Latest ‘Gay Disease’: Syphilis Is Predominantly a Homosexual Male Epidemic, CDC Reports

Catering to Promiscuous ‘Gays’ Is Big Business: The CDC revealed in 2014 that syphilis is now “predominantly” a homosexual male “epidemic.” Above is a photo of the homosexual bathhouse “Steamworks,” which sits prominently (at the 3246 address) on Halsted Street in the heart of Chicago’s homosexual “Boystown” neighborhood. ‘Homo-promiscuity’ is a major factor in the spread of syphilis, HIV and other STDs, but politically-speaking, orgiastic “gay” sex clubs like this one are apparently untouchable. AFTAH has long called for such perversion centers to be closed down in the name of public health, to no avail. Note the nondescript, windowless Steamworks building and the official “rainbow pillars” demarcating the city’s “gay-borhood.” 

One way that 2014 was not unique compared to previous years is that it brought further evidence of the destructiveness of homosexual behavior. In May, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced that such a high percentage of new syphilis cases are linked to homosexuality-practicing males that it now considers syphilis “predominantly an MSM [men who have sex with men] epidemic.”

The health agency’s May 9, 2014 Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Report (MMWR) [reprinted in PDF format HERE] found that almost 84 percent of primary and secondary syphilis cases reported in 2012 were among homosexual men (MSM)–up from 77 percent in 2009.

The report states (emphasis added):

“In 2012, primary and secondary syphilis cases in the 35 reporting areas that reported the sex of sex partners for [equal or greater than] 70% of male cases comprised 83.7% (13,113) of all nationwide cases. In those areas, the proportion of male primary and secondary syphilis cases attributed to MSM [men who have sex with men] increased from 77.0 (6,366) in 2009 to 83.9% (8,701) in 2012. Increases in incidence occurred among MSM of all ages and races/ethnicities from all regions. The greatest percentage increases occurred among Hispanics (53.4%, from 1,291 in 2009 to 1,980 in 2012) and whites (38.1%, 2,449 to 3,381), when compared with blacks (21.2%, 2,267 to 2,747)…By age group, the greatest percentage increases occurred among MSM aged 25-29 (53.2%m 1,073 to 1,644).”

In a separate section of the CDC MMWR report (p. 405, in the blue text box), the authors write (emphasis added):

“What is already known on this topic?
Rates of reported primary and secondary syphilis in the United States have increased since reaching historic lows in 2000. Cases of primary and secondary syphilis increasingly are among males, particularly men who have sex with men (MSM).

“What is added by this report?
Primary and secondary syphilis rates increased among men of all ages and races/ethnicities during 2005–2013, from 5.1 cases per 100,000 population in 2005 to 9.8 in 2013, when men accounted for 91.1% of all cases reported in the United States. Although rates remain highest among black men (28.1), recent increases were greatest among Hispanic and white men.Currently, syphilis is predominantly an MSM epidemic.”

Syphilis and HIV

The CDC MMWR reports that syphilis sores facilitate the spread of HIV–another disease that overwhelmingly and disproportionately affects homosexual and bisexual men:

“The increase in syphilis among MSM is a major public health concern, particularly because syphilis and the behaviors associated with acquiring it increase the likelihood of acquiring and transmitting human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). There are reported rates of 50%–70% HIV coinfection among MSM infected with primary and secondary syphilis and high HIV seroconversion rates following primary and secondary syphilis infection (8). The resurgence of syphilis, coupled with its strong link with HIV, underscores the need for programs and providers to 1) urge safer sexual practices (e.g., reduce the number of sex partners, use latex condoms, and have a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with a partner who has negative test results for sexually transmitted diseases);…”

Syphilis_Primary_chancre-penile-CDC

Syphilis and Male Homosexuality:Example of syphilis sore on the head of a penis, provided by a CDC Fact Sheet on Syphilis. In 2012, “Men who have Sex with Men” (MSM) made up almost 84 percent of primary and secondary syphilis cases in the U.S. See the blue text box  on page 405 of the CDC’s MMWR report–where it is stated that syphilis is “predominantly an MSM epidemic.”  Photo: CDC.

The CDC report continues (emphasis added):

“Annual syphilis surveillance data published in the just released 2011 STD Surveillance Report continue to emphasize the disproportionate burden of disease among gay and bisexual men. While the health problems caused by syphilis in adults are serious in their own right, it has been shown that the genital sores caused by syphilis make it easier to transmit and acquire HIV infection sexually. There is an estimated 2- to 5-fold increased risk of acquiring HIV if exposed to that infection when syphilis is present, and studies have also shown that syphilis will increase the viral load of someone who is already HIV infected. This is especially concerning, as data from several major cities throughout the country indicate that an average of four in 10 MSM with syphilis are also infected with HIV.”

What is syphilis?

Syphilis, according to the CDC, is “an STD that can cause long-term complications and/or death if not treated correctly. It “has been called ‘the great imitator’ because it has so many possible symptoms, many of which look like symptoms from other diseases,” the CDC Fact Sheet states.

The same Fact Sheet explains the three stages of syphilis as follows:

Primary Stage
During the first (primary) stage of syphilis, you may notice a single sore, but there may be multiple sores. The sore is the location where syphilis entered your body. The sore is usually firm, round, and painless. Because the sore is painless, it can easily go unnoticed. The sore lasts 3 to 6 weeks and heals regardless of whether or not you receive treatment. Even though the sore goes away, you must still receive treatment so your infection does not move to the secondary stage.

Secondary Stage
During the secondary stage, you may have skin rashes and/or sores in your mouth, vagina, or anus (also called mucous membrane lesions). This stage usually starts with a rash on one or more areas of your body. The rash can show up when your primary sore is healing or several weeks after the sore has healed. The rash can look like rough, red, or reddish brown spots on the palms of your hands and/or the bottoms of your feet. The rash usually won’t itch and it is sometimes so faint that you won’t notice it. Other symptoms you may have can include fever, swollen lymph glands, sore throat, patchy hair loss, headaches, weight loss, muscle aches, and fatigue (feeling very tired). The symptoms from this stage will go away whether or not you receive treatment. Without the right treatment, your infection will move to the latent and possibly late stages of syphilis.

Latent and Late Stages

The latent stage of syphilis begins when all of the symptoms you had earlier disappear. If you do not receive treatment, you can continue to have syphilis in your body for years without any signs or symptoms. Most people with untreated syphilis do not develop late stage syphilis. However, when it does happen it is very serious and would occur 10–30 years after your infection began. Symptoms of the late stage of syphilis include difficulty coordinating your muscle movements, paralysis (not able to move certain parts of your body), numbness, blindness, and dementia (mental disorder). In the late stages of syphilis, the disease damages your internal organs and can result in death.

steamworks_spring_break-1-300x291

‘‘Gay’ sex clubs: “Where the Boys Are”: this is an ad for the Chicago “gay” bathhouse “Steamworks.” Note the appeal to young homosexual men, and the offer of a “student discount.” Homosexual activists rarely discuss high-risk behaviors specifically associated with “gay” men in addressing issues like the FDA’s homosexual blood donation ban currently being debated in Washington, D.C. Click on graphic to enlarge.

