYw</ref>

*In 2008 Biden told a wheelchair bound State Senator from [[Missouri]] to "stand up".<ref name=standupchuck>[http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2008/09/10/joe_biden_to_man_in_wheechair_stand_up_chuck_let_em_see_ya Joe Biden to Man in Wheechair: "Stand Up, Chuck. Let 'Em See Ya!"], [[Rush Limbaugh]]</ref>

*He said "Its easy being Vice President." Then a lawmaker said "It's like being the grandpa and not the parent," to which he responded "Yeah, that's it!"<ref>[http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/26/biden-its-easy-being-vice-president/ Biden - "It's Easy Being Vice President"], [[Fox News]]</ref>

*After [[ObamaCare]] was signed into law, Biden was caught swearing on camera while expressing his joy.<ref>[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/7508111/US-health-care-Joe-Biden-swears-after-Barack-Obama-signs-historic-reforms.html US health care: Joe Biden swears after Barack Obama signs historic reforms], [[Daily Telegraph]]</ref>

*Biden was caught swearing again while speaking to a former Senate colleague.<ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2015/01/06/politics/biden-swearing-in/ Joe Biden swearing in senators makes great TV], [[Fox News]]</ref>

Read more: [http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/26/biden-its-easy-being-vice-president/#ixzz1X7ju3pUC Biden - "It's Easy Being Vice President"], [[Fox News]]

==In popular culture==
*[http://www.cc.com/video-clips/yfmksi/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-the-audacity-of-grope The Audacity of Grope]
*https://joebiden.info/ A collection of cringworthy moments from Biden's career
*Oliver Stone documentary [https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1180915084522078208?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw ''Ukraine on Fire'' trailer].

==See also==
*[[Ukrainian collusion timeline]]
*[[Race baiting]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Joe_Biden.htm Biden On the Issues]
*[http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/b000444/ Voting Record], [[Washington Post]]
*[http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=B000444, Biography at the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress]
*[http://www.joebiden.com/ Presidential Race Site]
*[https://twitter.com/todosconbiden/status/1187125647644286976?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Todos Con Biden]
{{USVicePresidents}}{{liberalism}}{{DEFAULTSORT:Biden, Joseph}}

[[Category:Joe Biden]]
[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Former United States Senators]]
[[Category:2008 Presidential Candidates]]
[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Black History]]
[[Category:Liberals]]
[[Category:Reagan Era]]
[[Category:Vice Presidents of the United States]]
[[Category:Catholic Politicians]]
[[Category:Irish-Americans]]
[[Category:Abortion Advocates]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Anti-Constitutionalists]]
[[Category:Trump-Russia Collusion Hoax]]
[[Category:Hillary Clinton email scandal]]
[[Category:United States Presidential Election, 2020]]
[[Category:Socialists]]
[[Category:Leftists]]
[[Category:Corruption]]
[[Category:Racism]]
[[Category:1970s]]
[[Category:1980s]]
[[Category:1990s]]
[[Category:2000s]]
[[Category:2010s]]
[[Category:2020s]]

Joe Biden

2020-03-11T14:42:10Z

Daniel1212: /* 2020 Presidential campaign */

{{Officeholder
|name=Joseph Biden
|image=JoeBiden.jpg
|party=[[Democratic party|Democrat]]
|spouse=[[Jill Biden]]
|religion=[[Roman Catholic]]
|offices=
{{Officeholder/vice president
|country=the United States
|number=47th
|terms=January 20, 2009 – January 20, 2017
|president=[[Barack Obama]]
|preceded=[[Dick Cheney]]
|former=Hopefully
|succeeded=[[Mike Pence]]
}}
{{Officeholder/senator
|state=Delaware
|terms=January 3, 1973 – January 15, 2009
|preceded=[[Cale Boggs]]
|former=y
|succeeded=[[Ted Kaufman]]
}}
}}
'''Joe Biden''' (born<ref>his birth name was Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.</ref> '''non compos mentis''' November 20, 1942, see: [[Biden's age]]) was the [[Vice President of the United States]] and served as [[President Barack Obama]]'s token [[segregation]]ist. On April 25, 2019, Biden announced his candidacy against President Trump in 2020 and was the immediate [[Democratic party]] frontrunner.<ref>Biden is considered the [[Konstantin Chernenko]] of the modern [[Left]].</ref> He's known as "Architect of Mass Incarceration." Prior to being Obama's pick for vice president, Biden never garnered 2% of Democratic primary voters in any of his presidential bids. Biden promises to cure [[cancer]],<ref>https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/joe-biden-says-hes-going-130151675.html</ref> [[AIDS]] and [[climate change]] while giving out free [[drug]]s and tuition. Biden also vows to raise [[tax]]es.<ref>https://twitter.com/TimRunsHisMouth/status/1234334186846248961?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw</ref>

Biden [[obstruction of justice|obstructed justice]] when he threatened a ''[[quid pro quo]]'' to withhold money unless a prosecutor was fired who was investigating his son. Biden publicly admitted that he threatened Ukrainian leaders to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aide unless a prosecutor looking into kickbacks his son, [[Hunter Biden]], was receiving from a Ukrainian oil and gas company.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urTk6O4c0mU&feature=youtu.be</ref><ref>https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/27/1853703/-Worse-Than-Sniffing-Hair</ref> Biden's campaign was near collapse in September 2019 when it became known that he is currently under investigation by Ukrainian prosecutors for misusing his power as U.S. Vice President to interfere in a [[money-laundering]] investigation of his son,<ref>https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1175392716110401543</ref> [[Hunter Biden]].<ref name="thehill.com">https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived</ref> Biden's family has a reputation for corruption.<ref>Alic, Haris (August 14, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/08/14/eight-things-biden-familys-culture-orruption/ Eight Things to Know About the Biden Family’s Culture of Corruption]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved August 15, 2019.</ref>

In the 1970s, twenty years after ''[[Brown vs. Board of Education]]'', Biden embraced the "[[separate but equal]]" doctrine. Biden told [[NPR]] that segregation was "a matter of black pride." Biden amassed a coalition of liberals and [[George Wallace]] supporters to oppose racial integration,<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/1975/12/21/archives/busing-the-solution-that-has-failed-to-solve.html</ref> and considered a [[Constitutional Amendment]] to outlaw court-ordered school desegregation.<ref>https://soundcloud.com/user-391839060/npr-1975-interview-with-sen-joe-biden</ref><ref>https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook-pm/2019/06/19/what-team-biden-says-about-joes-segregationist-comment-448372</ref><ref>https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/19/joe-biden-segregationist-senators-1370223</ref> Biden wrote an Amendment that gutted portions of the [[1964 Civil Rights Act]].

Biden authored the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.<ref name="nytimes.com">https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/22/us/politics/joe-bidens-role-in-90s-crime-law-could-haunt-any-presidential-bid.html</ref> His [[New Jim Crow]] bill incarcerated 2.5 million Black males, one-tenth of the Black male population,<ref>https://www.sentencingproject.org/news/could-joe-bidens-role-in-90s-crime-law-haunt-a-presidential-bid/</ref> destroying lives and families. The bill included the notoriously racist hundred-to-one sentencing disparity between crack and powder [[cocaine]],<ref name="c-span.org">https://www.c-span.org/video/?18528-1/violent-crime-control-act-1991</ref> and added more than forty federal [[death penalty]] crimes. Biden boasted “we do everything but hang people for jaywalking.”<ref name="books.google.com">''[https://books.google.com/books?id=AK_DAwAAQBAJ&lpg=PA141&dq=we%20do%20everything%20but%20hang%20people%20for%20jaywalking&pg=PA141#v=onepage&q=we%20do%20everything%20but%20hang%20people%20for%20jaywalking&f=false The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America]'', Naomi Murakawa, Oxford University Press, Jul 10, 2014, p. 141.</ref>

Biden's [[racist]], [[sexist]], and [[bigot]]ted handling of [[Anita Hill]] left him widely ostracized until Obama rehabilitated him as his vice presidential pick.,<ref>https://www.essence.com/news/politics/joe-biden-anita-hill-comment-2020-presidential-run/</ref><ref>https://youtu.be/sM19YOqs7hU</ref> He ha earned the nicknames of "Gropin' Joe" for his scandalous groping of women and even little girls, and ''QuidProQuo Joe'' for [[obstructing justice]] by firing a prosecutor and a Billion dollar payoff as a bribe. Multiple women have described and complained about his bizarre, unwanted touching of them and even sniffing their hair. His penchant for unwanted groping of women and young girls was ignored by party loyalists who made him the Democrat frontrunner.<ref>https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2015/02/18/what-are-we-going-to-do-about-creepy-uncle-joe-biden/</ref> ''[[The Washington Post]]'' reported that Biden likes to get nude in front of female [[Secret Service]] Agents when his wife isn't around.<ref>https://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/ct-joe-biden-media-balancing-20140804-column.html</ref> The female agents were afraid to report the incidents because, as Vice President, Biden couldn't be disciplined under [[civil service system]] rules and the women would be simply reassigned elsewhere - effectively demoted - a gross violation of women's equal rights and abuse of power inequities. Anita Hill found her private conversation with Biden shortly before entering the 2020 presidential race "deeply unsatisfying."<ref name="pbs.org">https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/anita-hill-says-recent-conversation-with-joe-biden-was-deeply-unsatisfying</ref>

Biden has embraced every wrong foreign policy view in existence since the 1980s, including supporting the [[Kremlin]] directed "nuclear freeze" movement, opposing the First Gulf War, supporting the 2003 Iraq War, and opposing the operation that killed Osama bin Laden.<ref>https://twitter.com/brithume/status/1121430027327954945</ref> On immigration, Biden claimed in 2014 that [[illegal immigrants]] were "already American citizens."<ref>Binder, John (April 25, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/25/flashback-joe-biden-in-2014-illegal-aliens-are-already-american-citizens/ Flashback–Joe Biden in 2014: Illegal Aliens are ‘Already American Citizens’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved April 25, 2019.</ref> He supports far-left, [[open borders]] positions on immigration.<ref>Arthur, Andrew R. (January 6, 2020). [https://cis.org/Arthur/Myth-Moderate-Joe-Biden The Myth of Moderate Joe Biden]. ''Center for Immigration Studies''. Retrieved January 6, 2020.</ref> He strongly supports the [[homosexual agenda]],<ref>Harvey, Linda (May 29, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/joe-biden-is-no-moderate-demorat-hes-an-lgbt-extremist Joe Biden is no ‘moderate Democrat.’ He’s an LGBT extremist]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved May 30, 2019.</ref> and he has flip-flopped on numerous issues including [[abortion]].<ref>Pollak, Joel B. (June 6, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/06/06/joe-biden-flip-flop-flip-abortion-hyde-amendment/ Joe Biden’s ‘Flip-Flop-Flip’ on Federal Funding for Abortion Is Latest Reversal]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 7, 2019.</ref> Biden has also made numerous false statements.<ref>Multiple references:
*Goodman, Alana (August 19, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/six-times-biden-described-major-events-in-his-life-that-never-happened Six times Biden described major events in his life that never happened]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved August 19, 2019.
*Boyle, Matthew (January 6, 2020). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/06/exclusive-trump-campaign-exposes-six-separate-foreign-policy-lies-by-democrat-joe-biden/ Exclusive — Trump Campaign Exposes Six Separate Foreign Policy Lies by Democrat Joe Biden]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved January 6, 2020.
*Kirkwood, R. Cort (January 7, 2020). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/34553-breitbart-details-six-foreign-policy-fibs-from-sleepy-joe Breitbart Details Six Foreign Policy Fibs From Sleepy Joe]. ''The New American''. Retrieved January 7, 2020.</ref>

Biden is the first [[Roman Catholic]] Vice President and is popularly known as a [[gaffe]] machine. As Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden was a strong supporter of [[President George W. Bush]] and helped shepherd the [[Iraq War]] resolution through Congress. Biden voted for the repeal of the Glass Steagall Act which led to the financial [[Crash of 2008]].

==2020 Presidential campaign==

===Policies===
What Biden proposes and vows is essentially not much different than radical Sanders, as in part they promote death and perversion, and implement politically correct policies and inculcate liberal "values," and increase dependence upon government from Pre-K on up, with this expensive expansion of government being funded via the economy that it will work to distress.

*LGBTQ
Biden promises to make enactment of the [[Equality Act]] during his first 100 days as President a top legislative priority, under which faithful Christians will be persecuted for obeying God and conscience. Biden states that while religious freedom is a fundamental American value, he opposes broad religious exemptions to existing nondiscrimination laws and policies across federal agencies and which he promises to reverse.

Biden intends to ban so-called “conversion therapy,” which is akin to Islamic outlawing of conversion, while promising to work to end suicide among young LGBTQ+ individuals. who are five times more likely to attempt suicide than their heterosexual peers.

Biden also charges that Donald Trump and Mike Pence have given "hate against LGBTQ+ individuals" safe harbor, and sites such policies are requiring transgender "women" to sleep and use bathrooms according to what they biologically are.

In addition, Biden promises to decriminalize HIV exposure and transmission laws, under which such failures as not informing a partner of their positive HIV status, or in donating blood, or intentionally attempting to transmit HIV is a crime. However, although sodomy is the means of HIV transmission in over 80% of cases among men (2017),<ref>[https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/gender/men/index.html HIV and Men] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved 03/11/20 </ref>Biden asserts that there is simply no “scientific basis” for HIV exposure and transmission laws.

Moreover, Biden believes every "transgender or non-binary person" should be able to change their "gender marker to “M,” “F,” or “X” on government identifications, passports, and other documentation," as well as use whatever facilities they feel corresponds to their gender identity. Including transgender students playing sports and using bathrooms and locker rooms.

Biden will also not permit adoption and foster care agencies that choose not to allow adoption by LGBTQ+ families to receive government funding.

Biden further promises to "ensure coverage for comprehensive care for LGBTQ+ Americans...to all appropriate health care treatments and resources...including gender confirmation surgery." As well as for HIV treatment and prevention, that of PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis) which cost about $2,000 a day, and would include coverage for lifetime treatment for HIV, which coast approximately 400,000 dollars, both of which Medicaid coverage presently includes.<ref>[https://peacebyjesuscom.blogspot.com/2019/10/negative-effects-of-homosexual.html Negative effects of homosexual relations] Retrieved 03/11/20</ref> Currently PrEP will be covered without cost-sharing starting in 2021.

Biden will also reverse the transgender military ban and rescind the prohibition against LGBTQ+ Muslims from entering the country, and permanently make upholding LGBTQ+ rights a priority of the foreign policy of the United States.

In addition, Biden intends to "advance culturally appropriate public information campaigns to promote LGBTQ+ human rights and reduce biases," and "develop and institute implicit bias training programs for federal workers and contractors to address discrimination based on race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression."
<ref>[https://joebiden.com/joes-vision/ Joe's Vision for America] Retrieved March 11, 2020</ref>[http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3823392/posts Joe Biden's delusions: excerpts from his campaign's "vision" pages] Free Republic. Retrieved March 11, 2020

===Criticism===
[[File:Biden-pervert-600x399.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Joementum: Protesters moved quickly to greet Biden on the campaign trail after his historic comeback.]]
:{{See also|Joseph Biden 2020 presidential campaign|United States presidential election, 2020‎‎|Biden-Ukraine scandal}}
Early polls in August 2015 showed Biden's favorability ratings beating both [[Sec. Hillary Clinton]] and [[Bernie Sanders]]. When ''[[The New York Times]]'' began investigating the [[Biden-Ukraine scandal]], Biden dropped out of the race in October 2015.<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/21/politics/joe-biden-not-running-2016-election/index.html</ref> ''The New York Times'' reported details of the scandal in December 2015.<ref>https://archive.is/EyhQ7</ref>

A CNN focus group of registered Democrats in March 2019 roundly rejected Biden as a serious contender.<ref>https://thehill.com/homenews/media/432611-cnn-focus-group-rejects-biden</ref> [[Biden's age]] and being out of touch seemed to be major factors. Biden launched his campaign anyway on April 25, 2019, by promoting the anti-Trump Charlottesville hoax and praising violent [[Antifa]] members.<ref>Multiple references:
*Scarry, Eddie (April 25, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/joe-biden-is-running-on-the-medias-charlottesville-lie-about-trump Joe Biden is running on the media's Charlottesville lie about Trump]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved April 25, 2019.
*Spiering, Charlie (April 25, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/25/joe-biden-announces-2020-campaign-warning-about-rise-of-white-nationalism/ Joe Biden Kicks Off 2020 Campaign by Spreading Charlottesville ‘Fine People’ Hoax]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved April 25, 2019.
*Shaw, C. Mitchell (April 26, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/32138-broad-brush-biden-attacks-thomas-jefferson-donald-trump-in-fallacious-video-announcing-candidacy Biden Attacks Thomas Jefferson, Donald Trump, Using Lies to Announce Candidacy]. ''The New American''. Retrieved April 27, 2019.
See also:
*Shaw, C. Mitchell (May 1, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/32173-fbi-report-shows-biden-s-courageous-americans-in-antifa-planned-an-armed-rebellion-at-u-s-border FBI Report Shows Biden's "Courageous Americans" in Antifa Planned an "Armed Rebellion" at U.S. Border]. ''The New American''. Retrieved May 1, 2019.</ref> The mother of Heather Heyer, who was killed by a lone nutcase in a melee between protesters, condemned Biden for exploiting her daughter's death for political gain.<ref>https://www.thedailybeast.com/heather-heyers-mom-susan-bro-breaks-silence-on-biden-invoking-charlottesville-for-2020</ref> Biden's promises his first act as president would be to defeat Donald Trump. While claiming to want to unite the country, Biden did the exact opposite in his statements.<ref>Shaw, C. Mitchell (May 1, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/32165-in-first-campaign-speech-biden-promises-to-unify-america-sows-seeds-of-division Biden Promises to Unify America, Sows Seeds of Division]. ''The New American''. Retrieved May 1, 2019.</ref> President Trump noted the rigged insider support again, this time for Biden over Bernie Sanders.<ref>https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2019/04/trump-tweet-crazy-bernie-vs-sleepy-joe.jpg</ref>

While Biden largely is running on Obama's legacy, Obama machine aides told reporters that Biden is "too old, too out of touch."<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/obama-thinks-bidens-closest-advisers-are-too-old-out-of-touch/</ref> Former Obama [[Defense Secretary]] [[Robert Gates]] said that Biden had {{quotebox|been wrong on nearly every major [[foreign policy]] and [[national security]] issue over the past four decades.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/obamas-former-defense-secretary-slams-bidens-foreign-policy-credentials-age/</ref>}}
[[File:2019.04.25-01.40-thepoliticalinsider-5cc1b8cdefd1a-768x676.jpg|left|thumb|350px|Joe Biden kicked off his presidential campaign with an easily debunked lie.]]
Within the first three weeks of his campaign, Biden twice denied assessments by the U.S. [[intelligence community]] of the threat posed by China to the U.S.<ref>Larsen, Emily (May 13, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/biden-downplays-china-again-after-bowing-to-pressure-last-time Biden downplays China again after bowing to pressure last time]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved May 13, 2019. See also:
*Tapscott, Mark (May 16, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/warners-tough-china-stance-points-to-biden-weakness_2926578.html Warner’s Tough China Stance Points to Biden’s Weakness]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved May 16, 2019.
*Caplan, Joshua (June 4, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2019/06/04/joe-biden-again-scoffs-at-asias-rise-what-are-we-worried-about/ Joe Biden Scoffs at Competition with ‘Asia’: ‘What Are We Worried About?’] ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 5, 2019.</ref> Biden's son, Hunter Biden, has extensive business ties<ref>https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/28/hunter-biden-china-business-drawing-new-scrutiny/</ref> with the Chinese military.

After the Democrat's First Debate Biden suffered an across the board decline in his support. He lost ground with white Democrats (from 32% to 18%) and voters of color (from 33% to 19%), among voters without a college degree (from 35% to 18%) and college graduates (from 28% to 20%), with both men (from 38% to 24%) and women (from 29% to 16%), and among voters under 50 years old (from 21% to 6%) as well as voters aged 50 and over (from 42% to 33%). Most of Biden’s lost support in these groups shifted almost equally toward [[Bernie Sanders]] and [[Elizabeth Warren]].

[[Progressive]]s claim at the age of 76, Biden "needs to grow" to overcome his racism and bigoted treatment of women.<ref>https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-black-female-democrats-may-respond-to-bidens-candidacy</ref> Anita Hill remarked that her private conversation with Joe Biden shortly before Biden entered the race was "deeply unsatisfying." Biden hired Bernie Sanders 2016 campaign press secretary, [[CNN]] political analyst Symone Sanders, as a senior adviser to play the [[race card]]. Symone Sanders donated money to [[Pete Buttigieg]] a month before taking the job with Biden. Symone Sanders is famous for her "we don't need white people" remark on CNN.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1rslAgK8uM&feature=youtu.be</ref>

Biden called the [[impeachment]] of [[Bill Clinton]] on 11 felony charges a "partisan lynching".<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/politics/biden-1998-impeach-kfile/index.html</ref>

Biden is known for flip-flopping his political positions.<ref>Pollak, Joel B. (May 28, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2019/05/28/joe-biden-fifty-years-flip-flops/ Pollak: Joe Biden’s Fifty Years of Flip-Flops]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved May 29, 2019.</ref> Commentator David Harsanyi remarked, {{quotebox|at his present political trajectory, Biden may end up promising to perform late-term abortions on transgendered Guatemalan migrants with his bare hands by the time the debate rolls around.<ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/27/first-debate-proved-democratic-party-gone-loco/</ref>}}

As a serial groper, Biden promised a "hands-on" approach to governing.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkREGzfSCAY</ref> With a reputation as a street fighter, Biden was KO'd in the first round of debates by a girl in a performance unworthy of even [[Dan Quayle]]. Reeling from the knock out blow, Biden warned his competitors that, after eight years in the Obama administration, he had the 'dirt' on all of them.<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/biden-warns-democratic-rivals-hes-got-all-this-information-about-other-peoples-pasts</ref> [[Michelle Obama]] refused to defend Biden's stance on segregation.<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/07/michelle-obama-silent-on-bidens-praise-for-segregationists/</ref> His poll numbers crashed after being outed as a racist.

Biden's campaign suffered a serious blow in September 2019 when it became known that he is currently under investigation by Ukrainian prosecutors for misusing his power as U.S. Vice President to interfere in a [[money-laundering]] investigation of his son,<ref>https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1175392716110401543</ref> [[Hunter Biden]].<ref name="thehill.com">https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived</ref> Biden displayed his contempt and disrespect when questioned at a townhall meeting, calling ordinary citizens and voters "damn liars."<ref>https://twitter.com/MollyNagle3/status/1202648690302869505</ref>

Biden stated he opposed moving the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem despite previously claiming to support such an action.<ref>Rambaran, Vivian (November 7, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bidens-opposition-to-moving-israel-embassy-in-direct-conflict-with-past-statements Biden's opposition to moving Israel embassy in direct conflict with past statements]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved November 7, 2019.</ref>

===Biden-Ukraine collusion scandal===
[[File:Obama, Groppin Joe and Hunter.jpg|right|250px|thumb|Obama (left) appointed Joe Biden (center) to dole out $1 Billion to the Ukraine for which the Biden Family, thru Hunter Biden (right) received $50,000 a month in [[kickback]]s.<ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/23/like-russian-collusion-ukraine-hysteria-is-pure-projection-by-media-and-democrats/ https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/21/trump-ukraine-biden-1507051</ref> ]]
:{{See also|Biden-Ukraine scandal}}
As Vice President, Biden oversaw the disbursement of $1 billion allocated by the U.S. to the new government of Ukraine. In 2014, Biden's son [[Hunter Biden]], was appointed to the board of directors of Burisma Holdings, the largest oil and gas company in Ukraine. Hunter Biden was hired by [[Mykola Zlochevsky]], who served as Ukraine's ecology minister in the previous administration. Hunter Biden was paid $166,000 per month. The money was split with the nephew of [[Whitey Bulger]].

Zlochevsky came under investigation by the new administration for alleged embezzlement of $5 Billion while ecology minister. The prosecutor traced payments made to Hunter Biden. Vice President Biden threatened the new Ukrainian administration to withhold $1 Billion in U.S. allocated funds unless the prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden was fired.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/09/world/europe/corruption-ukraine-joe-biden-son-hunter-biden-ties.html</ref>

Biden bragged about having caused the firing of the [[Ukraine]] prosecutor to a [[CFR]] conference.

U.S. banking records show Hunter Biden's firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, received regular transfers — usually more than $166,000 a month — from Burisma from spring 2014 through fall 2015, during a period when Joe Biden was the main U.S. official dealing with Ukraine. Biden threatened Ukrainian President [[Petro Poroshenko]] that the [[Obama administration]] would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending Ukraine toward insolvency, if it didn't immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin who was investigating his son, Hunter. Biden recounted, {{quotebox|"'You’re not getting the billion'. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money'...Well, [SOB], he got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time."<ref name="thehill.com">https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived</ref><ref>https://www.cfr.org/event/foreign-affairs-issue-launch-former-vice-president-joe-biden</ref>}}
Yuriy Lutsenko, who replaced Shokin as the prosecutor looking into Burisma, said the evidence in the Burisma case he'd like to present to William Barr, particularly the vice president's intervention.

Between April 2014 and October 2015, more than $3 million was paid out by Burisma to an account linked to Biden's and Devon Archer's Rosemont Seneca firm, according to the financial records placed in a federal court file in Manhattan in another case against Archer. The bank records show that, on most months when Burisma money flowed, two wire transfers of $83,333.33 each were sent to the Rosemont Seneca–connected account on the same day. The same Rosemont Seneca–linked account typically then paid Hunter Biden one or more payments ranging from $5,000 to $25,000 each. Ukrainian prosecutors reviewed internal company documents and wanted to interview Hunter Biden and Archer about why they had received such payments, but couldn't because of Joe Biden's intervention.

On September 4, 2019, former Prosecutor General [[Victor Shokin]] made a sworn affidavit outlining Joe Biden's shakedown.<ref>https://www.scribd.com/document/427618359/Shokin-Statement</ref>

Biden was needed for [[Deep State coup 2.0]]. When he was no longer needed he was dispatched to the ash-heap of history.
[[File:Biden blood eye.jpg|x180px|right|thumb|Many have expressed concern if Biden is up to the rigors of campaigning, let alone the duties of office.]]

