Advancing the New Sexual Order
By Jerry A. Kane
In 1973 homosexual activists, mental health professionals, and sympathetic academics successfully lobbied the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to declassify homosexuality as a mental disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).
Nearly forty years later, a small group of mental health professionals, academics, and researchers have gathered in Baltimore, Maryland, to discuss how to normalize pedophilia and remove it from APA’s manual of mental disorders. According to Dr. Judith Reisman, whose book Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences exposed Dr. Alfred C. Kinsey’s fraudulent sex science research, the Baltimore conference is part of the strategy used by mental health professionals to condition the public to accept pedophilia as normal.
“The first thing they do is to get the public to divest from thinking of what the offender does criminally, to thinking of the offender’s emotional state … [and] to empathize and sympathize. You don’t change the nation in one fell swoop; you have to change it by conditioning.”—Dr. Judith Reisman
B4U-ACT, a political activist group made up of pedophiles and pro-pedophile mental health professionals, is proposing that pedophiles be involved in rewriting the APA’s classification of pedophilia in the current draft of its DSM, which is scheduled for major revisions by 2013.
“The current revision of the DSM is full of inaccurate and misleading information on people who are attracted to children or adolescents. It is based on data from prison studies, which completely ignore the existence of those who are law-abiding. …We can help them, because we are the people they are writing about.”—Howard Kline, B4U-ACT science director
B4U-ACT wants the current DSM classification rewritten because it ties pedophilia to criminal behavior. The group is lobbying to put pedophilia on the same plane with neuroses or clinical depression so that pedophiles will be counseled instead of imprisoned.
“The aim is to get them [pedophiles] out of prison.”—Dr. Judith Reisman
B4U-ACT classifies pedophilia as a sexual orientation and opposes treatment for pedophiles or pederasts who are sexually attracted to children or adolescents.
“No one chooses to be emotionally and sexually attracted to children or adolescents. The cause is unknown; in fact, the development of attraction to adults is not understood. … Studies of the effectiveness of reconditioning methods to change feelings of attraction … have found that they are no more effective with pedophilia or hebephilia [pederasty] than with homosexuality.”—B4U-ACT Fact Sheet
Since the early 1970s, homosexual activist groups have been working aggressively behind the scenes to lower the age of sexual consent for adolescents and children and to destigmatize pederasty and pedophilia in society. The National Coalition of Gay Organizations called for a “repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent” in its 1972 “Gay Rights Platform.”
When U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg worked as an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in 1977, she co-authored a report with a feminist Brenda Feigen-Fasteau recommending that the age of consent for sexual acts be lowered to 12 years old.
The Supreme Court’s 2003 Lawrence v. Texas decision decriminalizing sodomy provided the groundwork for a leftist Court to eventually legalize pedophilia. If Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy keeps his word and retires in 2012 and the Ruler appoints his replacement, leftist judges will be in the majority on the Court.
In spite of public denials, homosexual rights activists have pushed the idea of sexual freedom in legislation and in the courts to gain access to adolescents and children.
“[O]ne of children’s essential rights is to express themselves sexually, probably primarily with each other but with adults as well. So the sexual freedom of children is an important part of a sexual revolution. … We have to have an emancipation proclamation for children.”—Kate Millett, feminist writer and activist
Homosexuals are inexorably linked to pederasts and pedophiles, which is why they have been lobbying for so long behind the scenes to normalize pedophilia in society.
“The love between men and boys is at the foundation of homosexuality”—San Francisco Sentinel, 27 March 1992.
To impose a new sexual order, homosexual activists, mental health professionals, and academic sympathizers are feverishly working to declassify pedophilia as a mental disorder and add it to the growing list of acceptable sexual orientations. To normalize sex with children, they intend to abolish all consent laws.
“The ultimate goal of the gay liberation movement is the achievement of sexual freedom for all – not just equal rights for ‘lesbians and gay men,’ but also freedom of sexual expression for young people and children.”—David Thorstad, founding member of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) and former president of New York’s Gay Activists Alliance
Once pedophilia is declassified in the DSM as a mental disorder and the behavior is no longer considered immoral or criminal, homosexual lobbyists will pressure society’s cultural institutions to destigmatize “consensual” sex between adults and children.
“What purpose does calling someone a ‘pervert’ or ‘predator’ serve anyway, other than to express contempt and hatred? … It certainly doesn’t protect children. I would urge all SO [sex offender] activists to listen to their own message: Stop buying into and promoting false stereotypes. Stop demonizing a whole class of people, and start learning the facts.“—Dr. Fred S. Berlin, founder of the Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic
A civilized society needs a moral code to survive, and when it loses moral clarity, human predators will fill the void and impose amoral laws to ensure their survival.