MSM and the spread of syphilis

Homosexual male promiscuity is a key factor in the increasing rates of syphilis among “men who have sex with men,” according to the CDC and other sources. Among the “safer sex” practices routinely urged by the CDC is to “reduce the number of sexual partners.” Many “gay” men, such asJack Hart, testify to the high number of sexual partners available to homosexual men [see Hart quote HERE].

For more than a decade, this writer andAmericans For Truth have urged closure of homosexual bathhouses, where men go for anonymous sexual encounters with other men. But rather then face shutdown, these orgy-facilitating sex clubs are doing a booming business, as AIDS drugs have lessened the physical effects of the disease.

“Homo-promiscuity,” as we at AFTAH are calling it, is also evident in the spread of phone apps like Grindr that are used by homosexual men to “locate” a casual sex partner nearby–literally measuring the distance for a potential sex partner in feet.

Allow blood donations from ‘abstinent’ gay men?

Meanwhile, although the Food & Drug Administration is on the verge of ending the ban on blood donations by MSM (men who have sex with men) and replacing it with a stipulation that MSM must not have had sex with another man for the last 12 months before giving blood, homosexual activist groups are complaining that this “reform” does not go far enough:

“While this new policy is movement toward an optimal policy that reflects fundamental fairness and the best scientific research, it falls far short of an acceptable solution because it continues to stigmatize gay and bisexual men, preventing them from donating life-saving blood based solely on their sexual orientation, rather than a policy based on actual risk to the blood supply,” said David Stacy, HRC’s Government Affairs Director. “This new policy cannot be justified in light of current scientific research and updated blood screening technology. We will continue to work towards an eventual outcome that both minimizes risk to the blood supply and treats gay and bisexual men with the respect they deserve.”

The common thread of such policy statements by LGBTQueer activist groups like HRC is their focus on “sexual orientation” rather than high-risk homosexual behaviors–which suits their propaganda emphasis on “fairness,” “equality” and “discrimination.” In contrast, AFTAH and other conservatives have sought to educate the public on the extreme health risks associated with behaviors like rectal sex and “rimming” (oral-anal “sex”) that are popular among “gay” men–and a key factor in the prevalence of disease in this population.

Alas, as the facts surrounding sexual diseases like syphilis and HIV demonstrate, Nature does not treat all behaviors “equally.”

SOURCE: CDC report on syphilis: 

CDC-MMWR-5-9-14-Syphilis_402-406 –SYPHILIS-Section-only

VIDEO: Marijuana Does Kill

Kevin Sabet, a former adviser on drug policy to three presidents—Clinton, Bush and Obama—says despite popular fiction, marijuana does kill.

“Saying marijuana has never contributed to death or never killed anyone is like saying tobacco hasn’t killed anyone,” Kevin Sabet, president of Project SAM, told The Daily Signal after speaking at a Heritage Foundation event on marijuana policy. “In that same way, marijuana does kill people in the form of mental illness, suicide and car crashes.”

To learn more visit: http://dailysign.al/1AcnEcK

With Cromnibus passed, Boehner surrenders all leverage through 2015

Well, the “cromnibus” monster spending bill passed last night, and President Obama and Vice President Biden worked hard to get Democrat support — which they did not receive.

The funding measure passed and in doing so, the new incoming GOP majority will have little to no say in funding measures through the entire year — basically half of the new GOP majority Congress. A better approach would have been to execute a continuing resolution (CR) that went into February and then do appropriations by agency, funding what is essential by priority. Instead Obamacare is funded through October next year and funding to President Obama’s illegal immigration executive action — $2.5 billion. However, Speaker Boehner has declared that next February Congress will take up the illegal immigration fight, since the DHS is only funded through February. Whoopee.

In effect Speaker Boehner essentially surrendered the majority which the American people gave the House GOP and with it, the greatest leverage — the power of the purse. Some 1,800 pages, no doubt including pork, has passed which most did not read.

And what if the gambit Speaker Boehner has doesn’t work out next February? That’s the question The Hill asks, writing, “Even if Republicans shut down the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) next year, President Obama could still carry out his executive actions giving legal status to up to 5 million undocumented immigrants. Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and other GOP leaders have punted the funding fight over Obama’s immigration action to February, arguing their new majority will have more leverage to stop the plan dead in its tracks.”

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Boehner and White House win’: Omnibus bill passes 219-206 – here are the 67 Republicans who voted NO

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on AllenBWest.com.

You’ve been Gruber’d, Stupid!

“No. I — I did not. Uhhh, I just heard about this… I — I get well briefed before I come out here. Uh, th-th-the fact that some advisor who never worked on our staff, uhh, expressed an opinion that, uhh, I completely disagree with wuh, uhh, in terms of the voters, is no reflection on the actual process that was run.” – President Obama replying to a question about Jonathan Gruber at the conclusion of the G-20 Conference in Brisbane, Australia.

Will the last name of the MIT professor identified as the “architect of ObamaCare” become a verb some day? Will people say “I’ve been Gruber’d? or “The government is “Grubering again”?

After all, when he admitted that ObamaCare’s passage was achieved by deceiving the Congressional Budget Office and the entire American public, turning his name into a synonym for lying is not unthinkable. Adding insult to injury, he said the voters were “stupid.”

Cartoon - Gruber and Obamacare

For a larger view click on the image.

How stupid was it for the Democrat-controlled Congress to pass a two-thousand page piece of legislation that none of them had read? (No Republican in Congress voted for it.) ObamaCare took over one-sixth of the U.S. economy and did something that makes me wonder why we even have a Supreme Court. It required people to buy a product whether they wanted to or not. If they didn’t, they would be subject to a penalty.

One way of the other, the federal government was going to squeeze you. The Court did conclude early on that ObamaCare was a tax, but don’t expect the mainstream media to tell you about all the other taxes hidden within it.

What surprises me about the Gruber revelations—available on YouTube to any journalist who wanted to investigate, but none did—is that there appears to be so little public outrage. An arrogant MIT professor who received $400,000 from the government and made millions as a consultant to the states who needed to understand ObamaCare, calls voters stupid and the initial reaction of the mainstream media was to ignore the story.

At the heart of the Gruber affair is the fact that Obama and his administration has been lying to the voters from the moment he began to campaign for the presidency. In virtually every respect, everything he has said for public consumption has been and is a lie.

