The Nation's Baby Killers

-Janice Graham

The powers that be, their sycophants and supporters, in the state of New York are celebrating. Their applause filled the legislative chamber. They lit up their monuments, including the World Trade Center, in honor of the legalization of . . . wait for it . . . abortion up to the very second of a baby's full-term birth. There is no longer any restriction on when an abortion can be done.

Yes, in the state of New York a baby can legally be destroyed in all those inhuman ways we've heard of, ---murdered---anytime, even just before signs indicate he or she is about to be born naturally. Incredibly, at full term, the adoption option isn't even part of the conversation.

Here is some history. As far as we have been able to learn, at the time of Roe v. Wade, when abortion was first legalized, it was only allowed in the first trimester. In 1992 the Supreme Court extended it to the end of the second trimester. Then, states began to nibble away even at that. But the very controversial idea of partial birth abortion, when birth is induced and the baby is brutally killed before it completely exists the birth canal, has been and is still forbidden.

We do not know how killing a full term infant is to be legally accomplished. There is certainly no humane way to kill a baby. We heard someone say the child is poisoned and then the mother waits a few days, after which the dead baby is taken or delivered. Doesn't that sound so much more dangerous for the mother than letting the baby be born alive and healthy?  Also, the part of the New York law, which used to require a second doctor on hand to save the child's life if the abortion didn't work, is now repealed. Isn't that horrible? Many are assuming this means it is now pretty much legal to either let die or even purposely kill an infant that survives abortion. To know what this might look like we need only open our eyes to what that butcher Gosnell was convicted of doing to living, post-birth infants in Pennsylvania. Have you seen the movie, Gosnell: The Trial of America's Biggest Serial Killer, documenting his crimes? He was put in jail forever, but thanks to New York is now probably busy preparing his appeal.

This brutality can be done legally for any reason. Or none. Not only that, but non-doctors, that's health care "practitioners" who acquire some sort of state certification or authorization (however that is decided), are now permitted to perform abortions legally. Also, a full-term infant (40 weeks) still inside the womb, who is the victim of a homicide will no longer be considered a valuable human life cut short by crime as before (at least after 24 weeks gestation), but completely ignored by the law. And guess what else? This sets a precedent for the entire country to follow, a country that is continually showing in more and more ways how much it despises its own posterity, through its celebratory destruction of innocent humanity, through its casual and perverse and financial exploitation of human sexuality, through the increasing sexualization and endangerment of innocent children, and through the mockery and misconstruction of the two sexes and the procreative act. 

FYI, in New York City, about one in every three pregnancies is ended by abortion. It has one of the highest rates of abortion in the country.

What a bunch of liars and hypocrites these New Yorkers are. They pretend it's all about the health of the mother. Not so. For one example, it's a fact that after 15 weeks gestation it is safer for the mother to carry the baby to term and give birth normally than to have an abortion. They pretend it's about the mother's mental or emotional health, but  would-be mothers are now coming forward testifying of the lasting trauma and regret they experience from having an abortion.

Let's get real. These pro-abortion zealots know that abortion was first legalized, albeit very stealthily, with the imprimatur that it would be rare and safe, that it would only occur when really necessary (however that was to be defined; these days it is hardly ever really necessary), that it would only be allowed in the first trimester, and that only trained medical doctors would perform it. It was drilled into everyone's head that this would end dangerous and seedy back-alley abortions and so improve the health and lives of women. What a slippery slope it has all turned out to be! Not that we ever thought abortion on demand was ever right. We believe human beings in every stage are endowed with certain inalienable rights.

Honestly, everybody knows that sexual intercourse between normal reproductive-age opposite sex couples may result in the creation of  a human embryo. Every decent and responsible person knows that when such people engage in male-female intercourse, they may make a baby. So nothing about abortion is about a woman having freedom over her own body. She has that when she engages in sex all right, but when conception occurs things change. Suddenly there is another unique human life involved, whom, if you merely leave alone up until the time of birth, will most likely be born healthy, be taken care of, and grow to adulthood and old age.

