The Overhauling of Straight America    - Gay and Lesbian Agenda Exposed!

               Tweet


Last Updated By Endtime Prophecy Net : July 29, 2011



Published On : June 10, 2001

Last Updated : May 5, 2010



Introduction By The WordWeaver

Twenty-three years ago, in November of 1987, a homosexual
magazine called 'Guide' published a lengthy article entitled
"The Overhauling of Straight America". Written by Marshall
Kirk and Erastes Pill, the purpose of this shocking article
was to establish a strategy for gaining acceptance for the
homosexual and lesbian lifestyles within American society,
while at the same time, demonizing anyone who would oppose
the proliferation of these deviant, perverted, and ungodly
relationships. Following is the full text of this revelatory
article. If you are a Christian, you will undoubtedly be
shocked to discover how closely these people have adhered to
their sick agenda, as well as alarmed by how far along they
have come during the past thirteen years, in the actual
implementation of their subtle plan. In addition to reading
this article, I also encourage you to read my own series
on this topic entitled "Homosexuality And Lesbian: To The
Point!" and "When Sin Is No Longer A Sin".


----- Begin Article -----

THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA

By Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill

Guide - November 1987


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. Ideally, we would
have straights register differences in sexual preference the
way they register different tastes for ice cream or sports
games: she likes strawberry and I like vanilla; he follows
baseball and I follow football. No big deal.

At least in the beginning, we are seeking public
desensitization and nothing more. We do not need and cannot
expect a full "appreciation" or "understanding" of
homosexuality from the average American. You can forget
about trying to persuade the masses that homosexuality is a
good thing. But if only you can get them to think that it is
just another thing, with a shrug of their shoulders, then
your battle for legal and social rights is virtually won.
And to get to shoulder-shrug stage, gays as a class must
cease to appear mysterious, alien, loathsome and contrary. A
large-scale media campaign will be required in order to
change the image of gays in America. And any campaign to
accomplish this turnaround should do six things.

[1] TALK ABOUT GAYS AND GAYNESS AS LOUDLY AND AS OFTEN AS
POSSIBLE.

The principle behind this advice is simple: almost any
behavior begins to look normal if you are exposed to enough
of it at close quarters and among your acquaintances. The
acceptability of the new behavior will ultimately hinge on
the number of one's fellows doing it or accepting it. One
may be offended by its novelty at first--many, in times
past, were momentarily scandalized by "streaking,'' eating
goldfish, and premarital sex. But 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 skeptic may still shake his head and think
"people arc crazy these days," but over time his objections
are likely to become more reflective, more philosophical,
less emotional.

The way to benumb raw sensitivities about homosexuality is
to have a lot of people talk a great deal about the subject
in a neutral or supportive way. Open and frank talk makes
the subject seem less furtive, alien, and sinful, more
above-board. Constant talk builds the impression that public
opinion is at least divided on the subject, and that a
sizable segment accepts or even practices homosexuality.
Even rancorous debates between opponents and defenders serve
the purpose of desensitization so long as "respectable" gays
are front and center to make their own pitch. The main thing
is to talk about gayness until the issue becomes thoroughly
tiresome.

And when we say talk about homosexuality, we mean just that.
In the early stages of any campaign to reach straight
America, the masses should not be shocked and repelled by
premature exposure to homosexual behavior itself. Instead,
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--only later his unsightly derriere!

Where we talk is important. The visual media, film and
television, are plainly the most powerful image-makers in
Western civilization. The average American household watches
over seven hours of TV daily. Those hours open up a gateway
into the private world of straights, through which a Trojan
horse might be passed. As far as desensitization is
concerned, the medium is the message--of normalcy. So far,
gay Hollywood has provided our best covert weapon in the
battle to desensitize the mainstream. Bit by bit over the
past ten years, gay characters and gay themes have been
introduced into TV programs and films (though often this has
been done to achieve comedic and ridiculous affects). On the
whole the impact has been encouraging. The prime-time
presentation of Consenting Adults on a major network in 1985
is but one high-water mark in favorable media exposure of
gay issues. But this should be just the beginning of a major
publicity blitz by gay America.