In one scandal after another, Obama would have us believe he knew nothing about it. That is the response one might expect from a criminal rather than a President.

One has to ask why it would be difficult to repeal in full a piece of legislation that the President said would not cause Americans to lose their healthcare insurance if they preferred their current plan, that would not cause them to lose the care of a doctor they knew and trusted, and would save them money for premiums. The initial deception was to name the bill the Affordable Care Act.

Repeal would help ensure the solvency of Medicare and restore the private sector market for healthcare insurance.

This is a President who was elected twice, so maybe Prof. Gruber is right when he speaks of stupid voters. Not all, of course, but more than voted for Obama’s two opponents. As this is written over 45% of those polled these days continue to express approval for Obama’s performance in office. How stupid is that?

AA - Most Corrupt AdministrationWhat is so offensive about Gruber’s own revelations about the manner in which the bill was written and the lies that were told to get it passed is the incalculable misery it has caused millions of Americans.

It has caused the loss of jobs. It has forced others into part-time employment. It has caused companies to reconsider expanding to grow the economy. It has driven up the cost of healthcare insurance. It has impacted local hospitals and clinics to the point where some have closed their doors. It has caused many healthcare professionals to retire or cease practicing medicine.

I invite you to make a list of all the things you think the government should require you to purchase whether you want it or need it. Should you be required to own a bike and use it as an alternative to a car? (Yes, you must own auto insurance to defray the cost of accidents, just as you must pay a tax on gasoline to maintain our highway system.) Should you be required to wear a certain style or item of clothing? Should you be required to get married by a certain age? Should you be required to eat certain foods and avoid others?

A new study by the Legatum Institute in London ranked citizen’s perception of their personal freedom in a number of nations. Americans ranked way down the list at 21 out of 25, well below Canada, France, and Costa Rica to name just three. The study was based on a 2013 poll.

What is a stake here is (1) the absolute need for a trustworthy federal government and (2) the need to repeal a piece of legislation based entirely on lies. On a larger scale, the right to make your own decisions on matters not relevant to the governance of the nation should be regarded as sacred, it’s called liberty.

The Republican-controlled Congress and the Supreme Court are the two elements of our government that can and must provide a measure of protection against the deception that is practiced every day by President Obama and members of his administration. Let’s hope neither is “stupid” in the two years that remain.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

RELATED INFOGRAPHIC:

GruberChart_v2

Harry loves Gruber — Watch Reid lauding Gruber as the greatest economist and other lies about Obamacare

Not one of the trifecta publicly seen as the political leaders of the Democrat Party; Reid, Pelosi, and Obama never knew who Gruber was. The incredible, consistent, sociopathic lying by these three would be horribly appalling if it were not so damn serious. The sociopathic lying by Obama, Reid, and Pelosi, if not called-on and checked by someone who has the platform by which to do so, will collapse this nation.

The American People shouted loudly a couple of weeks ago: “STOP!” The American People overwhelmingly shouted: “SAVE OUR COUNTRY!” The American People shouted at the polling booths: “STOP the transformation of our country; STOP the Marxism dressed-up in all sorts of rags to make it look appealing!” The American People gave the Republican Party grand permission to STOP Reid, Pelosi, and Obama and call them on all their lies!”

Reid, Pelosi, and Obama are racing all over the place telling anyone who will listen, “I (We) didn’t know Gruber, or “he was not on staff” or other lies, lies, lies! STOP IT!! Someone needs to wash their mouths out with soap!! Sociopathic liars all. Just look at the youtube site below where…you guessed it, Reid is praising Gruber all over the place. Obama doesn’t know him, but he was in private meetings in the Oval with Obama. Gruber made close to $6-million dollars being paid to be this all-knowing, all-wise, political and economic consultant, as well as health-care expert. ENOUGH! Enough lies and other sociopathic behaviors. ENOUGH!

Harry Reid is all over the place claiming he doesn’t know Gruber. Well, heck, Harry…just watch the YouTube video below and listen to your own bellicose praising of the guy. By-the-way Harry, the date of your admiration speech was December 1, 2009, I believe it was a Tuesday.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Inside the Comic Book Jonathan Gruber Wrote to Sell Obamacare to America

Obama Just Stepped In A Pile Of Gruber (+video)

Jonathan Gruber’s Big, Benevolent Fraud by D.W. MacKenzie

Obamacare, the noble lie, and cognitive dissonance at MIT.

It seems that critics of the so-called Affordable Care Act (ACA ) have a new ally in our efforts to expose the deficiencies of the legislation: Jonathan Gruber.

This development comes as a surprise, because Gruber was the ACA’s primary architect. He has made public remarks that expose problems with the ACA’s adoption and future operation. However, Gruber still supports the ACA and labors under the idea that it can be fixed.

Gruber admits that the ACA is a kind of fraud — that is, it was deliberately written in a misleading way. The ACA was presented as a way to increase the affordability and accessibility of health care. In reality, the ACA is a transfer scheme.

If the ACA benefits Americans, why did it need to be misrepresented? According to Gruber, transparent spending and transparent taxing are impossible: “You just can’t do it.… Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage.… Basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter.”

The ACA was written to hide the fact that it is designed as a transfer from healthier, younger people to less healthy, typically older people.

Why is a lack of transparency severely problematic? Because bureaucrats and politicians are supposed to serve the public in modern social-democratic welfare states. But why would we expect bureaucrats and politicians to actually serve the public?

Some scholars have suggested that competition in democratic elections can push politicians to serve the public, and elected politicians will therefore keep a watchful eye on bureaucrats. This is called the “median voter theorem.”

The problem is that political competition fails to discipline people in the public sector when governance is opaque. A well-informed electorate is a necessary condition for effective political competition.

Gruber is probably correct in saying that passing the ACA required misinforming the electorate. However, the opaque governance that Gruber lauds opens the door for large-scale waste and abuse by special interests. Opaque governance and a misinformed, or uniformed, electorate make it virtually certain that the ACA will be administered inefficiently, whatever one thinks of its merits.

Indeed, a lack of information causes adverse selection problems whereby the most corrupt people make the greatest efforts to rise in politics and within bureaucracies. Opaque governance thus guarantees abuse of the ACA by public officials and special interests.

What makes Gruber’s remarks particularly worthy of criticism is that he is employed as an economist — and at a top university. Worse still, he teaches public finance and policy at MIT: he really should understand the importance of transparency. And he does. Gruber is the author of Public Finance and Public Policy, chapter nine of which covers the median voter theorem. So, Gruber does understand the necessity of political openness and an informed electorate for efficiency in the public sector. Efficiency requires more than an informed electorate, but it is a necessary condition.