How our standards and morals have changed! There is a 1932 movie called Life Begins, starring Loretta Young. At the time it was made it was banned in some places because it was considered too raw or sensitive for public consumption. It's about several women in a maternity ward of a hospital awaiting the birth of their babies, all with different points of view about the impending event. Young's character is an inmate of the local prison (unfairly convicted of murder to life in prison) whose husband adores her, but who at the last moment must decide who to save, the mother or the baby. The father chooses his wife, but the doctors secretly let the condemned mother decide. She chooses the baby. Another woman, a showgirl, and married, feels no sense of motherhood, and wants to give her baby (it turns out to be twins) away. Another is joyfully adding to an already large family. Another is approaching motherhood in a purely scientific way, planning to have no human attachment with her infant. Still another's baby is destined not to survive birth. Each end up dealing with their own and others' birth situations in a natural and motherly way.  Surprisingly for some, these mothers quite quickly soften and grow to appreciate the miracle of birth and cherish their babies. The hard, unfeeling women change into caring, nuturing, unselfish mothers. How sad that so many women today aren't even giving themselves that chance! Interesting how none of these outcomes in the film end in killing a baby, needlessly or otherwise. I imagine that in those days abortion was just too unthinkable and unspeakable to portray in a movie. Yes, our standards and morals have greatly changed---to our own great shame---and people need to know it.

Now we see that, even for no reason at all, pregnant women get to decide if they want their growing baby to live or die at any stage. That is not far from killing a baby once born, as Gosnel did, or even a toddler, a child. In tyrannical countries, and increasingly in America, human beings end up being valued not because they are of immeasurable spiritual worth created in the image of God with an immortal soul, but according to arbitrary decisions about factors such as size, ethnicity, sex, mental or physical characteristics, whether or not they are wanted, population control, and usefulness. For some time there have been leaders in America all for infanticide, including Margaret Sanger, the mother of legalized abortion, who was all about reducing, controlling, even exterminating, the black population. Yes, she was a huge racist all for genocide, at least in this form, the type of genocide that obliterates a whole race of people before they are big enough to defend themselves. Even today, percentage-wise, there are far more abortions of black babies in America (specifically including New York City) than of other ethnicities. In 2015, nationwide, 31 % of pregnancies of black women ended in abortion, while 11 % of pregnancies of white women ended in abortion. That's three times as many. And yet this hideous racial component, then and now inherent in the practice of legalized abortion, is swept under the rug by the pro-abortion mob. Yes New York, the ugly truth is that this whole abortion issue is highly racist at its core. Funny how those endlessly accusing others of racism these days are actually the real racists. Violent, deadly racists.

What if the government decided who could have babies and who couldn't, or whose babies could live and whose couldn't for whatever reason, or for no reason at all (mandatory abortion)? This sort of thing happened in Nazi Germany and is actually the case in China today (although the laws have been relaxed a tiny bit since 2013 because the birth rate fell too low, especially for females). It could conceivably happen anywhere. There is a Netflix series The Man in the High Castle, about America in WW II contrarily having been defeated by the Nazis and Japan, in which a neo-Nazi father in 1962 is supposed to immediately euthanize his golden teenage son because he has been diagnosed to have a debilitating genetic disease in its early stage. In this world no defective person is allowed to live. Isn't this New York law to allow anybody to arbitrarily kill unborn babies a definite step toward the government assuming that power at any stage of any person's life?  If God's standard is no longer upheld, if capricious governments decide to make up their own rules about the value or worthlessness of  this or that human life, why not?

