1

WHO Pushes Sex Perversion for BABIES

Following in the footsteps of perverted sex maniac Alfred Kinsey responsible for the sexual abuse and torture of countless children, the United Nations World Health Organization (WHO)is pushing the grotesque view that babies and children under 4-years old should be masturbating while exploring sexuality and gender — and that governments should encourage this. Yes, seriously.

Despite being peddled for years by the WHO, political leaders are only just now getting around to condemning the abusive UN WHO “guidance” as governments push it on victims of public schools. A scandal surrounding the bizarre recommendations from the global organization has reached a fever pitch in Wales and the broader United Kingdom.

Conservative Shadow Minister for Education in Wales Laura Anne Jones called on the self-styled planetary “health” body to “rescind the advice immediately.” “We must stop this pushing of harmful gender ideology into sex education in Wales and the UK, with immediate effect,” said Jones, calling on Welsh authorities to “distance themselves” from the “disturbing” UN guidance.

Under the WHO recommendations directed at European policymakers, first released over a decade ago but only now being cited in school curricula in the UK, children under 4 years of age are encouraged to “ask questions about sexuality” and “explore gender identities.” According to the WHO, children need to “gain an awareness of gender identity” for reasons that were not made clear.

The UN scheme also calls on governments to teach these tiny tots about “enjoyment and pleasure when touching one’s own body, early childhood masturbation.” The organization has even released highly disturbing videos of adults teaching very young children about masturbation that very much look like grooming of children by pedophiles.

The approach to sex traces directly back to pervert Kinsey, who used taxpayer dollars to train pedophiles to “scientifically” abuse and rape children. Under the guise of “research,” Kinsey’s pedophiles brutally abused and raped children including babies and then concluded that they were “sexual” from birth. The horrific data documenting this abuse was in Kinsey’s book Sexual Behavior in the Human Male.

Critics expressed outrage. Tanya Carter with the Safe Schools Alliance called for an “urgent inquiry” into links between the perversion being pushed by the UN and the sex “education” curriculum being used in the UK. “We call upon them to revise their standards to align with a safeguarding-first approach that protects children while allowing them to develop a healthy and age-appropriate understanding of sex,” the group said.

The organization also condemned the agenda of the UN and its agencies — especially for attempting to normalize child rape. “We find it extremely concerning that the UN and WHO are promoting an approach that is experimental, unscientific, and appears to be aligned to the work of unethical individuals and organizations, including those promoting the acceptance of pedophilia,” the Alliance said.

This is the same WHO that is currently working with the Biden administration on a historic power grab. Under the guise of a new “International Pandemic Treaty” and amendments to the “International Health Regulations,” the global body is seeking to become the top global authority on everything related to international “health emergencies.” Critics are fighting back hard.

UN education agency UNESCO, in partnership with the WHO and UNICEF, has similarly come under fire for promoting horrific “international technical guidance” on what they euphemistically refer to as “comprehensive sexuality education.” The standards call for sexualizing Kindergarten children. By age 5, the standards teach children unspeakable perversion.

Promoting this sort of sick perversion to children is horrific enough. It should be considered a crime punishable by law. Doing it with tax money through government is a crime against humanity. It is past time for Congress and governments around the world to defund and disband the predatory UN and the WHO for good. The innocence of children depends on it.


This article was originally published by Freedom Project Media.




Our Cultural Challenge

In 2002, the British Broadcasting Corporation polled its viewers for the names of those they believed were the greatest Britons of all time. The BBC compiled the feedback and came up with a list of the top 100 greatest men and women in all British history. One of the names on that list, at number 73, was Aleister Crowley.

Crowley polled ahead of Robert the Bruce, J.K. Rowling, Chaucer, Henry II, J.R.R. Tolkien, Sir Walter Raleigh, and Richard Burton, among others. So, who is Aleister Crowley and why should we care?

There is no doubt Crowley had a significant impact on Great Briton, even the world. It is difficult to see, though, how anyone could view the impact he had as being great.

Crowley was born in 1875 to a wealthy English family. His father, an evangelist, raised Crowley as a Christian. If his father had not died when Crowley was 11, things might have turned out differently for Alister. Following his father’s death, Crowley became unmanageable for his mother. He began questioning Christian teachings and he completely turned away from his early moral upbringing. He started challenging his teachers, took up smoking and began to frequent prostitutes. He became so unruly his mother called him “the Beast,” a nickname he proudly retained for his whole life. After having a child, he insisted that his daughter call him by that name, and she did.

Crowley’s parents had named him Edward Alexander Crowley, but at 20 he changed it to Aleister since he loathed the nickname, Alec (in his biography Crowley spelled it Alick), that his mother called him.

While Crowley attended Cambridge University he engaged in torrid sexual relations with both men and women, was introduced to the occult through an organization called the Golden Dawn and became captivated by the practices. And he became involved with magic and with the ritual use of drugs.