Anyone who understands even the basics of the median voter theorem knows full well that transparency is strictly required for efficiency. Anyone who simultaneously believes that transparency and opaqueness are both necessary for good public policy has cognitive dissonance. Jonathan Gruber has unwittingly helped reveal the incoherence of the case for the ACA.

Gruber is an economist who fancied himself able to reengineer dynamic markets through social policy. His conceit as a social engineer is matched by his disrespect for the American electorate. He thought that an opaque political process and obscure legal language could keep people in the dark. On top of that, Gruber fathered lies because he knew voters would reject the ACA if they were aware of the wrenching changes the legislation would bring. As his lies became obvious, he blamed poor legal phrasing for the federal government’s inability to hide the costly consequences of his transfer scheme behind the subsidies in the federal exchange.

It’s the conceit of the “nudger” — the classic case of an elite policymaker who thinks he is smart enough to design what’s best for you, even if you’re too stupid to understand why and too ignorant to check up on him.

Didn’t Gruber realize such monumental legislation would be under tremendous scrutiny? Didn’t he realize the painful economic effects would be felt by real voters with common sense? And didn’t he realize that it would only take pulling back one of the curtains to expose the totality of this Wizard-of-Oz-like scheme?

Fortunately, it has gotten much easier for people to become informed about the real facts concerning the ACA, as well as other social programs. Citizens will never be well-informed about all of the backroom politics and the internal operations of bureaucracies. But we can at least learn about their true nature in the abstract — and with regard to the ACA in particular.

Perhaps most importantly, we can be on the lookout for those claiming to be wizards in Washington.

20141117_mackenziethumbABOUT D.W. MACKENZIE

D. W. MacKenzie is an assistant professor of economics at Carroll College in Helena, Montana.

Welcome to EbolaCare — but the Website is Down

A well known phenomenon in the animal kingdom is that when taking over a new pride, a lion will sometimes kill all the cubs. We don’t know exactly what kind of feeling drives him in this bloody act, but there’s obviously a lack of attachment. Suffice it to say the problem can be summed up thus: it’s not his family.

America’s pride is falling. And few things illustrate this better than the open-borders mentality that has allowed foreigners to bring diseases — most notably Ebola but also EV-D68 and others — into our country.

There was a time when a threat such as Ebola would have inspired travel bans reflexively. Not today. In this enlightened age, Barack Obama and underlings such as CDC director Tom Frieden tell us, with a straight face, that such measures just wouldn’t work. They also claim that banning commercial flights would frustrate efforts to aid Ebola-affected nations and thus increase the long-term chances of an epidemic in the U.S.

Space constraints preclude me from exploring every detail of their argument, but the bottom line is that it’s fallacious. A travel ban combined with a policy of issuing no visas to citizens from affected nations, a prohibition against entry by any foreign national holding a passport with a stamp from one of them, and a mandatory quarantine for Americans returning from such countries absolutely would work. No, it wouldn’t reduce the chances of more Ebola cases reaching our shores to zero, but such a requirement is unreasonable. We can’t eliminate all murder, but we still see fit to minimize it by having necessary laws, police and a criminal-justice system.

As for aid, it goes without saying that medical professionals and other emergency workers would be granted travel clearance and that charter and military planes could ferry them where they needed to go. Moreover, we’ve isolated Americans who contracted Ebola, and no one claims it prevented us from giving them sufficient treatment.

In fact, the arguments against common sense and the common good are so obviously flawed that it’s clear they are not reasons, but rationalizations. So what really explains our leaders’ common senselessness? National Review’s Mark Krikorian put it well last month:

Much of our political class is simply uncomfortable with the idea that border and immigration controls should be used vigorously and unapologetically to protect Americans. You can hear the objections now: It would be xenophobic, it might stigmatize West Africans, those countries will object to our State Department that they’re being discriminated against.

This is what it boils down to. And there’s a reason why people such as Barack Obama don’t believe in using immigration controls “vigorously and unapologetically to protect Americans.”

People such as Obama are not American.

This has nothing to do with theories about where Obama was born; as Thomas Sowell recently pointed out, native American Benedict Arnold is one of our most infamous traitors, while people born overseas have sometimes risked their necks to defend America. Nor does it even just concern Obama, as the phenomenon in question is exhibited by millions. What it has to do with is attitude.

This brings me to an October Forbes article by evolutionary biologist J.V. Chamary in which he inveighs against travel bans, calling the desire for them understandable but “selfish.” Born in France to parents from Mauritius and now living in the U.K., Chamary is the epitome of the attitude in question; he’s an internationalist, a philanderer of nations and a citizen of the world. And the thinking goes like this: we’re all just people, whether in Sacramento or Sierra Leone, Livermore or Liberia. Why should “my” country’s needs be elevated above another’s? This is the “intellectual” point of view, the conclusion someone arrives at upon thinking deeply and recognizing the truth of George Bernard Shaw’s statement, “Patriotism is the belief your country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it.”

Of course, it warrants noting that the affected West African nations have behaved just as “selfishly,” sometimes quarantining large areas within their borders to contain the Ebola. And neighboring African countries have been “selfish” enough to completely isolate the affected nations. We also might wonder how selfish it actually is if our concern is for others, our fellow Americans. But, no matter, Chamary has a point.

Not a good point — but a point.

Now let’s see if he actually believes it.

An easy way to find out is to ask: would you apply the same unselfish standard to your home? Would you temporarily house a couple of the people from affected nations who’ve been allowed to enter the U.S., thus exposing your children to them on a long-term basis?

When I briefly corresponded with Chamary and asked the above, his said it was a false dilemma that he was “unwilling to waste time addressing.” But it’s sufficiently analogous. Everything said about foreigners relative to Americans applies to outsiders relative to family members. We’re all just people; “undocumented family members” are children of God just like your documented family members. And what is God’s perspective (atheists can view this as a thought exercise), which is the highest perspective? He doesn’t gaze upon our blue orb and deem the Smiths more important than the Johnsons. Why, we could even say that “family patriotism is the belief your family should be prioritized over all other families because you were born in it,” couldn’t we, Mr. Barack Bernard Chamary? So why subordinate outsiders’ needs to your family’s?

This analogy is especially apt because a nation is an extension of the tribe, which in turn is an extension of the family. Yet it’s safe to say that Chamary, Obama and their fellow travelers would not endanger their families as they have the country. Why the different standards?

I suggest that their “enlightened,” citizen-of-the-world perspective isn’t the fruits of intellectualism at all, but is merely what feels right. The difference is that they’re emotionally attached to their families.

They’re not emotionally attached to America.

This is for a simple reason.

America is not their family.

