Resist the Bullies: Part 2
I have said repeatedly that the unspoken gay activist mantra is “We will intimidate and we will manipulate until you capitulate.”
—Dr. Michael Brown1—
Part 1 is available here.
Last time2 we discussed five specific ways militant homosexual activists are bullying the public.
- They do not respect the democratic process or the perspectives and will of public majorities.
- They disregard the large discrepancy between their miniscule numbers and the large size of the public at large, even promoting lies about their own numbers to gain political and cultural leverage.
- They disregard the facts. They make arguments they deem useful for the moment and then “dump” them when they no longer serve their purposes.
- They plead for tolerance but refuse to tolerate or respect others who disagree.
- Having achieved their interim goal of including same-sex couples in civil marriage, they are moving ahead to promote their primary goal, the total elimination of marriage and the family.
Against this backdrop, let’s consider two specific realms of American life radical gay activists have infiltrated and heavily influenced—the professional realm and the corporate realm. Looking at examples from each, we will see even more bullying on the part of the militant wing of the gay rights movement.
I use the term “professional realm” to refer to the arena of experts that includes doctors, psychologists, psychiatrists, and others. Certainly not every individual in these professions has become a pawn of the homosexual movement. The first example we will cite illustrates this vividly, but it also reveals in stark terms the results of years of militant gays’ intimidation and political pressure.
Dr. Paul Church is a urologist who served for almost 30 years on the staff of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts. In addition, he teaches at the Harvard Medical School. Motivated by what he’d learned and seen as specialist in urology, Dr. Church gathered irrefutable evidence that homosexual behavior poses very serious health risks. In light of the shear weight of this evidence, Church was gravely concerned about his hospital’s unmitigated support of gay pride celebrations.3 The hospital’s own mission statement says that Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center exists to “provide extraordinary care, where the patient comes first, supported by world-class education and research.”4 Elaborating, the statement goes on to say,
The mission of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center is to serve our patients compassionately and effectively, and to create a healthy future for them and their families. Our mission is supported by our commitment to personalized, excellent care for our patients; a workforce committed to individual accountability, [and] mutual respect and collaboration….5
Not only were the hospital’s actions hypocritical, but they also were deceptive and contrary to a high standard of medical ethics. Dr. Church voiced his concerns to hospital administrators and on the hospital’s intranet,6 and was fired for doing so.7
Said Dr. Church, “It is incredible to think they would be able to silence me and revoke my ability to be on the staff as a result of my raising valid health concerns over a risky lifestyle.”8 Even so, according to a pro-family organization’s report on the matter, “the BIDMC Medical Executive Board claimed that Dr. Church’s statements to colleagues about the medical dangers of homosexual behavior, and moral issues surrounding it, were ‘offensive’ and constituted ‘discrimination,’ ‘harassment,’ and ‘unprofessional conduct.’”9
Note carefully—the truth is irrefutably on Paul Church’s side, but that didn’t matter. Dr. Church appealed the decision against him, but to no avail.10
How can it be that the one with the strongest of cases and the one acting with the clearest of professional and ethical motives is deemed the villain? Yet this is where we are in America. Just wait till you see what homosexual activists have in store for you! For years homosexuality had been classified by the American Psychological Association as a mental disorder. According to Wikipedia,
In the early 1970s, activists campaigned against the… [Association’s official] classification of homosexuality as a mental disorder, protesting at APA offices and at annual meetings from 1970 to 1973. In 1973 the Board of Trustees voted to remove homosexuality as a disorder category from the DSM, a decision ratified by a majority (58%) of the general APA membership the following year.11
Yet clearly, “the change in the APA designation was not due to new findings, but had everything to do with the lobbying pressure and tactics of the homosexual community.”12 Moreover, at the time, only 25 percent of the APA membership voted on the proposal. What appears at first to be an overwhelming majority actually wasn’t!13
Fast forward to 2015, when considerable pressure is mounting to officially call homophobia a disorder.14,15 That’s right. If you object to homosexual behavior at all, you’re the one with the mental problem. Although this assessment isn’t yet official, this is the direction in which we’re moving.