No, it's not about a woman's rights. That's a distraction from the whole truth, the truth that rights come with adult responsibility and there is supposed to be a standard upheld for right behavior. Although racist at its core, and used to exploit unfortunate people and make money, the whole thing has also publicly become about removing the corresponding reproductive responsibility from the act of sex. In other words, people want people to be able to sex around all they want without any consequences. They want to all but eradicate the reproductive purpose of sex. But there is something that seems to have inevitably come along with that. Because people want to be irresponsible, or perhaps because people want to thumb their noses at traditional morality and/or God, or simply because anarchy sets the stage for power grabbing, we see people not only taking delight in the pleasures of thoughtless sex, but also delighting in the despising and destroying of human posterity. Apparently this is the inevitable outcome. 

That second part---the delight in despising and destroying of human life---was never part of  Roe v. Wade back in 1973. Back then there was no applauding and celebrating and lighting up the killing off of any fertilized embryo, much less pre-born babies perfectly viable or fully ready-to-be born. Like Glenn Beck said, can you imagine an animal control officer or vet, for example, celebrating, applauding, and lighting up the sky about the euthanizing of an animal or the destroying of its young at any stage? How psychotic does that sound? It's just sick! And yet, in the state of New York, this is going on in reference to numberless human beings---the most innocent of all humanity, the pre-born, what every one of us were at one time. There is no doubt that we are living among a certain form of psychopathic barbarians.

And as Herman Melville wrote, "I doubt it's ignorance that motives their actions." There is no excuse for ignorance as to the reproductive element of human sexual relations in this day and age. There is no excuse as to denying the humanity and viability of human life in the womb anymore, what with technology that makes possible detailed ultrasounds in increasing dimensions, in vitro surgery, the saving and care of even extremely premature infants, not to mention the truth exposed about the pain unborn babies experience and the brutality of all methods of abortion, or the sale of aborted babies' body parts being perpetrated. These days everyone knows that a human being is human at every stage. (How can they say the aborted baby isn't human when they turn around and sell its human body parts?)These days everyone knows something about the extremely savage and violent methods that are employed in destroying human life within a mother's womb. In advanced gestation cases the pulled-apart human pieces have to be puzzled together to make sure the entire body has been extracted! How can anyone say this is not murder, especially when the baby was at a stage to survive outside the womb? (I think it is a form of murder at any stage and for any reason, by the way.)

Inconveniently for the pro-abortion mob, premature babies are surviving at earlier and earlier stages of gestation. I was there when our triplet grandchildren were born in 2009 at 30 weeks---that's 6 1/2 months gestation, 2 1/2 months early. I had carried twins full term (both were over 7 pounds) so I never expected that my daughter (one of the twins) would go into labor so early, especially when she was on bed rest in the hospital being given all sorts of  prenatal, labor-checking care. The night of their birth, in my shock and gratitude I thanked the nurses for saving the babies' lives. They responded casually, "Oh, we didn't do that. They are fine, just feeders and growers." And yet they were so small I almost fainted when I first saw them, their little heads the size of oranges. They were perfectly formed, each just under 3 pounds. Today they are healthy normal nine-year-olds. Another baby was there at the hospital at the same time as the triplets who was born at 21 weeks and survived, cherished at every stage by her family. Decades ago, when I was a journalist, I did a story on the smallest baby ever born alive at the University of Utah. She was a pound and a half, the weight of a can of soda pop. A wedding ring fit on her thigh. Much to the joy of those who loved and cared for her, she thrived.

This same daughter with the triplets called me a few months ago almost hysterical with grief. I knew that for weeks she had been helping a co-worker with her early unwanted pregnancy, spending many hours trying to convince her not to have an abortion, explaining that she would regret it someday for all sorts of reasons (as many women now do). My daughter even said she would take the baby for her own. That morning the co-worker had arrived at work telling my daughter she had begun the process of termination, admitting that she knew it was selfish. She said she thought my daughter would not want to be friends anymore, but of course that didn't happen. My daughter was only struck with this girl's careless short-sightedness, with a sense of useless waste, and with a feeling of deep sorrow.

