TRUTH IS A SOMEBODY, NOT A SOMETHING by Gary L. Morella
"Heterosexism is the institutionalized form of discrimination against gay,
lesbian, or bisexual people. Heterosexism is the ideological system that
denies, denigrates, and stigmatizes any non-heterosexual form of behavior,
identity, relationship or community. Heterosexism assumes that the only valid
and legitimate forms of sex, love, and affection, is with someone of the
opposite sex."
ote, the above "verbal engineering", a quote from a lesbian employee of the
Vice-Provost office of a major university - an office which blatantly promotes
homosexuality, is typical of homosexual activists who attempt to marginalize
any who dare to disagree with the concept of sexual perversion as an
alternative lifestyle. It is the creed of speakers on homosexual issues to
school district teachers in-services throughout the country. It unmasks the
real motives of militant homosexual activists who are quick to categorize all
in opposition as "homophobic", "hateful", "uncharitable", "intolerant" and/or
"insensitive" in order to get public sympathy for their distorted views.
Nationally, there is a movement promoted by militant homosexual activists to
incorporate homosexuality into something called "diversity" days for our
schools. As a result school boards across the country need to be
aware of two issues, bias, and neutrality of the state in order to insure the
nonusurpation of parental rights.
From the standpoint of bias, in 1991 government sex-ed guidelines were sent to
all U.S. School Boards. These guidelines included the statement, "People do
not choose their sexual orientation" which was then complicated by a statement
on the next page which said: "... one's sexual orientation may change during
life." To date, "sexual orientation" in a gene context has not stood up to
scientific scrutiny. (Reference the writings of Van den Ardweg, DUBIOUS
PSYCHOLOGY, Satinover, HOMOSEXUALITY AND THE POLITICS OF TRUTH, and also
Moberly, Harvey, and Nicolosi - all preeminent psychologists who have worked
directly with homosexuals.) NARTH (the National Association of Research into
Therapy for Homosexuals) states that any so-called final pronouncement on
one's sexual tendencies under the age of 17 is highly problematic. I recommend
these individuals as sources for understanding the other side of the story
which is conveniently overlooked, i.e., it is possible to leave as opposed to
live the homosexual lifestyle.
A civilized society, while not downgrading individual people, must
"discriminate" in favor of health over disease, right over wrong, moral over
immoral, discriminate use of sexuality over indiscriminate sexual expression.
The consequences for not doing so are found in the CDC stats on the
skyrocketing rates of STDs, in particular, on the inordinate number of cases of
HIV/AIDS in the homosexual relative to the general population. The failure of
these sex-ed guidelines was reported in the October '94 issue of Atlantic
Monthly.
No one is denying the homosexual presence in society. What is being denied is
the propagation of the homosexual lifestyle as normal.
The public school is not the place for such forums. For example, showing IT'S
ELEMENTARY, a video which promotes the virtues of living the homosexual
lifestyle while depicting all critics as insensitive during these "diversity
days", crosses a line which accomplishes nothing but the polarization of
communities. This is NOT a "diversity" issue. It IS an issue of right and
wrong as defined by the Natural Law knowable through reason exclusive of
Divine Revelation which cannot be compromised. This is in opposition to
"values clarification" were our children are taught that there is no such
thing as right or wrong. This statement is actually a direct quote from one
of the children in IT'S ELEMENTARY. We're talking about behavior which can be
changed not skin color or ethnicity which can't.
As a research mathematician for almost 25 years I've seen how statistics can be
skewed to say just about anything. The problem usually is faulty sampling.
Such is the case with Alfred Kinsey's claims involving homosexuality now known
to be criminally fraudulent and upon which an entire sexual revolution and
government funded sex-ed system was based.
In reference to the neutrality of the state, IT'S ELEMENTARY's illustration of
homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle is a threat to civil freedoms. This
is based on two Supreme Court Cases which established the freedom from
government coercion when religious issues were involved. If the Supreme Court
could argue that prayer or Bible reading being offered in school was coercive
to those who did not share the Judeo-Christian view and, therefore, an
impermissible infringement on the separation of Church and State, then a school
illustrating homosexuality as an acceptable alternative lifestyle could hardly
be construed as less invasive or less of a breach of that separation.
In issues of this kind where opinion is sharply divided, the first and most
important consideration in searching for a solution is the preservation of the
God-given right of conscience. If the courts hold that people of faith, for
example, have no right to impose their own moral code upon the rest of the
country by civil legislation, then by the same reasoning, they are obliged in
conscience to oppose any regulation which would elevate to the status of public
policy a philosophy or practice which violates the rights of privacy or liberty
of conscience. The citizens's freedom cuts both ways.
In situations like this, involving serious moral issues in which people strive
to form a right conscience, the role of government is clear - strict
neutrality. The moment the government (public school is this instance)
presumes to "give advice" in this delicate area, it opens the door to
influencing the free decision of its citizens. And from influence it is only a
short step to coercion.
These are serious issues regarding proposed school activities which typically
are strongly opposed by a significant number of parents in school districts
nationally. This should be of vital concern to school boards recognizing the
necessity of parental support.
It is deplorable that people are the object of malice in speech or action.
Such treatment deserves condemnation wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind of
disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a
healthy society. The dignity of each person must be respected in word, in
action, and in law. This should be common sense for teaching professionals NOT
requiring diversity days to underscore same.
The Catholic witness to the teaching Magisterium of Holy Mother Church as
professed by the Holy Father is sorely needed in the public square. Sadly,
many of our parochial schools are in no better shape than their secular
counterparts. The dissidents have done their work well. Those who are
"Catholic" in more than name only MUST respond in kind. The souls of many
are at stake. Crosses must be carried, not shunned, recognizing that the Truth
is a Somebody, not a something.