===Eric Ciaramella===
[[Deep State]] informant [[Eric Ciaramella]] was assigned to the Obama [[White House]] by [[Russia collusion hoax]] mastermind [[John Brennan]]..He was detailed to the staff of [[National Security Council]] [[Susan Rice]] and Vice President [[Joe Biden]].<ref>http://www.ukrweekly.com/uwwp/wp-content/uploads/current-pdf/The_Ukrainian_Weekly_2015-47.pdf</ref> Ciaramella worked on Ukrainian issues for Biden in 2015 and 2016 during the time Biden was the "point man" handing out U.S. taxpayer cash to Ukraine.

Ciaramella worked with [[Democratic National Committee]] operative [[Alexandra Chalupa]] to dig up dirt on the [[2016 Trump campaign|Trump campaign]] during the [[2016 presidential election]]. Ciarmella invited Chalupa into the [[Obama]] White House for meetings.<ref>https://archive.usukraine.org/coalition/report-wh-press-conf-events.shtml</ref> Chalupa a key figure behind manufacturing the [[Russia collusion hoax]] and in the [[Ukrainian collusion scandal]] with the [[Atlantic Council]] and [[Crowdstrike]]. Ciaramella set the Trump [[impeachment inquiry]] in motion.

In May 2017, Ciaramella was instrumental in helping generate the “Putin fired Comey” narrative. A Ciaramella email the day after Comey's firing ended up in the media, which is reported to have allegedly called Comey “crazy, a real nut job.” Ciaramella is said to have argued that “[[President Putin]] suggested that President Trump fire Comey.” In the days after Comey’s firing, this presidential action was used to further political and media calls for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate supposed ‘Russia collusion.’ Ciaramella was dismissed from the Trump White House in June 2917 and accused of illegal [[leak]]s and working against the interests of the [[United States]] government. Ciaramella returned to the CIA.

In August 2019 The Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG), [[Michael Atkinson]], referred to Ciaramella as one who has
:“some indicia of an arguable political bias … in favor of a rival political candidate"
The ICIG was severely criticized for changing the rules at the last minute and allowing a third-party "[[whistleblower]]" [[hearsay]] complaint.

===Primaries===
With the [[Impeachment sham]] over, Biden's usefulness was over, too. Biden's poor finish in the Iowa caucus demonstrated to many that he never was a viable candidate, and that support for his campaign was not very deep.

The Democrats rigged Iowa caucus fiasco to [[Stop Bernie]] landed Biden in fourth place. Many days after the charade, Biden press spokesperson Symone Sanders, speaking on behalf of the campaign, refused to officially acknowledge if the DNC's posted results were legitimate.<ref>https://hotair.com/archives/john-s-2/2020/02/05/biden-spokesperson-symone-sanders-refuses-say-results-iowa-caucus-legitimate/</ref> Biden himself became increasingly testy over questions concerning his durability as a candidate. At a campaign event in Hampton, [[New Hampshire]] on February 9, when asked by a female college student if he could turn his campaign around after Iowa, Biden snapped and called her "a lying dog-faced pony soldier."<ref>https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/02/biden-lashes-out-at-female-new-hampshire-voter-asking-about-his-poor-performance-in-iowa-youre-a-lying-dog-faced-pony-soldier-video/</ref> This came days after Biden belittled another woman asking about his policy on coal. Such incidents only increased doubts about Biden's mental fitness to be President.

====Iowa caucuses====
Biden ran forth, as expected.

====New Hampshire primary====
Biden ran fifth in a filed of ten, slightly worse than expected.

====Nevada caucuses====
Biden ran second with 17% to Sanders, who failed to achieve a majority; the other 49% was spread among 5 remaining candidates.

====Super Tuesday - March 3, 2020====
:{{See also|Bernie Derangement Syndrome|Joe Biden's mental decline}}
Biden's campaign donations dried up as corruption allegations were revealed in the [[Ukrainegate scandal]] during the Democrats' impeachment sham, and he didn't spend anytime or money in any Super Tuesday state. In reaction to Bernie's sweep of early primaries, the DNC establishment's [[Stop Bernie]] movement went into full swing.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/27/us/politics/democratic-superdelegates.html</ref> 1344 delegates were up for grabs on Super Tuesday with an unknown number to win as [[Superdelegates]] have yet to decide to intervention was necessary to Stop Bernie and thwart the will of the people.<ref>.https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/31/dnc-superdelegates-110083</ref> Former DNC chair [[Donna Brazile]] scolded [[RNC]] chair Ronna McDaniel to "stay the hell out" for publicly commenting on DNC internal delegate vote rigging processes and speaking "Russian talking points". Steyer was out on Friday, Buttigieg cut a deal on Sunday, and both Klobuchar and [[Beto O'Rourke|Beto]] backed Biden on Monday. In accepting Buttigieg's endorsement, Biden who at the time was under investigation in the Ukrainegate scandal,<ref>https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/ukraine-court-forces-probe-into-biden-role-in-firing-of-prosecutor-viktor-shokin/2020/02/27/92710222-5983-11ea-8efd-0f904bdd8057_story.html</ref> told a throng of adoring Democrats that Buttigieg reminded him of his son.<ref>https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/03/03/he-reminds-me-of-my-son-biden-buttigieg-love-fest-joined-by-beto-klobuchar-in-last-minute-panic-to-stop-bernie-893278</ref> Biden's son, [[Hunter Biden]], was accused of [[money laundering]] millions of dollars from the Ukrainian firm [[Burisma]] for the Biden family and asked an Arkansas court to delay disclosing how much money he made from Burisma and Chinese sources in a paternity suit until after Super Tuesday.<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/hunter-biden-wants-to-delay-child-support-deposition-until-after-key-primaries</ref> The court denied the request.<ref>https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/feb/27/judge-tells-hunter-biden-to-show-up-nex/?news-arkansas#.XlfN9s2Jm-Y.twitter</ref>

On election eve MSNBC reported that former President Obama confirmed 'the signal has been sent in the past 36 hours' to engage the [[Stop Bernie movement]].<ref>https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1234660535079067649?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw</ref> Biden encouraged voters to get out for 'Super Thursday.'<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5y3XHIyLRM</ref>

With the 100% of the popular vote counted at 12:00 PM EST Wednesday, Democrats had not yet published final allocation of 444 delegates from California and Texas.<ref>https://www.politico.com/2020-election/delegate-count-tracker-democratic-primary/</ref> Partial results posted by the DNC indicated Biden had 453 delegates, Sanders 382, Warren 50, and [[Gabbard]] 1. Bloomberg quit, accounting for 46 [[Zombie]] delegates, Buttigieg 26, and Klobuchar 7. With the insiders work done, the likelihood of moving the goalposts to allow Superdelegates to vote in the first round was reduced. Meanwhile Biden and the [[liberal media]] took a victory lap.

Far left [[animal rights]]/[[Green New Deal|cow flatulence]] activists Sarah Segal and Ashley Froud disrupted Biden's victory speech,<ref>https://monkeyviral.com/what-is-let-dairy-die-and-why-is-it-all-over-the-democratic-race/</ref><ref>https://www.trendsmap.com/twitter/tweet/1235047072421703680</ref> Bernie trashed Biden on the [[Iraq War]] and his support for [[NAFTA]] trade deals which destroyed [[middle class]] America and manufacturing jobs. Warren ran 3rd in her home state of [[Massachusetts]]. In 10 debate appearances since June 2019, [[Elizabeth Warren]] was never asked once by the [[fake news]] media complex about her false claims of [[Native American]] heritage.<ref>https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/03/06/warren-went-all-10-debates-without-one-question-about-her-native-american-claims-894450</ref>

====Texas primary====
Five days after the voting, Dallas County Elections Administrator discovered her office did not count about 10% of the total ballots that voters cast in [[Texas]]' Super Tuesday primary.<ref>https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/politics/dallas-county-asks-to-recount-election-after-44-thumb-drives-discovered/287-84e19400-81bc-4256-bcb3-e25df380d699</ref> She discovered 44 thumb drives containing ballots that were not included in the final results. Biden was alleged to have been the winner.

Biden nonetheless was declared the winner, and without Texas Sanders' hopes evaporated. The scandal, of course, garnered no national media coverage.

====Michigan and the blue collar working class vote====
At a [[Michigan]] autoplant, an autoworker asked about Biden's promise to take [[gun]]s away and put [[Beto O'Rourke]] in charge of confiscation. The discussion got heated, Biden crouched up close and wagged his finger in the face of a [[labor union]] member and traditional Democrat voter. The voter told Biden he didn't appreciated Biden sticking his finger in his face and Biden's [[bullying]] tactics. Biden told the voter, "you're full of s---",<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/youre-full-of-shit-biden-snaps-at-voter-over-second-amendment</ref> and threatened, "you wanna take this outside?" Biden's handlers intervened and whisked Biden away.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTLuFlHm4c8&feature=youtu.be</ref>

The contest in Michigan, which Sanders won in 2016, is said to be test of who commands the blue collar and [[working class] vote, Biden or Sanders. Biden was greeted at the auto plant with cheers of “Trump! Trump! Trump!”'<ref>https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/03/trump-trump-trump-trump-detroit-auto-workers-cheer-president-trump-during-joe-bidens-plant-visit/</ref>

===Debates===
Biden attempted to clarify some of his positions on segregation and race in the pre-primary Third Debate. By the time he finished he had insinuated that black parents didn’t know how to raise their children.<ref>https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2019/09/13/bidens-answer-inequality-one-explicitly-racist-moments-time-democratic-debate/</ref>
{{quotebox|'''Linsey Davis:''' Mr. Vice President, I want to talk to you about inequality in schools and race. In a conversation about how to deal with segregation in schools back in 1975, you told a reporter, “I don’t feel responsible for the sins of my father and grandfather. I feel responsible for what the situation is today, for the sins of my own generation, and I’ll be damned if I feel responsible to pay for what happened 300 years ago.” You said that some 40 years ago, but as you stand here tonight, what responsibility do you think that Americans need to take to repair the legacy of slavery in our country?

'''Joe Biden:''' Well, they have to deal with the … Look, there is institutional segregation in this country. And from the time I got involved, I started dealing with that. Redlining, banks, making sure that we are in a position where—

Look, we talk about education. I propose that what we take is those very poor schools, the Title 1 schools, triple the amount of money we spend from $15 to $45 billion a year. Give every single teacher a raise to the equal of … A raise of getting out of the $60,000 level.

No. 2, make sure that we bring in to the help with the stud—the teachers deal with the problems that come from home. The problems that come from home, we need… We have one school psychologist for every 1,500 kids in America today. It’s crazy. The teachers are required—I’m married to a teacher. My deceased wife is a teacher. They have every problem coming to them.

Make sure that every single child does, in fact, have three, four, and five-year-olds go to school. School! Not day care, school. We bring social workers into homes of parents to help them deal with how to raise their children. It’s not that they don’t want to help. They don’t know what— They don’t know what quite what to do. Play the radio. Make sure the television—excuse me, make sure you have the record player on at night. The phone—make sure the kids hear words. A kid coming from a very poor school—er, a very poor background will hear 4 million words fewer spoken by the time they get there.

'''Davis:''' Thank you, Mr. Vice President.

'''Biden:''' No, I’m going to go like the rest of them do, twice over, OK? Because here’s the deal. The deal is that we’ve got this a little backwards. And by the way, in Venezuela, we should be allowing people to come here from [[Venezuela]]. I know [[Nikolas Maduro|Maduro]]. I’ve confronted Maduro. No. 2, you talk about the need to do something in Latin America. I’m the guy that came up with $740 million to see to it those three countries, in fact, change their system so people don’t have to chance to leave. You’re all acting like we just discovered this yesterday! Thank you very much.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7Tpx5WMFio&feature=youtu.be</ref>}}
Even ''[[The Young Turks]]'' slammed Biden for his racist answer in blaming parents for not knowing how to raise their children rather than answering question.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZzt4HNR1bE</ref>

===Racism===
In addition to Biden's longstanding alliance with fellow Democrat segregationists in the U.S. Senate, Biden is known for a history of making racially insensitive remarks.

====Segregation====
[[File:Biden segregation.png 1718483346.png|left|350px|thumb|Biden called segregation "a matter of Black pride" and pushed for a [[Constitutional Amendment]] to outlaw Court ordered de-segregation.<ref name="politico.com">https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/joe-biden-integration-school-busing-120968_full.html</ref>]]
Biden reopened the debate over the crimes of the Democrats [[slave power]]<ref name="zerohedge.com">https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-20/biden-doubles-down-after-reminding-everyone-democrats-owned-slaves</ref> at a time some far leftists were pushing for [[slave reparations]].<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/05/30/book-joe-biden-1973-lectured-cleveland-what-good-negro/</ref> In 1972 Biden argued that segregation was good for Blacks and was what they wanted. {{Quotebox|“I think the concept of busing … that we are going to [[integrate]] people so that they all have the same access and they learn to grow up with one another and all the rest, is a rejection of the whole movement of black pride, a rejection of the entire black awareness concept, where black is beautiful, black culture should be studied; and the cultural awareness of the importance of their own identity, their own individuality.”<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/read-the-transcript-of-the-october-1975-npr-interview-with-sens-joe-biden-and-edward-brooke</ref>}} Biden led a coalition of segregationists that was opposed by Republican Sen. [[Edward Brooke]], the first [[African American]] senator elected since Democrats forced the end of [[Reconstruction]] after the [[American Civil War|Civil War]]. National Public Radio's David Ensor asked Biden, "What about a constitutional amendment? Isn’t that what you’re gonna have to end up supporting if you want to stop court ordered busing, too?" Biden responded, {{Quotebox|"That would clearly do it. I’m hopeful, and I have — now that I have some sort of new allies in this area, it’s become respectable now for [[liberal]]s to at least say publicly what they’ve been saying in private, that busing doesn’t work. We are trying to figure out whether or not we can come up with an innovative piece of legislation which would limit the remedy, and I don’t — honestly don’t know whether we can come up with something constitutional. And if we can’t, I will not in an attempt to eliminate busing violate the Constitution. I won’t do that. The only way, if I’m gonna go at it, I’m gonna go at it through a Constitutional Amendment if it can’t be done through a piece of legislation."}} Ensor reported that Biden proposed renewing segregation because busing wasn't working, and Biden was afraid that older liberal colleagues were blind to how Black separatists felt about their children being bused to [[white]] schools. {{Quotebox|"There are those of we [[social experiment|social planner]]s who think somehow that if we just [[subrogate]] man’s individual characteristics and traits by making sure that a presently heterogeneous society becomes a totally homogeneous society, that somehow we’re going to solve our social ills. Quite to the contrary."}}

Title VI of the [[1964 Civil Rights Act]] prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.<ref>https://quizlet.com/45411923/ethical-and-legal-issues-2-flash-cards/</ref> By 1975, Biden authored an amendment to gut Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. ''[[Politico]]'' writes of the whole sordid affair, {{quotebox|Biden morphed into a leading anti-busing crusader—all the while continuing to insist that he supported the goal of school desegregation, he only opposed busing as the means to achieve that end. This stance, which many of Biden’s liberal and moderate colleagues also held, was clever but disingenuous. It enabled Biden to choose votes over principles, while acting as if he was not doing so....In a seminal moment, the Senate thus turned against desegregation. The Senate had supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act, [[1965 Voting Rights Act]] and 1968 Fair Housing Act....the Senate remained the last bastion for those who supported strong integration policies. Biden stormed that bastion...<ref name="politico.com">https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/joe-biden-integration-school-busing-120968_full.html</ref>}} Sen. James Abourezk of [[South Dakota]] related how Biden reacted when Abrourezek tried to block the amendment: {{quotebox|‘Abourezk, you **********, if I ever vote for another one of your bills, it'll be a cold day in hell.'

‘Calm down, Joe,' I told him, ‘You're eventually gonna thank me for doing this.'

‘Like hell I will you dirty *******.'

A few days later, Biden came into the scheduled committee meeting, this time with a broad, friendly grin aimed directly at me.

‘Jesus, Abourezk, you were right,' he said. ‘I am gonna thank you. You should see the Delaware newspapers—big front-page headlines saying, ‘Biden Battles Liberals in Washington.' He was unabashedly elated. ‘They love me back home, how did you know this would happen?'<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/biden-exploded-at-dem-colleague-over-busing-called-him-dirty-bastard/</ref>}} Republican Sen. [[Edward Brooke]], the first black senator ever to be popularly elected, called Biden's amendment “the greatest symbolic defeat for [[civil rights]] since 1964.” Brooke accused Biden of leading an assault on integration.

Prof. Ronnie Dunn said opposition to busing was motivated by [[racism]] and that without the court-ordered policy Biden probably would not have become vice president in 2009. “What I find ironic is that [Biden] was the vice president under a president who, if it hadn’t been for the social interaction that occurred during the era of busing, I argue we likely would not have seen the election of Barack Obama." Dunn, an Urban Studies professor at Cleveland State University and author of the book ''Boycotts, Busing, & Beyond'', said Biden made the case in favor of maintaining segregation. "That was an argument against desegregation.” Dunn said Biden must address the issue if he runs for president. “People have to be held accountable."<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/joe-biden-embraced-segregation-in-1975-claiming-it-was-a-matter-of-black-pride</ref>

Biden's opposition to integration didn't stop there. ''HuffPo'' reported: {{quotebox|In 1977, two black men nominated for key Justice Department posts by [[President Jimmy Carter]] easily won approval from the Senate Judiciary Committee. After confirmation by the full Senate, Drew Days III became the nation’s first black head of the department’s civil rights division and Wade McCree became the second black solicitor general. Only one member of the committee voted against them. It wasn’t segregationists [[Strom Thurmond]] (R-S.C.) or James Eastland (D-Miss.). It wasn’t even former [[Ku Klux Klan]] member [[Robert Byrd]] (D-W.Va.). The lone Judiciary Committee vote against the two men was Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.).<ref>https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-busing-nominees_n_5ca3c03de4b03174b92904f7</ref>}}

In 1981 Biden said in a Senate hearing, “sometimes even [[George Wallace]] is right about some things.” Wallace is famous for saying in 1963, “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.”<ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/09/biden-sometimes-even-george-wallace-is-right/</ref>

In a farewell address to retiring Democrat segregationist Sen. John Stennis in 1986 Biden said: {{quotebox|"To think that I would be one day on the floor of the United States Senate, being paid such accolades by such a man of character and courage as John Stennis is beyond my wildest dreams. And I mean that sincerely."<ref>https://youtu.be/9X6Y2CLqgDM</ref>}}

When Biden announced his candidacy ''Politico'' attempted to poo-poo and explain away Biden and liberal Democrat racism with a back-handed slap at [[school vouchers]] for minority students, which liberal elites have strenuously opposed ever since the Biden Amendment passed:
{{quotebox|School desegregation, as part of a broader suite of civil rights reforms, was once as a vital component of the Democratic Party platform. Yet since the 1970s, Democrats, in the face of concerted white backlash, have largely accommodated themselves to increasing segregation in public schools across the nation. Party leaders, even the most progressive among them, rarely propose serious solutions to this vexing problem. A sincere critique of Biden’s busing record would require a broader reckoning of the Democratic Party’s—and by extension the nation’s—abandonment of this central goal of the [[civil rights movement]]. And it’s hard to see that happening anytime soon.<ref>https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/05/05/joe-biden-busing-problem-226791</ref>}}

Sen. [[Cory Booker]] of [[New Jersey]] condemned the [[2020 Democrat primary]] frontrunner at the Juneteenth annual commemoration of [[Republican]] [[Abraham Lincoln]] ending [[slavery]] in the United States. {{quotebox|You don’t joke about calling black men 'boys'...frankly, I’m disappointed that he hasn’t issued an immediate apology for the pain his words are dredging up for many Americans. He should.<ref name="zerohedge.com">https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-20/biden-doubles-down-after-reminding-everyone-democrats-owned-slaves</ref>}}

====Superpredators====
In a 1993 Senate floor speech, Biden warned of "predators on our streets" who were "beyond the pale" and said they must be cordoned off from the rest of society because the justice system did not know how to rehabilitate them. Biden described a {{quotebox|"cadre of young people, tens of thousands of them, born out of wedlock, without parents, without supervision, without any structure, without any conscience developing because they literally ... because they literally have not been socialized, they literally have not had an opportunity."}} Biden went on in the same breath, {{quotebox|"It doesn't matter whether or not the person that is accosting your son or daughter or my son or daughter, my wife, your husband, my mother, your parents, it doesn't matter whether or not they were deprived as a youth. It doesn't matter whether or not they had no background that enabled them to become socialized into the fabric of society. It doesn't matter whether or not they're the victims of society. The end result is they're about to knock my mother on the head with a lead pipe, shoot my sister, beat up my wife, take on my sons."}} Biden said, that he didn't care "why someone is a malefactor in society" and that criminals needed to be "away from my mother, your husband, our families." Biden added "we should focus on them now" because "if we don't, they will, or a portion of them, will become the predators 15 years from now."

Biden's 1993 "predator" remarks are similar to comments then made by first lady [[Hillary Clinton]] where she warned of "Superpredators" who had "no conscience, no empathy" and who need to be brought "to heel."

====Biden Crime Bill====
:{{Main article|The New Jim Crow}}
Biden was a staunch opponent of school desegregation in the 1970s and leading crusader for mass incarceration in the 1980s and 1990s. Biden described [[African American]] felons in the aftermath of the Central Park 5 jogger case as 'predators' too [[sociopath]]ic to rehabilitate,<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/07/politics/biden-1993-speech-predators/index.html</ref> and [[white supremacist]] senators as his friends.

Biden boasts as one of his greatest legislative achievements passage of the 1994 Crime bill which locked up 10% of the Black adult male population of the United States.<ref name="nytimes.com"/><ref>http://www.prisonpolicy.org/research/incarceration_rates_growth_causes/</ref>

When [[President George H.W. Bush]] asked for a record increase in funding to fight the [[War on Drugs]], Biden told a TV interviewer {{Quotebox|"In a nutshell, the President's plan does not include enough police officers to catch the violent thugs, enough prosecutors to convict them, enough judges to sentence them or enough prison cells to put them away for a long time."<ref>http://articles.latimes.com/1989-09-06/news/mn-1646_1_drug-war</ref><ref>http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/12/first-step-act-skepticism.html</ref>}} [[File:1994 Superpredator Act.jpg|right|350px|thumb|The Superpredator Act of 1994. Feinstein, Kerry and Biden are clearly visible with President Clinton. The bill is known for its sentencing disparities which led to mass incarceration of Blacks.<ref>https://fair.org/home/senate-crime-bill-unscrutinized-by-the-press/</ref>]] Biden, [[Ted Kennedy]], and [[Strom Thurmond]] worked on proposals that raised maximum penalties, removed a directive requiring the US Sentencing Commission to take into account prison capacity, and created the cabinet-level “drug czar” position. In 1984, they passed the Comprehensive Crime Control Act, which, among other things, abolished [[parole]], imposed a less generous cap on “good time” sentence reductions, and allowed the Sentencing Commission to issue more punitive guidelines.

Biden bragged on the Senate floor that it was under his and Thurmond's leadership that Congress passed a law sending anyone caught with a rock of cocaine the size of a quarter to jail for a minimum of five years - the notoriously racist hundred-to-one sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine. In the same speech Biden took credit for [[civil asset forfeiture]] and seizure laws, and demanded to know why [[Papa Bush]] hadn't sentenced more drug dealers to life in prison or exercise the [[death penalty]] once Congress had given him that power.<ref name="c-span.org"/>

Biden's version of a new crime bill added more than forty crimes that would be eligible for the [[death penalty]]. Biden boasted “we do everything but hang people for jaywalking.”<ref name="books.google.com"/> The [[NAACP]] and other groups lobbied against the bill.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/27/us/civil-libertarians-go-after-crime-bills.html</ref> Although the 1991 crime bill was defeated by Republicans, the 1994 Biden/Clinton crime bill was passed.<ref>''[https://books.google.com/books?id=SGUJBAAAQBAJ&lpg=PT142&dq=biden%20strongly%20believes%20the%20administration%20needs%20to%20seize%20control%20of%20the%20issue%20by%20upping%20the%20ante&pg=PT142#v=onepage&q=biden%20strongly%20believes%20the%20administration%20needs%20to%20seize%20control%20of%20the%20issue%20by%20upping%20the%20ante&f=false The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America]'', Naomi Murakawa.</ref>

By 2001, the United States had the highest rate of incarceration in the world. [[Human Rights Watch]] reported that in seven states, African Americans constituted 80 to 90 percent of all drug offenders even though they were no more likely than whites to use or sell illegal drugs. Prison admissions for drug offenses reached a level in 2000 for African Americans more than 26 times the level they had been under [[Ronald Reagan]].<ref>[https://www.thenation.com/article/hillary-clinton-does-not-deserve-black-peoples-votes/ Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote], Michelle Alexander, ''The Nation'', February 10, 2016</ref> Biden's "social planning" had proven effective.