My question is: Where are the churches? Where are the ecclesiastical leaders speaking out ceaselessly against this most undeniable, inhumanity to man? They should be at the forefront, decrying this wickedness, this unnatural murderous barbarism directed at the most vulnerable of human beings. And if they aren't taking a stand against it anymore, are they for it?

We should weep at the brutal Nazi-esque inhumanity showcased by this new law in New York. We should weep at the callousness, the irresponsibility, the selfishness, and the hell, now and forever, awaiting the unrepentant people who do such deeds and the unrepentant people who support them. We should weep for the lost life, and for our children and grandchildren having to make their way in such an unfeeling, immoral, and wicked world, where evil is celebrated as good, and good is portrayed as evil.

Note 1/27/19: When we were at Utah's March for Life on January 26 we heard that the Catholic Church is pushing back on New York's Gov. Cuomo (who is Catholic) about this development.

Note 1/30/19: Today a Virginia legislator proposed the same sort of bill, which included the legalizing of killing a baby after birth, which Virginia's governor says he is fine with. Even though the bill was defeated in committee, the juggernaut has begun.

Note 2/3/19: We have been hearing that it is not uncommon across the United States in abortion clinics for babies born alive to be put aside and left to die.We  have also been hearing that several states have been allowing the practice of late-term abortion for many years. Perhaps what is new about the above development is the specific legalization and public celebration in no uncertain terms of full-term abortion, which there is never any need for and which is dangerous for the mother, and what people are calling infanticide, when a baby meant to be killed is born alive and neglected to death or killed in some other way post birth.

Note 2/4/19: According to a 2013 CA study cited by Glenn Beck, the great majority of women seeking late term abortions do so for reasons having nothing to do with their health, such as  she didn't know she was pregnant, she couldn't make up her mind if she wanted the baby, she needed insurance coverage, there were domestic issues, etc.

Note 2/26/19 We have changed the title of this post from The New York Baby Killers to The Nation's Baby Killers. This is because yesterday the U.S Senate voted on a bill that would require doctors to try to save babies born alive after abortion attempts,which bill was defeated 53 to 44. This means that our governing representatives have decided for us all that live newborn babies should be left to die, which is the same as killing them because newborn infants are completely helpless. And yet a mother who dumps her newborn in a dumpster or neglects her baby until it is sick or dead would definitely be arrested! This makes no sense. Unwanted human beings born under the watch of an abortion provider have no rights, but those born somewhere else or taken home do? Or not? These days who knows? But we do know this. Right now, incredibly,  the federal law is damnably silent on what to do with babies born alive who were intended to be born dead. It appears it is left up to state laws, and we know where that has gone: if people try to kill a baby before it is born in a designated facility, they are justified in killing it after it is born in that facility. This is obviously not about women's health. It appears it is just about getting rid of the victim/witness of attempted murder.

Very inconsistent, very wicked, and very scary.

A Cursing and a Confounding

-Janice Graham

I have read through an online thread about reactions to changes in the LDS temple proceedings. It is so sad and there is so much confusion.  People are taking so many different views, and it appears to me they all have a strictly temporal focus, as in what affects us only here and now. Mormons who are too afraid to think for themselves are either gushing about and/or rationalizing the changes like mere sycophants or they are completely closing up, all as if they were not blessed with minds and hearts and access to the Spirit to know truth from error for themselves. Regarding anyone who is thinking at all, these changes are making them mad, from the feminists to the chauvinists and everyone else in between. Does anyone see how we are being tossed to and fro, how people aren't thinking things through, how people can't communicate with each other, and how we are being discombobulated simply because we have put too much trust in human beings?

Yes, all of this I have been reading feels like a cursing.  Our thoughts and communications are being confounded. And yes, we Mormons do put too much trust in ourselves and each other and in our leaders. Just listen to us! We need to get back down to earth and place our very human feet firmly on the very real ground. Even our leaders, in choice moments, will admit they aren’t perfect, that none of them have been, and that we mustn’t live on borrowed light. As such, rather than a cursing and a confounding, this could be a huge teaching moment. We could actually start to learn some real and terrible and beautiful things.