Their pride lies elsewhere

Such people are not just internationalists; they sometimes feel more of a kinship with foreign nations than the one whose passport they happen to carry. And in the case of Obama, the antipathy for his passport place is so profound that he aims to eat the cubs. Or, at least, replace them via immigration.

This is why, even though a nation without secure borders is like a house without walls, Obama will keep his walls and open our borders. For some Americans this will mean death from disease and at the hands of illegal-alien criminals, but Obama doesn’t care. Lions, even cowardly ones, do what they do. And we’re not his family.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

When Government Spreads Disease: The 1906 Meat Inspection Act by Jeffrey A. Tucker

Government has been spoiling stuff since well before the TSA.

You know the old myth about the meat-packing industry. In 1906, Upton Sinclair came out with his book The Jungle, and it shocked the nation by documenting the horror of the meat-packing industry. People were being boiled in vats and sent to larders. Rat waste was mixed with meat. And so on.

As a result, the Federal Meat Inspection Act passed Congress, and consumers were saved from ghastly diseases. The lesson is that government is essential to stop private enterprise from poisoning us with its food.

To some extent, this mythology accounts for the wide support for government’s involvement in stopping Ebola today. Not only that, but the story is also the basis for the US Department of Agriculture’s food inspection efforts, the Food and Drug Administration’s regulation of medical drugs, the central plan that governs food production, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the legions of bureaucrats who inspect and badger enterprise every step of the way. It is the founding template for why government is involved in our food and health at all.

It’s all premised on the implausible idea that people who make and sell us food have no concern as to whether it makes us sick. It only takes a quick second, though, to realize that this idea just isn’t true. So long as there is a functioning, consumer-driven marketplace, customer focus, which presumably includes not killing you, is the best regulator. Producer reputation has been a huge feature of profitability, too. And hygiene was a huge feature of reputation — long before Yelp.

Lawrence Reed deals ably with other myths of the meat-packing industry. Sinclair’s book was not intended as a factual account. It was a fantasy rendered as a socialist screed. It did drum up support for regulation, but the real reason for the act’s passage was that the large Chicago meat packers realized that regulation would hurt their smaller competitors more than themselves. Meat inspections imposed costs that cartelized the industry. That’s why the largest players were the law’s biggest promoters. Such laws almost have more to do with benefiting elites than protecting the public.

Still, there is more to this little-known history that speaks to the entire basis for government management of health. The legislation required federal inspectors to be on site at all hours in every meat-packing plant. At the time, regulators came up with a shabby method for detecting bad meat, namely poking a rod into the meat and smelling the rod. If it came out smelling clean, they would poke the same rod into the next piece of meat and smell it again. They would do this throughout the entire plant.

But as Baylen J. Linnekin points out in “The Food-Safety Fallacy: More Regulation Doesn’t Necessarily Make Food Safer” (Northeastern University Law Journal, vol. 4, no. 1), this method was fundamentally flawed. You can’t necessarily detect pathogens in meat by smell. It takes a long time for bacteria to begin to stink. In the meantime, bacteria can spread disease through touch. The rod could pick up bacteria and transmit it from one piece of meat to another, and there was no way for inspectors to know about it. This method of testing meat most certainly spread any pathogens from bad meat to good meat, assuring that an entire plant became a house of pathogens rather than having them restricted to just one carcass.

As Linnekin explains:

USDA inspectors undoubtedly transmitted harmful bacteria from one contaminated piece of meat to other uncontaminated pieces in untold quantities and, consequently, were directly responsible for sickening untold numbers of Americans by their actions.

Poke-and-sniff — incredibly a centerpiece of the USDA’s meat inspection program until the late 1990s — was, in terms of its sheer efficiency at transmitting pathogens from infected meat to clean meat, nearly the ideal device. Add to this the fact that the USDA’s own inspectors were critical of the inspection regime from the start, and that the USDA abdicated its inspection role at hundreds of meat processors for nearly three decades, and it becomes quite apparent that instead of making food safer, poke-and-sniff made food and consumers less safe.

Yes, you read that right. Poke-and-sniff began in 1906 and was common until the 1990s. The USDA’s own website recounts the career of one meat inspector who praised the shift from the old practice, a practice that persisted longer than even Soviet communism.

When people teach about this history in a conventional classroom environment, they tell the story of meat-packing horror and the act’s passage. But there the story ends. There is a pervasive lack of curiosity about what happened next. Did the regulations achieve their aims? Did the situation improve, and, if so, was this improvement due to the regulations or to private innovations? Or did the problem get worse, and, if so, can the worsening be traced to the regulations themselves? These are the sorts of questions we need to ask.

As for why bad practices last and don’t get weeded out through experimentation, this is the way it is with regulations. Once a rule is in place, no one can seem to stop it, no matter how little sense it makes. You know this if you have ever been in the TSA line at the airport. The sheer irrationality strikes me every time — and it strikes the TSA employees, too. They are taking away bottles of shampoo but allowing lighters on planes. Sometimes they confiscate a corkscrew and other times not. They test your hands to make sure you haven’t been handling bombs, but the sheer implausibility is so apparent that the inspectors themselves can hardly keep a straight face.

Whenever government imposes a rule, it begins to operate as if on autopilot. No matter how brainless, damaging, irrational, or outmoded it happens to be, the rule ends up trumping the reasoning of the human mind. This becomes a very serious matter regarding health. Ruling this sector of life, you don’t want an overlord who is unresponsive to new information and new evidence and innovation — a regime that specializes in following a routine, no matter how bad, rather than improving itself with a testable goal in mind.

This is why in societies where governments rule, all things slip into a frozen state. This is why even today Cuba seems like a tableau of the 1950s. This is why when the curtain was pulled back on East Germany and the old Soviet Union, we found societies that seemed stuck in the past. This is why the postal service can’t seem to innovate and why public schools are still structured as if it were the 1970s. Once a government plan is established, it tends to stick, even when it is not achieving its aims.

The case of poke-and-sniff in meat-packing should serve as a warning for all government regulatory measures, whether designed to protect us from disease or bring us safety or any other reason. We live in a world of change and of growing knowledge. Our lives and well-being depend on economic systems that can respond to change, extract that growing knowledge, and enable it to be used in ways that serve human needs. A competitive market economy specializes in doing just that.

ABOUT JEFFREY A. TUCKER

Jeffrey Tucker is a distinguished fellow at FEE, CLO of the startup Liberty.me, and editor at Laissez Faire Books. Author of five books, he speaks at FEE summer seminars and other events.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of FEE and Shutterstock.

High school students fight back against culture of death: Bold challenge at abortion clinic!

When it comes to standing up to the culture of death, a lot of people have given up on the youth of America. But don’t believe it!

The students at the Immaculate Heart of Mary Catholic School in Still River, MA, out-perform most adult groups. They take activism right to the streets!