In May 2019 journalist and historian Shaun King observed, {{Quotebox|I’ve heard a very dangerous lie being told about how the systems of mass incarceration were built in this nation. I didn’t expect to have to respond this way because I didn’t expect Joe Biden to lie about the 1994 Crime Bill. He wrote it. He fought for it. And the results were devastating. Every single expert on this topic agrees. This week Joe Biden took the stance that not only is he not sorry for the Crime Bill, but that it didn’t even increase mass incarceration. And it’s shameful because either he’s willfully lying, which is horrible, or he’s just plain ignorant about the true impact of the bill, which is also horrible. Either way, I have a major problem with it because these laws are still in effect and they are doing damage in our communities every single day, 24 hours a day.<ref>https://www.facebook.com/shaunking/videos/688203931610804/</ref>}}

The Leftist ''Jacobin'' magazine summed up Biden's record: {{Quotebox|"It’s not as if Biden didn’t know what he was doing.... He just didn’t care. Biden had made a calculated decision that the elections he would win were worth the damage he inflicted.... But even if Biden has subsequently learned the error of his ways, the rank cynicism and callousness involved in his two-decade-long championing of carceral policies should be more than enough to give anyone pause about his qualities as a leader, let alone a [[progressive]] one."<ref>https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/08/biden-crime-mass-incarceration-police-prisons</ref>}}

====Mass incarceration====
Sen. [[Cory Booker]] told the the NAACP convention in [[Detroit]] in response to another so-called "criminal justice reform" proposal by Biden: {{quotebox|For a guy who helped to be an architect of mass incarceration, this in an inadequate solution to what is a raging crisis in our country.<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/cory-booker-calls-joe-biden-an-architect-of-mass-incarceration</ref>}}

Biden now advocates for a man sentenced to prison to choose to be incarcerated in a women's prison.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0ovc0BAUYo&feature=youtu.be</ref>

====Sexual harassment====
[[File:Creepy Uncle Joe.jpg|left|thumb|350px|''The Washington Post'' calls Biden "Creepy Uncle Joe" for his habit of groping wives and children.]]
''See also:'' [[Creepy Uncle Joe]]
According to the ''[[Washington Post]]'', female [[Secret Service]] agents did not want to work with Biden. Whenever Biden's wife was not home, Biden stripped naked. The female Secret Service agents where afraid to report incidents to their superiors in fear for their jobs.<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2015/02/18/what-are-we-going-to-do-about-creepy-uncle-joe-biden/?utm_term=.b4c0f48017a7 What are we going to do about Creepy Uncle Joe Biden?, ''WaPo'']</ref> In the days just prior to his announcement to run, no less than 8 women of the [[MeToo movement]] complained of Biden's inappropriate grabbing and touching. Even Biden's wife, Jill, has been visibly seen creeped-out by Biden's awkward attempts at public displays of affection.<ref>https://thepoliticalinsider.com/watch-even-joe-bidens-wife-wants-him-to-keep-his-hands-to-himself/</ref> Biden responded by admitting America has become more conservative and then mocked critics and victims in a speech before firefighters. Biden told ''[[The View]]'' he needs to be more "cognizant" about groping women and children.<ref>https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/joe-biden-joins-view-president-trump-beat-easily/story?id=62638945</ref> Even Rep. [[Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez]] remained unconvinced of Biden's alleged flip on his touchy-feelly approach to women in politics.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/ocasio-cortez-bidens-answers-on-touching-havent-convinced-all-women/</ref>

For years, Biden failed to apologize to [[Anita Hill]] personally for the way she was treated when she testified in the 1991 confirmation of [[Clarence Thomas]]..<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/26/us/politics/anita-hill-biden-clarence-thomas.html</ref><ref>https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/440833-biden-on-anita-hill-i-dont-think-i-treated-her-badly</ref><ref>https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/26/biden-apology-accusers-anita-hill-1290843</ref><ref>https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2019/apr/26/trump-news-today-live-biden-anita-hill-view-2020-democrats-updates-us-politics</ref>

Upon his announcement Biden immediately secured the endorsement of prominent sleaze lawyer and former Democratic hopeful [[Michael Avenatti]]. Avenatti shares many of Biden's core precepts, including his racist agenda remarking that the Democratic nominee "had better be a white male."<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/joe-biden-michael-avenatti/</ref> Avenatti, a chief critic of President Trump, dropped out of the race after being arrested for felonious assault and battery on a woman and extortion. An unrepentant racist, Biden says immigrants should have to speak [[English]].<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kgxq3Va9Lpc&feature=youtu.be</ref>

Biden said enshrining [[LGBT+]] protections into labor and civil rights laws would be his priority. Passing the [[Equality Act]] “will be the first thing” he would ask for.<ref>https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/joe-biden-gay-waiter-comments-democratic-election-seattle-medina-a8981351.html</ref>

Campaign staffers physically block reporters when asking Biden questions, then photographing anyone who objects.

Biden's mental faculties have been called into question: he confused UK prime minister [[Theresa May]] with [[Margaret Thatcher]].<ref>https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1123250/theresa-may-trump-news-margaret-thatcher-joe-biden-us-president-2020</ref> According to mental health experts, Biden's slurring of words and phrases and verbal inarticulateness marks a decline in mental abilities.

===Trump-Russia conspiracy===
[[File:Biden and Flood.jpg|right|350px|thumb|Biden and Flood with their wives.<ref>[https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/02/loaded-for-guccifer-aims-for-a-romanian-guccifer-2-0/ Say “Hi” To Guccifer 2.0], Adam Carter, ''Disobedient Media'', February 24, 2018.</ref>]]
:{{See also|Hillary Clinton email scandal|Trump-Russia collusion hoax}}
[[Warren Flood]] was Vice President Biden's information technology ([[IT]]) director at the [[White House]].

According to the metadata, on June 15, 2016, three days after [[Julian Assange]] announced [[WikiLeaks]] was about to publish “emails related to Hillary Clinton,” the first Guccifer 2.0 document was created by Warren Flood on the East coast at 13:38 EDT, and was modified thirty minutes later by [[Феликс Эдмундович]], or Felix Edmunovich, the Russian patronymic of [[Felix Edmunovich Dzerzhinsky]],<ref>In Russian, the middle name is taken from the father, and the last name from the grandfather. Use of a patronymic expresses deep affection and emotion ([[Vladimir Ilyich]] or [[Joseph Vissarionovich]], for example) and is generally reserved for family members or close friends.</ref> founder of the [[KGB]] - a blatantly amateurish attempt to create [[Russia]]n fingerprints.

A document that Warren Flood authored in 2008, and was attached to one of [[John Podesta]]'s leaked emails, was used by Guccifer 2.0 as a template into which he then copied the contents of the DNC's ''Trump Opposition Research'' document. It was copied from this file: https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/fileid/26562/7365 which is also attached to [https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/26562 this leaked email]. It is Flood's document that the "CONFIDENTIAL" text in the background derives from.

Guccifer 2.0 was a [[2016 Hillary Clinton campaign]] [[false flag]] operation set up to discredit the [[DNC]] revelations at [[Wikileaks]]. Adam Carter writes, {{quotebox|"one particular group would have been particularly desperate precisely at that time, for the emergence of a narrative about Russian hackers to discredit proper leaks / justify claims that all leaks are 'probably doctored' and they will have very likely known [Warren] Flood too. That group is the Clinton Campaign. As of June 12th, [2016] they were in a position where [[Julian Assange]] had just announced WikiLeaks' upcoming release of [[Hillary Clinton email scandal|Hillary's emails]], she was still under [[FBI]] investigation, and [[Trump]] was attacking Hillary for her use of a private server with his supporters frequently chanting "lock her up!" at rallies. The campaign was in a desperate position and really needed something similar to a Russian hacker narrative and one where they would be fortunate to have a seemingly clumsy hacker that leaves lots of 'fingerprints' tainting files and bringing the reputation of leaks into question... Sure enough, 2-3 days later, Guccifer2.0 - the world's weirdest hacker - was spawned and started telling lies in an effort to attribute himself to the malware discoveries, etc."<ref>http://g-2.spac/#7</ref>}}

[[National Security Advisor]] [[Susan Rice]] sent an email to herself about a secret [[Oval Office]] meeting where the ''[[Clinton-Steele dossier]]'' was discussed.<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/donald-trump-intelligence-report-russia/index.html</ref><ref>https://apnews.com/152579d488a740b2a8d39fbe2f34506d</ref><ref>https://apnews.com/a82309544e9e465fa2ad4f83e5a48540</ref> The email was written and sent to herself 15 minutes after Donald Trump was sworn in on January 20, 2017:<ref>https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-graham-uncover-unusual-email-sent-susan-rice-herself-president-trump-s</ref> {{Quotebox|"On January 5, following a briefing by [[IC]] leadership on Russian hacking during the [[2016 Presidential election]], President Obama had a brief follow-on conversation with FBI Director [[Jim Comey]] and Deputy Attorney General [[Sally Yates]] in the Oval Office. Vice President Biden<ref>[https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/03/08/doj-political-surveillance-from-the-irs-in-2011-to-the-fisa-court-in-2016/ DOJ Political Surveillance – From the IRS in 2011 to the FISA Court in 2016], Posted on March 8, 2020 by sundance. theconservativetreehouse.com </ref> and I were also present. President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities "by the book". The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book. From a national security perspective, however, President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the [[Trump transition|incoming team]], we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia. '''[Redacted section]''' The President asked Comey to inform him if anything changes in the next few weeks that should affect how we share classified information with the incoming team. Comey said he would."<ref>[https://nobsopus.blogspot.com/2019/03/grassley-to-rice.html Grassley to Rice], February 8, 2018. [https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-02-08%20CEG%20LG%20to%20Rice%20(Russia%20Investigation%20Email).pdf Original].</ref>}}

The following day [[DNI]] [[James Clapper]] released a public version of the ''Intelligence Community Assessment'' on Russian election interference, a joint [[John Brennan]], Clapper and Comey document consisting of recycled reports on [[RT]] with two pages of [[sexual]] innuendo from the Clinton opposition research ''Steele dossier''.<ref>The notorious "pee-pee memo."</ref> NSA Dir. [[Adm. Mike Rogers]] dissented from the conclusions and did not attend the days' prior Oval Office meeting.<ref>https://www.theepochtimes.com/why-are-the-brennan-comey-and-rogers-transcripts-being-withheld_2677629.html</ref><ref>[https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf ]</ref>

''[[The Washington Post]]'' was assured by Comey, Brennan and Clapper that "the sources involved in the [Clinton-Steele dossier's] reporting were credible enough to warrant inclusion in the highly classified [presidential] report.”<ref>http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-trump-russia-allegations-20170110-story.html</ref> Brennan however, in public Congressional testimony months later, said the dossier and its sources ''were not'' credible enough to incorporate in the joint ''Intelligence Community Assessment'' on Russian election interference. Brennan swore the Clinton-Steele dossier'' did not “in any way” factor into the CIA's assessment that Russia interfered in the election to help Trump.

Clapper [[leak]]ed the substance of the ''Clinton-Steele dossier'' to [[Jake Tapper]] of [[CNN]] before Comey briefed President-elect Trump, providing the "news hook" in Comey's words, that CNN was looking for to publicize the dossier's unverified contents after Trump was briefed. This was the beginning of the bogus pee-memo rumor designed to smear President-elect Trump, with Obama, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Biden, Rice and Sally Yates colluding together. And the purpose was to hoax the [[FISA court]] into granting an extension of surveillance beyond Trump's swearing in. It is also a prime example of "circular journalism" and [[fake news]] [[collusion]] between [[mainstream media]] and [[Democrat]] operatives.<ref>https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/susan-rice-email-president-obama-russia-investigation/</ref>

Biden claims that if he had been president rather than Barack Obama in 2015 and 2016, the Russians would not have interfered in the 2016 election.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfhqT3zre20&feature=youtu.be</ref>

===Anti-2nd Amendment===
Immediately after [[Deep State coup 2.0]] was announced to thwart the will of voters and [[subvert]] American [[democracy]], Biden rolled out his gun seizure plan.<ref>https://townhall.com/tipsheet/juliorosas/2019/10/02/joe-biden-rolls-out-his-extensive-gun-control-plan-n2554041</ref> In accepting [[Beto O'Rourke]]'s support as part of the Texas deal that excluded Sanders, Biden vowed to put Beto in charge of the gun seizure program.<ref>https://www.ammoland.com/2020/03/beto-will-be-bidens-gun-grabbing-point-man-its-war-says-ccrkba/</ref>

===Marijuana===
Biden authored legislation increasing mandatory minimum sentences for marijuana possession. Nearly 20 million people have been arrested and incarcerated for marijuana possession since Biden wrote the bill.<ref>http://www.drugpolicy.org/issues/drug-war-statistics</ref> Mandatory minimums give the judge no discretion in handing out a sentence. Marijuana arrests outnumber arrests for [[violent]] [[crime]].<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/us/marijuana-arrests.html</ref> President Trump has taken the lead in sentencing and prison reform.<ref>https://grabien.com/story.php?id=237403</ref> Biden wrote the legislation which established the Office of National Drug Control Policy, also known as the "drug czar."

When a big money donor who favors decriminalization held a fundraiser for Biden in May 2019, Biden "evolved" his 30-plus year stance on marijuana mandatory minimum sentencing which has caused so much hardship and suffering to families, particularly minorities who have been Biden's targets.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/joe-bidens-shift-on-marijuana-came-days-before-fundraiser-with-pro-legalization-donor/</ref> Biden suddenly showed no concern about exposing children to a gateway drug.

===Atlantic Council===
:{{See also|Military industrial complex}}
In 2011 Biden delivered the keynote address at the [[Atlantic Council]]’s distinguished leadership awards. He did so again in 2014 at its “Toward A Europe Whole and Free” conference,<ref>https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/commentary/transcript/remarks-by-vice-president-joe-biden-at-the-atlantic-council-s-toward-a-europe-whole-and-free-conference/</ref> which was dedicated to expanding NATO’s influence and countering “Russian aggression.” Speakers like [[Zbigniew Brzezinski]], a former U.S. [[national security adviser]], sniped at Barack Obama for an insufficiently bellicose posture toward Russia, while former Secretary of State [[Madeleine Albright]] fretted over polls showing low public support for U.S. [[interventionism]] overseas. Biden emphasized the need to power [[Europe]] with non-Russian sources of natural gas. This provided a prime opportunity to Ukrainian suppliers like Burisma and U.S. energy titans. Many of these energy companies, from [[Chevron]] to Noble Energy, also happen to be top donors to the Atlantic Council.

After the [[Maidan Revolt]], ''Foreign Policy'' magazine wrote, “No one in the U.S. government has wielded more influence over Ukraine than Vice President Joe Biden."<ref>https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/10/30/what-will-ukraine-do-without-joe-biden-putin-war-kiev-clinton-trump/</ref> The Atlantic Council described Biden as “the point person on Ukraine in the Obama administration.”<ref>https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/explainer-five-things-about-the-ukraine-controversy-you-need-to-know-plus-a-freebie/</ref> “Ukraine was the top, or one of the top three, foreign policy issues we were concentrating on,” said [[Michael Carpenter]], Biden’s foreign policy adviser. “[Biden] was front and center.”<ref>https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/10/05/bidens-visits-to-ukraine-draw-scrutiny/</ref>

===Plagiarism, again===
In giving lip service to [[climate change]], Biden has been accused of plagiarizing content from climate activist websites for his own fundraising site. Biden's alleged climate policy appears to be cut and pasted from non-profit websites to solicit donations for his campaign.

Josh Nelson noted, "The paragraph in Joe Biden's climate plan about carbon capture and sequestration includes language that is remarkably similar to items published previously by the Blue Green Alliance and the Carbon Capture Coalition...Biden's goal is to make CCUS a widely available, cost-effective, and rapidly scalable solution to reduce carbon emissions to meet mid-century climate goals," reads the Biden website. The website for the Carbon Capture Coalition states, "[our] goal is to make carbon capture, use and storage (CCUS) a widely available, cost-effective, and rapidly scalable solution to reduce carbon emissions to meet mid-century climate goals."

Biden's website also claims that, "carbon capture, use, and storage (CCUS) is a rapidly growing technology that has the potential to create economic benefits for multiple industries while significantly reducing carbon dioxide emissions." The language mirrors the language of a 2017 letter to the Senate from the Blue Green Alliance: "Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is a rapidly growing technology that has potential to create economic benefits for multiple industries while significantly reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions."<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/joe-bidens-climate-platform-appears-to-plagiarize-from-nonprofits/</ref><ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/04/joe-bidens-global-warming-plan-repeatedly-plagiarizes-sources/</ref>

[[CNN]]'s John King didn't buy the staff flub excuse. "This is a leadership issue," King said.<ref>https://dailycaller.com/2019/06/05/leadership-issue-cnn-john-king-biden-plagiarism/</ref>

===Biden's age and voters===
''See also:'' [[Biden's age]] and [[Joe Biden's mental decline]] and [[Joe Biden's eye filling with blood during a town hall]]

Biden is reported to have suffered two brain aneurysms, the first a near death experience in 1988.

Joe Biden is turning 77 in November 2019. He will be nearly 78 years old on [[Election Day]] 2020. Biden hasn’t disclosed his medical history since 2008, when physicians found he had an irregular heartbeat.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bidens-eye-fills-with-blood-during-cnn-climate-town-hall Biden's eye fills with blood during CNN climate town hall], Washington Examiner</ref> Biden has long been plagued by health issues.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/surgeon-who-operated-on-joe-biden-hes-better-now-than-before-brain-surgery Surgeon who operated on Biden: He's better now than before brain surgery], Washington Examiner, 2019</ref><ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bidens-eye-fills-with-blood-during-cnn-climate-town-hall Biden's eye fills with blood during CNN climate town hall], Washington Examiner</ref> and appears to be medicated. See also: [[Biden's age]] and [[Joe Biden's eye filling with blood during a town hall]].

Nate Silver of ''FiveThirtyEight'' wrote about Biden's age:
{{Cquote|A lot of rank-and-file voters do have concerns about Biden’s age. An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll in February found that 62 percent of voters had reservations about voting for someone aged 75 or older. [https://news.gallup.com/poll/254120/less-half-vote-socialist-president.aspx Other polls] have also shown advanced age to be a concern among Democrats, Republicans and independents alike.<ref>[https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-bidens-opponents-being-too-coy-in-making-age-an-issue/ Voters Care About Biden’s Age — Not About His Gaffes] by Nate Silver,''FiveThirtyEight''</ref>}}

Biden says he met with survivors of the Stoneman Douglas Parkland shooing while he was vice president; the Stoneman Douglas shooting occurred more than one year after Biden left office.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYOBkzU6VcI</ref> Whatever the concerns, Biden would likely be a one-term president.

===Taxes===
[[File:CCP Biden.png|right|300px|thumb|]]
Biden has vowed to raise taxes on the American people.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWqL7nM4T-s</ref>

===Fundraising===
Biden accepted the maximum contribution allowed from former HBO chief executive officer Chris Albrecht. Albrecht resigned as chief executive officer at HBO ain 2007 after being arrested and charged with assaulting his girlfriend. In 1991 Time Warner Inc. paid a $400,000 settlement to a female worker allegedly assaulted by Albrecht while on the job. The victim reported directly to Albrecht at the time as senior vice president at HBO Independent Productions.

=== Joe Biden and his controversies related to the military ===

Joe Biden has faced a couple of controversies related the military. Below is some information related to those controversies.

*[[Joe Biden and the military]]

==2009–2017: Vice presidency==
As he assumed office, Biden's responsibilities as vice president were not made clear. He had no specific portfolio of responsibilities. He alarmed the nation on April 30, 2009, by going on network television to warn Americans to stay out of confined spaces such as subways and airplanes, lest they catch Swine Flu. Health officials rejected his scare tactics and the White House immediately repudiated them.

Under President Obama the budget [[deficit]] reached over $1 trillion for the first time in history. When asked over the fate of the United States' going into bankruptcy, Biden stated at an [[AARP]] meeting, "Now, people when I say that look at me and say, "What are you talking about, Joe? You’re telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?’" Biden said. "The answer is yes, that's what I’m telling you."<ref name=bankrupt />

Biden eventually was placed in charge of promoting the [[Obama administration]]'s [[Recovery Summer]] in 2010, an attempt to highlight the Democratic Congress's [[American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009]], or "[[economic stimulus]] program. During Recovery Summer, the workforce shrank, [[unemployment]] swelled, and [[economic growth]] slowed to less than 2%. More Americans fell victim to Democrat economic policy and by the [[2010 Midterm election]] sweep no less than 27,000,000 people were unemployed or underemployed.

===Seal Team 6===
In killing Osama bin Laden, Obama transformed the [[War on Terror]] from a preventative war against terrorism to a war of vengeance and retribution to enhance Obama's re-election prospects.

The families of Navy Seal Team 6 blame Vice President Biden for revealing the identity of the Navy Seal Team that killed [[Osama bin Laden]].<ref>https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/03/bidens_betrayal_of_seals_should_doom_presidential_run.html</ref> Seal Team 6 is a covert action force, and all its members are sworn to secrecy to never reveal the actions they participate in. The government likewise is bound to protect their identities. In boasting of the killing, Biden named Seal Team 6 by name as the unit that found bin Laden.

On August 6, 2011, the [[Taliban]] ambushed a Chinook helicopter carrying 30 U.S. service members — including 15 SEAL Team 6 members — in [[Afghanistan]].<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2013/05/09/military-families-allege-muslim-cleric-damned-dead-navy-seals-at-ceremony/</ref> Everyone on board was killed.<ref>https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/7/the-betrayal-of-the-navys-seal-team-6/</ref> In a show of [[multiculturalism]], the [[Obama administration]] insisted a [[Muslim]] cleric be present when the bodies were recovered.<ref>http://joemiller.us/2013/05/seal-team-6-press-conference-obama-at-fault-muslim-cleric-prayed-at-funeral-damned-them-to-hell/</ref>

Families of the slain SEAL members held a news conference at the National Press Club demanding an investigation into why their sons had been identified, despite specific assurances by the Obama administration their identities would be protected.<ref>http://joemiller.us/2013/05/navy-seal-team-vi-families-to-reveal-obama-admin-s-culpability-in-death-of-sons/</ref> To add insult, the families complained about the Muslim cleric that the Obama administration required to preside in a ceremony over their remains, damned their souls to hell as infidels in an Islamic prayer proclaiming victory.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S7h5PO3r-w</ref>

===Cronyism and influence peddling===
Five months into the [[Obama administration]] in June 2009 Biden's son, [[Hunter Biden]] and Chris Heinz, stepson of Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair [[John Kerry]] formed Rosemount Seneca. The firm partnered with the Thornton Group run by Devon Archer, and the Bank of China, to form Bohai Harvest RST (BHR) in China. Devon Archer is the nephew of [[Whitey Bulger]], head of the [[Boston]] Irish [[mafia]] who enjoyed federal protection under FBI director [[Robert Mueller]] as an informant. Bulger was convicted of 19 murders that occurred while under Mueller's protection; some have linked the Bulger klan to as many as 52 murders while Mueller was the United States Attorney in Boston. The Bank of China is owned by the Chinese government and closely connected with the Chinese military and intelligence services. Biden, Heinz, and Archer transferred and sold "duel use" technology to the Chinese military which was used to create the Chinese [[drone]] program and replicate the Chinese version of the [[F-15]] fighter.<ref>https://nypost.com/2018/03/15/inside-the-shady-private-equity-firm-run-by-kerry-and-bidens-kids/</ref> Unsurprisingly, Joe Biden disregards the assessment of U.S. intelligence agencies and doesn't regard China as a strategic threat.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD9d3TUYHNo&feature=youtu.be</ref><ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/05/02/bidens-alleged-financial-ties-u-s-enemy-china-overshadow-2020-bid/</ref>

In April 2014, Hunter Biden joined the Board of Directors of Burisma, a [[Ukrainian]] oil and gas company despite having no experience in the oil and gas industry.<ref>http://burisma.com/en/board-of-directors/</ref><ref>http://www.dw.com/en/who-are-hunter-bidens-ukrainian-bosses/a-17642254</ref> The status of an independent Ukraine became the focus of much [[fake news]] reporting during the 2016 election and the [[Trump-Russia collusion hoax]].

Joseph Biden is a supporter of the [[Trans Pacific Partnership]] TPP.

==Past campaigns==
[[Liberal]] Biden, notorious for his long-winded speeches and his foot-in-mouth moments, as illustrated by his declaration that "we have to go spend money to keep from going [[bankrupt]]."<ref name=bankrupt>[http://cnsnews.com/news/article/joe-biden-we-have-go-spend-money-keep-going-bankrupt Joe Biden: ‘We Have to Go Spend Money to Keep From Going Bankrupt’], [[Cybercast News Service]]</ref> A favorite of the [[liberal media]], Biden avoids the mockery that greeted a less gaffe-prone predecessor, [[Dan Quayle]].

He ran for President in 1988 but dropped out of the race after admitting he had [[plagiarism#Joe Biden|plagiarized]] a speech by the leader of the British [[Labour Party]].<ref>[http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history_lesson/2008/08/the_write_stuff.html Why Biden's plagiarism shouldn't be forgotten.] - [[Slate Magazine]] - Aug. 25, 2008</ref>

Biden considered running as a Presidential candidate for the 2004 elections, but then decided against it, saying that it would be "now too much of a long shot.".<ref>[https://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/special/president/candidates/whos.in.out.html Who is in, who is out 2004], [[CNN]]</ref> He was later mentioned as a possible running mate for Democratic Senator [[John Kerry]], but he instead urged Kerry to chose Senator John McCain.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4961694/ McCain urged to join Kerry ticket], [[MSNBC]]</ref>

He won few votes when running for [[2008 Presidential election|president in 2008]]; he dropped out after placing fifth in Iowa in January, 2008. Biden became [[Barack Obama]]'s vice-presidential running mate. His campaign stressed his Irish Catholic roots in appeals to working class [[Democrat]]s, who had deserted Obama in the primaries but returned in the fall.

===1988 Presidential campaign===
Joe Biden announced his candidacy for President in 1987. He ran on his experience, saying in an campaign advertisement "The [[White House]] isn't the place to learn how to deal with international crisis, the balance of power, war and peace, and the economic future of the next generation." <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121919956426355701.html Biden's Foreign Policy Background Carries Growing Cachet], [[Wall Street Journal]]</ref> His campaign was short-lived due to controversies. While campaigning in [[New Hampshire]] in 1987, a civilian asked about his grades in college, to which Biden yelled, "I think I have a much higher I.Q. than you do." He went on to say that he "went to law school on a full academic scholarship - the only one in my class to have a full academic scholarship" adding that he "ended up in the top half" of his class (Biden graduated 76th in a class of 85) and "graduated with three degrees from college."

Biden explained his comments "I did not graduate in the top half of my class at law school and my recollection of this was inaccurate...I graduated from the University of Delaware with a double major in history and political science. My reference to degrees at the Claremont event was intended to refer to these majors - I said 'three' and should have said 'two'." <ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/22/us/biden-admits-errors-and-criticizes-latest-report.html Biden Admits Errors and Criticizes Latest Report], [[The New York Times]]</ref>

Later in the campaign he was found to have plagiarized a speech from British [[Labour Party]] leader [[Neil Kinnock]]. The plagiarism was considered all the more serious, because it included details of Kinnock's life which were not true in Biden's case. Biden dropped out of the race in December 1987, and did not participate in the 1988 Democratic caucuses and primaries.