Reflect on how far we’ve come in such a short period of time. To dissuade the overseers of the mental and behavioral sciences from officially calling homosexuality a disorder and, just a few decades later, to influence them to consider declaring homophobia a disorder, truly is breathtaking.16 If gay activists can do all this without an official declaration of homophobia as a mental disorder, think what they can do when it becomes one!
Let’s consider another realm in which bullying is taking place—corporate America. Ironically, as in so many other settings, it is by condemning bullying and harassment that radical gay advocates gain the upper hand to practice harassment themselves. Corporate America has long been influenced by the demands of gay activists. We see this in the dramatic increase of “gay-friendly” companies in America in recent years.17 Here, however, I want to focus on the effects of efforts within a corporation to make the workplace “inclusive” and “safe” for LGBT individuals. A common effort will involve distribution of “Safe Space” emblems (or something similar) with an encouragement for employees to display them in their work areas. One website declares,
Display a Safe Space emblem in your office.
EQUAL! has developed this emblem to designate “safe spaces” in the workplace. The emblem bears a pink triangle, an internationally recognized symbol of positive gay identity, surrounded by a green circle, an international symbol of acceptance.
Displaying this emblem will let others know you support full participation of all members of the workplace, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, characteristics, or expression.18
Christians and others who adhere to traditional moral beliefs, however, do not support homosexuals with regard to their way of life. Their lack of support isn’t driven at all by hate, but by genuine concern and a desire for all coworkers to avoid harm and to experience the best life has to offer. Based on this conviction, should a Christian refuse to display a “Safe Space” emblem at work? If he or she refuses, even politely, this decision can and likely will be misinterpreted by the company and by fellow employees as hate and bigotry. One website describes similar scenarios.19 Even if you disagree with how the Christians responded to the diversity training in these situations, they still were made to declare their opposition to homosexuality and were effectively portrayed as adversaries of the company and of fellow employees. The program effectively “outs” Christians and paints them as hatemongers, even by implication. Who, then, is the real bully? The answer is obvious.
Several observations are in order at this point.
- Paul Church’s experience highlights that the militant homosexual agenda has no regard whatsoever for the truth or for people’s health and well-being.
- Church’s experience shows that militant gay activists and those who have bought into their lies will punish people who raise concerns about the gay agenda, even if those voicing concerns are motivated by professionalism and sound ethics.
- The push to call homophobia a mental disorder is a coercive and manipulative effort to silence and even crush those who refuse to affirm and celebrate homosexuality.
- Diversity training in the workplace isn’t really about equality, because no effort is made to promote respect for Christians and others with moral convictions. In fact, the opposite occurs.
- The stated goals of tolerance and equality are a front for coercion, intimidation, and forced compliance.
We must recognize bullying for what it truly is. When we do, we will be less intimidated and less likely to capitulate to the demands of those who are trying desperately to run roughshod over us and others. Also, we must act in appropriate ways to expose bullying by militant gays, something the mainstream media never will do. We always must be motivated by love, of course; but we must remember that love never acquiesces to lies. Rather, it upholds and declares the truth—just as Dr. Paul Church has done.
We’ll continue this series in two weeks, when we will look at additional things we must do to resist our would-be intimidators. Next week, we’ll reflect the importance of Thanksgiving.
Copyright © 2015 by B. Nathaniel Sullivan. All Rights Reserved.
Part 3 is available here.
Feds Review Plan to Let Homosexuals Donate Blood: Politics play role as population has much higher incidence of AIDS, Hepatitis C infections
Update on Dr. Paul Church
Doctor Ousted for Talking About Risks of LGBT Behavior
5https://www.hospitalcareers.com/hospital/221/beth-israel-deaconess-medical-center; original link: http://www.bidmc.org/About-BIDMC/Protecting-Patients-and-Families/External-Vendors/BIDMC-Mission.aspx
12,13 Richard C. Howe, “Homosexuality in America, Exposing the Myths,” [Tupelo, MS: American Family Association, 1994], 11). Available online: https://www.scribd.com/doc/12829966/Homosexuality-in-America-Exposing-the-Myths