VIDEO of students and their “Prayer Vigil Challenge”. You can also see it on Vimeo HERE.

As a conservative Catholic school, they are determined to confront the horrific scourge of abortion. Unlike many pro-life groups, they don’t just hold meetings, put out literature, give some speeches, hold banquets, and raise money. They actually go to the abortion clinics. The older kids help counsel women who would otherwise make a deadly “choice” — and they all use the power of prayer. They make a difference!

In this wonderful video – made outside of a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic featuring the students themselves – they are challenging students from nearby schools to join them on the front lines.

In this video the students are right on the front lines!

These kids are very inspiring. They really get it. They are not afraid to talk about God and the religious basis of why they’re there. And they clearly understand the terrible things that secularism has done to society.

Prayer vigil near entrance of the Planned Parenthood abortion clinic.

That’s not all. For the last 25 years the school has provided what has become themost memorable float in the annual South Boston St. Patrick’s Day Parade – St. Patrick blessing the crowds — and the school band has also marched in the parade.

As we all know, in recent years many homosexual activist groups and liberal politicians have tried to intimidate schools, businesses, and others from participating in the parade. The liberal establishment is angry because the parade leaders have held fast to their Catholic beliefs and kept it a “family friendly” parade that excludes openly homosexual groups.

The annual Parade wouldn’t be the same without the school’s memorable float! [MassResistance photo]

They’re the real thing. The school even has a special dispensation from Rome to hold a daily Latin Mass!

A big part of this, of course, is the school’s principal, Br. Thomas Augustine. He is a pillar of strength and moral leadership in a time of unfortunate religious and cultural weakness. We wish there were a thousand more like him!

And like all moral heroes, Br. Thomas is hated by the Left. Earlier this year, the Boston Globe published an editorial personally attacking Br. Thomas after he wrote a letter to the editor taking an uncompromising stand supporting the Parade organizers’ right to hold their parade with real Catholic values.

We would encourage you to watch the video. The Resistance movement is alive and well!

P.S. – Br. Thomas reported to us that the video brought a great response to their challenge!

Obama’s Revenge

The Democratic Party that supported President Obama’s agenda for the past six years was dramatically rejected in the midterm elections and the message for the new Republican-controlled Senate and House is to aggressively take action on stalled legislation to improve the economy and address other issues that have suffered neglect.

The GOP is going to be up against the revenge Obama will take on America in the remaining two years. The midterms will not generate any humility in Obama; only anger and resentment.

Republicans were not elected to “work with” Obama. They were elected to stop his agenda and actions that have been harmful to the nation. The big question coming out of this electoral mandate is whether the inside-the-beltway Republicans in Washington will do what the voters want.

Obama promised a “transformation” of America, a nation dedicated to individual freedom and liberty, and it has taken this long for many to realize that his definition of transformation was an ever-increasing Big Government to control every aspect of our lives:

  • the education of our youth who lack knowledge of civics, math, and science,
  • the deprivation and reduction of access to vital sources of energy,
  • the refusal to protect U.S. sovereignty by ignoring our immigration laws and border security,
  • the reduction of our military power to levels rivaling pre-World War Two,
  • the failure to resist the growth of Islamic fanaticism,
  • the historic and dangerous increase of our national debt,
  • the failure to take fundamental steps to revive the economy by cutting taxes and reducing regulations,
  • the destruction of our market-based healthcare system.

Obama will take the electoral rejection very personally and, as we have seen in his contempt for working with Congress and his smears of the Republican Party, no one should doubt he will use the remainder of his term in office to wreak as much damage as possible; to prove he is right and the rest of the nation is wrong.

Much of what he will do was put off until after the midterm elections because he knew the level of rejection would be even greater. Now he is free to misuse “executive orders” unless the new Congress takes steps to defund and legislatively stop them. Investigations into the scandals that have become synonymous with his administration must be vigorously pursued.

What can we anticipate?

Obama will do everything he can to leave American vulnerable to increased illegal immigration including a rumored amnesty that would provide work permits and green cards to millions who would compete with jobless natural born and naturalized Americans. He has already refused to spend funds that have been allocated to secure our borders.

When Attorney General Eric Holder exits the Department of Justice expect Obama to nominate someone even more radical and divisive.

In the next two years you can expect the Environmental Protection Agency, already producing more regulations than any other element of the government, to go into overdrive to shut down as many power plants as possible, reducing the production of electricity on which the nation depends.

Obama has done little to respond to the growing global Islamist movement, showing favor to terrorist groups such as Hamas, but his greatest effort has been to provide Iran with the approval to advance its nuclear weapons capability by opening negotiations that, if agreed to, would put it within mere months of being able to put nuclear warheads on missiles and in bombs. It would change the balance of power in the Middle East and threaten the rest of the world.

Expect Obama to try to close Guantanamo despite legislation forbidding this action. In keeping with his tilt toward Islam, he has already released five Taliban leaders in exchange for an alleged U.S. Army deserter. Others who were released rejoined the Islamic holy war.

He will, of course, do everything he can to protect his namesake legislation, the Affordable Patient Care Act otherwise known as ObamaCare. It must be dismantled before it does even more harm to the nation’s healthcare system. He has waited until after the midterms for Americans to learn that their ACA premiums will rise dramatically. Ultimately, it must be repealed.

In these and many other ways, he can continue to harm our national interests. The one prediction that can be made with certainty is that he will spend even more time playing golf and indulging the many perks of the office.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Delaware TV gets the hottest U.S. Senate campaign ad: Chris Coons Ebola Zone!

Kevin Wade

Kevin Wade, Republican for the U.S. Senate in Delaware.

The real battle nationally is for control of the U.S. Senate. Millions are being poured into races to retain or obtain control of that body.

However, there is one key Republican U.S. Senate race that can be a Republican pickup – in Delaware.

Kevin Wade, a self-made business man, believes he can take and put the Delaware U.S. Senate seat solidly in the “R” column.

Historically the Delaware U.S. Senate seat is won with approximately 150,000 total votes. The race will likely hinge on about 8,000 voters changing their voting pattern on the General Election Day. It is projected that the Republican turnout will be 10% higher and 10% lower for the Democrats. That leaves 8,000 voters to be convinced to swing  this U.S. Senate Republican on November 4th.

This is the seat formerly held by now Vice President Joe Biden. That alone must have Delaware Republicans energized.

According to Wade, “It is all in reach. I don’t understand the fascination with ‘big state’ races at the national level. My vote in the U.S. Senate would count as much as California’s U.S. Senator. The yield on a donor dollar and volunteer hour is so much higher in this small voting universe in Delaware.”

This political ad may make the difference on a Republican Senate seat pickup in Delaware:

Florida RINO News Update: Mitt Romney or Jeb Bush for President? Really?