You know, I haven't heard anyone turning to Christ in all this confusion. I don’t hear about anybody relying fully on Christ as the source of all knowledge and truth. I don’t hear people seeking the Lord’s solutions. People are suffering and upset. Why don’t they turn to the Lord? Instead, what I hear is people relying on words printed on paper or men who have risen to some position or their own passionate personal opinions. I haven’t heard anyone talk about how they feel they know such and so because they have prayed about it and it has been confirmed as true or not by the Holy Ghost. People don’t think to do this, not really, because they have dumped the burden and care of their personal religiosity on someone or something else. They are bitter and angry at the injustices of things and have made that their idol. Or they think they or somebody they know knows everything. Or they are sycophants. Or whatever. None of these are part of the gospel. They are actually the opposite of it.

Christian churches exist as a place to meet together often to discuss the eternal welfare of our immortal souls. They are supposed to supply teaching and preaching and rejoicing in Christ so we can know and continually be reminded of where to look for a remission of our sins. That is any Christian church’s primary job, and if it is inefficient or weak or faulty in that, all the extra stuff becomes at best a seemingly harmless distraction and at worst an outright demon, as C. S. Lewis warned. Sorry, churches are abdicating the very reason they exist if they seek to avoid confronting the now controversial doctrinal and moral questions and evils of the times (such as by shortening church meetings on the pretext that more should be taught in the home).

Not that these changes in the temple issues are not real or important. I am pretty sad that I unthinkingly made covenants 45 years ago that weren’t right and that somehow don’t apply the same way anymore. Yes, it's confusing. But like I said, this can be a great learning experience. We can be sadder, yes, but wiser, and isn’t wisdom more important? Through a series of life experiences I had to learn not to rely on people like I used to. I now do my own spiritual homework.  Sometimes it’s hard and it’s painful, but it’s worth it if you love God and truth and you want to grow spiritually.  Sometimes it’s pretty easy to see what’s been happening, but even then it’s painful because we have to give up even more of that pride and idolatry that we have again slipped into relying on. It’s also pretty lonely among fellow church members who don’t think this way at all, who go to church to get callings and be seen and feel better about themselves. I know, because I used to be somewhat like that.

A while ago I had to learn to look for the Lord’s solutions. Yes, all of us are fallen beings, sinners, and yes, we can repent because of Christ. Yes, the gospel of Jesus Christ can be defined in a few words. God loved our eternal souls so much He sent His Son to die for our sins so we can be saved if we repent. No, the gospel is not about family, or whether we are male or female. (God is no respecter of persons; all souls are equally valuable.) It isn't to make people feel better about themselves (except as children of God with immeasurable worth apart from anything else about them or what they do). The gospel is plain and precious and it can apply to the everyday life, moment by moment, of anyone who is humble enough to accept it and who desires to learn and grow spiritually.

Sadly, most people, even church-goers, maybe especially church-goers, resist these simple and true concepts. Perhaps they think taking responsibility for the condition of one's own soul is too much work. It is a lot of work, the most difficult type of work, spiritual work. When you do actually accept the gospel, you have to continually repent, as in seeking the still small voice of the Lord to know truth from error and be continually corrected and instructed, especially where human beings are concerned, including oneself, and even where the scriptures are concerned, which have been messed with by human beings for centuries and influenced by all sorts of cultures and interpretations. No, I don’t rely on certain paper with certain patterns of ink printed on it. I rely on what the Spirit of the Lord says to me about scripture. What I get is always simple and grounded and full of common sense. But you have to take your emotions out of it. You have to kill yourself off, as it were. You have to love God first. That’s why it’s the first commandment.

So why don’t we hear the plain applied gospel more regularly and clearly in all of our church venues? Why are other things emphasized in its place? You’ll figure that out soon enough if you truly seek the Lord. Yes, you will be sadder but you will be wiser, and grow spiritually.