===2008 Presidential campaign===
:{{Main article|2008 Presidential election}}
Biden declared his candidacy for [[President]] on January 31, 2007 but withdrew in January 2008 after coming 5th in the [[Iowa Caucus]], receiving only 1% of the vote.<ref>[http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/01/04/chris-dodd-abandons-presidential-campaign-after-poor-showing-in-iowa/ Biden, Dodd Bow Out of Presidential Race After Poor Showings in Iowa], [[Fox News]]</ref> He ran on his foreign policy experience and credentials in the Senate. Biden voted for the [[Operation Iraqi Freedom]] - the [[War in Iraq]]. On November 15, 2007, during the CNN presidential debate, he said {{Cquote|''This is not about experience. It's not about change. It's about action. Who among us is going to be able to, on Day 1, step in and end the war?.''}}

In a presidential debate, when asked, “Would you call for [[tariff]]s to protect American consumers from unsafe products from [[China]]? Are you willing to go there?” Biden answered, “I’m not. No, I’m not willing to go there."<ref>https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/biden-was-a-much-better-candidate-when-he-wasnt-running/</ref>

During an ABC Democratic presidential debate, Biden was asked about the statement he made regarding [[Barack Obama]]. Biden said: {{Cquote|''I think he can be ready but right now, I don’t believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training. I think that I stand by the statement.''<ref>[http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/23/mccain-launches-tv-ad-using-bidens-words-against-obama/ McCain Launches TV Ad Using Biden’s Words Against Obama], [[Fox News]], August 23, 2008</ref>}}

===2008 Vice presidential campaign===
[[Image:0.jpg|right|thumb|250px|Biden campaigning for Barack Obama, 09/24/08]] Biden had been mentioned as a Vice Presidential candidate for Senator [[Barack Obama]], in that he would add foreign policy experience to the ticket. When asked in June over the speculation, Biden stated, "I'd make a great president. I'd make a great [[Secretary of State]]. I'd make a great vice president." <ref>The Hill's Blog Briefing Room: [http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2008/06/17/biden-id-make-a-great-president-secretary-of-state-vice-president/ Biden: I'd Make a Great President, Secretary of State, Vice President]</ref> On August 19, Biden was asked by reporters of his VP status, to which he replied "Hey guys, I'm not the guy. See ya." <ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/08/biden-on-obamas.html?cid=127045696 Biden on Obama's VP Pick: 'I'm Not The Guy'] [[ABC News]], August 19, 2008</ref> It was Joe Biden's son, Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden, who issued an arrest warrant on fabricated charges to attempt to discredit Larry Sinclair's National Press Club news conference where he alleged a [[gay]] affair with Obama and claimed he was using [[cocaine]] at the time.<ref>http://archive.is/8a4xF</ref> Biden was nominated by Obama choice for vice president a week later.<ref>https://larrysinclair.com/blog/a-reminder-from-lame-cherry/</ref>

In August 2005 Biden paradoxically and nonsensically said, "[[John McCain]] is a personal friend, a great friend, and I would be honored to run with or against John McCain, because I think the country would be better off."<ref>[http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NGRhNzJlMWY5NjdiNzhjMTRkYjMzNjYwOGJmYzNjMTY= 'Just Words' That Joe Biden Would Like To Forget], [[National Review Online]]</ref>

However, on August 23 it was announced that Biden would be Obama's 2008 running mate. They appeared together in [[Springfield]], [[Illinois]]. Obama proudly introduced Senator Biden,
''

:''"Let me introduce to you, the next president — the next vice president of the United States of America, Joe Biden."''

Biden took the stage and endorsed Obama, saying,
''

:''"In this election year the choice is clear, one man stands ready to deliver change we desperately need, a man I'm proud to call my friend, a man who will be the next President of the [[United States]], Barack America."''
''

Obama hoped Biden would help the ticket in multiple ways:

* Biden has extensive foreign policy experience in the United States Senate and as such could have helped to bolster Obama's comparative lack of experience in this area.
* Biden is [[Catholic]], and Obama was weak with that key voting bloc; however, the [[Catholic Church]] may have taken offense at Biden's pro-[[abortion]] positions (see below).
* Biden was born in [[Pennsylvania]], a must-win state for Obama where he was thought to be weak;<ref>[[Hillary Clinton]] defeated Obama by a wide margin in the [[Pennsylvania]] primary; in August polls show Obama leading McCain by an average of only 5.8% in [[Pennsylvania]] [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/pa/pennsylvania_mccain_vs_obama-244.html RealClearPolitics Pennsylvania Tracking]</ref>
* Biden's son is going to [[Iraq]], which may have helped to rehabilitate Obama's image as anti-military; however, Biden himself never served.

Almost immediately after his selection, the conflict between his pro-[[abortion]] position and that of his church surfaced:<ref>[https://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS29316+23-Aug-2008+PRN20080823 Choice of Biden Re-Opens Catholic Wound], [[Reuters]]</ref>

:Biden has said: "I am a long-standing supporter of ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' and a woman's right to choose." But Biden's own bishop, Bishop Michael Saltarelli of Wilmington, Del., has ... denounced the notion that politicians can 'personally oppose' abortion, but refuse to pass laws protecting the unborn. He made clear that pro-abortion Catholic politicians should refrain from receiving the Eucharist:

:"The promotion of abortion by any Catholic is a grave and serious matter. Objectively, according to the constant teaching of the Scriptures and the Church, it would be more spiritually beneficial for such a person to refrain from receiving the Body and Blood of Christ. I ask Catholics in this position to have the integrity to respect the Eucharist, Catholic teaching and the Catholic faithful."

In September of the campaign Biden asked [[Missouri]] State Senator Chuck Graham, who has [[paralysis]], to "Stand up, Chuck, let 'em see you. Oh, God love you. What am I talking about? I tell you what, you're making everybody else stand up, though, pal. I tell you what, stand up for Chuck." <ref name=standupchuck />

Biden's [[Republican]] opponent for the Vice Presidency was [[Alaska]] [[Governor]] [[Sarah Palin]]. They participated in their first and only Vice Presidential debate on October 2 in [[St. Louis]], [[Missouri]]. Biden was elected the 47th Vice President of the United States on November 4, 2008.

===2012 Vice presidential campaign===
Biden got a pass from fellow [[liberal]]s in the media despite acting like a rude clown during his vice presidential debate with [[Paul Ryan]] in October 2012. Biden repeatedly interrupted Ryan and engaged in other offensive behavior, and even complained about not getting more time despite talking more than Ryan did. At one point Biden even nonsensically interjected, "so now you're Jack Kennedy?" in interrupting a valid point being made by Ryan.

==1973–2009: U.S. Senate==
[[Image:Biden_on_Meet_the_Press.jpg|right|thumb|250px|Biden on Meet The Press, 09/09/07]] In 1972, Biden unseated the liberal Republican Senator [[Cale Boggs]]. In 1973, he hence became the fifth-youngest U.S. senator in U.S. history. He was later reelected six times.

Biden, as a senator from [[Delaware]] from 1973-2009, served on the Senate Judiciary Committee and subsequently the Committee on Foreign Relations, alternating as the chair or ranking member on both committees. Biden in 2007 was ranked as the third most liberal Senator by the non-partisan ''National Journal''.<ref>[http://www.nationaljournal.com/conventions/co_20080823_9669.php Biden's Senate Vote Record], ''National Journal''</ref>

Biden has close ties with lobbyists, receiving $5,133,072 in contributions from [[lawyer]]s and [[lobbyist]]s since 2003.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12735.html Statesman known for slips of his tongue], [[Politico]]</ref> Biden requested 116 congressional [[earmark]]s in 2008 alone, resulting in $342 million in taxpayer money.<ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/23/biden.earmarks/?iref=hpmostpop Biden, Obama helped keep 'Bridge to Nowhere' alive], [[CNN]]</ref>

During a late-night marathon debate over President George W. Bush's tax cut bill, 98-year-old Sen. [[Strom Thurmond]] began ailing. Biden told the ''New York Daily News'' "I saw Strom sitting in his seat, he looked awful. I said, 'Strom, you should go home'. He's an old buddy."<ref>https://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/storm-concern-strom-article-1.901327</ref>

Biden was for the Iraq War before he was against it.

===Abortion===
On the [[abortion issue]], Biden is [[pro-abortion]] and opposed President [[George W. Bush]]'s two nominees to the U.S. [[Supreme court]]. On ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' he said, "I strongly support Roe v. Wade....That’s why I led the fight to defeat [Robert] Bork. Thank [[God]] he is not in the Court or Roe v. Wade would be gone by now."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20130312002759/http://nrlc.org/Election2008/comparison0909084c.pdf Where Do the Candidates Stand on Abortion?], [[National Right to Life Committee]]</ref> He received a 100% rating from [[NARAL Pro-Choice America]] in 2001, 2004, 2005 and 2006,<ref>http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=53279</ref> but not in other years because of his opposition to [[partial-birth abortion]] and public funding for abortions.<ref>http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Joe_Biden_Abortion.htm</ref>

===2nd Amendment===
He is a strong opponent of 2nd-amendment rights, earning an F by the [[National Rifle Association]]. Biden has also voted to give [[Social Security]] benefits and citizenship to [[illegal aliens]]. On energy, he opposes increased domestic oil production, saying proponents of offshore drilling want to "rape" the Outer Continental Shelf.<ref>http://www.votesmart.org/speech_detail.php?sc_id=400058</ref>

===Judiciary committee===
Biden was a long-time member of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, which he chaired from 1987 until 1995 and served as ranking minority member from 1981 until 1987 and again from 1995 until 1997. He almost never supported a supreme court nominee who was not in his party and presided over two of the more contentious [[U.S. Supreme Court]] confirmation hearings ever, [[Robert Bork]] in 1987 and the [[racism|racially motivated]] hearings for [[Clarence Thomas]]<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egTyaIAaqz8 Clarence Thomas High-Tech Lynching]</ref> in 1991.

Sen. [[Arlen Specter]], who jumped to the Democrats in 2009, wrote in his memoirs that Biden admitted to him that Biden believed Anita Hill was lying.

===Biden crime bill===
[[File:Joe Biden.jpg|250px|right|thumb|Biden [[collude]]d with segregationists to undermine the Supreme Court decision of ''Brown vs. Board''.]]
The [[Biden Crime Bill of 1994]], also known as the Superpredator Act, came in response to the Central Park jogger case and trial of the Central Park Five. On its twentieth anniversary the Brennan Center observed, {{quotebox|It expanded the death penalty, creating 60 new death penalty offenses under 41 federal capital statutes. It eliminated education funding for incarcerated students, effectively gutting prison education programs. Despite a wealth of research showing education increases post-release employment, reduces recidivism, and improves outcomes for the formerly incarcerated and their families, this change has not been reversed.

And the bill created a wave of change toward harsher state sentencing policy. That change was driven by funding incentives: the bill’s $9.7 billion in federal funding for prison construction went only to states that adopted truth-in-sentencing (TIS) laws, which lead to defendants serving far longer prison terms. Within 5 years, 29 states had TIS laws on the books, 24 more than when the bill was signed. New York State received over $216 million by passing such laws. By 2000 the state had added over 12,000 prison beds and incarcerated 28 percent more people than a decade before.}}

===War on sovereignty===
:{{Main article|War on sovereignty}}
In 1992, Joe Biden penned a piece for the ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'' entitled, "''How I Learned to Love the New World Order''," in which he extolled "collective security" through the [[United Nations]] and called for a “permanent commitment of forces for use by the Security Council.”

On July 14, 1993, a little over a year after writing the Journal op-ed cited above, Senator Biden introduced Senate Joint Resolution 112 urging the new president, [[Bill Clinton]], to initiate discussions to establish a standing United Nations army. Under his proposal, United States bases and facilities would be made available to train UN forces, and the president would not “be deemed to require the authorization of Congress” to make American troops, facilities, or other assistance “available to the [[Security Council]] on its call.”

He also called for the creation of a “[[new world order]]” at the Export-Import Bank conference in Washington on April 5, 2013. “The affirmative task we have now is to actually create a new world order,” he exclaimed.

===Foreign policy===
As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden voted against aid to the government of [[South Vietnam]] leading to its collapse in 1975.

He called the rise of the [[Ayatollah Khomeini]] in the [[Iranian Revolution]] in 1979 a step forward for [[human rights]].

Biden opposed [[Ronald Reagan]]'s development of the [[missile defense system|Missile Defense System]] and ending the doctrine of [[Mutual Assured Destruction]].

He voted against the [[Persian Gulf War]] in 1991.

Biden voted for the [[Iraq War]] in 2002. In a 2005 interview with ''Meet the Press'', Biden advocated a troop surge saying, "I’ve been calling for more troops [in Iraq] for over two years, along with [[John McCain]] and others subsequent to my saying that." On July 23, 2007, Biden said, "there's not a single [[military]] man in this [[audience]], who will tell this Senator he can get those troops out in six months if the order goes today, let's start telling the truth."<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wylferBh3IA</ref> He advocated Iraqi [[federal]]ism based on [[nation]]al and [[religious]] differences for [[Kurd]]s, [[Shiite]]s and [[Sunni]]s.

==Early life==
Biden was born at Scranton State General Hospital in Scranton, [[Pennsylvania]]<ref name="timeline">[http://biden.senate.gov/senator/timeline/ Joe Biden Timeline]</ref> and grew up in New Castle County, Delaware,<ref name="bio">[http://biden.senate.gov/senator/ Joe Biden Biography]</ref> in a middle-class family. His father was a white-collar businessman who did well but had fallen on hard times when Biden was a youth.<ref name="bluecollar">[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/08/joe_bidens_mythical_bluecollar.html Joe Biden's Mythical Blue-Collar Roots], [[Real Clear Politics]]</ref> Biden attended Archmere Academy, a private Catholic college-preparatory high school in the Wilmington, Delaware area, graduating in 1961.<ref name="bio" /> Biden took a summer job to help his family pay for his schooling.<ref name="bluecollar" /><ref>Archmere Academy [http://www.archmereacademy.com/Default.aspx?tabid=74] Tuition for 2008-2009 is $18,450.</ref> Biden received 5 [[Vietnam war]] draft deferments. He graduated from the University of Delaware in 1965, and from the Syracuse University College of Law in 1968 near the bottom of his class.<ref name="bio" /> After finishing law school Biden worked in the Wilmington, Del. public defenders office where he claims to have represented a member of the [[Black Panthers]];<ref>https://www.aaihs.org/the-1968-occupation-of-black-wilmington/#fnref-43519-4</ref> no evidence has ever been produced to support Biden's claim he ever represented a member of the Black Panthers.

Biden is a serial plagiarizer.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zPl7Ncs8AI</ref> He was accused of, and ultimately admitted to plagiarism while a student at Syracuse Law School.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/17/us/biden-was-accused-of-plagiarism-in-law-school.html Biden Was Accused of Plagiarism in Law School], [[The New York Times]]</ref> He submitted a paper in which he plagiarized from a law review article. After receiving a grade of F, he was permitted to retake the course.<ref>[http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE3DB143FF93BA2575AC0A961948260 Biden Admits Plagiarism in School But Says It Was Not 'Malevolent'], By E. J. DIONNE JR., SPECIAL TO [[The New York Times|THE NEW YORK TIMES]], Published: September 18, 1987</ref>

In 1966, while still in law school, Biden married Neilia Hunter.<ref name="timeline" /> They had three children together: Joseph R. "Beau" Dien, III, Robert Hunter, and Naomi. Shortly after his election to the Senate in 1972, his wife and infant daughter were killed in a car accident, and his two sons were seriously injured.<ref name="timeline" /> He eventually remarried to Dr. Jill Biden (née Jacobs), an educator in Delaware's schools.<ref name="bio" /> She currently is an instructor<ref>[http://www.dtcc.edu/catalog/pdf/personnel.pdf Delaware Technical Community College - College Catalog]</ref> teaching at Delaware Technical Community College. Together, the couple added a daughter, Ashley Biden, to the family.<ref name="bio" />

Biden was elected to the U.S Senate from Delaware in 1972. Delaware was a slave state. It did not join the [[Confederacy]] partially because President [[Abraham Lincoln]] suborned the Maryland state legislature and would not permit it to leave the union. Delaware, separated from the south by Maryland, could not secede on its own. Delaware voters in fact rejected Lincoln's plan to compensate for emancipation of its slaves, paid for by the federal government. Delawares Democrat and racist traditions were still very strong when Biden was elected.,<ref>https://www.westernjournal.com/dick-morris-biden-eastland-perfect-together/</ref>

Since 1991, Biden has been an [[adjunct professor]] at the Widener University School of Law, where he teaches a seminar on constitutional law.<ref name="bio" />

Biden's son, Hunter Biden, was thrown out of the [[US Navy]] for [[cocaine]] use. Hunter Biden has been a Washington [[lobbyist]] since 2001.<ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-08-24-Biden-son_N.htm Biden's son a registered lobbyist since 2001], [[USA Today]]</ref>

=== Joe Biden, his struggles with grief and his unresolved emotional wounds ===
[[File:Bill Clinton and officials on Air Force One.jpg|thumbnail|200px|[[Bill Clinton]], Joe Biden and other Clinton administration officials.]]

''See also:'' [[Joe Biden, grief and cognitive decline|Joe Biden and grief]]

Politico in an article entited ''How Grief Became Joe Biden’s ‘Superpower’'' indicates:
{{Cquote|There is no person in American politics today whose life has been so shaped by loss and grief. The long arc of Biden’s career is all but bracketed by tragedy. In 1972, his wife and baby daughter were killed in a car accident; in 2015, one of his two sons who had survived the crash died of a rare strain of brain cancer. These wretched tentpoles are not only tragedies the 76-year-old Biden has had to endure. They influenced major decisions he made about his political career—first, his priorities in the Senate; later, his decision to opt out of the presidential election of 2016. And they defined him as a person as well, according to longtime friends, former aides and veteran politicos in his home state of Delaware.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/01/25/joe-biden-2019-profile-grief-beau-car-accident-224178 How Grief Became Joe Biden’s ‘Superpower’]</ref>}}

The ''Washington Post'' states concerning Biden: "In a candid 2012 speech to military families and friends who had lost a loved one in action, Biden spoke about the anger, crisis of faith and wounds that don't really ever heal."<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/05/31/joe-bidens-heartfelt-thoughts-on-grief/ Joe Biden’s heartfelt speech on grief], Washington Post</ref>

The Associated Press indicates concerning Biden:
{{Cquote|After the accident, Biden had no interest in the Senate anymore. No ambition for anything, really. His world view shrank to taking care of his boys.

“For the first time in my life, I understood how someone could consciously decide to commit suicide,” he would later reveal.

Biden didn’t just have to deal with grief. He had the added burden of processing it in public.
<ref>[https://www.apnews.com/e5a1e70314eb44219448eeb850c65f1e Biden’s prism of loss: A public man, shaped by private grief], Associated Press</ref>}}

==Embarrassing or silly remarks==
[[File:Bidenbeforeafter.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Biden had a hair transplant, where hairs were removed from his buttocks and placed on his head.<ref>''[http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2008/08/bidens_hair.html Does Joe Biden Have Butt Hair on His Head?]'', By Jessica Pressler, ''The Intelligencer'', Aug. 25, 2008.</ref>]]
*Biden earned the nickname '''Butthead Biden''' in 1989 when he began having hair follicle transplants from his buttocks to his scalp to relieve pressure on his [[vanity]].
*In attempting to quote the the [[Declaration of Independence]] before [[Super Tuesday]], Biden misquoted, "all men and women created by" and then stumbled saying, "go, you know, you know the thing."<ref> Dominick Mastrangelo, March 02, 2020 [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/you-know-the-thing-biden-botches-declaration-of-independence-quote-during-campaign-stop 'You know, the thing': Biden botches Declaration of Independence quote during campaign stop] The Washington Examiner. Retrieved March 03, 2020</ref><ref>https://twitter.com/SteveGuest/status/1234579299652554753</ref>
*When Representative [[Gabrielle Giffords]] returned to Congress after a long hiatus (which was the result of her being shot in the head), Biden (who had a brain surgery in the past) remarked to her that "Now we're both members of the Cracked Head Club".<ref>[http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/08/gabrielle-giffords-joe-biden-cracked-head-club-/1 Biden jokes Giffords is in 'Cracked Head Club' ], [[USA Today]]</ref>

*When he met Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen, Biden said "God rest her soul" in reference to Cowen's mother. However, it was Cowen's father that died, not his mother.<ref>[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7469323/Joe-Biden-loses-the-gift-of-the-gab-on-St-Patricks-Day.html Joe Biden loses the gift of the gab on St Patrick's Day - The Daily Telegraph], [[The Daily Telegraph]]</ref>

===Hostile comments===
*At one 2005 political event he said, ''"The next [[Republican]] that tells me I'm not religious, I'm going to shove my rosary down their throat."'' <ref>[http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1840965,00.html#ixzz0xxjisdkg Does Biden Have a Catholic Problem?], [[Time Magazine]]</ref>

*In March 2007, Biden was criticizing President [[George W. Bush]] for vetoing a bill that would set a timeline for troops to be removed from Iraq, saying that [[Congress]] should "shove it down his throat."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20080903080136/http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/5/1/144042.shtml?s=us Biden on Iraq Bill: 'Shove It Down His Throat'], [[Newsmax]]</ref>

*In February 2019, Biden criticized U.S. President [[Donald Trump]] in Germany, breaking a longstanding tradition of not criticizing the current commander-in-chief in foreign countries.<ref>Gehrke, Joel (February 16, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/biden-tells-europeans-in-munich-that-america-is-an-embarrassment Biden tells Europeans in Munich that America is 'an embarrassment']. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved February 16, 2019.</ref>

===Quotations about guns===
* During a February 2013 interview, Biden said that if there was a “problem” that his wife should “walk out on the balcony here, walk out, put that double-barrel shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house.” <ref>[https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/20/biden-shotgun-advice-draws-quizzical-response/ Biden Shotgun Advice Draws Quizzical Response], [[The New York Times]]</ref> Doing so is of course, illegal, and would leave his wife holding an empty shotgun while dealing with the “problem”.

* In another February 2013 interview, Biden said "[if] you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door." Coincidently, a man from Virginia Beach had done just that a few days before, and was arrested.<ref>[https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/02/28/biden-advises-shooting-shotgun-through-door Biden Advises Shooting Shotgun Through Door], [[U.S. News & World Report]]</ref>

===Remarks about race or ethnicity===
*In July 2006, while speaking to a group of Indian-Americans in Delaware, Biden stated, "You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I'm not joking." His comment was caught on C-SPAN.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13757367/ Biden explains Indian-American remarks], [[MSNBC]]</ref>

*In August 2006, Biden was on [[Fox News]] Sunday and bragged about his state being a former [[slave]] state. "You don't know my state. My state was a slave state. My state is a border state. My state is the eighth largest black population in the country. My state is anything from a northeast liberal state." <ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFduMuP7v-k</ref>

*Talking about his fellow Democratic presidential candidate [[Barack Obama]] he said in January 2007, "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy, ... I mean, that's a storybook, man." <ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/31/biden.obama/ Biden's description of Obama draws scrutiny], [[CNN]]</ref>

*Thanks To Japan’s [[Xenophobia]], Women Are Encouraged To Stay In The Workforce.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7u1d_1V1Ekc</ref>

===Erroneous comments===
*Joe Biden once told voters that his [[helicopter]] was "forced down" on "the superhighway of terror" by Afghan extremists. When actually, snow forced the helicopter pilot to land and wait out a [[storm]].<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,431604,00.html Fact Check: Biden's Chopper Was 'Forced Down' by Snowflakes], [[Fox News]]</ref>

*In the Oct. 2008 VP debate, Biden made numerous misstatements, on topics ranging from the Constitution to the Mideast.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,433314,00.html Did Biden Get It Wrong? You Betcha], [[Fox News]]</ref>

*He said he was second in line to be President when he was first and Nancy Pelosi was second at the time.<ref>[http://michellemalkin.com/2010/09/20/bozo-the-vp-botches-line-of-succession/ Bozo the VP botches line of succession], [[Michelle Malkin]]</ref>

*During the 2008 presidential campaign, Biden said that "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed. He said, 'look, here's what happened.'"<ref>[https://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/22/eveningnews/main4470063.shtml Behind The Scenes With Joe Biden], [[CBSNews]]</ref> In actuality television wasn't in use for another twenty years and the president during the 1929 stock market crash was [[Herbert Hoover]], not [[Franklin Roosevelt]].

*In another erroneous remark made during the presidential campaign, Biden referred to [[Sarah Palin]] as lieutenant Governor of Alaska, when in fact she the state's Governor at the time.<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1643290_1643292_1841625,00.html Biden's Palin Demotion], [[Time Magazine]]</ref>

*Biden made yet another deceptive claim during the 2008 presidential campaign in which he asserted that "This guy is brain-dead," referring to then-President [[George W. Bush]] .<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2007/aug/24/joe-biden/irresponsible-claim-and-wrong-medical-diagnosis/ Irresponsible claim (and wrong medical diagnosis)], [[PolitiFact]]</ref> This absurd claim was completely unfounded and demonstrably false.

===Other quotations===
*During the 2008 presidential elections Joe Biden gave a speech in Springfield, Illinois in which he introduced the Democratic nominee for president as "Barack America".<ref>[https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2008/0823/barack-america-and-president-biden-ooops Barack America and President Biden? Ooops...], [[Christian Science Monitor]]</ref>

*Biden remarked about the 2010 Midterm “I was amazed at the amount of money, this $200 billion of money that is — where there’s no accountability.” Clearly he meant $200 million says the New York Times.<ref>[https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/200-billion-in-ads-mr-biden-thats-real-money/?ref=politics $200 Billion in Ads, Mr. Biden? That’s Real Money], [[The New York Times]], October 22, 2010</ref> Though just a moment later. “So it really — I’ve never seen this before, so the only caveat I’d put in terms of the House is how much impact this $200 billion are going to mean.”

*During the 2005 confirmation hearings for Justice [[John Roberts]], Biden asked Roberts, "Can a microscopic tag be planted in someones body to track his every move, you will rule on that." <ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbPvWm9ZkYw</ref>

*In 2008 Biden told a wheelchair bound State Senator from [[Missouri]] to "stand up".<ref name=standupchuck>[http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2008/09/10/joe_biden_to_man_in_wheechair_stand_up_chuck_let_em_see_ya Joe Biden to Man in Wheechair: "Stand Up, Chuck. Let 'Em See Ya!"], [[Rush Limbaugh]]</ref>

*He said "Its easy being Vice President." Then a lawmaker said "It's like being the grandpa and not the parent," to which he responded "Yeah, that's it!"<ref>[http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/26/biden-its-easy-being-vice-president/ Biden - "It's Easy Being Vice President"], [[Fox News]]</ref>

*After [[ObamaCare]] was signed into law, Biden was caught swearing on camera while expressing his joy.<ref>[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/7508111/US-health-care-Joe-Biden-swears-after-Barack-Obama-signs-historic-reforms.html US health care: Joe Biden swears after Barack Obama signs historic reforms], [[Daily Telegraph]]</ref>

*Biden was caught swearing again while speaking to a former Senate colleague.<ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2015/01/06/politics/biden-swearing-in/ Joe Biden swearing in senators makes great TV], [[Fox News]]</ref>

Read more: [http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/26/biden-its-easy-being-vice-president/#ixzz1X7ju3pUC Biden - "It's Easy Being Vice President"], [[Fox News]]

==In popular culture==
*[http://www.cc.com/video-clips/yfmksi/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-the-audacity-of-grope The Audacity of Grope]
*https://joebiden.info/ A collection of cringworthy moments from Biden's career
*Oliver Stone documentary [https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1180915084522078208?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw ''Ukraine on Fire'' trailer].