Would a desensitizing campaign of open and sustained talk
about gay issues reach every rabid opponent of
homosexuality? Of course not. 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.
Against the mighty pull of institutional Religion one must
set the mightier draw of Science & Public Opinion (the
shield and sword of that accursed "secular humanism"). Such
an unholy alliance has worked well against churches before,
on such topics as divorce and abortion. With enough open
talk about the prevalence and acceptability of
homosexuality, that alliance can work again here.

[2] PORTRAY GAYS AS VICTIMS, NOT AS AGGRESSIVE CHALLENGERS.

In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be cast as
victims in need of protection so that straights will be
inclined by reflex to assume the role of protector. If gays
are presented, instead, as a strong and prideful tribe
promoting a rigidly nonconformist and deviant lifestyle,
they are more likely to be seen as a public menace that
justifies resistance and oppression. For that reason, we
must forego the temptation to strut our "gay pride" publicly
when it conflicts with the Gay Victim image. And we must
walk the fine line between impressing straights with our
great numbers, on the one hand, and sparking their hostile
paranoia-"They are all around us!"--on the other.

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. In practical terms, this
means that jaunty mustachioed musclemen would keep very low
profile in gay commercials and other public presentations,
while sympathetic figures of nice young people, old people,
and attractive women would be featured. (It almost goes
without saying that groups on the farthest margin of
acceptability such as NAMBLA, [Ed note -- North American
Man-Boy Love Association] must play no part at all in such a
campaign: suspected child-molesters will never look like
victims.)

Now, there are two different messages about the Gay Victim
that are worth communicating. First, 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. The message must read: "As far as gays can tell,
they were born gay, just as you were born heterosexual or
white or black or bright or athletic. Nobody ever tricked or
seduced them; they never made a choice, and are not morally
blameworthy. What they do isn't willfully contrary - it's
only natural for them. This twist of fate could as easily
have happened to you!"

Straight viewers must be able to identify with gays as
victims. Mr. and Mrs. Public must be given no extra excuses
to say, "they are not like us." To this end, the persons
featured in the public campaign should be decent and
upright, appealing and admirable by straight standards,
completely unexceptionable in appearance--in a word, they
should be indistinguishable from the straights we would like
to reach. (To return to the terms we have used in previous
articles, spokesmen for our cause must be R-type "straight
gays" rather than Q-type "homosexuals on display.") Only
under such conditions will the message be read correctly:
"These folks are victims of a fate that could have happened
to me."

By the way, we realize that many gays will question an
advertising technique, which might threaten to make
homosexuality look like some dreadful disease, which strikes
fated "victims". But the plain fact is that the gay
community is weak and must manipulate the powers of the
weak, including the play for sympathy. In any case, we
compensate for the negative aspect of this gay victim appeal
under Principle 4. (Below)

The second message would portray gays as victims of society.
The straight majority does not recognize the suffering it
brings to the lives of gays and must be shown: graphic
pictures of brutalized gays; dramatizations of job and
housing insecurity, loss of child custody, and public
humiliation: and the dismal list goes on.

"... In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be
cast as victims in need of protection so that straights will
be inclined by reflex to assume the role of protector."

[3] GIVE PROTECTORS A JUST CAUSE.

A media campaign that casts gays as society's victims and
encourages straights to be their protectors must make it
easier for those to respond to assert and explain their new
protectiveness. Few straight women, and even fewer straight
men, will want to defend homosexuality boldly as such. Most
would rather attach their awakened protective impulse to
some principle of justice or law, to some general desire for
consistent and fair treatment in society. Our campaign
should not demand direct support for homosexual practices,
should instead take anti-discrimination as its theme. The
right to free speech, freedom of beliefs, freedom of
association, due process and equal protection of laws-these
should be the concerns brought to mind by our campaign.

It is especially important for the gay movement to hitch its
cause to accepted standards of law and justice because its
straight supporters must have at hand a cogent reply to the
moral arguments of its enemies. The homophobes clothe their
emotional revulsion in the daunting robes of religious
dogma, so defenders of gay rights must be ready to counter
dogma with principle.

[4] MAKE GAYS LOOK GOOD.