Do your own spiritual work. Use the faculties God gave you. Put aside your grievances. Forgive and repent. Pray about what you know to be true about God's love, the gospel of Jesus Christ, and why you are here on earth. The Spirit will confirm what is true. You will learn terribly lovely things and become a new creature in Christ. The rest, of some value or mere pretense, is minutiae in comparison.

The Huge Horrific Health Hazards of Homosexuality Part I

-Janice Graham

We have referred to the book, The Health Hazards of Homosexuality: What the Medical and Psychological Research Reveals, produced by our friends at MassResistance in Massachusettes in 2017, multiple times in this blog. But we have never done a full book review, even though we believe a review must be done that is available for our readers. One reason for this is that I, who write the book reviews for Standard of Liberty and have been studying the issue of homosexuality for almost 20 years, have kept having to put the book aside. Although I have skimmed the book here and there, in the two years I have had it in my possession I have only gotten to page 98 in my actual reading, not because I am squeamish, but because because the truths this book exposes are so very dark and disturbing, and it is extremely sad and hard to believe that human beings would degrade themselves to this level. It makes one alternately cringe and weep. We are told in the foreword by Brian Camenker, "Some of the citations and images border on pornography so reader beware! The vulgarity, however exposes the very nature of homosexuality, It is one reason that homosexual health issues have not been presented truthfully to the public" p 1.

So we are only on page 98. Still, we have now decided to go ahead with our review, and begin to share what we have learned so far, hoping to continue reviewing this book in stages. You might say it is our New Year's resolution here at SoL. As most people will not be inclined or take the time to read this big book, we believe a series of short posts are very important.

For starters, even the obvious fact that this huge book outlining the health hazards of these now accepted and celebrated sexual behaviors consists of 500 dense pages, plus 100 more pages of teeny tiny end notes, speaks volumes. Alongside health hazards, are documented "homosexual ideologies, lifestyle, behaviors, and practices, referencing their public events, 'gay pride' parades, videos, conferences, publications, and websites,"whereby these health hazards are initiated and spread.

 In the forward we are told why this "untouchable" subject must be broached. "A disproportionate incidence of pathologies is found among homosexual men, lesbians, and bisexuals. Yet the general public is told very little, if anything about the baneful nature of homosexuality and its associated addictions and behaviors. . . For too long, honest discussion on this subject has been blocked by intimidation and even outright threats." (We here at SoL have received many threats ourselves, including a terroristic threat which had to be turned over to the FBI.)

But it's not intimidation and threats that keep the decent general public from confronting this topic, a topic that is force-fed to their children and plastered all over their culture. It's self-imposed ignorance for whatever the reason, as if responsible, thinking human beings should act like the three monkeys with their hands pressed over their eyes, ears, and mouths. For example, one time we at Standard of Liberty were at an event talking to a family about our book for families raising children, Wild Elephant: The Gospel Truth about Today's Stampeding Sexuality," offering them a free copy. The father replied, "Well if we ever have that problem, I suppose we can get it then."

Unfortunately, this is the attitude most people have about this issue. They don't realize that bad ideas about human sexuality are being modeled, taught, and propagandized through every existing societal institution, and that proper information can prevent these bad ideas from taking root, warn people against them, and heal those who are exposed and exploited. Health Hazards exists to show that homosexuality is "not just a private personal issue; it is an important public health issue." Its producers "hope that the information in this book will encourage our society to take a step back, understand what the normalization of homosexuality has brought in its wake, and reconsider the course we're on."

Besides learning about specific health hazards common among LGBT people such as pornography addiction; shortened lifespan; mental illness, suicidality, anxiety and depression; the incurable disease HIV/AIDS and every other STD; co-infections; other diseases such as staph, hepititis, cancers, and tuberculosis; chronic conditions and illnesses; medicine drug side-effects; substance abuse, and partner abuse, I also learned more specifically about how homosex is most definitely a public health crisis, and how "greater societal acceptance of homosexuality has resulted in even more disease and suffering." The book must be read individually to realize in full the myriad dangers and truly staggering statistics.