==See also==
*[[Ukrainian collusion timeline]]
*[[Race baiting]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Joe_Biden.htm Biden On the Issues]
*[http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/b000444/ Voting Record], [[Washington Post]]
*[http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=B000444, Biography at the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress]
*[http://www.joebiden.com/ Presidential Race Site]
*[https://twitter.com/todosconbiden/status/1187125647644286976?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Todos Con Biden]
{{USVicePresidents}}{{liberalism}}{{DEFAULTSORT:Biden, Joseph}}

[[Category:Joe Biden]]
[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Former United States Senators]]
[[Category:2008 Presidential Candidates]]
[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Black History]]
[[Category:Liberals]]
[[Category:Reagan Era]]
[[Category:Vice Presidents of the United States]]
[[Category:Catholic Politicians]]
[[Category:Irish-Americans]]
[[Category:Abortion Advocates]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Anti-Constitutionalists]]
[[Category:Trump-Russia Collusion Hoax]]
[[Category:Hillary Clinton email scandal]]
[[Category:United States Presidential Election, 2020]]
[[Category:Socialists]]
[[Category:Leftists]]
[[Category:Corruption]]
[[Category:Racism]]
[[Category:1970s]]
[[Category:1980s]]
[[Category:1990s]]
[[Category:2000s]]
[[Category:2010s]]
[[Category:2020s]]

Joe Biden

2020-03-11T14:41:45Z

Daniel1212: /* Policies */

{{Officeholder
|name=Joseph Biden
|image=JoeBiden.jpg
|party=[[Democratic party|Democrat]]
|spouse=[[Jill Biden]]
|religion=[[Roman Catholic]]
|offices=
{{Officeholder/vice president
|country=the United States
|number=47th
|terms=January 20, 2009 – January 20, 2017
|president=[[Barack Obama]]
|preceded=[[Dick Cheney]]
|former=Hopefully
|succeeded=[[Mike Pence]]
}}
{{Officeholder/senator
|state=Delaware
|terms=January 3, 1973 – January 15, 2009
|preceded=[[Cale Boggs]]
|former=y
|succeeded=[[Ted Kaufman]]
}}
}}
'''Joe Biden''' (born<ref>his birth name was Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.</ref> '''non compos mentis''' November 20, 1942, see: [[Biden's age]]) was the [[Vice President of the United States]] and served as [[President Barack Obama]]'s token [[segregation]]ist. On April 25, 2019, Biden announced his candidacy against President Trump in 2020 and was the immediate [[Democratic party]] frontrunner.<ref>Biden is considered the [[Konstantin Chernenko]] of the modern [[Left]].</ref> He's known as "Architect of Mass Incarceration." Prior to being Obama's pick for vice president, Biden never garnered 2% of Democratic primary voters in any of his presidential bids. Biden promises to cure [[cancer]],<ref>https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/joe-biden-says-hes-going-130151675.html</ref> [[AIDS]] and [[climate change]] while giving out free [[drug]]s and tuition. Biden also vows to raise [[tax]]es.<ref>https://twitter.com/TimRunsHisMouth/status/1234334186846248961?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw</ref>

Biden [[obstruction of justice|obstructed justice]] when he threatened a ''[[quid pro quo]]'' to withhold money unless a prosecutor was fired who was investigating his son. Biden publicly admitted that he threatened Ukrainian leaders to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aide unless a prosecutor looking into kickbacks his son, [[Hunter Biden]], was receiving from a Ukrainian oil and gas company.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urTk6O4c0mU&feature=youtu.be</ref><ref>https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/27/1853703/-Worse-Than-Sniffing-Hair</ref> Biden's campaign was near collapse in September 2019 when it became known that he is currently under investigation by Ukrainian prosecutors for misusing his power as U.S. Vice President to interfere in a [[money-laundering]] investigation of his son,<ref>https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1175392716110401543</ref> [[Hunter Biden]].<ref name="thehill.com">https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived</ref> Biden's family has a reputation for corruption.<ref>Alic, Haris (August 14, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/08/14/eight-things-biden-familys-culture-orruption/ Eight Things to Know About the Biden Family’s Culture of Corruption]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved August 15, 2019.</ref>

In the 1970s, twenty years after ''[[Brown vs. Board of Education]]'', Biden embraced the "[[separate but equal]]" doctrine. Biden told [[NPR]] that segregation was "a matter of black pride." Biden amassed a coalition of liberals and [[George Wallace]] supporters to oppose racial integration,<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/1975/12/21/archives/busing-the-solution-that-has-failed-to-solve.html</ref> and considered a [[Constitutional Amendment]] to outlaw court-ordered school desegregation.<ref>https://soundcloud.com/user-391839060/npr-1975-interview-with-sen-joe-biden</ref><ref>https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook-pm/2019/06/19/what-team-biden-says-about-joes-segregationist-comment-448372</ref><ref>https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/19/joe-biden-segregationist-senators-1370223</ref> Biden wrote an Amendment that gutted portions of the [[1964 Civil Rights Act]].

Biden authored the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.<ref name="nytimes.com">https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/22/us/politics/joe-bidens-role-in-90s-crime-law-could-haunt-any-presidential-bid.html</ref> His [[New Jim Crow]] bill incarcerated 2.5 million Black males, one-tenth of the Black male population,<ref>https://www.sentencingproject.org/news/could-joe-bidens-role-in-90s-crime-law-haunt-a-presidential-bid/</ref> destroying lives and families. The bill included the notoriously racist hundred-to-one sentencing disparity between crack and powder [[cocaine]],<ref name="c-span.org">https://www.c-span.org/video/?18528-1/violent-crime-control-act-1991</ref> and added more than forty federal [[death penalty]] crimes. Biden boasted “we do everything but hang people for jaywalking.”<ref name="books.google.com">''[https://books.google.com/books?id=AK_DAwAAQBAJ&lpg=PA141&dq=we%20do%20everything%20but%20hang%20people%20for%20jaywalking&pg=PA141#v=onepage&q=we%20do%20everything%20but%20hang%20people%20for%20jaywalking&f=false The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America]'', Naomi Murakawa, Oxford University Press, Jul 10, 2014, p. 141.</ref>

Biden's [[racist]], [[sexist]], and [[bigot]]ted handling of [[Anita Hill]] left him widely ostracized until Obama rehabilitated him as his vice presidential pick.,<ref>https://www.essence.com/news/politics/joe-biden-anita-hill-comment-2020-presidential-run/</ref><ref>https://youtu.be/sM19YOqs7hU</ref> He ha earned the nicknames of "Gropin' Joe" for his scandalous groping of women and even little girls, and ''QuidProQuo Joe'' for [[obstructing justice]] by firing a prosecutor and a Billion dollar payoff as a bribe. Multiple women have described and complained about his bizarre, unwanted touching of them and even sniffing their hair. His penchant for unwanted groping of women and young girls was ignored by party loyalists who made him the Democrat frontrunner.<ref>https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2015/02/18/what-are-we-going-to-do-about-creepy-uncle-joe-biden/</ref> ''[[The Washington Post]]'' reported that Biden likes to get nude in front of female [[Secret Service]] Agents when his wife isn't around.<ref>https://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/ct-joe-biden-media-balancing-20140804-column.html</ref> The female agents were afraid to report the incidents because, as Vice President, Biden couldn't be disciplined under [[civil service system]] rules and the women would be simply reassigned elsewhere - effectively demoted - a gross violation of women's equal rights and abuse of power inequities. Anita Hill found her private conversation with Biden shortly before entering the 2020 presidential race "deeply unsatisfying."<ref name="pbs.org">https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/anita-hill-says-recent-conversation-with-joe-biden-was-deeply-unsatisfying</ref>

Biden has embraced every wrong foreign policy view in existence since the 1980s, including supporting the [[Kremlin]] directed "nuclear freeze" movement, opposing the First Gulf War, supporting the 2003 Iraq War, and opposing the operation that killed Osama bin Laden.<ref>https://twitter.com/brithume/status/1121430027327954945</ref> On immigration, Biden claimed in 2014 that [[illegal immigrants]] were "already American citizens."<ref>Binder, John (April 25, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/25/flashback-joe-biden-in-2014-illegal-aliens-are-already-american-citizens/ Flashback–Joe Biden in 2014: Illegal Aliens are ‘Already American Citizens’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved April 25, 2019.</ref> He supports far-left, [[open borders]] positions on immigration.<ref>Arthur, Andrew R. (January 6, 2020). [https://cis.org/Arthur/Myth-Moderate-Joe-Biden The Myth of Moderate Joe Biden]. ''Center for Immigration Studies''. Retrieved January 6, 2020.</ref> He strongly supports the [[homosexual agenda]],<ref>Harvey, Linda (May 29, 2019). [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/joe-biden-is-no-moderate-demorat-hes-an-lgbt-extremist Joe Biden is no ‘moderate Democrat.’ He’s an LGBT extremist]. ''LifeSiteNews''. Retrieved May 30, 2019.</ref> and he has flip-flopped on numerous issues including [[abortion]].<ref>Pollak, Joel B. (June 6, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/06/06/joe-biden-flip-flop-flip-abortion-hyde-amendment/ Joe Biden’s ‘Flip-Flop-Flip’ on Federal Funding for Abortion Is Latest Reversal]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 7, 2019.</ref> Biden has also made numerous false statements.<ref>Multiple references:
*Goodman, Alana (August 19, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/six-times-biden-described-major-events-in-his-life-that-never-happened Six times Biden described major events in his life that never happened]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved August 19, 2019.
*Boyle, Matthew (January 6, 2020). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/06/exclusive-trump-campaign-exposes-six-separate-foreign-policy-lies-by-democrat-joe-biden/ Exclusive — Trump Campaign Exposes Six Separate Foreign Policy Lies by Democrat Joe Biden]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved January 6, 2020.
*Kirkwood, R. Cort (January 7, 2020). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/34553-breitbart-details-six-foreign-policy-fibs-from-sleepy-joe Breitbart Details Six Foreign Policy Fibs From Sleepy Joe]. ''The New American''. Retrieved January 7, 2020.</ref>

Biden is the first [[Roman Catholic]] Vice President and is popularly known as a [[gaffe]] machine. As Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden was a strong supporter of [[President George W. Bush]] and helped shepherd the [[Iraq War]] resolution through Congress. Biden voted for the repeal of the Glass Steagall Act which led to the financial [[Crash of 2008]].

==2020 Presidential campaign==

===Policies===
What Biden proposes and vows is essentially not much different than radical Sanders, as in part they promote death and perversion, and implement politically correct policies and inculcate liberal "values," and increase dependence upon government from Pre-K on up, with this expensive expansion of government being funded via the economy that it will work to distress.

*LGBTQ
Biden promises to make enactment of the [[Equality Act]] during his first 100 days as President a top legislative priority, under which faithful Christians will be persecuted for obeying God and conscience. Biden states that while religious freedom is a fundamental American value, he opposes broad religious exemptions to existing nondiscrimination laws and policies across federal agencies and which he promises to reverse.

Biden intends to ban so-called “conversion therapy,” which is akin to Islamic outlawing of conversion, while promising to work to end suicide among young LGBTQ+ individuals. who are five times more likely to attempt suicide than their heterosexual peers.

Biden also charges that Donald Trump and Mike Pence have given "hate against LGBTQ+ individuals" safe harbor, and sites such policies are requiring transgender "women" to sleep and use bathrooms according to what they biologically are.

In addition, Biden promises to decriminalize HIV exposure and transmission laws, under which such failures as not informing a partner of their positive HIV status, or in donating blood, or intentionally attempting to transmit HIV is a crime. However, although sodomy is the means of HIV transmission in over 80% of cases among men (2017),<ref>[https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/gender/men/index.html HIV and Men] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved 03/11/20 </ref>Biden asserts that there is simply no “scientific basis” for HIV exposure and transmission laws.

Moreover, Biden believes every "transgender or non-binary person" should be able to change their "gender marker to “M,” “F,” or “X” on government identifications, passports, and other documentation," as well as use whatever facilities they feel corresponds to their gender identity. Including transgender students playing sports and using bathrooms and locker rooms.

Biden will also not permit adoption and foster care agencies that choose not to allow adoption by LGBTQ+ families to receive government funding.

Biden further promises to "ensure coverage for comprehensive care for LGBTQ+ Americans...to all appropriate health care treatments and resources...including gender confirmation surgery." As well as for HIV treatment and prevention, that of PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis) which cost about $2,000 a day, and would include coverage for lifetime treatment for HIV, which coast approximately 400,000 dollars, both of which Medicaid coverage presently includes.<ref>[https://peacebyjesuscom.blogspot.com/2019/10/negative-effects-of-homosexual.html Negative effects of homosexual relations] Retrieved 03/11/20</ref> Currently PrEP will be covered without cost-sharing starting in 2021.

Biden will also reverse the transgender military ban and rescind the prohibition against LGBTQ+ Muslims from entering the country, and permanently make upholding LGBTQ+ rights a priority of the foreign policy of the United States.

In addition, Biden intends to "advance culturally appropriate public information campaigns to promote LGBTQ+ human rights and reduce biases," and "develop and institute implicit bias training programs for federal workers and contractors to address discrimination based on race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression."
<ref>[https://joebiden.com/joes-vision/ Joe's Vision for America] Retrieved March 11, 2020</ref>[http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3823392/posts Joe Biden's delusions: excerpts from his campaign's "vision" pages] Free Republic. Retrieved March 11, 2020
===Criticism===
[[File:Biden-pervert-600x399.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Joementum: Protesters moved quickly to greet Biden on the campaign trail after his historic comeback.]]
:{{See also|Joseph Biden 2020 presidential campaign|United States presidential election, 2020‎‎|Biden-Ukraine scandal}}
Early polls in August 2015 showed Biden's favorability ratings beating both [[Sec. Hillary Clinton]] and [[Bernie Sanders]]. When ''[[The New York Times]]'' began investigating the [[Biden-Ukraine scandal]], Biden dropped out of the race in October 2015.<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/21/politics/joe-biden-not-running-2016-election/index.html</ref> ''The New York Times'' reported details of the scandal in December 2015.<ref>https://archive.is/EyhQ7</ref>

A CNN focus group of registered Democrats in March 2019 roundly rejected Biden as a serious contender.<ref>https://thehill.com/homenews/media/432611-cnn-focus-group-rejects-biden</ref> [[Biden's age]] and being out of touch seemed to be major factors. Biden launched his campaign anyway on April 25, 2019, by promoting the anti-Trump Charlottesville hoax and praising violent [[Antifa]] members.<ref>Multiple references:
*Scarry, Eddie (April 25, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/joe-biden-is-running-on-the-medias-charlottesville-lie-about-trump Joe Biden is running on the media's Charlottesville lie about Trump]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved April 25, 2019.
*Spiering, Charlie (April 25, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/25/joe-biden-announces-2020-campaign-warning-about-rise-of-white-nationalism/ Joe Biden Kicks Off 2020 Campaign by Spreading Charlottesville ‘Fine People’ Hoax]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved April 25, 2019.
*Shaw, C. Mitchell (April 26, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/32138-broad-brush-biden-attacks-thomas-jefferson-donald-trump-in-fallacious-video-announcing-candidacy Biden Attacks Thomas Jefferson, Donald Trump, Using Lies to Announce Candidacy]. ''The New American''. Retrieved April 27, 2019.
See also:
*Shaw, C. Mitchell (May 1, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/32173-fbi-report-shows-biden-s-courageous-americans-in-antifa-planned-an-armed-rebellion-at-u-s-border FBI Report Shows Biden's "Courageous Americans" in Antifa Planned an "Armed Rebellion" at U.S. Border]. ''The New American''. Retrieved May 1, 2019.</ref> The mother of Heather Heyer, who was killed by a lone nutcase in a melee between protesters, condemned Biden for exploiting her daughter's death for political gain.<ref>https://www.thedailybeast.com/heather-heyers-mom-susan-bro-breaks-silence-on-biden-invoking-charlottesville-for-2020</ref> Biden's promises his first act as president would be to defeat Donald Trump. While claiming to want to unite the country, Biden did the exact opposite in his statements.<ref>Shaw, C. Mitchell (May 1, 2019). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/32165-in-first-campaign-speech-biden-promises-to-unify-america-sows-seeds-of-division Biden Promises to Unify America, Sows Seeds of Division]. ''The New American''. Retrieved May 1, 2019.</ref> President Trump noted the rigged insider support again, this time for Biden over Bernie Sanders.<ref>https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2019/04/trump-tweet-crazy-bernie-vs-sleepy-joe.jpg</ref>

While Biden largely is running on Obama's legacy, Obama machine aides told reporters that Biden is "too old, too out of touch."<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/obama-thinks-bidens-closest-advisers-are-too-old-out-of-touch/</ref> Former Obama [[Defense Secretary]] [[Robert Gates]] said that Biden had {{quotebox|been wrong on nearly every major [[foreign policy]] and [[national security]] issue over the past four decades.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/obamas-former-defense-secretary-slams-bidens-foreign-policy-credentials-age/</ref>}}
[[File:2019.04.25-01.40-thepoliticalinsider-5cc1b8cdefd1a-768x676.jpg|left|thumb|350px|Joe Biden kicked off his presidential campaign with an easily debunked lie.]]
Within the first three weeks of his campaign, Biden twice denied assessments by the U.S. [[intelligence community]] of the threat posed by China to the U.S.<ref>Larsen, Emily (May 13, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/biden-downplays-china-again-after-bowing-to-pressure-last-time Biden downplays China again after bowing to pressure last time]. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved May 13, 2019. See also:
*Tapscott, Mark (May 16, 2019). [https://www.theepochtimes.com/warners-tough-china-stance-points-to-biden-weakness_2926578.html Warner’s Tough China Stance Points to Biden’s Weakness]. ''The Epoch Times''. Retrieved May 16, 2019.
*Caplan, Joshua (June 4, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2019/06/04/joe-biden-again-scoffs-at-asias-rise-what-are-we-worried-about/ Joe Biden Scoffs at Competition with ‘Asia’: ‘What Are We Worried About?’] ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 5, 2019.</ref> Biden's son, Hunter Biden, has extensive business ties<ref>https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/28/hunter-biden-china-business-drawing-new-scrutiny/</ref> with the Chinese military.

After the Democrat's First Debate Biden suffered an across the board decline in his support. He lost ground with white Democrats (from 32% to 18%) and voters of color (from 33% to 19%), among voters without a college degree (from 35% to 18%) and college graduates (from 28% to 20%), with both men (from 38% to 24%) and women (from 29% to 16%), and among voters under 50 years old (from 21% to 6%) as well as voters aged 50 and over (from 42% to 33%). Most of Biden’s lost support in these groups shifted almost equally toward [[Bernie Sanders]] and [[Elizabeth Warren]].

[[Progressive]]s claim at the age of 76, Biden "needs to grow" to overcome his racism and bigoted treatment of women.<ref>https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-black-female-democrats-may-respond-to-bidens-candidacy</ref> Anita Hill remarked that her private conversation with Joe Biden shortly before Biden entered the race was "deeply unsatisfying." Biden hired Bernie Sanders 2016 campaign press secretary, [[CNN]] political analyst Symone Sanders, as a senior adviser to play the [[race card]]. Symone Sanders donated money to [[Pete Buttigieg]] a month before taking the job with Biden. Symone Sanders is famous for her "we don't need white people" remark on CNN.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1rslAgK8uM&feature=youtu.be</ref>

Biden called the [[impeachment]] of [[Bill Clinton]] on 11 felony charges a "partisan lynching".<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/politics/biden-1998-impeach-kfile/index.html</ref>

Biden is known for flip-flopping his political positions.<ref>Pollak, Joel B. (May 28, 2019). [https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2019/05/28/joe-biden-fifty-years-flip-flops/ Pollak: Joe Biden’s Fifty Years of Flip-Flops]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved May 29, 2019.</ref> Commentator David Harsanyi remarked, {{quotebox|at his present political trajectory, Biden may end up promising to perform late-term abortions on transgendered Guatemalan migrants with his bare hands by the time the debate rolls around.<ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/27/first-debate-proved-democratic-party-gone-loco/</ref>}}

As a serial groper, Biden promised a "hands-on" approach to governing.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkREGzfSCAY</ref> With a reputation as a street fighter, Biden was KO'd in the first round of debates by a girl in a performance unworthy of even [[Dan Quayle]]. Reeling from the knock out blow, Biden warned his competitors that, after eight years in the Obama administration, he had the 'dirt' on all of them.<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/biden-warns-democratic-rivals-hes-got-all-this-information-about-other-peoples-pasts</ref> [[Michelle Obama]] refused to defend Biden's stance on segregation.<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/07/michelle-obama-silent-on-bidens-praise-for-segregationists/</ref> His poll numbers crashed after being outed as a racist.

Biden's campaign suffered a serious blow in September 2019 when it became known that he is currently under investigation by Ukrainian prosecutors for misusing his power as U.S. Vice President to interfere in a [[money-laundering]] investigation of his son,<ref>https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1175392716110401543</ref> [[Hunter Biden]].<ref name="thehill.com">https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived</ref> Biden displayed his contempt and disrespect when questioned at a townhall meeting, calling ordinary citizens and voters "damn liars."<ref>https://twitter.com/MollyNagle3/status/1202648690302869505</ref>

Biden stated he opposed moving the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem despite previously claiming to support such an action.<ref>Rambaran, Vivian (November 7, 2019). [https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bidens-opposition-to-moving-israel-embassy-in-direct-conflict-with-past-statements Biden's opposition to moving Israel embassy in direct conflict with past statements]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved November 7, 2019.</ref>

===Biden-Ukraine collusion scandal===
[[File:Obama, Groppin Joe and Hunter.jpg|right|250px|thumb|Obama (left) appointed Joe Biden (center) to dole out $1 Billion to the Ukraine for which the Biden Family, thru Hunter Biden (right) received $50,000 a month in [[kickback]]s.<ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/23/like-russian-collusion-ukraine-hysteria-is-pure-projection-by-media-and-democrats/ https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/21/trump-ukraine-biden-1507051</ref> ]]
:{{See also|Biden-Ukraine scandal}}
As Vice President, Biden oversaw the disbursement of $1 billion allocated by the U.S. to the new government of Ukraine. In 2014, Biden's son [[Hunter Biden]], was appointed to the board of directors of Burisma Holdings, the largest oil and gas company in Ukraine. Hunter Biden was hired by [[Mykola Zlochevsky]], who served as Ukraine's ecology minister in the previous administration. Hunter Biden was paid $166,000 per month. The money was split with the nephew of [[Whitey Bulger]].

Zlochevsky came under investigation by the new administration for alleged embezzlement of $5 Billion while ecology minister. The prosecutor traced payments made to Hunter Biden. Vice President Biden threatened the new Ukrainian administration to withhold $1 Billion in U.S. allocated funds unless the prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden was fired.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/09/world/europe/corruption-ukraine-joe-biden-son-hunter-biden-ties.html</ref>

Biden bragged about having caused the firing of the [[Ukraine]] prosecutor to a [[CFR]] conference.

U.S. banking records show Hunter Biden's firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, received regular transfers — usually more than $166,000 a month — from Burisma from spring 2014 through fall 2015, during a period when Joe Biden was the main U.S. official dealing with Ukraine. Biden threatened Ukrainian President [[Petro Poroshenko]] that the [[Obama administration]] would pull $1 billion in U.S. loan guarantees, sending Ukraine toward insolvency, if it didn't immediately fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin who was investigating his son, Hunter. Biden recounted, {{quotebox|"'You’re not getting the billion'. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money'...Well, [SOB], he got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time."<ref name="thehill.com">https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived</ref><ref>https://www.cfr.org/event/foreign-affairs-issue-launch-former-vice-president-joe-biden</ref>}}
Yuriy Lutsenko, who replaced Shokin as the prosecutor looking into Burisma, said the evidence in the Burisma case he'd like to present to William Barr, particularly the vice president's intervention.

Between April 2014 and October 2015, more than $3 million was paid out by Burisma to an account linked to Biden's and Devon Archer's Rosemont Seneca firm, according to the financial records placed in a federal court file in Manhattan in another case against Archer. The bank records show that, on most months when Burisma money flowed, two wire transfers of $83,333.33 each were sent to the Rosemont Seneca–connected account on the same day. The same Rosemont Seneca–linked account typically then paid Hunter Biden one or more payments ranging from $5,000 to $25,000 each. Ukrainian prosecutors reviewed internal company documents and wanted to interview Hunter Biden and Archer about why they had received such payments, but couldn't because of Joe Biden's intervention.

On September 4, 2019, former Prosecutor General [[Victor Shokin]] made a sworn affidavit outlining Joe Biden's shakedown.<ref>https://www.scribd.com/document/427618359/Shokin-Statement</ref>

Biden was needed for [[Deep State coup 2.0]]. When he was no longer needed he was dispatched to the ash-heap of history.
[[File:Biden blood eye.jpg|x180px|right|thumb|Many have expressed concern if Biden is up to the rigors of campaigning, let alone the duties of office.]]

===Eric Ciaramella===
[[Deep State]] informant [[Eric Ciaramella]] was assigned to the Obama [[White House]] by [[Russia collusion hoax]] mastermind [[John Brennan]]..He was detailed to the staff of [[National Security Council]] [[Susan Rice]] and Vice President [[Joe Biden]].<ref>http://www.ukrweekly.com/uwwp/wp-content/uploads/current-pdf/The_Ukrainian_Weekly_2015-47.pdf</ref> Ciaramella worked on Ukrainian issues for Biden in 2015 and 2016 during the time Biden was the "point man" handing out U.S. taxpayer cash to Ukraine.

Ciaramella worked with [[Democratic National Committee]] operative [[Alexandra Chalupa]] to dig up dirt on the [[2016 Trump campaign|Trump campaign]] during the [[2016 presidential election]]. Ciarmella invited Chalupa into the [[Obama]] White House for meetings.<ref>https://archive.usukraine.org/coalition/report-wh-press-conf-events.shtml</ref> Chalupa a key figure behind manufacturing the [[Russia collusion hoax]] and in the [[Ukrainian collusion scandal]] with the [[Atlantic Council]] and [[Crowdstrike]]. Ciaramella set the Trump [[impeachment inquiry]] in motion.

In May 2017, Ciaramella was instrumental in helping generate the “Putin fired Comey” narrative. A Ciaramella email the day after Comey's firing ended up in the media, which is reported to have allegedly called Comey “crazy, a real nut job.” Ciaramella is said to have argued that “[[President Putin]] suggested that President Trump fire Comey.” In the days after Comey’s firing, this presidential action was used to further political and media calls for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate supposed ‘Russia collusion.’ Ciaramella was dismissed from the Trump White House in June 2917 and accused of illegal [[leak]]s and working against the interests of the [[United States]] government. Ciaramella returned to the CIA.