In order to make a Gay Victim sympathetic to straights you
have to portray him as Everyman. But an additional theme of
the campaign should be more aggressive and upbeat: to offset
the increasingly bad press that these times have brought to
homosexual men and women, the campaign should paint gays as
superior pillars of society. Yes, yes, we know--this trick
is so old it creaks. Other minorities use it all the time in
ads that announce proudly, "Did you know that this Great Man
(or Woman) was _________?" But the message is vital for all
those straights who still picture gays as "queer" people--
shadowy, lonesome, fail, drunken, suicidal, child-snatching
misfits.

The honor roll of prominent gay or bisexual men and women is
truly eyepopping. From Socrates to Shakespeare, from
Alexander the Great to Alexander Hamilton, from Michelangelo
to Walt Whitman, from Sappho to Gertrude Stein, the list is
old hat to us but shocking news to heterosexual America. In
no time, a skillful and clever media campaign could have the
gay community looking like the veritable fairy godmother to
Western Civilization.

Along the same lines, we shouldn't overlook the Celebrity
Endorsement. The celebrities can be straight (God bless you,
Ed Asner, wherever you are) or gay.

[5] MAKE THE VICTIMIZERS LOOK BAD.

At a later stage of the media campaign for gay rights-long
after other gay ads have become commonplace-it will be time
to get tough with remaining opponents. To be blunt, they
must be vilified. (This will be all the more necessary
because, by that time, the entrenched enemy will have
quadrupled its output of vitriol and disinformation.) Our
goal is here is twofold. First, we seek to replace the
mainstream's self-righteous pride about its homophobia with
shame and guilt. Second, we intend to make the antigays look
so nasty that average Americans will want to dissociate
themselves from such types.

The public should be shown images of ranting homophobes
whose secondary traits and beliefs disgust middle America.
These images might include: the Ku Klux Klan demanding that
gays be burned alive or castrated; bigoted southern
ministers drooling with hysterical hatred to a degree that
looks both comical and deranged; menacing punks, thugs, and
convicts speaking coolly about the "fags" they have killed
or would like to kill; a tour of Nazi concentration camps
where homosexuals were tortured and gassed.

A campaign to vilify the victimizers is going to enrage our
most fervid enemies, of course. But what else can we say?
The shoe fits, and we should make them try it on for size,
with all of America watching.

[6] SOLICIT FUNDS: THE BUCK STOPS HERE

Any massive campaign of this kind would require
unprecedented expenditures for months or even years--an
unprecedented fundraising drive.

Effective advertising is a costly proposition: several
million dollars would get the ball rolling. There are 10-15
million primarily homosexual adults in this country: if each
one of them donated just two dollars to the campaign, its
war chest would actually rival that of its most vocal
enemies. And because those gays not supporting families
usually have more discretionary income than average, they
could afford to contribute much more.

"... We intend to make the antigays look so nasty that
average Americans will want to dissociate themselves from
such types."

But would they? Or is the gay community as feckless,
selfish, uncommitted, and short-sighted as its critics
claim? We will never know unless the new campaign
simultaneously launches a concerted nationwide appeal for
funding support from both known and anonymous donors. The
appeal should be directed both at gays and at straights who
care about social justice.

In the beginning, for reasons to be explained in a moment,
the appeal for funds may have to be launched exclusively
through the gay press--national magazines, local newspapers,
flyers at bars, notices in glossy skin magazines. Funds
could also come through the outreach of local gay
organizations on campuses and in metropolitan areas.
Eventually, donations would be solicited directly alongside
advertisements in the major straight media.

There would be no parallel to such an effort in the history
of the gay community in America. If it failed to generate
the needed capital to get started; there would be little
hope for the campaign and l little hope for major progress
toward gay rights in the near future. For the moment let us
suppose that gays could see how donations would greatly
serve their long-term interest, and that sufficient funds
could be raised. An heroic assumption.

GETTING ON THE AIR, OR, YOU CAN'T GET THERE FROM HERE.

Without access to TV, radio, and the mainstream press, there
will be no campaign. This is a tricky problem, became many
impresarios of the media simply refuse to accept what they
call "issue-advertising" -- persuasive advertising can
provoke a storm of resentment from the public and from
sponsors, which is bad for business. The courts have
confirmed the broadcaster's right to refuse any"issue
advertising" he dislikes.