Mitt Romney, the man, the legend, the star spangled unicorn who indirectly created Obamacare now leads a field of potential 2016 GOP candidates in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Saul Alinsky cheerleader, holds a dominant lead among Democrats. The GOP Sheeple are flocking to the man who lighted the path for the Democrats to take control of 1/6th of our free market economy.

Twenty one percent of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents would choose the former Massachusetts governor. I think the Republican Party has lost its mind or perhaps it has been subjected to Chinese water torture for the past 6 years. The Romney camp keep sending me emails to me saying “My fellow conservative”. Romney is not a conservative he is posing as one to get the conservative vote. Don’t fall for it.

Then we have former Governor Jeb Bush (R-FL) this Hillary Clinton admirer has a 9% support in the poll. Perhaps Jeb needs to have a house party with Bill and Hillary and help raise some money for the Republic-crats. Jeb is the guy that awarded Hillary Clinton a Freedom Medal on the eve of the 1st anniversary of Benghazi. She was responsible for getting 2 Navy SEALs an Ambassador and his aid killed.

Jeb Bush is the guy pushing the United Nations endorsed IB Common Core down our throats in Florida. Maybe to help his brother Neil garner a huge contract to upload the Common Core software via his software company in Austin. Hey, I am all for free market capitalism but not at the expense of our kids. They need to learn the Constitution not collective bargaining and that 1 plus 1 equals 6.

Yes indeed, former Florida governor Jeb Bush who posed alongside Barack Obama in 2011 to make a pitch for reforms to education policies like the United Nations endorsed COMMON CORE. He said he was “incredibly honored” to be standing beside president Obama. Jeb Bush the guy who said that Ronald Reagan would not have fit well in the modern Republican Party. Holy mother of Chinese chicken livers. Save us sweet Jesus from these people. Charlie Crist literally hugged Obama. Jeb Bush did the same thing but from 2 feet away using forked tongue speaking in many tones of RINOSPEAK.

Back to Romney.

Mitt Romney said his Massachusetts health reform plan was much better than Obama’s. It does not matter that it is unconstitutional and violates the 4th Amendment. He claims it’s different in important ways. Oh, here we go with Mr. Romney justifying his Collectivist take over of health care in Massachusetts. A system that forced my cousin to leave this once free state. Perhaps when he made everyone hold their breath to cut down the CO2 emissions he had to create a welfare state to save them from suffocation.

When interviewed by a Denver TV station, Romney cited the key features that differentiate his reform approach from Obama’s. Oh my gracious pass the Grey Poupon please. A Collectivist ideology is a Communist ideology.

Romney declared:

“My health care plan, I put in place in my state has everyone insured, but we didn’t go out and raise taxes on people and have a unelected board tell people what kind of health care they can have.”

FACT CHECK.

Does Romneycare have everyone insured? NO. The plan cut the state’s rate of uninsured by almost half but this forced young people onto this unconstitutional debacle. Buy insurance or pay a fine or go to jail. All tyranny.

Did Romneycare raise taxes? NO, but the state didn’t need to. It covered the cost of reform with larger payments that it negotiated from the federal government for its Medicaid program. So technically it was a tax increase but from federal, not state money. Just more fleecing and redistribution of wealth.

Does Romneycare have an unelected board that tells people what kinds of health care they can have? YES.

The Massachusetts Connector Authority serves as the state’s insurance exchange. It sets standards for the types of plans that may be sold, thereby determining the kind of access residents will have to health care services. DEATH PANELS ladies and gentleman. This violate free market capitalism (it is commonly called price fixing). In my opinion it is totally UNCONSTITUTIONAL and violates the Commerce Clause unless its forced under states rights under the 10th Amendment to inflict tyranny on its own people. Romney is the king of tyranny.

Is Obamacare any different? NO.

Obamacare does raise taxes and it also let’s unelected officials determine what kind of insurance people can receive by setting standards for coverage under the state exchanges that will sell it. Just like Romneycare.

After all is said and done Obamacare and Romneycare are almost identical.

They both expand coverage in the same three ways. They reformed the free market for individual insurance by creating exchanges to sell it, subsidizing those with low incomes, and mandating that everyone maintain coverage in some form.

They expanded Medicaid to cover more people. They penalized employers who did not offer coverage to their workers. But more importantly both these plans made you a criminal if you did not comply. ALL TYRANNY!

So there you have it boys and girls. The two front runners for the Republican Party for President in 2016. The man who created Obamacare and the man who presented Hillary Clinton with a freedom medal and praised Obama for Common Core. Sweet Jesus I think we need to dismantle the GOP and rebuild it with Americans that can actually follow the U.S. Constitution.

With these two guys perhaps being hand picked by the GOP as presidential contenders we all need to prepare for a Hillary Clinton presidency and the final chapter on our formerly free republic.

Stay strong patriots. Buy more ammo. I think Hugh Janus has a better shot at saving our nation.

Ebola! Ebola! Yawn

AA - Ebola Nations

For a larger view click on the map.

How is Ebola spread? Two ways; one, by letting anyone exposed to it in West Africa into America when they fly here and, two, by assuming that medical professionals and others who have been exposed to it would quarantine themselves from contact with others once they are here.

The latest case is Dr. Craig Spencer, an American to whom the travel ban would not apply, identified as potentially having Ebola after treating victims in Africa and who totally ignored the potential of spreading it to others as he made his way around New York on subways, went bowling, and likely had dinner at a restaurant.

Earlier a NBC news crew that had been exposed to Ebola was issued a mandatory quarantine by the New Jersey Health Department, but its chief medical editor and correspondent, Dr. Nancy Snyderman, while symptom-free, decided to break the quarantine. One of the crew, Ashoko Mokpo, did fall ill and is being treated at the Nebraska Medical Center.

What does it tell you when two medical professional behave in this manner? It tells you that even those who know they can infect others were indifferent to the risk. It tells you that airport staff armed with thermometers are no defense against anyone coming in from the Ebola hot zone in Africa.

It tells you that the failure to impose a ban on all flights from West Africa should have been imposed weeks ago.

It tells you that sending three thousand active duty soldiers and another thousand reservists into the Ebola hot zone is a senseless act that exposes them to the disease and countless others on their return unless they are all held in quarantine until no signs of the disease are detected. The risk still remains even after the twenty-one days that the Center for Disease Control cites as the time in which victims would show signs of the disease.

The two Dallas nurses who acquired the disease have been treated and one has been released. As of October 23, there were eighteen cases of Ebola in Europe and the U.S. Unlike Africa, Western nations have responded quite well to the threat.

In New York, the Mayor, Bill de Blasio, was joined by the Governor Andrew Cuomo to hold a

press conference that seemed to this observer intended to exonerate them of any charge they were not taking Dr. Spencer’s foolishness lightly and to avoid public panic among a public that is clearly not panicking.