In August 2019 The Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG), [[Michael Atkinson]], referred to Ciaramella as one who has
:“some indicia of an arguable political bias … in favor of a rival political candidate"
The ICIG was severely criticized for changing the rules at the last minute and allowing a third-party "[[whistleblower]]" [[hearsay]] complaint.

===Primaries===
With the [[Impeachment sham]] over, Biden's usefulness was over, too. Biden's poor finish in the Iowa caucus demonstrated to many that he never was a viable candidate, and that support for his campaign was not very deep.

The Democrats rigged Iowa caucus fiasco to [[Stop Bernie]] landed Biden in fourth place. Many days after the charade, Biden press spokesperson Symone Sanders, speaking on behalf of the campaign, refused to officially acknowledge if the DNC's posted results were legitimate.<ref>https://hotair.com/archives/john-s-2/2020/02/05/biden-spokesperson-symone-sanders-refuses-say-results-iowa-caucus-legitimate/</ref> Biden himself became increasingly testy over questions concerning his durability as a candidate. At a campaign event in Hampton, [[New Hampshire]] on February 9, when asked by a female college student if he could turn his campaign around after Iowa, Biden snapped and called her "a lying dog-faced pony soldier."<ref>https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/02/biden-lashes-out-at-female-new-hampshire-voter-asking-about-his-poor-performance-in-iowa-youre-a-lying-dog-faced-pony-soldier-video/</ref> This came days after Biden belittled another woman asking about his policy on coal. Such incidents only increased doubts about Biden's mental fitness to be President.

====Iowa caucuses====
Biden ran forth, as expected.

====New Hampshire primary====
Biden ran fifth in a filed of ten, slightly worse than expected.

====Nevada caucuses====
Biden ran second with 17% to Sanders, who failed to achieve a majority; the other 49% was spread among 5 remaining candidates.

====Super Tuesday - March 3, 2020====
:{{See also|Bernie Derangement Syndrome|Joe Biden's mental decline}}
Biden's campaign donations dried up as corruption allegations were revealed in the [[Ukrainegate scandal]] during the Democrats' impeachment sham, and he didn't spend anytime or money in any Super Tuesday state. In reaction to Bernie's sweep of early primaries, the DNC establishment's [[Stop Bernie]] movement went into full swing.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/27/us/politics/democratic-superdelegates.html</ref> 1344 delegates were up for grabs on Super Tuesday with an unknown number to win as [[Superdelegates]] have yet to decide to intervention was necessary to Stop Bernie and thwart the will of the people.<ref>.https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/31/dnc-superdelegates-110083</ref> Former DNC chair [[Donna Brazile]] scolded [[RNC]] chair Ronna McDaniel to "stay the hell out" for publicly commenting on DNC internal delegate vote rigging processes and speaking "Russian talking points". Steyer was out on Friday, Buttigieg cut a deal on Sunday, and both Klobuchar and [[Beto O'Rourke|Beto]] backed Biden on Monday. In accepting Buttigieg's endorsement, Biden who at the time was under investigation in the Ukrainegate scandal,<ref>https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/ukraine-court-forces-probe-into-biden-role-in-firing-of-prosecutor-viktor-shokin/2020/02/27/92710222-5983-11ea-8efd-0f904bdd8057_story.html</ref> told a throng of adoring Democrats that Buttigieg reminded him of his son.<ref>https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/03/03/he-reminds-me-of-my-son-biden-buttigieg-love-fest-joined-by-beto-klobuchar-in-last-minute-panic-to-stop-bernie-893278</ref> Biden's son, [[Hunter Biden]], was accused of [[money laundering]] millions of dollars from the Ukrainian firm [[Burisma]] for the Biden family and asked an Arkansas court to delay disclosing how much money he made from Burisma and Chinese sources in a paternity suit until after Super Tuesday.<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/hunter-biden-wants-to-delay-child-support-deposition-until-after-key-primaries</ref> The court denied the request.<ref>https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/feb/27/judge-tells-hunter-biden-to-show-up-nex/?news-arkansas#.XlfN9s2Jm-Y.twitter</ref>

On election eve MSNBC reported that former President Obama confirmed 'the signal has been sent in the past 36 hours' to engage the [[Stop Bernie movement]].<ref>https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1234660535079067649?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw</ref> Biden encouraged voters to get out for 'Super Thursday.'<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5y3XHIyLRM</ref>

With the 100% of the popular vote counted at 12:00 PM EST Wednesday, Democrats had not yet published final allocation of 444 delegates from California and Texas.<ref>https://www.politico.com/2020-election/delegate-count-tracker-democratic-primary/</ref> Partial results posted by the DNC indicated Biden had 453 delegates, Sanders 382, Warren 50, and [[Gabbard]] 1. Bloomberg quit, accounting for 46 [[Zombie]] delegates, Buttigieg 26, and Klobuchar 7. With the insiders work done, the likelihood of moving the goalposts to allow Superdelegates to vote in the first round was reduced. Meanwhile Biden and the [[liberal media]] took a victory lap.

Far left [[animal rights]]/[[Green New Deal|cow flatulence]] activists Sarah Segal and Ashley Froud disrupted Biden's victory speech,<ref>https://monkeyviral.com/what-is-let-dairy-die-and-why-is-it-all-over-the-democratic-race/</ref><ref>https://www.trendsmap.com/twitter/tweet/1235047072421703680</ref> Bernie trashed Biden on the [[Iraq War]] and his support for [[NAFTA]] trade deals which destroyed [[middle class]] America and manufacturing jobs. Warren ran 3rd in her home state of [[Massachusetts]]. In 10 debate appearances since June 2019, [[Elizabeth Warren]] was never asked once by the [[fake news]] media complex about her false claims of [[Native American]] heritage.<ref>https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/03/06/warren-went-all-10-debates-without-one-question-about-her-native-american-claims-894450</ref>

====Texas primary====
Five days after the voting, Dallas County Elections Administrator discovered her office did not count about 10% of the total ballots that voters cast in [[Texas]]' Super Tuesday primary.<ref>https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/politics/dallas-county-asks-to-recount-election-after-44-thumb-drives-discovered/287-84e19400-81bc-4256-bcb3-e25df380d699</ref> She discovered 44 thumb drives containing ballots that were not included in the final results. Biden was alleged to have been the winner.

Biden nonetheless was declared the winner, and without Texas Sanders' hopes evaporated. The scandal, of course, garnered no national media coverage.

====Michigan and the blue collar working class vote====
At a [[Michigan]] autoplant, an autoworker asked about Biden's promise to take [[gun]]s away and put [[Beto O'Rourke]] in charge of confiscation. The discussion got heated, Biden crouched up close and wagged his finger in the face of a [[labor union]] member and traditional Democrat voter. The voter told Biden he didn't appreciated Biden sticking his finger in his face and Biden's [[bullying]] tactics. Biden told the voter, "you're full of s---",<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/youre-full-of-shit-biden-snaps-at-voter-over-second-amendment</ref> and threatened, "you wanna take this outside?" Biden's handlers intervened and whisked Biden away.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTLuFlHm4c8&feature=youtu.be</ref>

The contest in Michigan, which Sanders won in 2016, is said to be test of who commands the blue collar and [[working class] vote, Biden or Sanders. Biden was greeted at the auto plant with cheers of “Trump! Trump! Trump!”'<ref>https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/03/trump-trump-trump-trump-detroit-auto-workers-cheer-president-trump-during-joe-bidens-plant-visit/</ref>

===Debates===
Biden attempted to clarify some of his positions on segregation and race in the pre-primary Third Debate. By the time he finished he had insinuated that black parents didn’t know how to raise their children.<ref>https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2019/09/13/bidens-answer-inequality-one-explicitly-racist-moments-time-democratic-debate/</ref>
{{quotebox|'''Linsey Davis:''' Mr. Vice President, I want to talk to you about inequality in schools and race. In a conversation about how to deal with segregation in schools back in 1975, you told a reporter, “I don’t feel responsible for the sins of my father and grandfather. I feel responsible for what the situation is today, for the sins of my own generation, and I’ll be damned if I feel responsible to pay for what happened 300 years ago.” You said that some 40 years ago, but as you stand here tonight, what responsibility do you think that Americans need to take to repair the legacy of slavery in our country?

'''Joe Biden:''' Well, they have to deal with the … Look, there is institutional segregation in this country. And from the time I got involved, I started dealing with that. Redlining, banks, making sure that we are in a position where—

Look, we talk about education. I propose that what we take is those very poor schools, the Title 1 schools, triple the amount of money we spend from $15 to $45 billion a year. Give every single teacher a raise to the equal of … A raise of getting out of the $60,000 level.

No. 2, make sure that we bring in to the help with the stud—the teachers deal with the problems that come from home. The problems that come from home, we need… We have one school psychologist for every 1,500 kids in America today. It’s crazy. The teachers are required—I’m married to a teacher. My deceased wife is a teacher. They have every problem coming to them.

Make sure that every single child does, in fact, have three, four, and five-year-olds go to school. School! Not day care, school. We bring social workers into homes of parents to help them deal with how to raise their children. It’s not that they don’t want to help. They don’t know what— They don’t know what quite what to do. Play the radio. Make sure the television—excuse me, make sure you have the record player on at night. The phone—make sure the kids hear words. A kid coming from a very poor school—er, a very poor background will hear 4 million words fewer spoken by the time they get there.

'''Davis:''' Thank you, Mr. Vice President.

'''Biden:''' No, I’m going to go like the rest of them do, twice over, OK? Because here’s the deal. The deal is that we’ve got this a little backwards. And by the way, in Venezuela, we should be allowing people to come here from [[Venezuela]]. I know [[Nikolas Maduro|Maduro]]. I’ve confronted Maduro. No. 2, you talk about the need to do something in Latin America. I’m the guy that came up with $740 million to see to it those three countries, in fact, change their system so people don’t have to chance to leave. You’re all acting like we just discovered this yesterday! Thank you very much.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7Tpx5WMFio&feature=youtu.be</ref>}}
Even ''[[The Young Turks]]'' slammed Biden for his racist answer in blaming parents for not knowing how to raise their children rather than answering question.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZzt4HNR1bE</ref>

===Racism===
In addition to Biden's longstanding alliance with fellow Democrat segregationists in the U.S. Senate, Biden is known for a history of making racially insensitive remarks.

====Segregation====
[[File:Biden segregation.png 1718483346.png|left|350px|thumb|Biden called segregation "a matter of Black pride" and pushed for a [[Constitutional Amendment]] to outlaw Court ordered de-segregation.<ref name="politico.com">https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/joe-biden-integration-school-busing-120968_full.html</ref>]]
Biden reopened the debate over the crimes of the Democrats [[slave power]]<ref name="zerohedge.com">https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-20/biden-doubles-down-after-reminding-everyone-democrats-owned-slaves</ref> at a time some far leftists were pushing for [[slave reparations]].<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/05/30/book-joe-biden-1973-lectured-cleveland-what-good-negro/</ref> In 1972 Biden argued that segregation was good for Blacks and was what they wanted. {{Quotebox|“I think the concept of busing … that we are going to [[integrate]] people so that they all have the same access and they learn to grow up with one another and all the rest, is a rejection of the whole movement of black pride, a rejection of the entire black awareness concept, where black is beautiful, black culture should be studied; and the cultural awareness of the importance of their own identity, their own individuality.”<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/read-the-transcript-of-the-october-1975-npr-interview-with-sens-joe-biden-and-edward-brooke</ref>}} Biden led a coalition of segregationists that was opposed by Republican Sen. [[Edward Brooke]], the first [[African American]] senator elected since Democrats forced the end of [[Reconstruction]] after the [[American Civil War|Civil War]]. National Public Radio's David Ensor asked Biden, "What about a constitutional amendment? Isn’t that what you’re gonna have to end up supporting if you want to stop court ordered busing, too?" Biden responded, {{Quotebox|"That would clearly do it. I’m hopeful, and I have — now that I have some sort of new allies in this area, it’s become respectable now for [[liberal]]s to at least say publicly what they’ve been saying in private, that busing doesn’t work. We are trying to figure out whether or not we can come up with an innovative piece of legislation which would limit the remedy, and I don’t — honestly don’t know whether we can come up with something constitutional. And if we can’t, I will not in an attempt to eliminate busing violate the Constitution. I won’t do that. The only way, if I’m gonna go at it, I’m gonna go at it through a Constitutional Amendment if it can’t be done through a piece of legislation."}} Ensor reported that Biden proposed renewing segregation because busing wasn't working, and Biden was afraid that older liberal colleagues were blind to how Black separatists felt about their children being bused to [[white]] schools. {{Quotebox|"There are those of we [[social experiment|social planner]]s who think somehow that if we just [[subrogate]] man’s individual characteristics and traits by making sure that a presently heterogeneous society becomes a totally homogeneous society, that somehow we’re going to solve our social ills. Quite to the contrary."}}

Title VI of the [[1964 Civil Rights Act]] prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.<ref>https://quizlet.com/45411923/ethical-and-legal-issues-2-flash-cards/</ref> By 1975, Biden authored an amendment to gut Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. ''[[Politico]]'' writes of the whole sordid affair, {{quotebox|Biden morphed into a leading anti-busing crusader—all the while continuing to insist that he supported the goal of school desegregation, he only opposed busing as the means to achieve that end. This stance, which many of Biden’s liberal and moderate colleagues also held, was clever but disingenuous. It enabled Biden to choose votes over principles, while acting as if he was not doing so....In a seminal moment, the Senate thus turned against desegregation. The Senate had supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act, [[1965 Voting Rights Act]] and 1968 Fair Housing Act....the Senate remained the last bastion for those who supported strong integration policies. Biden stormed that bastion...<ref name="politico.com">https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/joe-biden-integration-school-busing-120968_full.html</ref>}} Sen. James Abourezk of [[South Dakota]] related how Biden reacted when Abrourezek tried to block the amendment: {{quotebox|‘Abourezk, you **********, if I ever vote for another one of your bills, it'll be a cold day in hell.'

‘Calm down, Joe,' I told him, ‘You're eventually gonna thank me for doing this.'

‘Like hell I will you dirty *******.'

A few days later, Biden came into the scheduled committee meeting, this time with a broad, friendly grin aimed directly at me.

‘Jesus, Abourezk, you were right,' he said. ‘I am gonna thank you. You should see the Delaware newspapers—big front-page headlines saying, ‘Biden Battles Liberals in Washington.' He was unabashedly elated. ‘They love me back home, how did you know this would happen?'<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/biden-exploded-at-dem-colleague-over-busing-called-him-dirty-bastard/</ref>}} Republican Sen. [[Edward Brooke]], the first black senator ever to be popularly elected, called Biden's amendment “the greatest symbolic defeat for [[civil rights]] since 1964.” Brooke accused Biden of leading an assault on integration.

Prof. Ronnie Dunn said opposition to busing was motivated by [[racism]] and that without the court-ordered policy Biden probably would not have become vice president in 2009. “What I find ironic is that [Biden] was the vice president under a president who, if it hadn’t been for the social interaction that occurred during the era of busing, I argue we likely would not have seen the election of Barack Obama." Dunn, an Urban Studies professor at Cleveland State University and author of the book ''Boycotts, Busing, & Beyond'', said Biden made the case in favor of maintaining segregation. "That was an argument against desegregation.” Dunn said Biden must address the issue if he runs for president. “People have to be held accountable."<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/joe-biden-embraced-segregation-in-1975-claiming-it-was-a-matter-of-black-pride</ref>

Biden's opposition to integration didn't stop there. ''HuffPo'' reported: {{quotebox|In 1977, two black men nominated for key Justice Department posts by [[President Jimmy Carter]] easily won approval from the Senate Judiciary Committee. After confirmation by the full Senate, Drew Days III became the nation’s first black head of the department’s civil rights division and Wade McCree became the second black solicitor general. Only one member of the committee voted against them. It wasn’t segregationists [[Strom Thurmond]] (R-S.C.) or James Eastland (D-Miss.). It wasn’t even former [[Ku Klux Klan]] member [[Robert Byrd]] (D-W.Va.). The lone Judiciary Committee vote against the two men was Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.).<ref>https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-busing-nominees_n_5ca3c03de4b03174b92904f7</ref>}}

In 1981 Biden said in a Senate hearing, “sometimes even [[George Wallace]] is right about some things.” Wallace is famous for saying in 1963, “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.”<ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/09/biden-sometimes-even-george-wallace-is-right/</ref>

In a farewell address to retiring Democrat segregationist Sen. John Stennis in 1986 Biden said: {{quotebox|"To think that I would be one day on the floor of the United States Senate, being paid such accolades by such a man of character and courage as John Stennis is beyond my wildest dreams. And I mean that sincerely."<ref>https://youtu.be/9X6Y2CLqgDM</ref>}}

When Biden announced his candidacy ''Politico'' attempted to poo-poo and explain away Biden and liberal Democrat racism with a back-handed slap at [[school vouchers]] for minority students, which liberal elites have strenuously opposed ever since the Biden Amendment passed:
{{quotebox|School desegregation, as part of a broader suite of civil rights reforms, was once as a vital component of the Democratic Party platform. Yet since the 1970s, Democrats, in the face of concerted white backlash, have largely accommodated themselves to increasing segregation in public schools across the nation. Party leaders, even the most progressive among them, rarely propose serious solutions to this vexing problem. A sincere critique of Biden’s busing record would require a broader reckoning of the Democratic Party’s—and by extension the nation’s—abandonment of this central goal of the [[civil rights movement]]. And it’s hard to see that happening anytime soon.<ref>https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/05/05/joe-biden-busing-problem-226791</ref>}}

Sen. [[Cory Booker]] of [[New Jersey]] condemned the [[2020 Democrat primary]] frontrunner at the Juneteenth annual commemoration of [[Republican]] [[Abraham Lincoln]] ending [[slavery]] in the United States. {{quotebox|You don’t joke about calling black men 'boys'...frankly, I’m disappointed that he hasn’t issued an immediate apology for the pain his words are dredging up for many Americans. He should.<ref name="zerohedge.com">https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-20/biden-doubles-down-after-reminding-everyone-democrats-owned-slaves</ref>}}

====Superpredators====
In a 1993 Senate floor speech, Biden warned of "predators on our streets" who were "beyond the pale" and said they must be cordoned off from the rest of society because the justice system did not know how to rehabilitate them. Biden described a {{quotebox|"cadre of young people, tens of thousands of them, born out of wedlock, without parents, without supervision, without any structure, without any conscience developing because they literally ... because they literally have not been socialized, they literally have not had an opportunity."}} Biden went on in the same breath, {{quotebox|"It doesn't matter whether or not the person that is accosting your son or daughter or my son or daughter, my wife, your husband, my mother, your parents, it doesn't matter whether or not they were deprived as a youth. It doesn't matter whether or not they had no background that enabled them to become socialized into the fabric of society. It doesn't matter whether or not they're the victims of society. The end result is they're about to knock my mother on the head with a lead pipe, shoot my sister, beat up my wife, take on my sons."}} Biden said, that he didn't care "why someone is a malefactor in society" and that criminals needed to be "away from my mother, your husband, our families." Biden added "we should focus on them now" because "if we don't, they will, or a portion of them, will become the predators 15 years from now."

Biden's 1993 "predator" remarks are similar to comments then made by first lady [[Hillary Clinton]] where she warned of "Superpredators" who had "no conscience, no empathy" and who need to be brought "to heel."

====Biden Crime Bill====
:{{Main article|The New Jim Crow}}
Biden was a staunch opponent of school desegregation in the 1970s and leading crusader for mass incarceration in the 1980s and 1990s. Biden described [[African American]] felons in the aftermath of the Central Park 5 jogger case as 'predators' too [[sociopath]]ic to rehabilitate,<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/07/politics/biden-1993-speech-predators/index.html</ref> and [[white supremacist]] senators as his friends.

Biden boasts as one of his greatest legislative achievements passage of the 1994 Crime bill which locked up 10% of the Black adult male population of the United States.<ref name="nytimes.com"/><ref>http://www.prisonpolicy.org/research/incarceration_rates_growth_causes/</ref>

When [[President George H.W. Bush]] asked for a record increase in funding to fight the [[War on Drugs]], Biden told a TV interviewer {{Quotebox|"In a nutshell, the President's plan does not include enough police officers to catch the violent thugs, enough prosecutors to convict them, enough judges to sentence them or enough prison cells to put them away for a long time."<ref>http://articles.latimes.com/1989-09-06/news/mn-1646_1_drug-war</ref><ref>http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/12/first-step-act-skepticism.html</ref>}} [[File:1994 Superpredator Act.jpg|right|350px|thumb|The Superpredator Act of 1994. Feinstein, Kerry and Biden are clearly visible with President Clinton. The bill is known for its sentencing disparities which led to mass incarceration of Blacks.<ref>https://fair.org/home/senate-crime-bill-unscrutinized-by-the-press/</ref>]] Biden, [[Ted Kennedy]], and [[Strom Thurmond]] worked on proposals that raised maximum penalties, removed a directive requiring the US Sentencing Commission to take into account prison capacity, and created the cabinet-level “drug czar” position. In 1984, they passed the Comprehensive Crime Control Act, which, among other things, abolished [[parole]], imposed a less generous cap on “good time” sentence reductions, and allowed the Sentencing Commission to issue more punitive guidelines.

Biden bragged on the Senate floor that it was under his and Thurmond's leadership that Congress passed a law sending anyone caught with a rock of cocaine the size of a quarter to jail for a minimum of five years - the notoriously racist hundred-to-one sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine. In the same speech Biden took credit for [[civil asset forfeiture]] and seizure laws, and demanded to know why [[Papa Bush]] hadn't sentenced more drug dealers to life in prison or exercise the [[death penalty]] once Congress had given him that power.<ref name="c-span.org"/>

Biden's version of a new crime bill added more than forty crimes that would be eligible for the [[death penalty]]. Biden boasted “we do everything but hang people for jaywalking.”<ref name="books.google.com"/> The [[NAACP]] and other groups lobbied against the bill.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/27/us/civil-libertarians-go-after-crime-bills.html</ref> Although the 1991 crime bill was defeated by Republicans, the 1994 Biden/Clinton crime bill was passed.<ref>''[https://books.google.com/books?id=SGUJBAAAQBAJ&lpg=PT142&dq=biden%20strongly%20believes%20the%20administration%20needs%20to%20seize%20control%20of%20the%20issue%20by%20upping%20the%20ante&pg=PT142#v=onepage&q=biden%20strongly%20believes%20the%20administration%20needs%20to%20seize%20control%20of%20the%20issue%20by%20upping%20the%20ante&f=false The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America]'', Naomi Murakawa.</ref>

By 2001, the United States had the highest rate of incarceration in the world. [[Human Rights Watch]] reported that in seven states, African Americans constituted 80 to 90 percent of all drug offenders even though they were no more likely than whites to use or sell illegal drugs. Prison admissions for drug offenses reached a level in 2000 for African Americans more than 26 times the level they had been under [[Ronald Reagan]].<ref>[https://www.thenation.com/article/hillary-clinton-does-not-deserve-black-peoples-votes/ Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote], Michelle Alexander, ''The Nation'', February 10, 2016</ref> Biden's "social planning" had proven effective.

In May 2019 journalist and historian Shaun King observed, {{Quotebox|I’ve heard a very dangerous lie being told about how the systems of mass incarceration were built in this nation. I didn’t expect to have to respond this way because I didn’t expect Joe Biden to lie about the 1994 Crime Bill. He wrote it. He fought for it. And the results were devastating. Every single expert on this topic agrees. This week Joe Biden took the stance that not only is he not sorry for the Crime Bill, but that it didn’t even increase mass incarceration. And it’s shameful because either he’s willfully lying, which is horrible, or he’s just plain ignorant about the true impact of the bill, which is also horrible. Either way, I have a major problem with it because these laws are still in effect and they are doing damage in our communities every single day, 24 hours a day.<ref>https://www.facebook.com/shaunking/videos/688203931610804/</ref>}}

The Leftist ''Jacobin'' magazine summed up Biden's record: {{Quotebox|"It’s not as if Biden didn’t know what he was doing.... He just didn’t care. Biden had made a calculated decision that the elections he would win were worth the damage he inflicted.... But even if Biden has subsequently learned the error of his ways, the rank cynicism and callousness involved in his two-decade-long championing of carceral policies should be more than enough to give anyone pause about his qualities as a leader, let alone a [[progressive]] one."<ref>https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/08/biden-crime-mass-incarceration-police-prisons</ref>}}

====Mass incarceration====
Sen. [[Cory Booker]] told the the NAACP convention in [[Detroit]] in response to another so-called "criminal justice reform" proposal by Biden: {{quotebox|For a guy who helped to be an architect of mass incarceration, this in an inadequate solution to what is a raging crisis in our country.<ref>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/cory-booker-calls-joe-biden-an-architect-of-mass-incarceration</ref>}}

Biden now advocates for a man sentenced to prison to choose to be incarcerated in a women's prison.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0ovc0BAUYo&feature=youtu.be</ref>

====Sexual harassment====
[[File:Creepy Uncle Joe.jpg|left|thumb|350px|''The Washington Post'' calls Biden "Creepy Uncle Joe" for his habit of groping wives and children.]]
''See also:'' [[Creepy Uncle Joe]]
According to the ''[[Washington Post]]'', female [[Secret Service]] agents did not want to work with Biden. Whenever Biden's wife was not home, Biden stripped naked. The female Secret Service agents where afraid to report incidents to their superiors in fear for their jobs.<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2015/02/18/what-are-we-going-to-do-about-creepy-uncle-joe-biden/?utm_term=.b4c0f48017a7 What are we going to do about Creepy Uncle Joe Biden?, ''WaPo'']</ref> In the days just prior to his announcement to run, no less than 8 women of the [[MeToo movement]] complained of Biden's inappropriate grabbing and touching. Even Biden's wife, Jill, has been visibly seen creeped-out by Biden's awkward attempts at public displays of affection.<ref>https://thepoliticalinsider.com/watch-even-joe-bidens-wife-wants-him-to-keep-his-hands-to-himself/</ref> Biden responded by admitting America has become more conservative and then mocked critics and victims in a speech before firefighters. Biden told ''[[The View]]'' he needs to be more "cognizant" about groping women and children.<ref>https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/joe-biden-joins-view-president-trump-beat-easily/story?id=62638945</ref> Even Rep. [[Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez]] remained unconvinced of Biden's alleged flip on his touchy-feelly approach to women in politics.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/ocasio-cortez-bidens-answers-on-touching-havent-convinced-all-women/</ref>

For years, Biden failed to apologize to [[Anita Hill]] personally for the way she was treated when she testified in the 1991 confirmation of [[Clarence Thomas]]..<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/26/us/politics/anita-hill-biden-clarence-thomas.html</ref><ref>https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/440833-biden-on-anita-hill-i-dont-think-i-treated-her-badly</ref><ref>https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/26/biden-apology-accusers-anita-hill-1290843</ref><ref>https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2019/apr/26/trump-news-today-live-biden-anita-hill-view-2020-democrats-updates-us-politics</ref>

Upon his announcement Biden immediately secured the endorsement of prominent sleaze lawyer and former Democratic hopeful [[Michael Avenatti]]. Avenatti shares many of Biden's core precepts, including his racist agenda remarking that the Democratic nominee "had better be a white male."<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/joe-biden-michael-avenatti/</ref> Avenatti, a chief critic of President Trump, dropped out of the race after being arrested for felonious assault and battery on a woman and extortion. An unrepentant racist, Biden says immigrants should have to speak [[English]].<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kgxq3Va9Lpc&feature=youtu.be</ref>

Biden said enshrining [[LGBT+]] protections into labor and civil rights laws would be his priority. Passing the [[Equality Act]] “will be the first thing” he would ask for.<ref>https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/joe-biden-gay-waiter-comments-democratic-election-seattle-medina-a8981351.html</ref>

Campaign staffers physically block reporters when asking Biden questions, then photographing anyone who objects.

