REDEEMING THE RAINBOW

Agenda? What “Gay” Agenda?One example of the “gay” movement’s reliance on deception is its audacious insistence thatit has no agenda. Homosexual activists and their best-trained allies ritually challenge any referenceto the “gay” agenda with an affected tone of incredulity. “What agenda?,” they exclaim, as if theentire homosexual movement, with its hundreds of organizations and thousands of activists, allworking to achieve specific political goals, were invisible. What is most interesting about this is notthat they want to deceive people into believing that they have no agenda, but that they would insistthis is true in the face of reality.What does it tell you about a group of people obviously organized and working to changesociety, who not only pretend to have no agenda, but who also make the promotion of this selfevidentfalsehood a leading tactic in their campaign? They must either be very stupid (which isclearly not the case), or very confident that they can make the public accept the lie. They seemconvinced, just like the Nazi propagandists who advocated this tactic, that if they tell the lie longenough and loudly enough, it will supplant the truth. Perhaps it will. Is it really any more of a liethan the assertion (now accepted by a great many otherwise intelligent people) that homosexualityis perfectly normal behavior equivalent to normal sexual relations between husbands andwives?Unfortunately, most of the deceptive rhetoric used by the “gay” movement is more subtle.If Christians are to restore respect for the truth, they must learn how to recognize and expose theselies.The Illogic of Pro-“Gay” ArgumentsThe success of the campaign to propagandize so-called “gay rights” is an amazing triumph ofrhetorical manipulation. He who defines the terms controls the debate -- and by extension, publicopinion. On this issue the terms have been defined (in many cases invented) by the talentedsophists of the “gay” movement.Sophistry, it must be noted, is the ancient Greek art of persuasion by subtly false reasoning.The key to overcoming sophistry is to simplify and clarify what the sophists have intentionally madecomplex and vague. That process begins by defining the terms and concepts being used in thearguments. One quickly discovers that most arguments advocating “gay rights” depend upon hiddenfalse assumptions and deliberately ambiguous terms. It’s all smoke and mirrors.Among the most common terms and concepts in the “gay rights” arsenal are: homosexuality,sexual orientation, heterosexism, diversity, multi-culturalism, inclusiveness, discrimination, homophobia andtolerance. These words and phrases are used by “gay” sophists to frame the question of homosexualityas a civil rights issue. It is a context chosen to favor homosexuals to the extent that they castthemselves as victims and their opponents as oppressors. Yet even within this context, “gay”arguments are easily refuted.Redeeming the Rainbow 98