What exactly constitutes "issue advertising"? It evidently
does not include platitudinous appeals to the virtues of
family unity (courtesy of the Mormons) neither does it
include tirades against perfidious Albion courtesy of Lyndon
LaRouche); neither does it include reminders that a
Mind-Is-a Terrible Thing to Waste (courtesy of the United
Negro College Fund); neither does it include religious shows
which condemn gay "sinners"; neither does it include
condemnations of nuclear war or race discrimination--at
least not in Massachusetts. Some guys get all the breaks.

What issue advertising does include these days is almost any
communique presented openly by a homosexual organization.
The words "gay" and "homosexual"' are considered
controversial whenever they appear.

Because most straightforward appeals are impossible, the
National Gay Task Force has had to cultivate quiet backroom
liaisons with broadcast companies and newsrooms in order to
make sure that issues important to the gay community receive
some coverage; but such an arrangement is hardly ideal, of
course, because it means that the gay community's image is
controlled by the latest news event instead of by careful
design--and recently most of the news about gays has been
negative.

So what can be done to crash the gates of the major media?
Several things, advanced in several stages.

START WITH THE FINE PRINT

Newspapers and magazines may very well be hungrier for gay
advertising dollars than television and radio arc. And the
cost of ads in print is generally lower. But remember that
the press, for the most part, is only read by
better-educated Americans, many of who are already more
accepting of homosexuality in any case. So to get more
impact for our dollars, we should skip the New Republic and
New Left Review readers and head for Time, People, and the
National Enquirer. (Of course, the gay community may have to
establish itself as a regular advertising presence in more
sophisticated forums first before it is accepted into the
mass press.)

While we're storming the battlements with salvos of ink, we
should also warm the mainstream up a bit with a subtle
national campaign on highway billboards. In simple bold
print on dark backgrounds, a series of unobjectionable
messages should be introduced:

IN RUSSIA, THEY TELL YOU WHAT TO BE. IN AMERICA WE HAVE THE
FREEDOM TO BE OURSELVES... AND TO BE THE BEST.

Or

PEOPLE HELPING INSTEAD OF HATING--THAT'S WHAT AMERICA IS ALL
ABOUT.

And so on. Each sign will tap patriotic sentiment, each
message will drill a seemingly agreeable proposition into
mainstream heads - a "public service message" suited to our
purposes. And, if their owners will permit it, each
billboard will be signed, in slightly smaller letters,
"Courtesy of the National Gay Task Force" - to build
positive associations and get the public used to seeing such
sponsorship.

VISUAL STAGE 1: YOU REALLY OUGHTTA BE IN PICTURES

As for television and radio, a more elaborate plan may be
needed to break the ice. For openers, naturally, we must
continue to encourage the appearance of favorable gay
characters in films and TV shows. Daytime talk shows also
remain a useful avenue for exposure.

But to speed things up we might consider a bold stratagem to
gain media attention. The scheme we have in mind would
require careful preparations, yet it would save expense even
while it elevated the visibility and stature of the gay
movement overnight.

Well before the next elections for national office, we might
lay careful plans to run symbolic gay candidates for every
high political office in this country. (Such plans would
have to deal somehow with the tricky problem of inducing
gays and straights to sign enough endorsement petitions to
get us on the ballot.) Our 50-250 candidates would
participate in such debates as they could, run gay-themed
advertisements coordinated at our national headquarters, and
demand equal time on the air. They could then graciously
pull out of the races before the actual elections, while
formally endorsing more viable straight contenders. (With
malicious humor, perhaps, in some states we could endorse
our most rabid opponents.) It is essential not to ask people
actually to vote Yea or Nay on the gay issue at this early
stage: such action would end up committing most to the Nay
position and would only tally huge and visible defeats for
our cause.

Through such a political campaign, the mainstream would get
over the initial shock of seeing gay ads, and the
acceptability of such ads would be fortified by the most
creditable context possible; and all this would be
accomplished before non-electoral advertising was attempted
by the gay community. During the campaign all hell would
break loose, but if we behaved courageously and respectable
our drive would gain legitimacy in and case and might even
become a cause celebre. If all went as planned, the somewhat
desensitized public and the major networks themselves would
be 'readied for the next step of our program.

VISUAL STAGE 2: PEEKABOO ADVERTISING

At this point the gay community has its foot in the door,
and it is time to ask the networks to accept gay sponsorship
of certain ads and shows. Timing is critical: The request
must be made immediately after our national political ads
disappear. Failing that, we should request sponsorship the
next time one of the networks struts its broad-mindedness by
televising a film or show with gay characters or themes. If
they wish to look consistent instead of hypocritical, we'll
have them on the spot.