Biden's mental faculties have been called into question: he confused UK prime minister [[Theresa May]] with [[Margaret Thatcher]].<ref>https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1123250/theresa-may-trump-news-margaret-thatcher-joe-biden-us-president-2020</ref> According to mental health experts, Biden's slurring of words and phrases and verbal inarticulateness marks a decline in mental abilities.

===Trump-Russia conspiracy===
[[File:Biden and Flood.jpg|right|350px|thumb|Biden and Flood with their wives.<ref>[https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/02/loaded-for-guccifer-aims-for-a-romanian-guccifer-2-0/ Say “Hi” To Guccifer 2.0], Adam Carter, ''Disobedient Media'', February 24, 2018.</ref>]]
:{{See also|Hillary Clinton email scandal|Trump-Russia collusion hoax}}
[[Warren Flood]] was Vice President Biden's information technology ([[IT]]) director at the [[White House]].

According to the metadata, on June 15, 2016, three days after [[Julian Assange]] announced [[WikiLeaks]] was about to publish “emails related to Hillary Clinton,” the first Guccifer 2.0 document was created by Warren Flood on the East coast at 13:38 EDT, and was modified thirty minutes later by [[Феликс Эдмундович]], or Felix Edmunovich, the Russian patronymic of [[Felix Edmunovich Dzerzhinsky]],<ref>In Russian, the middle name is taken from the father, and the last name from the grandfather. Use of a patronymic expresses deep affection and emotion ([[Vladimir Ilyich]] or [[Joseph Vissarionovich]], for example) and is generally reserved for family members or close friends.</ref> founder of the [[KGB]] - a blatantly amateurish attempt to create [[Russia]]n fingerprints.

A document that Warren Flood authored in 2008, and was attached to one of [[John Podesta]]'s leaked emails, was used by Guccifer 2.0 as a template into which he then copied the contents of the DNC's ''Trump Opposition Research'' document. It was copied from this file: https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/fileid/26562/7365 which is also attached to [https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/26562 this leaked email]. It is Flood's document that the "CONFIDENTIAL" text in the background derives from.

Guccifer 2.0 was a [[2016 Hillary Clinton campaign]] [[false flag]] operation set up to discredit the [[DNC]] revelations at [[Wikileaks]]. Adam Carter writes, {{quotebox|"one particular group would have been particularly desperate precisely at that time, for the emergence of a narrative about Russian hackers to discredit proper leaks / justify claims that all leaks are 'probably doctored' and they will have very likely known [Warren] Flood too. That group is the Clinton Campaign. As of June 12th, [2016] they were in a position where [[Julian Assange]] had just announced WikiLeaks' upcoming release of [[Hillary Clinton email scandal|Hillary's emails]], she was still under [[FBI]] investigation, and [[Trump]] was attacking Hillary for her use of a private server with his supporters frequently chanting "lock her up!" at rallies. The campaign was in a desperate position and really needed something similar to a Russian hacker narrative and one where they would be fortunate to have a seemingly clumsy hacker that leaves lots of 'fingerprints' tainting files and bringing the reputation of leaks into question... Sure enough, 2-3 days later, Guccifer2.0 - the world's weirdest hacker - was spawned and started telling lies in an effort to attribute himself to the malware discoveries, etc."<ref>http://g-2.spac/#7</ref>}}

[[National Security Advisor]] [[Susan Rice]] sent an email to herself about a secret [[Oval Office]] meeting where the ''[[Clinton-Steele dossier]]'' was discussed.<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/donald-trump-intelligence-report-russia/index.html</ref><ref>https://apnews.com/152579d488a740b2a8d39fbe2f34506d</ref><ref>https://apnews.com/a82309544e9e465fa2ad4f83e5a48540</ref> The email was written and sent to herself 15 minutes after Donald Trump was sworn in on January 20, 2017:<ref>https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-graham-uncover-unusual-email-sent-susan-rice-herself-president-trump-s</ref> {{Quotebox|"On January 5, following a briefing by [[IC]] leadership on Russian hacking during the [[2016 Presidential election]], President Obama had a brief follow-on conversation with FBI Director [[Jim Comey]] and Deputy Attorney General [[Sally Yates]] in the Oval Office. Vice President Biden<ref>[https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/03/08/doj-political-surveillance-from-the-irs-in-2011-to-the-fisa-court-in-2016/ DOJ Political Surveillance – From the IRS in 2011 to the FISA Court in 2016], Posted on March 8, 2020 by sundance. theconservativetreehouse.com </ref> and I were also present. President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities "by the book". The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book. From a national security perspective, however, President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the [[Trump transition|incoming team]], we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia. '''[Redacted section]''' The President asked Comey to inform him if anything changes in the next few weeks that should affect how we share classified information with the incoming team. Comey said he would."<ref>[https://nobsopus.blogspot.com/2019/03/grassley-to-rice.html Grassley to Rice], February 8, 2018. [https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-02-08%20CEG%20LG%20to%20Rice%20(Russia%20Investigation%20Email).pdf Original].</ref>}}

The following day [[DNI]] [[James Clapper]] released a public version of the ''Intelligence Community Assessment'' on Russian election interference, a joint [[John Brennan]], Clapper and Comey document consisting of recycled reports on [[RT]] with two pages of [[sexual]] innuendo from the Clinton opposition research ''Steele dossier''.<ref>The notorious "pee-pee memo."</ref> NSA Dir. [[Adm. Mike Rogers]] dissented from the conclusions and did not attend the days' prior Oval Office meeting.<ref>https://www.theepochtimes.com/why-are-the-brennan-comey-and-rogers-transcripts-being-withheld_2677629.html</ref><ref>[https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf ]</ref>

''[[The Washington Post]]'' was assured by Comey, Brennan and Clapper that "the sources involved in the [Clinton-Steele dossier's] reporting were credible enough to warrant inclusion in the highly classified [presidential] report.”<ref>http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-trump-russia-allegations-20170110-story.html</ref> Brennan however, in public Congressional testimony months later, said the dossier and its sources ''were not'' credible enough to incorporate in the joint ''Intelligence Community Assessment'' on Russian election interference. Brennan swore the Clinton-Steele dossier'' did not “in any way” factor into the CIA's assessment that Russia interfered in the election to help Trump.

Clapper [[leak]]ed the substance of the ''Clinton-Steele dossier'' to [[Jake Tapper]] of [[CNN]] before Comey briefed President-elect Trump, providing the "news hook" in Comey's words, that CNN was looking for to publicize the dossier's unverified contents after Trump was briefed. This was the beginning of the bogus pee-memo rumor designed to smear President-elect Trump, with Obama, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Biden, Rice and Sally Yates colluding together. And the purpose was to hoax the [[FISA court]] into granting an extension of surveillance beyond Trump's swearing in. It is also a prime example of "circular journalism" and [[fake news]] [[collusion]] between [[mainstream media]] and [[Democrat]] operatives.<ref>https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/susan-rice-email-president-obama-russia-investigation/</ref>

Biden claims that if he had been president rather than Barack Obama in 2015 and 2016, the Russians would not have interfered in the 2016 election.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfhqT3zre20&feature=youtu.be</ref>

===Anti-2nd Amendment===
Immediately after [[Deep State coup 2.0]] was announced to thwart the will of voters and [[subvert]] American [[democracy]], Biden rolled out his gun seizure plan.<ref>https://townhall.com/tipsheet/juliorosas/2019/10/02/joe-biden-rolls-out-his-extensive-gun-control-plan-n2554041</ref> In accepting [[Beto O'Rourke]]'s support as part of the Texas deal that excluded Sanders, Biden vowed to put Beto in charge of the gun seizure program.<ref>https://www.ammoland.com/2020/03/beto-will-be-bidens-gun-grabbing-point-man-its-war-says-ccrkba/</ref>

===Marijuana===
Biden authored legislation increasing mandatory minimum sentences for marijuana possession. Nearly 20 million people have been arrested and incarcerated for marijuana possession since Biden wrote the bill.<ref>http://www.drugpolicy.org/issues/drug-war-statistics</ref> Mandatory minimums give the judge no discretion in handing out a sentence. Marijuana arrests outnumber arrests for [[violent]] [[crime]].<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/us/marijuana-arrests.html</ref> President Trump has taken the lead in sentencing and prison reform.<ref>https://grabien.com/story.php?id=237403</ref> Biden wrote the legislation which established the Office of National Drug Control Policy, also known as the "drug czar."

When a big money donor who favors decriminalization held a fundraiser for Biden in May 2019, Biden "evolved" his 30-plus year stance on marijuana mandatory minimum sentencing which has caused so much hardship and suffering to families, particularly minorities who have been Biden's targets.<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/joe-bidens-shift-on-marijuana-came-days-before-fundraiser-with-pro-legalization-donor/</ref> Biden suddenly showed no concern about exposing children to a gateway drug.

===Atlantic Council===
:{{See also|Military industrial complex}}
In 2011 Biden delivered the keynote address at the [[Atlantic Council]]’s distinguished leadership awards. He did so again in 2014 at its “Toward A Europe Whole and Free” conference,<ref>https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/commentary/transcript/remarks-by-vice-president-joe-biden-at-the-atlantic-council-s-toward-a-europe-whole-and-free-conference/</ref> which was dedicated to expanding NATO’s influence and countering “Russian aggression.” Speakers like [[Zbigniew Brzezinski]], a former U.S. [[national security adviser]], sniped at Barack Obama for an insufficiently bellicose posture toward Russia, while former Secretary of State [[Madeleine Albright]] fretted over polls showing low public support for U.S. [[interventionism]] overseas. Biden emphasized the need to power [[Europe]] with non-Russian sources of natural gas. This provided a prime opportunity to Ukrainian suppliers like Burisma and U.S. energy titans. Many of these energy companies, from [[Chevron]] to Noble Energy, also happen to be top donors to the Atlantic Council.

After the [[Maidan Revolt]], ''Foreign Policy'' magazine wrote, “No one in the U.S. government has wielded more influence over Ukraine than Vice President Joe Biden."<ref>https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/10/30/what-will-ukraine-do-without-joe-biden-putin-war-kiev-clinton-trump/</ref> The Atlantic Council described Biden as “the point person on Ukraine in the Obama administration.”<ref>https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/explainer-five-things-about-the-ukraine-controversy-you-need-to-know-plus-a-freebie/</ref> “Ukraine was the top, or one of the top three, foreign policy issues we were concentrating on,” said [[Michael Carpenter]], Biden’s foreign policy adviser. “[Biden] was front and center.”<ref>https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/10/05/bidens-visits-to-ukraine-draw-scrutiny/</ref>

===Plagiarism, again===
In giving lip service to [[climate change]], Biden has been accused of plagiarizing content from climate activist websites for his own fundraising site. Biden's alleged climate policy appears to be cut and pasted from non-profit websites to solicit donations for his campaign.

Josh Nelson noted, "The paragraph in Joe Biden's climate plan about carbon capture and sequestration includes language that is remarkably similar to items published previously by the Blue Green Alliance and the Carbon Capture Coalition...Biden's goal is to make CCUS a widely available, cost-effective, and rapidly scalable solution to reduce carbon emissions to meet mid-century climate goals," reads the Biden website. The website for the Carbon Capture Coalition states, "[our] goal is to make carbon capture, use and storage (CCUS) a widely available, cost-effective, and rapidly scalable solution to reduce carbon emissions to meet mid-century climate goals."

Biden's website also claims that, "carbon capture, use, and storage (CCUS) is a rapidly growing technology that has the potential to create economic benefits for multiple industries while significantly reducing carbon dioxide emissions." The language mirrors the language of a 2017 letter to the Senate from the Blue Green Alliance: "Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is a rapidly growing technology that has potential to create economic benefits for multiple industries while significantly reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions."<ref>https://freebeacon.com/politics/joe-bidens-climate-platform-appears-to-plagiarize-from-nonprofits/</ref><ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/04/joe-bidens-global-warming-plan-repeatedly-plagiarizes-sources/</ref>

[[CNN]]'s John King didn't buy the staff flub excuse. "This is a leadership issue," King said.<ref>https://dailycaller.com/2019/06/05/leadership-issue-cnn-john-king-biden-plagiarism/</ref>

===Biden's age and voters===
''See also:'' [[Biden's age]] and [[Joe Biden's mental decline]] and [[Joe Biden's eye filling with blood during a town hall]]

Biden is reported to have suffered two brain aneurysms, the first a near death experience in 1988.

Joe Biden is turning 77 in November 2019. He will be nearly 78 years old on [[Election Day]] 2020. Biden hasn’t disclosed his medical history since 2008, when physicians found he had an irregular heartbeat.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bidens-eye-fills-with-blood-during-cnn-climate-town-hall Biden's eye fills with blood during CNN climate town hall], Washington Examiner</ref> Biden has long been plagued by health issues.<ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/surgeon-who-operated-on-joe-biden-hes-better-now-than-before-brain-surgery Surgeon who operated on Biden: He's better now than before brain surgery], Washington Examiner, 2019</ref><ref>[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bidens-eye-fills-with-blood-during-cnn-climate-town-hall Biden's eye fills with blood during CNN climate town hall], Washington Examiner</ref> and appears to be medicated. See also: [[Biden's age]] and [[Joe Biden's eye filling with blood during a town hall]].

Nate Silver of ''FiveThirtyEight'' wrote about Biden's age:
{{Cquote|A lot of rank-and-file voters do have concerns about Biden’s age. An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll in February found that 62 percent of voters had reservations about voting for someone aged 75 or older. [https://news.gallup.com/poll/254120/less-half-vote-socialist-president.aspx Other polls] have also shown advanced age to be a concern among Democrats, Republicans and independents alike.<ref>[https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-bidens-opponents-being-too-coy-in-making-age-an-issue/ Voters Care About Biden’s Age — Not About His Gaffes] by Nate Silver,''FiveThirtyEight''</ref>}}

Biden says he met with survivors of the Stoneman Douglas Parkland shooing while he was vice president; the Stoneman Douglas shooting occurred more than one year after Biden left office.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYOBkzU6VcI</ref> Whatever the concerns, Biden would likely be a one-term president.

===Taxes===
[[File:CCP Biden.png|right|300px|thumb|]]
Biden has vowed to raise taxes on the American people.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWqL7nM4T-s</ref>

===Fundraising===
Biden accepted the maximum contribution allowed from former HBO chief executive officer Chris Albrecht. Albrecht resigned as chief executive officer at HBO ain 2007 after being arrested and charged with assaulting his girlfriend. In 1991 Time Warner Inc. paid a $400,000 settlement to a female worker allegedly assaulted by Albrecht while on the job. The victim reported directly to Albrecht at the time as senior vice president at HBO Independent Productions.

=== Joe Biden and his controversies related to the military ===

Joe Biden has faced a couple of controversies related the military. Below is some information related to those controversies.

*[[Joe Biden and the military]]

==2009–2017: Vice presidency==
As he assumed office, Biden's responsibilities as vice president were not made clear. He had no specific portfolio of responsibilities. He alarmed the nation on April 30, 2009, by going on network television to warn Americans to stay out of confined spaces such as subways and airplanes, lest they catch Swine Flu. Health officials rejected his scare tactics and the White House immediately repudiated them.

Under President Obama the budget [[deficit]] reached over $1 trillion for the first time in history. When asked over the fate of the United States' going into bankruptcy, Biden stated at an [[AARP]] meeting, "Now, people when I say that look at me and say, "What are you talking about, Joe? You’re telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?’" Biden said. "The answer is yes, that's what I’m telling you."<ref name=bankrupt />

Biden eventually was placed in charge of promoting the [[Obama administration]]'s [[Recovery Summer]] in 2010, an attempt to highlight the Democratic Congress's [[American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009]], or "[[economic stimulus]] program. During Recovery Summer, the workforce shrank, [[unemployment]] swelled, and [[economic growth]] slowed to less than 2%. More Americans fell victim to Democrat economic policy and by the [[2010 Midterm election]] sweep no less than 27,000,000 people were unemployed or underemployed.

===Seal Team 6===
In killing Osama bin Laden, Obama transformed the [[War on Terror]] from a preventative war against terrorism to a war of vengeance and retribution to enhance Obama's re-election prospects.

The families of Navy Seal Team 6 blame Vice President Biden for revealing the identity of the Navy Seal Team that killed [[Osama bin Laden]].<ref>https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/03/bidens_betrayal_of_seals_should_doom_presidential_run.html</ref> Seal Team 6 is a covert action force, and all its members are sworn to secrecy to never reveal the actions they participate in. The government likewise is bound to protect their identities. In boasting of the killing, Biden named Seal Team 6 by name as the unit that found bin Laden.

On August 6, 2011, the [[Taliban]] ambushed a Chinook helicopter carrying 30 U.S. service members — including 15 SEAL Team 6 members — in [[Afghanistan]].<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2013/05/09/military-families-allege-muslim-cleric-damned-dead-navy-seals-at-ceremony/</ref> Everyone on board was killed.<ref>https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/7/the-betrayal-of-the-navys-seal-team-6/</ref> In a show of [[multiculturalism]], the [[Obama administration]] insisted a [[Muslim]] cleric be present when the bodies were recovered.<ref>http://joemiller.us/2013/05/seal-team-6-press-conference-obama-at-fault-muslim-cleric-prayed-at-funeral-damned-them-to-hell/</ref>

Families of the slain SEAL members held a news conference at the National Press Club demanding an investigation into why their sons had been identified, despite specific assurances by the Obama administration their identities would be protected.<ref>http://joemiller.us/2013/05/navy-seal-team-vi-families-to-reveal-obama-admin-s-culpability-in-death-of-sons/</ref> To add insult, the families complained about the Muslim cleric that the Obama administration required to preside in a ceremony over their remains, damned their souls to hell as infidels in an Islamic prayer proclaiming victory.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S7h5PO3r-w</ref>

===Cronyism and influence peddling===
Five months into the [[Obama administration]] in June 2009 Biden's son, [[Hunter Biden]] and Chris Heinz, stepson of Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair [[John Kerry]] formed Rosemount Seneca. The firm partnered with the Thornton Group run by Devon Archer, and the Bank of China, to form Bohai Harvest RST (BHR) in China. Devon Archer is the nephew of [[Whitey Bulger]], head of the [[Boston]] Irish [[mafia]] who enjoyed federal protection under FBI director [[Robert Mueller]] as an informant. Bulger was convicted of 19 murders that occurred while under Mueller's protection; some have linked the Bulger klan to as many as 52 murders while Mueller was the United States Attorney in Boston. The Bank of China is owned by the Chinese government and closely connected with the Chinese military and intelligence services. Biden, Heinz, and Archer transferred and sold "duel use" technology to the Chinese military which was used to create the Chinese [[drone]] program and replicate the Chinese version of the [[F-15]] fighter.<ref>https://nypost.com/2018/03/15/inside-the-shady-private-equity-firm-run-by-kerry-and-bidens-kids/</ref> Unsurprisingly, Joe Biden disregards the assessment of U.S. intelligence agencies and doesn't regard China as a strategic threat.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD9d3TUYHNo&feature=youtu.be</ref><ref>https://thefederalist.com/2019/05/02/bidens-alleged-financial-ties-u-s-enemy-china-overshadow-2020-bid/</ref>

In April 2014, Hunter Biden joined the Board of Directors of Burisma, a [[Ukrainian]] oil and gas company despite having no experience in the oil and gas industry.<ref>http://burisma.com/en/board-of-directors/</ref><ref>http://www.dw.com/en/who-are-hunter-bidens-ukrainian-bosses/a-17642254</ref> The status of an independent Ukraine became the focus of much [[fake news]] reporting during the 2016 election and the [[Trump-Russia collusion hoax]].

Joseph Biden is a supporter of the [[Trans Pacific Partnership]] TPP.

==Past campaigns==
[[Liberal]] Biden, notorious for his long-winded speeches and his foot-in-mouth moments, as illustrated by his declaration that "we have to go spend money to keep from going [[bankrupt]]."<ref name=bankrupt>[http://cnsnews.com/news/article/joe-biden-we-have-go-spend-money-keep-going-bankrupt Joe Biden: ‘We Have to Go Spend Money to Keep From Going Bankrupt’], [[Cybercast News Service]]</ref> A favorite of the [[liberal media]], Biden avoids the mockery that greeted a less gaffe-prone predecessor, [[Dan Quayle]].

He ran for President in 1988 but dropped out of the race after admitting he had [[plagiarism#Joe Biden|plagiarized]] a speech by the leader of the British [[Labour Party]].<ref>[http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history_lesson/2008/08/the_write_stuff.html Why Biden's plagiarism shouldn't be forgotten.] - [[Slate Magazine]] - Aug. 25, 2008</ref>

Biden considered running as a Presidential candidate for the 2004 elections, but then decided against it, saying that it would be "now too much of a long shot.".<ref>[https://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/special/president/candidates/whos.in.out.html Who is in, who is out 2004], [[CNN]]</ref> He was later mentioned as a possible running mate for Democratic Senator [[John Kerry]], but he instead urged Kerry to chose Senator John McCain.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4961694/ McCain urged to join Kerry ticket], [[MSNBC]]</ref>

He won few votes when running for [[2008 Presidential election|president in 2008]]; he dropped out after placing fifth in Iowa in January, 2008. Biden became [[Barack Obama]]'s vice-presidential running mate. His campaign stressed his Irish Catholic roots in appeals to working class [[Democrat]]s, who had deserted Obama in the primaries but returned in the fall.

===1988 Presidential campaign===
Joe Biden announced his candidacy for President in 1987. He ran on his experience, saying in an campaign advertisement "The [[White House]] isn't the place to learn how to deal with international crisis, the balance of power, war and peace, and the economic future of the next generation." <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121919956426355701.html Biden's Foreign Policy Background Carries Growing Cachet], [[Wall Street Journal]]</ref> His campaign was short-lived due to controversies. While campaigning in [[New Hampshire]] in 1987, a civilian asked about his grades in college, to which Biden yelled, "I think I have a much higher I.Q. than you do." He went on to say that he "went to law school on a full academic scholarship - the only one in my class to have a full academic scholarship" adding that he "ended up in the top half" of his class (Biden graduated 76th in a class of 85) and "graduated with three degrees from college."

Biden explained his comments "I did not graduate in the top half of my class at law school and my recollection of this was inaccurate...I graduated from the University of Delaware with a double major in history and political science. My reference to degrees at the Claremont event was intended to refer to these majors - I said 'three' and should have said 'two'." <ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/22/us/biden-admits-errors-and-criticizes-latest-report.html Biden Admits Errors and Criticizes Latest Report], [[The New York Times]]</ref>

Later in the campaign he was found to have plagiarized a speech from British [[Labour Party]] leader [[Neil Kinnock]]. The plagiarism was considered all the more serious, because it included details of Kinnock's life which were not true in Biden's case. Biden dropped out of the race in December 1987, and did not participate in the 1988 Democratic caucuses and primaries.

===2008 Presidential campaign===
:{{Main article|2008 Presidential election}}
Biden declared his candidacy for [[President]] on January 31, 2007 but withdrew in January 2008 after coming 5th in the [[Iowa Caucus]], receiving only 1% of the vote.<ref>[http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/01/04/chris-dodd-abandons-presidential-campaign-after-poor-showing-in-iowa/ Biden, Dodd Bow Out of Presidential Race After Poor Showings in Iowa], [[Fox News]]</ref> He ran on his foreign policy experience and credentials in the Senate. Biden voted for the [[Operation Iraqi Freedom]] - the [[War in Iraq]]. On November 15, 2007, during the CNN presidential debate, he said {{Cquote|''This is not about experience. It's not about change. It's about action. Who among us is going to be able to, on Day 1, step in and end the war?.''}}

In a presidential debate, when asked, “Would you call for [[tariff]]s to protect American consumers from unsafe products from [[China]]? Are you willing to go there?” Biden answered, “I’m not. No, I’m not willing to go there."<ref>https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/biden-was-a-much-better-candidate-when-he-wasnt-running/</ref>

During an ABC Democratic presidential debate, Biden was asked about the statement he made regarding [[Barack Obama]]. Biden said: {{Cquote|''I think he can be ready but right now, I don’t believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training. I think that I stand by the statement.''<ref>[http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/23/mccain-launches-tv-ad-using-bidens-words-against-obama/ McCain Launches TV Ad Using Biden’s Words Against Obama], [[Fox News]], August 23, 2008</ref>}}

===2008 Vice presidential campaign===
[[Image:0.jpg|right|thumb|250px|Biden campaigning for Barack Obama, 09/24/08]] Biden had been mentioned as a Vice Presidential candidate for Senator [[Barack Obama]], in that he would add foreign policy experience to the ticket. When asked in June over the speculation, Biden stated, "I'd make a great president. I'd make a great [[Secretary of State]]. I'd make a great vice president." <ref>The Hill's Blog Briefing Room: [http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2008/06/17/biden-id-make-a-great-president-secretary-of-state-vice-president/ Biden: I'd Make a Great President, Secretary of State, Vice President]</ref> On August 19, Biden was asked by reporters of his VP status, to which he replied "Hey guys, I'm not the guy. See ya." <ref>[http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/08/biden-on-obamas.html?cid=127045696 Biden on Obama's VP Pick: 'I'm Not The Guy'] [[ABC News]], August 19, 2008</ref> It was Joe Biden's son, Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden, who issued an arrest warrant on fabricated charges to attempt to discredit Larry Sinclair's National Press Club news conference where he alleged a [[gay]] affair with Obama and claimed he was using [[cocaine]] at the time.<ref>http://archive.is/8a4xF</ref> Biden was nominated by Obama choice for vice president a week later.<ref>https://larrysinclair.com/blog/a-reminder-from-lame-cherry/</ref>

In August 2005 Biden paradoxically and nonsensically said, "[[John McCain]] is a personal friend, a great friend, and I would be honored to run with or against John McCain, because I think the country would be better off."<ref>[http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NGRhNzJlMWY5NjdiNzhjMTRkYjMzNjYwOGJmYzNjMTY= 'Just Words' That Joe Biden Would Like To Forget], [[National Review Online]]</ref>

However, on August 23 it was announced that Biden would be Obama's 2008 running mate. They appeared together in [[Springfield]], [[Illinois]]. Obama proudly introduced Senator Biden,
''

:''"Let me introduce to you, the next president — the next vice president of the United States of America, Joe Biden."''