Deviant sexual behaviors, because they usually include sodomy, a practice that until 2009 was posted by the Surgeon General and the FDA as "simply too risky to practice," p 10,  are often hundreds and even thousands of times more dangerous than normal intercourse. But in this short review I will name two main thoughts from my reading so far that hit me like a ton of bricks. The first concerns what is referred to as bisexuality.

It is no wonder that the excuse for unlimited debauchery called bisexuality (and also pansexuality) is on the rise. The endless alphabet letters popularly delineating this and that sexual orientation, are nothing more than pretend names for zero sexual boundaries. Turns out the B in LGBT, that doesn't seen to get much attention, is more dangerous than the L or the G or the T! I never thought of this before. Yes, bisexuals are in more danger from their behaviors than any of the others. Evidently, the more types of sex you abuse, the more at risk you are for more diseases and more illnesses.

The second fact to hit me like a brick in the first 98 pages of this book is this: The acceptance of homosexuality, i.e. sodomy, has encouraged this behavior among straight people.

 I should have realized this way back when, when I happened to be talking to a girl at the Utah Pride Center about a youth event SoL was opposing, arguing that the Pride Center was encouraging the practice of sodomy for minors. She said to me in no uncertain terms, "Every Body Does It."  I shot back at her in no uncertain terms, "Decent People Don't." Funny how she shut up after that.

It makes sense that if homosexuality is perfectly wonderful and normal and pleasurable and safe, or that society is portraying it as such, which it most certainly is, straight people would begin to practice sodomy as well and some of the same diseases and illnesses will afflict the supposed purely heterosexual population. Indeed, we have heard this is an option young people are being presented with, even virginal newlyweds! Please note: "Acting as the 'receptive partner' ('bottom') is riskiest of all, because the rectum was not made for such use and is easily damaged by penetration [by the penis]" p 11. In a heterosexual couple, this always means the female. This is when I weep.

To paraphrase C. S. Lewis, there is a quality of sadism that can be encouraged in sex. Sodomitic practices are definitely sadistic. So now, because of the acceptance of homosex as normal, sexy, exciting, and because of that oversexualizing of human beings, heterosex is becoming increasingly grossly distorted.

Here is an example of how none of this gay stuff is about anybody's "orientation" or "sexual identity." I happened to watch a documentary about what goes on in Hollywood behind the scenes.  We don't have much doubt that this sort of thing does really happen. These days, if a young actor of either sex, and especially black, wants to make it in the business, they are subjected to what amounts to gang rape of every type perpetrated by the elite old men in charge of  casting movies, and even commercials. They show them what is going to be done to them, make them sign a paper, threaten to empty their bank accounts, if they don't allow them to desecrate their body in unspeakable ways. The poor aspiring young actor or actress thinks it will be a one-time thing, but oh no. Every time they want a part, they are again taken up to some fancy hotel room. It is reportedly worse for the females simply because they have more orifices to defile. Are these perpetrators gay, homosexual, or bisexual? No. Those are just names used to excuse and legitimize and promote sex of all kinds. These men are not "gay." They most likely have wives and families. What they are are horrible, predatory, opportunistic perverts. It's just sex, sex, and more sex, in any way they can possibly imagine.

Turns out this has been the end game since the beginning. It's not really about gay or any other fancy pretend sexual orientation or made-up  hundred-and-one genders. It's about the promotion of Godless sexual immorality across the board. You know, like in Sodom and Gomorrah.

To summarize, the B in LGBT, bisexuality, meaning anything goes, is way more risky than any other behavior, and the wholesale societal acceptance of homosex has resulted in sodomitic practices and their corresponding health hazards increasing in the general population as well.

Here's hoping I can get through enough of the book to do Part II, that is, if I can pry my eyes open and then read through my tears. Then wash myself off or go running or something.

You're welcome.