Download entire 232-page book HERE (PDF ... - MassResistance

This is not to deny the "scientific" support for the "born-that-way" argument within the social
sciences, but this support is based on the "soft" science of opinions and subjective observation
(usually by ideologically pro-"gay" researchers), not the "hard" science of blood and DNA tests and
other objective criteria. Much of even this “soft” science has already been discredited because of
faulty sampling techniques and other invalidating factors.
The "born that way" argument, therefore, is nothing but a hypothesis, one which “gay“ activists have
been trying unsuccessfully to gather conclusive evidence for several decades.
Consequences for Children
Why is this so important? What does it matter if the pro-homosexual camp has not met its burden of
proof on this question? Why shouldn't society, in the interest of tolerance, give homosexuals the
benefit of the doubt?
Consider the consequences of legitimizing homosexuality to children if the proponents of "safe
schools" are wrong.
Obviously, one consequence is that children, especially teenagers, are going to be more likely to
experiment with homosexuality or to accept the homosexual advances of others. Statistically, these
children's risk of AIDS and other "gay"-related STDs is dramatically increased, especially if their
homosexual partners are older and more sexually experienced.
This is no small matter. The proliferation in recent years of "gay" youth centers near high school and
junior high campuses vastly increases the likelihood that "gay-questioning" kids will meet and mingle
with the older homosexuals who haunt such places.
Another consequence is that the young people who experiment with homosexuality will be more
likely to conclude that they are in fact "gay." As the logic goes, if homosexuality is believed to be
innate, who but a "gay" person would have and enjoy "gay" sex? Thus, both the young experimenter
and all of his or her peers will be inclined to assume that he or she is "gay."
This begs the question, what is "gayness?" Since there are no objective criteria that one may use to
prove that someone is "gay," such as a blood or DNA test, we are left with nothing but a person's
self-declaration and perhaps his or her sexual conduct as evidence. "Gay" activists, however, insist
that homosexual conduct is not the determinant of what makes a person "gay," and that "straight"
people sometimes engage in homosexual behavior.
A "gay" identity, therefore, depends entirely upon the emotional state and the beliefs of the
individual. We all know how easy it can be to manipulate a person's emotions and beliefs. If this were
not true, there would be no religious cults (and no commercial advertising on TV).
This is not to deny that some people may be particularly predisposed to accepting a homosexual
Redeeming the Rainbow 169