But the networks would still be forced to say No unless we
made their resistance look patently unreasonable, and
possibly illegal. We'd do just that by proposing "gay ads"
patterned exactly after those currently sponsored by the
Mormons and others. As usual, viewers would be treated to
squeak-clean skits on the importance of family harmony and
understanding --this time the narrator would end by saying,
"This message was brought to you by --the National Gay Task
Force." All very quiet and subdued. Remember: exposure is
everything, and the medium is the message.

"... Exposure is everything and the medium is the message."

The gay community should join forces with other civil
liberties groups of respectable cast to promote bland
messages about America the Melting Pot, always ending with
an explicit reference to the Task Force of some other gay
organization. Making the best of a bad situation, we can
also propose sympathetic media appeals for gifts and
donations to fund AIDS research--if Jerry Lewis and the
March of Dimes can do it, so can we. Our next indirect step
will be to advertise locally on behalf of support groups
peripheral to the gay community: frowzy straight moms and
dads announcing phone numbers and meeting times for "Parents
of Gays" or similar gatherings. Can't you just see such ads
now, presented between messages from the Disabled Vets and
the Postal Workers Union?

VISUAL STAGE 3: ROLL OUT THE BIG GUNS

By this point, our salami tactics will have carved out,
slice by slice, a large portion of access to the mainstream
media. So what then? It would finally be time to bring gay
ads out of the closet. The messages of such ads should
directly address lingering public fears about homosexuals as
loathsome and contrary aliens. For examples, the following
are possible formats for TV or radio commercials designed to
chip away at chronic misperceptions.

Format A for Familiarization: The Testimonial.

To make gays seem less mysterious, present a series of short
spots featuring the boy-or girl-next-door, fresh and
appealing, or warm and lovable grandma grandpa types. Seated
in homey surroundings, they respond to an off camera
interviewer with assurance, good nature, and charm. Their
comments bring out three social facts:

1. There is someone special in their life, a long-term
relationship (to stress gay stability, monogamy,
commitment);

2. Their families are very important to them, and are
supportive of them (to stress that gays are not
"anti-family," and that families need not be anti-gay.)

3. As far as they can remember they have always been
gay, and were probably born gay; they certainly never
decided on a preference one way or the other (stressing that
gays are doing what is natural for them, and are not being
willfully contrary). The subjects should be interviewed
alone, not with their lovers or children, for to include
others in the picture would unwisely raise disturbing
questions about the complexities of gay social relations,
which these commercials could not explain. It is best
instead to take one thing at a time.

Format B for Positive associations: The Celebrity Spot.

While it might be useful to present celebrity endorsements
by currently popular gay figures and straight sympathizers
(Johnny Mathis? Marlo Thomas?), the homophobia climate of
America would make such brash endorsements unlikely in the
near future. So early celebrity spots will instead identify
historical gay or bisexual personalities who are illustrious
and dignified...and dead. The ads could be sardonic and
indirect. For example, over regal music and a portrait or
two, a narrator might announce simply:

Michelangelo (an art class), Tchaikovsky (a music class),
Tennessee Williams (a drama class), etc.

Format C for Victim Sympathy: Our Campaign to Stop Child
Abuse.

As we said earlier, there are many ways to portray gays as
victims of discrimination: images of brutality, tales of job
loss and family separation, and so on. But we think
something like the following 30-sccond commercials would get
to the heart of the matter best of all.

The camera slowly moves in on a middle-class teenager,
sitting alone in his semi-darkened bedroom. The boy is
pleasing and unexceptional in appearance, except that he has
been roughed up and is staring silently, pensively, with
evident distress. As the camera gradually focuses in on his
face, a narrator comments: It will happen to one in every
ten sons. As he grows up he will realize that he feels
differently about things than most of his friends. If he
lets it show, he'll be an outsider made fun of, humiliated,
attacked. If he confides in his parents, they may throw him
out of the house, onto the streets. Some will say he is
"anti-family." Nobody will let him be himself. So he will
have to hide. From his friends, his family. And that's hard.
It's tough enough to be a kid these days, but to be the one
in ten... A message from the National Gay Task Force.