Crowley later became disillusioned with Golden Dawn because the leadership found him to be too hedonistic. After graduating, Crowley travelled the world. He climbed mountains in Mexico and later in India. While in India he developed an interest in yoga and meditation.

After two years abroad, Crowley returned to Europe, to Paris, where he joined a friend from Cambridge, Gerard Kelly, who eventually became a famous painter. During his time in Paris, Crowley met and fell in love with Kelly’s younger sister, Rose. He married her initially to save her from an arranged marriage she did not want, but later they fell in love with each other.

Rose enthusiastically shared Aleister’s beliefs and bizarre sexual preferences. They traveled together and she helped create and develop Crowley’s new Religion, Thelema, which had been partially inspired by Golden Dawn. They wound up having two daughters, one of whom died of typhoid. Apparently because of grief from this loss, Rose started drinking heavily. A few years later, Crowley and Rose divorced and by 1911, Rose was institutionalized.

Crowley continued to develop his religion.

Around 1920 Crowley and several followers traveled to Sicily and set up his Abby of Thelema at Cefalu. He and his acolytes remained at the Abby engaging in their depraved sexual and occult practices until Benito Mussolini caught wind of what they were doing. Mussolini was so disgusted he ordered Crowley and his followers all deported.

After travelling in North Africa for a time, Crowley eventually returned to England where he concentrated on writing. In his books and articles he promoted the occult, sexual excess and sexual liberation, and a no limits anything goes lifestyle. Crowley believed in and engaged in unfettered sex with same and opposite sex partners, even with children and teens. His followers followed suit.

It was about this time that the British press labeled Crowley the “wickedest man in the world.” That’s pretty bad considering all the evil going on in the early 20th century—the rise of organized crime, the emergence of Fascism, the slaughter of the Russian Revolution . . . the horrors perpetrated by the architects of World War I.

Undaunted, Crowley continued to promote his religion, Thelema, and pleasure seeking lifestyles that recognized none of the boundaries of civilized society. His followers were encouraged to do whatever they wanted which was the first principle of Thelema: “’Do What Thou Wilt’ is the whole of the law.” The original list of foundational obligations for Thelemites were:

  • To discover and express one’s own Will.
  • To abstain from knowingly restricting others from discovering and expressing their own Will.
  • To attempt to eliminate those forces that restrict the discovery and expression of Will (i.e. Tyranny, Superstition, and Oppression).

There are dozens of Thelemic orders throughout the United States and Europe today. “Do What Thou Wilt” remains the first principle, but over the years the original “obligations” have been expanded and clarified as follows:

  • Each individual has a Will (or ‘True Will’ to distinguish it from one’s wants, wishes, and desires), their purpose on Earth, a Nature to fulfill, and each person’s sole right and duty is to find that Will and to do it.
  • Each individual is Divine, the center of their own universe. This is one central meaning of the phrase ‘Every man and every woman is a star.’
  • Each individual therefore has their own unique Way in the world, with their own unique ‘good’ and ‘bad’ suitable to their Nature.
  • Each individual has the right to be who they are, especially in terms of sexual and gender identity. There is no ‘preferred’ gender identity in Thelema except the one that is the best fulfillment of your nature. As it is said, ‘Take your fill and will of love as ye will, when, where and with whom ye will?’
  • Thelemites engage in various spiritual practices, often those of Magick (sic) and Yoga, to try to deepen their understanding of their true nature and Will.

Prominent people took an interest in Crowley in increasing numbers after he died at age 72 in 1947. One of his admirers was Alfred Kinsey. After publishing his two earth changing books, “Sexual Behavior in the Human Male,” and “Sexual Behavior in the Human Female,” Kinsey traveled to Crowley’s home, to locations of the orders of Thelema, and to the Abby of Thelema in Sicily. He was looking for original material on the sexual practices Crowley engaged in, especially for Crowley’s diaries on sex magic. Kinsey was unsuccessful.

Others, too, became enamored with Crowley’s teaching. The Beatles included a photo of Aleister Crowley on the cover of their album, “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band,” and John Lennon said the Beatle’s philosophy was the same as Crowley’s, asserting “[t]he whole Beatle idea was to do what you want, right?  To take your own responsibility.” David Bowie, wrote Crowley into his song, Quicksand,

“I’m closer to the Golden Dawn, Immersed in Crowley’s uniform, I’m not a prophet or a stone age man, Just a mortal with potential of a superman”

Jimmy Page of Led Zeppelin bought Crowley’s former home in Scotland, and Timothy Leary was inspired by Crowley when he encouraged his 60’s followers to “turn on, tune in, and drop out.” Leary believed he was carrying on what Crowley started.

Even Jack Parsons, a rocket scientist who founded NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab was a devoted follower of Crowley. So it was not just members of the counter-culture who were enamored with Crowley’s vision of a hedonistic lifestyle.

Many of Crowley’s  books remain available on Amazon today. And his philosophy has become infused throughout Western culture.

