Friday, June 3, 2011

The Gay Agenda

In my blog reading last evening, I discovered a number of gay and lesbian people who didn't know we apparently have an agenda, and who, obviously, don't have their own copy.  I didn't have my own copy either.

Several days ago, I went looking on the Internet to find out what I could about the so-called gay agenda, and what I found is located below.  The following is from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

'In 2003 Alan Sears and Craig Osten, president and vice-president of the Alliance Defense Fund, an American anti-gay conservative Christian organization, offered...[this] characterization [of the gay agenda]:
It is an agenda that they basically set in the late 1980s, in a book called After the Ball, where they laid out a six-point plan for how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior—in a decade-long time frame.... They admit it privately, but they will not say that publicly. In their private publications, homosexual activists make it very clear that there is an agenda. The six-point agenda that they laid out in 1989 was explicit:
  1. Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible(...)
  2. Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers(...)
  3. Give homosexual protectors a just cause(...)
  4. Make gays look good(...)
  5. Make the victimizers look bad(...)
  6. Get funds from corporate America(...)
After the Ball is a book published in 1989 by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen. It argues that after the gay liberation phase of the 1970s and 1980s, gay rights groups should adopt more professional public relations techniques to convey their message. It was published by Doubleday and was generally available.'

'The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) is an American non-profit organization "dedicated to promoting and ensuring fair, accurate and inclusive representation of people and events in the media as a means of eliminating homophobia and discrimination"...[against] lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) persons.  GLAAD describes the term as a "rhetorical invention of anti-gay extremists seeking to create a climate of fear by portraying the pursuit of civil rights for LGBT people as sinister," and commentators have remarked on a lack of realism and veracity to the idea of a gay agenda per se. Such campaigns based on a presumed "Gay Agenda" have been described as anti-gay propaganda by researchers and critics.'

Information is power.  Since we're supposed to have a gay agenda, don't you think, as gay and lesbian people, we should know what that agenda is?

(For the full article on Wikipedia, please click here.)


  1. If the gays have an agenda, I'd suggest it be Filofax, as they're better designed than daytimers, and don't have the quasi-religious side-notes that Steven Covey products do. (I crack myself up...)

    I don't know what's on the gay agenda, but if there were a female agenda, the first item would be "no men allowed to go to 7-11 in sweatpants with no underwear. Ever."

  2. As Grace once said to Will on the old sitcom "Will and Grace," "You funny lady." I cracked up, too, Sarah. Good one. Or should I say two?

    What's remarkable to me is, okay, so let's assume someone in 1989 wrote a book including six points gay and lesbian people should do. So what? Does anyone seriously think gay people are motivated by these six points? I don't think so.

    I didn't even know about them until earlier this week. That means I've spent nearly 52 years of my life with no knowledge of the so-called gay agenda. A lot of good I am to the homosexual cause, huh? A total loss, believe me.

    And, by the sounds of things, I'm not alone. I'd say most gay people don't know the first thing about this. That we may have done some of the things on the list would be a total accident, certainly not intentional.

    Anyway, now none of us has an excuse. We know what the gay agenda is, and we should go forth in the world and make it happen. Don't you think?

    Thanks for your comment, Sarah.

  3. I guess it's all about power sharing, Rick. Straight white guys must be the most fragile things on the planet (second only to straight marriage, if Maggie Gallagher is any indication), because it seems pretty scary to them to give away any rights; to minorities, to women, to gays. And it seems to me the "gay agenda" is basically seeking the same rights everyone else has...sheesh.

  4. Of course, you've hit the nail on the head, Sarah. When you think about it, straight, white guys are the most insecure of all of us. It doesn't take much to threaten them.

    I want to add Christians to this, too. I think the negative vehemence Christians have against gay people has less to do with thinking they, Christians, know the right way everyone should live and insisting everyone live it, and more to do with not wanting the world to see that they, Christians, are actually wrong, which could discredit them and result in losing followers. In the end, it's all about money and power, and not compassion and love. Does that make sense?

    Any thinking human being has to wonder what the Christian's motive for putting down gay people for centuries is really about. Otherwise, don't you think they'd simply worry about their own souls and mind their own business? Something to think about.

    Thanks for your follow-up comment.