What is nice about such an ad is that it would economically
portray gays as innocent and vulnerable, victimized and
misunderstood, surprisingly numerous yet not menacing. It
also renders the "anti-family" charge absurd and
hypocritical.

Format D for Identification with Victims: The Old
Switcheroo.

The mainstream will identify better with the plight of gays
if straights can, once in a while, walk a mile in gay shoes.
A humorous television or radio ad to help them do this might
involve a brief animated or dramatized scenario, as follows.

The camera approaches the mighty oak door of the boss's
office, which swings open, and the camera (which represents
you the viewer) enters the room. Behind the oversized desk
sits a fat and scowling old curmudgeon chomping on a cigar.
He looks up at the camera (i.e. at the viewer) and snarls, "
So it's you, Smithers. Well you're fired!" The voice of a
younger man is heard to reply with astonishment,
"But--but--Mr. Thomburg, I've been with your company for ten
years. I thought you liked my work." The boss responds, with
a tone of disgust, "Yes, yes, Smithers your work is quite
adequate. But I've heard rumors that you've been seen around
town with some kind of girlfriend. A girlfriend! Frankly I'm
shocked. We're not about to start hiring any heterosexuals
in this company. Now get out." The younger man speaks once
more: "But boss, that's just not fair! What if it were you?"
The boss glowers back as the camera pulls quickly out of the
room and the big door slams shut. Printed on the door: "A
message from the National Gay Task Force."

One can easily imagine similar episodes involving housing or
other discrimination.

Format E for Vilification of Victimizers: Damn the
Torpedoes.

We have already indicated some of the images which might be
damaging to the homophobic vendetta: ranting and hateful
religious extremists neo-Nazis, and Ku Klux Klansmen made to
look evil and ridiculous (hardly a difficult task).

These images should be combined with those of their gay
victims by a method propagandists call the "bracket
technique." For example, for a few seconds an unctuous
beady-eyed Southern preacher is seen pounding the pulpit in
rage about "those sick, abominable creatures." While his
tirade continues over the soundtrack, the picture switches
to pathetic photos of gays who look decent, harmless, and
likable; and then we cut back to the poisonous face of the
preacher, and so forth. The contrast speaks for itself. The
effect is devastating.

"...it would portray gays as innocent and vulnerable,
victimized and misunderstood, surprisingly numerous, yet not
menacing."

Format F for Funds: SOS

Alongside or during these other persuasive advertisements,
we would have to solicit donations so that the campaign
might continue. Direct appeals from celebrities (preferable
living ones, thank you) might be useful here. All appeals
must stress that money can be given anonymously (e.g. via
money orders) and that all donations are confidential. "We
can't help unless you help," and all that.

The Time Is Now

We have sketched out here a blueprint for transforming the
social values of straight America. At the core of our
program is a media campaign to change the way the average
citizens view homosexuality. It is quite easy to find fault
with such a campaign. We have tried to be practical and
specific here, but the proposals may still have a visionary
sheen.

There are one hundred reasons why the campaign could not be
done or would be risky. But there are at least 20 million
good reasons why some such program must be tried in the
coming years: the welfare and happiness of every gay man and
woman in this country demand it. As the last large, legally
oppressed minority in American society, it is high time that
gays took effective measures to rejoin the mainstream in
pride and strength. We believe that, like it or not, such a
campaign is the only way of doing so anytime soon.

And, let us repeat, time may be running out. The AIDS
epidemic is sparking anger and fear in the heartland of
straight America. As the virus leaks out of homosexual
circles and into the rest of society, we need have no
illusions about who is receiving the blame. The ten years
ahead may decide for the next forty whether gays claim their
liberty and equality or are driven back, once again, as
America's caste of detested untouchables. It's more than a
quip: speak now or forever hold your peace.

----- End Of 1987 Article -----

Additional Endtime Prophecy Net Links

Home Page	EPN Blog	Our World Message	Privacy Policy
About Us	EPN Search Engine	EPN Articles in PDF	Mini-Biography
Contact Us	KJV Bible Study Tools	Non-EPN Articles	Map Resources
Link To Us	KJV Bible Verse Lists	KJV Bible Online	Facebook Page

Please Help To Promote Endtime Prophecy Net