Given the continued news coverage of Ebola, it is amazing that Americans have absorbed the fundamental message that the disease has not affected those outside the healthcare community with the exception of the NBC crew and that steps have been put in place to identify and isolate those who had it. Moreover, while a deadly virus in Africa, it has been treated and cured here in America.

So far, so good.

The real challenge will be the flu season when lots of people will show up at hospitals with flu symptoms that resemble Ebola symptoms. If you haven’t been vaccinated, get one! How hospitals deal with this is going to be a real test of their judgment and skills.

I am hopeful we may be spared more press conferences that don’t tell us anything more than what we already know. I surely don’t want to hear President Obama tell me that everything is fine and there is nothing to worry about.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

FL Governor Scott Orders Mandatory Health Monitoring for Anyone Returning from Ebola-Affected Areas

Governor Calls on DOH to Determine Risk Level for Returning Citizens, in Absence of CDC Information.

On October 25, 2014 Governor Rick Scott signed an Executive Order mandating twice-daily 21-day health monitoring for people returning from CDC designated Ebola-affected areas.

Governor Scott said, “This executive order will give the Florida Department of Health the authority they need to conduct 21-day health monitoring and risk assessments for all those who have returned or will return to Florida from the CDC designated Ebola-affected areas of Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. We have asked the CDC to identify the risk levels of all returning individuals from these areas, but they have not provided that information. Therefore, we are moving quickly to require the four individuals who have returned to Florida already – and anyone in the future who will return to Florida from an Ebola area – to take part in twice daily 21-day health evaluations with DOH personnel.

“I want to be clear that we are taking this aggressive action at the state level out of an abundance of caution in the absence of much-needed Ebola risk classification information from the CDC. We are using what information is available to our Department of Health through the CDC’s Epi-X web-based system, which monitors individuals who travel to areas with infectious diseases, including Ebola. Using this system, we know that four individuals have already returned to Florida after traveling to Ebola-affected areas. Following the news of Dr. Craig Spencer testing positive for Ebola in New York, DOH began working to identify anyone who has already returned to Florida after traveling to an Ebola area and is aggressively investigating how much risk these individuals pose for contracting the disease. We will take further action to protect the health of these individuals, and our communities, if we determine any of them are at a ‘high risk’ of contracting the disease. Further action by the Florida Department of Health will include mandatory quarantine of anyone we suspect is at high-risk of testing positive for Ebola due to the type of contact they had with the disease.

“Mandatory twice-daily health monitoring will help us obtain important information that will assist us in caring for the Floridians who are returning to our state and preventing any spread of this deadly disease if one of these individuals ever develops possible Ebola symptoms within 21 days of their return. Again, we are glad we do not have a case of Ebola in Florida, but we will continue to do everything in our power to ensure we never do.”

Governor Scott’s full executive order is available here.

Governor Scott’s mandate to the Florida Department of Health today mirrors the Department of Defense’s post-deployment requirements for military men and women deployed in Ebola-affected areas.

The LGBT Human Rights Campaign Smears Bi-sexual Pro-Marriage College Professor

Jack Rigby, a psychologist living in Australia, who in his early practice worked with many homosexuals was asked: What is the social redeeming value of homosexuality, exactly? Jack responded:

Utterly none. Individual homosexuals can be constructively integrated to the rest of the population by simply conforming to normal social mores and exercising discretion.

The interesting observation I made over many decades of association with sexually aberrant people, was that these people almost instinctively recognize others of the same state without any obvious physical indications.

However, in recent decades in the fractured Society in the West, there has been a very strange situation develop in which small numbers of Homosexuals have formed politically obnoxious very public and virulently demanding groups.

One of these “politically obnoxious, very public and virulently demanding groups” is the Human Rights Campaign (HRC).

Screen-Shot-2014-10-17-at-4.53.06-PM-773x1024

The cover of Human Rights Campaign’s ‘The Export of Hate.’

This became self-evident when HRC sent out an email in a campaign called “The Export of Hate.” Their target and main “exporter of hate” in the email was bi-sexual Robert “Bobby” Oscar Lopez, an English professor at California State University-Northridge. Professor Lopez incurred HRC’s wrath because of his outspoken view that children do better when raised by a mother and father than they do when raised by parents of the same sex.

Kelsey Harkness, News Producer for The Daily Signal, reports, “Having a baby is supposed to be one of the happiest moments of your life. But for Bobby Lopez, an unusual figure in the marriage debate, it was a day overshadowed by fear. His wife was in labor with their second child when Lopez received hateful phone calls and emails from LGBT rights activists. Why?”

Lopez, 43, was raised in a household by two mothers. He drew public attention in 2012 after penning an account of that experience in an article for Public Discourse titled “Growing Up With Two Moms: The Untold Children’s View.” Overall, “children of same-sex couples have a tough road ahead of them,” Lopez argued, writing:

When your home life is so drastically different from everyone around you, in a fundamental way striking at basic physical relations, you grow up weird. I have no mental health disorders or biological conditions. I just grew up in a house so unusual that I was destined to exist as a social outcast.

Ever since Lopez went public with his story, left-leaning gay rights groups such as HRC and GLAAD, an organization that calls itself “the voice for LGBT equality,” have targeted Lopez as an “extremist.”

lopez-export-of-hate

Bobby Lopez is caricatured as an international criminal in the LGBT Human Rights Campaign group’s attack. For a larger view click on the image.

They have provoked those on their mailing lists to write and call his family and university, attempted to blacklist him with the media and academia, and put in public records requests to acquire his contact information.

“It was an onslaught from that point forward,” Lopez recalls in an interview with The Daily Signal.

Already effectively shunned by many student groups, other organizations and media outlets in the U.S., Lopez still speaks regularly wherever he can, including foreign venues, about three core beliefs:

  • All children have the right to be born free, not bought or sold.
  • All children have the right to a mom and a dad.
  • All children have the right to connect with their origins.

Having grown up in a same-sex household, Lopez says he is particularly qualified to speak on these subjects.

“This debate is ultimately about me and people like me,” he says. “If anyone has a right to weigh in on this with full academic freedom and freedom of speech, it’s me.”

And being bisexual, Lopez considers himself a member of the LGBT community.

Dr. Rigby wrote, “I actually have a great deal of concern for the number of the normally integrated ones who will be innocently caught up in the eventual reaction of Society to these strident, insane  anti-social demands of the entirely unstable violent few, whose intolerable antics and demands have already surpassed any reasonable level of public tolerance.”

Bobby Lopez is a normally integrated bi-sexual. That is why he and his family are being targeted. Integration cannot be tolerated.