“All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked. … [W]e shall make films about the love between heroic men. … The family unit … will be abolished. The family unit … must be eliminated. … All churches who [sic] condemn us will be closed. … We shall sodomize your sons … We shall seduce them in your schools … wherever men are with men together. Your sons will become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.”—Michael Swift, pseudonym used by the author of The Gay Manifesto
I.M. Kane
For more on the story, see ‘Time to Normalize Pedophilia’: Firsthand Report on B4U-ACT Conference, Conference aims to normalize pedophilia, and Academic conference seeks to normalize pedophilia.
Read Full Post »
THE MILLSTONE DIARIES 
HOLDER JUSTICE: NO CONSERVATIVES NEED APPLY
Posted in Guest Commentary on August 26, 2011| Leave a Comment »
Holder Justice: No Conservatives Need Apply
By Quin Hillyer
(Originally published at CFIF Center for Individual Freedom)
According to every outlet of the establishment media, it was a near-earthshaking scandal when the Bush Justice Department rejected some applicants for “career” (officially non-political) jobs because the applicants were too liberal. “The entire Justice Department and all Americans were harmed” screamed the Washington Post. The New York Times, in high dudgeon, wrote that “the strength of American democracy depends on our ability to be shocked by abuses like these — and to punish them appropriately.”
The Post and the Times were crying crocodile tears. It wasn’t hiring bias to which they objected; it was merely conservative hiring bias that bothered them. Neither they nor any other establishment news organ seems the slightest bit perturbed now that, thanks to Pajamas Media, it is abundantly clear that the Obama Justice Department’s liberal hiring is far more politicized than anything the Bushies even dreamed of.
Despite deliberately weeding out hard leftists for some positions, the Bush Civil Rights Division hired as many as two dozen known liberals for career positions. No such reciprocity has come from the Obama DoJ. When I was at The Washington Times, we broke the story (in this editorial) that a whole slate of 16 new hires or promotions consisted of nothing but liberal activists. Again, if these are “career” slots in which political considerations are not supposed to prevail, it stands to reason that at least a reasonable percentage of the hires would lean right. But not here.
That Washington Times report was the tip of the iceberg. Now Pajamas Media has analyzed the hiring in five – count them, five – differentsectionsofDoJ. So far, those five sections in the Civil Rights Division have hired 70 lawyers. According to Pajamas, every single one – every single one, every single one, every single one – has boasted a resume full of ideologically leftist connections.
These people were members of groups like “Queer Resistance Front,” “Intersex Society of North America,” and of course People for the American Way. Their published essays focused on issues such as “Genital Normalizing Surgery on Intersexed Infants” and on arguing that providing material support for terrorism isn’t a war crime. They, or those promoted, have histories of extracurricular activities that include getting arrested at a World Bank protest, going on a hunger strike while chaining oneself to an oak tree and doing advocacy work for “the rights of incarcerated native Hawaiians to dance the hula and perform Hawaiian chants and rituals in privately owned prisons in Arizona.” A large number of them have donated significant campaign funds to Barack Obama, and some to other liberal candidates.
Not a single one has a single affiliation with any group seen as right of center. Actually, according to Pajamas, none is even apolitical. Instead, all are definitively liberal.
A departmental Inspector General report in 2008 stated flatly that “federal law and Department policy prohibit the use of political or ideological affiliations to assess applicants for career attorney positions in the Department and in the management of career attorneys.” And: “Identifying candidates as ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’ by the activities or organizations with which they are affiliated can be used as a proxy for political affiliation and thus can violate CSRA’s prohibition.” Yet Loretta King, acting assistant attorney for civil rights, sent a memo to section chiefs telling them to consider, while hiring, a candidate’s “commitment to civil rights (e.g., extracurricular activities, volunteer work, internships).” She also reportedly nixed all candidates without affiliations with traditional (i.e., left wing) civil rights organizations, and ordered section chiefs not to inquire whether applicants felt they could apply the law in a race-neutral manner.
This would hardly be the first time that King has had her ethics questioned. Two other times, courts have imposed sanctions against King or attorneys under her direction for egregious conduct and forced the Justice Department – meaning American taxpayers – to pay fees to make up for the King-overseen misconduct.
None of this is merely a battle over political patronage. It has real-world consequences. Vicious New Black Panthers don’t get sanctioned for intimidating voters, but near-octogenarians do get sanctioned merely for trying to talk women out of abortions. Blacks who pass a firefighter entrance exam get blocked from being hired in favor of a larger number of blacks who badly failed the exam – the latter of whom, argued the Obama DoJ, also deserve back pay. Kinston, N.C., is forbidden to hold nonpartisan municipal elections because black voters supposedly won’t be able to identify their “candidates of choice” if those candidates aren’t identified as Democrats.
And so on and on go the outrageous stories of the legal abuses imposed by this horrendously ideological Justice Department. Whether or not the Washington Post or New York Times will recognize it, this is truly a scandal.
Read Full Post »