Biden took the stage and endorsed Obama, saying,
''

:''"In this election year the choice is clear, one man stands ready to deliver change we desperately need, a man I'm proud to call my friend, a man who will be the next President of the [[United States]], Barack America."''
''

Obama hoped Biden would help the ticket in multiple ways:

* Biden has extensive foreign policy experience in the United States Senate and as such could have helped to bolster Obama's comparative lack of experience in this area.
* Biden is [[Catholic]], and Obama was weak with that key voting bloc; however, the [[Catholic Church]] may have taken offense at Biden's pro-[[abortion]] positions (see below).
* Biden was born in [[Pennsylvania]], a must-win state for Obama where he was thought to be weak;<ref>[[Hillary Clinton]] defeated Obama by a wide margin in the [[Pennsylvania]] primary; in August polls show Obama leading McCain by an average of only 5.8% in [[Pennsylvania]] [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/pa/pennsylvania_mccain_vs_obama-244.html RealClearPolitics Pennsylvania Tracking]</ref>
* Biden's son is going to [[Iraq]], which may have helped to rehabilitate Obama's image as anti-military; however, Biden himself never served.

Almost immediately after his selection, the conflict between his pro-[[abortion]] position and that of his church surfaced:<ref>[https://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS29316+23-Aug-2008+PRN20080823 Choice of Biden Re-Opens Catholic Wound], [[Reuters]]</ref>

:Biden has said: "I am a long-standing supporter of ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' and a woman's right to choose." But Biden's own bishop, Bishop Michael Saltarelli of Wilmington, Del., has ... denounced the notion that politicians can 'personally oppose' abortion, but refuse to pass laws protecting the unborn. He made clear that pro-abortion Catholic politicians should refrain from receiving the Eucharist:

:"The promotion of abortion by any Catholic is a grave and serious matter. Objectively, according to the constant teaching of the Scriptures and the Church, it would be more spiritually beneficial for such a person to refrain from receiving the Body and Blood of Christ. I ask Catholics in this position to have the integrity to respect the Eucharist, Catholic teaching and the Catholic faithful."

In September of the campaign Biden asked [[Missouri]] State Senator Chuck Graham, who has [[paralysis]], to "Stand up, Chuck, let 'em see you. Oh, God love you. What am I talking about? I tell you what, you're making everybody else stand up, though, pal. I tell you what, stand up for Chuck." <ref name=standupchuck />

Biden's [[Republican]] opponent for the Vice Presidency was [[Alaska]] [[Governor]] [[Sarah Palin]]. They participated in their first and only Vice Presidential debate on October 2 in [[St. Louis]], [[Missouri]]. Biden was elected the 47th Vice President of the United States on November 4, 2008.

===2012 Vice presidential campaign===
Biden got a pass from fellow [[liberal]]s in the media despite acting like a rude clown during his vice presidential debate with [[Paul Ryan]] in October 2012. Biden repeatedly interrupted Ryan and engaged in other offensive behavior, and even complained about not getting more time despite talking more than Ryan did. At one point Biden even nonsensically interjected, "so now you're Jack Kennedy?" in interrupting a valid point being made by Ryan.

==1973–2009: U.S. Senate==
[[Image:Biden_on_Meet_the_Press.jpg|right|thumb|250px|Biden on Meet The Press, 09/09/07]] In 1972, Biden unseated the liberal Republican Senator [[Cale Boggs]]. In 1973, he hence became the fifth-youngest U.S. senator in U.S. history. He was later reelected six times.

Biden, as a senator from [[Delaware]] from 1973-2009, served on the Senate Judiciary Committee and subsequently the Committee on Foreign Relations, alternating as the chair or ranking member on both committees. Biden in 2007 was ranked as the third most liberal Senator by the non-partisan ''National Journal''.<ref>[http://www.nationaljournal.com/conventions/co_20080823_9669.php Biden's Senate Vote Record], ''National Journal''</ref>

Biden has close ties with lobbyists, receiving $5,133,072 in contributions from [[lawyer]]s and [[lobbyist]]s since 2003.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12735.html Statesman known for slips of his tongue], [[Politico]]</ref> Biden requested 116 congressional [[earmark]]s in 2008 alone, resulting in $342 million in taxpayer money.<ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/23/biden.earmarks/?iref=hpmostpop Biden, Obama helped keep 'Bridge to Nowhere' alive], [[CNN]]</ref>

During a late-night marathon debate over President George W. Bush's tax cut bill, 98-year-old Sen. [[Strom Thurmond]] began ailing. Biden told the ''New York Daily News'' "I saw Strom sitting in his seat, he looked awful. I said, 'Strom, you should go home'. He's an old buddy."<ref>https://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/storm-concern-strom-article-1.901327</ref>

Biden was for the Iraq War before he was against it.

===Abortion===
On the [[abortion issue]], Biden is [[pro-abortion]] and opposed President [[George W. Bush]]'s two nominees to the U.S. [[Supreme court]]. On ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' he said, "I strongly support Roe v. Wade....That’s why I led the fight to defeat [Robert] Bork. Thank [[God]] he is not in the Court or Roe v. Wade would be gone by now."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20130312002759/http://nrlc.org/Election2008/comparison0909084c.pdf Where Do the Candidates Stand on Abortion?], [[National Right to Life Committee]]</ref> He received a 100% rating from [[NARAL Pro-Choice America]] in 2001, 2004, 2005 and 2006,<ref>http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=53279</ref> but not in other years because of his opposition to [[partial-birth abortion]] and public funding for abortions.<ref>http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Joe_Biden_Abortion.htm</ref>

===2nd Amendment===
He is a strong opponent of 2nd-amendment rights, earning an F by the [[National Rifle Association]]. Biden has also voted to give [[Social Security]] benefits and citizenship to [[illegal aliens]]. On energy, he opposes increased domestic oil production, saying proponents of offshore drilling want to "rape" the Outer Continental Shelf.<ref>http://www.votesmart.org/speech_detail.php?sc_id=400058</ref>

===Judiciary committee===
Biden was a long-time member of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, which he chaired from 1987 until 1995 and served as ranking minority member from 1981 until 1987 and again from 1995 until 1997. He almost never supported a supreme court nominee who was not in his party and presided over two of the more contentious [[U.S. Supreme Court]] confirmation hearings ever, [[Robert Bork]] in 1987 and the [[racism|racially motivated]] hearings for [[Clarence Thomas]]<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egTyaIAaqz8 Clarence Thomas High-Tech Lynching]</ref> in 1991.

Sen. [[Arlen Specter]], who jumped to the Democrats in 2009, wrote in his memoirs that Biden admitted to him that Biden believed Anita Hill was lying.

===Biden crime bill===
[[File:Joe Biden.jpg|250px|right|thumb|Biden [[collude]]d with segregationists to undermine the Supreme Court decision of ''Brown vs. Board''.]]
The [[Biden Crime Bill of 1994]], also known as the Superpredator Act, came in response to the Central Park jogger case and trial of the Central Park Five. On its twentieth anniversary the Brennan Center observed, {{quotebox|It expanded the death penalty, creating 60 new death penalty offenses under 41 federal capital statutes. It eliminated education funding for incarcerated students, effectively gutting prison education programs. Despite a wealth of research showing education increases post-release employment, reduces recidivism, and improves outcomes for the formerly incarcerated and their families, this change has not been reversed.

And the bill created a wave of change toward harsher state sentencing policy. That change was driven by funding incentives: the bill’s $9.7 billion in federal funding for prison construction went only to states that adopted truth-in-sentencing (TIS) laws, which lead to defendants serving far longer prison terms. Within 5 years, 29 states had TIS laws on the books, 24 more than when the bill was signed. New York State received over $216 million by passing such laws. By 2000 the state had added over 12,000 prison beds and incarcerated 28 percent more people than a decade before.}}

===War on sovereignty===
:{{Main article|War on sovereignty}}
In 1992, Joe Biden penned a piece for the ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'' entitled, "''How I Learned to Love the New World Order''," in which he extolled "collective security" through the [[United Nations]] and called for a “permanent commitment of forces for use by the Security Council.”

On July 14, 1993, a little over a year after writing the Journal op-ed cited above, Senator Biden introduced Senate Joint Resolution 112 urging the new president, [[Bill Clinton]], to initiate discussions to establish a standing United Nations army. Under his proposal, United States bases and facilities would be made available to train UN forces, and the president would not “be deemed to require the authorization of Congress” to make American troops, facilities, or other assistance “available to the [[Security Council]] on its call.”

He also called for the creation of a “[[new world order]]” at the Export-Import Bank conference in Washington on April 5, 2013. “The affirmative task we have now is to actually create a new world order,” he exclaimed.

===Foreign policy===
As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden voted against aid to the government of [[South Vietnam]] leading to its collapse in 1975.

He called the rise of the [[Ayatollah Khomeini]] in the [[Iranian Revolution]] in 1979 a step forward for [[human rights]].

Biden opposed [[Ronald Reagan]]'s development of the [[missile defense system|Missile Defense System]] and ending the doctrine of [[Mutual Assured Destruction]].

He voted against the [[Persian Gulf War]] in 1991.

Biden voted for the [[Iraq War]] in 2002. In a 2005 interview with ''Meet the Press'', Biden advocated a troop surge saying, "I’ve been calling for more troops [in Iraq] for over two years, along with [[John McCain]] and others subsequent to my saying that." On July 23, 2007, Biden said, "there's not a single [[military]] man in this [[audience]], who will tell this Senator he can get those troops out in six months if the order goes today, let's start telling the truth."<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wylferBh3IA</ref> He advocated Iraqi [[federal]]ism based on [[nation]]al and [[religious]] differences for [[Kurd]]s, [[Shiite]]s and [[Sunni]]s.

==Early life==
Biden was born at Scranton State General Hospital in Scranton, [[Pennsylvania]]<ref name="timeline">[http://biden.senate.gov/senator/timeline/ Joe Biden Timeline]</ref> and grew up in New Castle County, Delaware,<ref name="bio">[http://biden.senate.gov/senator/ Joe Biden Biography]</ref> in a middle-class family. His father was a white-collar businessman who did well but had fallen on hard times when Biden was a youth.<ref name="bluecollar">[http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/08/joe_bidens_mythical_bluecollar.html Joe Biden's Mythical Blue-Collar Roots], [[Real Clear Politics]]</ref> Biden attended Archmere Academy, a private Catholic college-preparatory high school in the Wilmington, Delaware area, graduating in 1961.<ref name="bio" /> Biden took a summer job to help his family pay for his schooling.<ref name="bluecollar" /><ref>Archmere Academy [http://www.archmereacademy.com/Default.aspx?tabid=74] Tuition for 2008-2009 is $18,450.</ref> Biden received 5 [[Vietnam war]] draft deferments. He graduated from the University of Delaware in 1965, and from the Syracuse University College of Law in 1968 near the bottom of his class.<ref name="bio" /> After finishing law school Biden worked in the Wilmington, Del. public defenders office where he claims to have represented a member of the [[Black Panthers]];<ref>https://www.aaihs.org/the-1968-occupation-of-black-wilmington/#fnref-43519-4</ref> no evidence has ever been produced to support Biden's claim he ever represented a member of the Black Panthers.

Biden is a serial plagiarizer.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zPl7Ncs8AI</ref> He was accused of, and ultimately admitted to plagiarism while a student at Syracuse Law School.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/17/us/biden-was-accused-of-plagiarism-in-law-school.html Biden Was Accused of Plagiarism in Law School], [[The New York Times]]</ref> He submitted a paper in which he plagiarized from a law review article. After receiving a grade of F, he was permitted to retake the course.<ref>[http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE3DB143FF93BA2575AC0A961948260 Biden Admits Plagiarism in School But Says It Was Not 'Malevolent'], By E. J. DIONNE JR., SPECIAL TO [[The New York Times|THE NEW YORK TIMES]], Published: September 18, 1987</ref>

In 1966, while still in law school, Biden married Neilia Hunter.<ref name="timeline" /> They had three children together: Joseph R. "Beau" Dien, III, Robert Hunter, and Naomi. Shortly after his election to the Senate in 1972, his wife and infant daughter were killed in a car accident, and his two sons were seriously injured.<ref name="timeline" /> He eventually remarried to Dr. Jill Biden (née Jacobs), an educator in Delaware's schools.<ref name="bio" /> She currently is an instructor<ref>[http://www.dtcc.edu/catalog/pdf/personnel.pdf Delaware Technical Community College - College Catalog]</ref> teaching at Delaware Technical Community College. Together, the couple added a daughter, Ashley Biden, to the family.<ref name="bio" />

Biden was elected to the U.S Senate from Delaware in 1972. Delaware was a slave state. It did not join the [[Confederacy]] partially because President [[Abraham Lincoln]] suborned the Maryland state legislature and would not permit it to leave the union. Delaware, separated from the south by Maryland, could not secede on its own. Delaware voters in fact rejected Lincoln's plan to compensate for emancipation of its slaves, paid for by the federal government. Delawares Democrat and racist traditions were still very strong when Biden was elected.,<ref>https://www.westernjournal.com/dick-morris-biden-eastland-perfect-together/</ref>

Since 1991, Biden has been an [[adjunct professor]] at the Widener University School of Law, where he teaches a seminar on constitutional law.<ref name="bio" />

Biden's son, Hunter Biden, was thrown out of the [[US Navy]] for [[cocaine]] use. Hunter Biden has been a Washington [[lobbyist]] since 2001.<ref>[https://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-08-24-Biden-son_N.htm Biden's son a registered lobbyist since 2001], [[USA Today]]</ref>

=== Joe Biden, his struggles with grief and his unresolved emotional wounds ===
[[File:Bill Clinton and officials on Air Force One.jpg|thumbnail|200px|[[Bill Clinton]], Joe Biden and other Clinton administration officials.]]

''See also:'' [[Joe Biden, grief and cognitive decline|Joe Biden and grief]]

Politico in an article entited ''How Grief Became Joe Biden’s ‘Superpower’'' indicates:
{{Cquote|There is no person in American politics today whose life has been so shaped by loss and grief. The long arc of Biden’s career is all but bracketed by tragedy. In 1972, his wife and baby daughter were killed in a car accident; in 2015, one of his two sons who had survived the crash died of a rare strain of brain cancer. These wretched tentpoles are not only tragedies the 76-year-old Biden has had to endure. They influenced major decisions he made about his political career—first, his priorities in the Senate; later, his decision to opt out of the presidential election of 2016. And they defined him as a person as well, according to longtime friends, former aides and veteran politicos in his home state of Delaware.<ref>[https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/01/25/joe-biden-2019-profile-grief-beau-car-accident-224178 How Grief Became Joe Biden’s ‘Superpower’]</ref>}}

The ''Washington Post'' states concerning Biden: "In a candid 2012 speech to military families and friends who had lost a loved one in action, Biden spoke about the anger, crisis of faith and wounds that don't really ever heal."<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/05/31/joe-bidens-heartfelt-thoughts-on-grief/ Joe Biden’s heartfelt speech on grief], Washington Post</ref>

The Associated Press indicates concerning Biden:
{{Cquote|After the accident, Biden had no interest in the Senate anymore. No ambition for anything, really. His world view shrank to taking care of his boys.

“For the first time in my life, I understood how someone could consciously decide to commit suicide,” he would later reveal.

Biden didn’t just have to deal with grief. He had the added burden of processing it in public.
<ref>[https://www.apnews.com/e5a1e70314eb44219448eeb850c65f1e Biden’s prism of loss: A public man, shaped by private grief], Associated Press</ref>}}

==Embarrassing or silly remarks==
[[File:Bidenbeforeafter.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Biden had a hair transplant, where hairs were removed from his buttocks and placed on his head.<ref>''[http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2008/08/bidens_hair.html Does Joe Biden Have Butt Hair on His Head?]'', By Jessica Pressler, ''The Intelligencer'', Aug. 25, 2008.</ref>]]
*Biden earned the nickname '''Butthead Biden''' in 1989 when he began having hair follicle transplants from his buttocks to his scalp to relieve pressure on his [[vanity]].
*In attempting to quote the the [[Declaration of Independence]] before [[Super Tuesday]], Biden misquoted, "all men and women created by" and then stumbled saying, "go, you know, you know the thing."<ref> Dominick Mastrangelo, March 02, 2020 [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/you-know-the-thing-biden-botches-declaration-of-independence-quote-during-campaign-stop 'You know, the thing': Biden botches Declaration of Independence quote during campaign stop] The Washington Examiner. Retrieved March 03, 2020</ref><ref>https://twitter.com/SteveGuest/status/1234579299652554753</ref>
*When Representative [[Gabrielle Giffords]] returned to Congress after a long hiatus (which was the result of her being shot in the head), Biden (who had a brain surgery in the past) remarked to her that "Now we're both members of the Cracked Head Club".<ref>[http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/08/gabrielle-giffords-joe-biden-cracked-head-club-/1 Biden jokes Giffords is in 'Cracked Head Club' ], [[USA Today]]</ref>

*When he met Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen, Biden said "God rest her soul" in reference to Cowen's mother. However, it was Cowen's father that died, not his mother.<ref>[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7469323/Joe-Biden-loses-the-gift-of-the-gab-on-St-Patricks-Day.html Joe Biden loses the gift of the gab on St Patrick's Day - The Daily Telegraph], [[The Daily Telegraph]]</ref>

===Hostile comments===
*At one 2005 political event he said, ''"The next [[Republican]] that tells me I'm not religious, I'm going to shove my rosary down their throat."'' <ref>[http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1840965,00.html#ixzz0xxjisdkg Does Biden Have a Catholic Problem?], [[Time Magazine]]</ref>

*In March 2007, Biden was criticizing President [[George W. Bush]] for vetoing a bill that would set a timeline for troops to be removed from Iraq, saying that [[Congress]] should "shove it down his throat."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20080903080136/http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/5/1/144042.shtml?s=us Biden on Iraq Bill: 'Shove It Down His Throat'], [[Newsmax]]</ref>

*In February 2019, Biden criticized U.S. President [[Donald Trump]] in Germany, breaking a longstanding tradition of not criticizing the current commander-in-chief in foreign countries.<ref>Gehrke, Joel (February 16, 2019). [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/biden-tells-europeans-in-munich-that-america-is-an-embarrassment Biden tells Europeans in Munich that America is 'an embarrassment']. ''Washington Examiner''. Retrieved February 16, 2019.</ref>

===Quotations about guns===
* During a February 2013 interview, Biden said that if there was a “problem” that his wife should “walk out on the balcony here, walk out, put that double-barrel shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house.” <ref>[https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/20/biden-shotgun-advice-draws-quizzical-response/ Biden Shotgun Advice Draws Quizzical Response], [[The New York Times]]</ref> Doing so is of course, illegal, and would leave his wife holding an empty shotgun while dealing with the “problem”.

* In another February 2013 interview, Biden said "[if] you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door." Coincidently, a man from Virginia Beach had done just that a few days before, and was arrested.<ref>[https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/02/28/biden-advises-shooting-shotgun-through-door Biden Advises Shooting Shotgun Through Door], [[U.S. News & World Report]]</ref>

===Remarks about race or ethnicity===
*In July 2006, while speaking to a group of Indian-Americans in Delaware, Biden stated, "You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I'm not joking." His comment was caught on C-SPAN.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13757367/ Biden explains Indian-American remarks], [[MSNBC]]</ref>

*In August 2006, Biden was on [[Fox News]] Sunday and bragged about his state being a former [[slave]] state. "You don't know my state. My state was a slave state. My state is a border state. My state is the eighth largest black population in the country. My state is anything from a northeast liberal state." <ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFduMuP7v-k</ref>

*Talking about his fellow Democratic presidential candidate [[Barack Obama]] he said in January 2007, "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy, ... I mean, that's a storybook, man." <ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/31/biden.obama/ Biden's description of Obama draws scrutiny], [[CNN]]</ref>

*Thanks To Japan’s [[Xenophobia]], Women Are Encouraged To Stay In The Workforce.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7u1d_1V1Ekc</ref>

===Erroneous comments===
*Joe Biden once told voters that his [[helicopter]] was "forced down" on "the superhighway of terror" by Afghan extremists. When actually, snow forced the helicopter pilot to land and wait out a [[storm]].<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,431604,00.html Fact Check: Biden's Chopper Was 'Forced Down' by Snowflakes], [[Fox News]]</ref>

*In the Oct. 2008 VP debate, Biden made numerous misstatements, on topics ranging from the Constitution to the Mideast.<ref>[https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,433314,00.html Did Biden Get It Wrong? You Betcha], [[Fox News]]</ref>

*He said he was second in line to be President when he was first and Nancy Pelosi was second at the time.<ref>[http://michellemalkin.com/2010/09/20/bozo-the-vp-botches-line-of-succession/ Bozo the VP botches line of succession], [[Michelle Malkin]]</ref>

*During the 2008 presidential campaign, Biden said that "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed. He said, 'look, here's what happened.'"<ref>[https://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/22/eveningnews/main4470063.shtml Behind The Scenes With Joe Biden], [[CBSNews]]</ref> In actuality television wasn't in use for another twenty years and the president during the 1929 stock market crash was [[Herbert Hoover]], not [[Franklin Roosevelt]].

*In another erroneous remark made during the presidential campaign, Biden referred to [[Sarah Palin]] as lieutenant Governor of Alaska, when in fact she the state's Governor at the time.<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1643290_1643292_1841625,00.html Biden's Palin Demotion], [[Time Magazine]]</ref>

*Biden made yet another deceptive claim during the 2008 presidential campaign in which he asserted that "This guy is brain-dead," referring to then-President [[George W. Bush]] .<ref>[https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2007/aug/24/joe-biden/irresponsible-claim-and-wrong-medical-diagnosis/ Irresponsible claim (and wrong medical diagnosis)], [[PolitiFact]]</ref> This absurd claim was completely unfounded and demonstrably false.

===Other quotations===
*During the 2008 presidential elections Joe Biden gave a speech in Springfield, Illinois in which he introduced the Democratic nominee for president as "Barack America".<ref>[https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2008/0823/barack-america-and-president-biden-ooops Barack America and President Biden? Ooops...], [[Christian Science Monitor]]</ref>

*Biden remarked about the 2010 Midterm “I was amazed at the amount of money, this $200 billion of money that is — where there’s no accountability.” Clearly he meant $200 million says the New York Times.<ref>[https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/200-billion-in-ads-mr-biden-thats-real-money/?ref=politics $200 Billion in Ads, Mr. Biden? That’s Real Money], [[The New York Times]], October 22, 2010</ref> Though just a moment later. “So it really — I’ve never seen this before, so the only caveat I’d put in terms of the House is how much impact this $200 billion are going to mean.”

*During the 2005 confirmation hearings for Justice [[John Roberts]], Biden asked Roberts, "Can a microscopic tag be planted in someones body to track his every move, you will rule on that." <ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbPvWm9ZkYw</ref>

*In 2008 Biden told a wheelchair bound State Senator from [[Missouri]] to "stand up".<ref name=standupchuck>[http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2008/09/10/joe_biden_to_man_in_wheechair_stand_up_chuck_let_em_see_ya Joe Biden to Man in Wheechair: "Stand Up, Chuck. Let 'Em See Ya!"], [[Rush Limbaugh]]</ref>

*He said "Its easy being Vice President." Then a lawmaker said "It's like being the grandpa and not the parent," to which he responded "Yeah, that's it!"<ref>[http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/26/biden-its-easy-being-vice-president/ Biden - "It's Easy Being Vice President"], [[Fox News]]</ref>

*After [[ObamaCare]] was signed into law, Biden was caught swearing on camera while expressing his joy.<ref>[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/7508111/US-health-care-Joe-Biden-swears-after-Barack-Obama-signs-historic-reforms.html US health care: Joe Biden swears after Barack Obama signs historic reforms], [[Daily Telegraph]]</ref>

*Biden was caught swearing again while speaking to a former Senate colleague.<ref>[https://www.cnn.com/2015/01/06/politics/biden-swearing-in/ Joe Biden swearing in senators makes great TV], [[Fox News]]</ref>

Read more: [http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/26/biden-its-easy-being-vice-president/#ixzz1X7ju3pUC Biden - "It's Easy Being Vice President"], [[Fox News]]

==In popular culture==
*[http://www.cc.com/video-clips/yfmksi/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-the-audacity-of-grope The Audacity of Grope]
*https://joebiden.info/ A collection of cringworthy moments from Biden's career
*Oliver Stone documentary [https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1180915084522078208?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw ''Ukraine on Fire'' trailer].

==See also==
*[[Ukrainian collusion timeline]]
*[[Race baiting]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Joe_Biden.htm Biden On the Issues]
*[http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/b000444/ Voting Record], [[Washington Post]]
*[http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=B000444, Biography at the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress]
*[http://www.joebiden.com/ Presidential Race Site]
*[https://twitter.com/todosconbiden/status/1187125647644286976?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Todos Con Biden]
{{USVicePresidents}}{{liberalism}}{{DEFAULTSORT:Biden, Joseph}}

[[Category:Joe Biden]]
[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Former United States Senators]]
[[Category:2008 Presidential Candidates]]
[[Category:Obama Administration]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Black History]]
[[Category:Liberals]]
[[Category:Reagan Era]]
[[Category:Vice Presidents of the United States]]
[[Category:Catholic Politicians]]
[[Category:Irish-Americans]]
[[Category:Abortion Advocates]]
[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Anti Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Anti-Constitutionalists]]
[[Category:Trump-Russia Collusion Hoax]]
[[Category:Hillary Clinton email scandal]]
[[Category:United States Presidential Election, 2020]]
[[Category:Socialists]]
[[Category:Leftists]]
[[Category:Corruption]]
[[Category:Racism]]
[[Category:1970s]]
[[Category:1980s]]
[[Category:1990s]]
[[Category:2000s]]
[[Category:2010s]]
[[Category:2020s]]