Does this make him a great man? There is no objective measure by which he could be considered great. Yet he has had a profound influence on us, starting with the counter-culture of the 60’s and 70’s and extending right into the 21st century. The occult, the new age religion, the bondage to pleasure, the desire to ever expanding sexual boundaries, his shadow envelopes it all.

No. He was not great. Evil is the more appropriate term.

But what does this say about us? How can a man go from being considered the wickedest man on earth, someone so depraved Mussolini couldn’t allow him to remain in Italy, to being considered one of the greatest men in the history of Great Briton, a nation whose empire once spanned the entire globe? How did this happen?

Darkness is now viewed as light. Evil is now seen as good.

Where is the church?





Leftists Want to Enshrine a Right to Exterminate the Unborn in Illinois’ Constitution

Leftist boomers and their ideological spawn together have created the worst generations, shameful heirs of a noble legacy hard-won by our forebears. Leftist boomers, taking their cues from pervert Alfred Kinsey, hedonist man-child Hugh Hefner, and addled Timothy Leary, ushered in the drug and sexual revolutions. Satiating primitive urges, escapist longings, and self-centered desires while eschewing self-denial and God are the driving forces of these generations. They believe their Deep Thoughts, intense feelings, and overactive groins determine morality (which they incoherently claim is subjective while trying to force others to believe leftist morality is objective, inarguable truth). And so we see the child-sacrifice cult growing, particularly here in Illinois, the former breadbasket/current killing fields of the country.

According to Chicago Sun-Times columnist leftist crank Rich Miller, Illinois House Speaker Democrat Chris Welchstrongly indicated recently that a state constitutional amendment guaranteeing reproductive rights was a very likely prospect” (emphasis added).

Miller acknowledged the troubling reality that the manifestly failing state of Illinois is ruled by a de facto single-party system:

Welch will soon have more members of his party than any speaker since the state constitution was revised to reduce the chamber’s membership by a third. He said there were a number of explanations for his caucus’ expansion, but the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade was “monumental.”

It’s ironic that leftists who have conniptions about the possibility of Republicans controlling both the U.S. Senate and House and about the somewhat-conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court don’t seem to mind the super-majority of leftists in Springfield who are ruining the state in every measurable way. (Nor did leftists seem exercised about the Warren and Burger Courts, which are both considered liberal Courts.)

But enough about “progressive” inconsistency. Back to the nefarious plans of Illinois’ Springfield miscreants.

Welch told Miller that “the Republican Party, not just here in Illinois but across the country, is wrong on those issues. They’re just wrong.”

“Those issues” seems to be one issue: the legal right of women to choose to kill their gestating children. I’d love to hear more from moral absolutist Welch on his justifications for asserting the wrongness of protecting human life.

State Senator Don Harmon (D-Oak Park) also dismissed the concerns of those who believe incipient human life has value:

I think that voters who would traditionally vote for Republican candidates turned out and said, ‘I’ve had enough of this nonsense. I’m going to vote for a Democrat, or I’m certainly not going to vote for the crazy Republicans’ and skipped a race.”

I’m not sure exactly what Deep Thinker Harmon believes is nonsensical and crazy. Is it “nonsensical” and “crazy” that Republicans believe a new human being comes into existence when sperm and egg unite?

Is it “nonsensical” and “crazy” that Republicans believe more powerful humans ought not have a legal right to order the extermination of weaker humans?

Is it “nonsensical” and “crazy” that Republicans support the overturning of Roe v. Wade, which “progressive” legal scholars have long argued had no basis in the Constitution?

Miller cited the new president of Personal PAC, Illinois’ most powerful pro-genocide lobbying organization, Sarah Garza Resnick, who hopes to “work with legislative Republicans to recruit pro-choice candidates.”

What is the “choice” she wants Republicans to support—the one she avoids identifying? That would be the “choice” of women to have their human offspring dismembered at any stage of development for any or no reason with no restrictions: no limits on gestational age, no parental notification, no mandatory waiting periods, no informed consent (and no limits on scientific experimentation on human embryos).

Garza offers some unsolicited advice to Republicans:

“I think that any smart political strategist would need to read the tea leaves of what is going on and what the voters are sending a very clear message on. And if you want to stay relevant and get the other important issues that you care about discussed, then I think it would make sense to recruit and run pro-choice Republicans. …

If you look at what happened in Kansas, and if you look at what happened where [abortion] was on the ballot in five states … on November 8, the people of this country overwhelmingly want choice to be protected and codified and they don’t want it to be dismantled.”

Well, anyone who’s anyone knows how important it is to “stay relevant.”

This seems a good moment to remind Americans who favor truth and justice over political expedience that sometimes the madding crowd is on the way wrong side of history. We should have learned that lesson from the history of the slave trade all around the world. And at one time, there were countless numbers of Americans who did not want the institution of slavery dismantled. It’s a good thing Garza wasn’t around then to offer unsolicited advice to political leaders.

Sunny Hostin, co-host of The View—a show whose leftist hosts are so intolerant and hostile they drive away all co-hosts with distinctly conservative views—recently compared white suburban women who would vote for Republicans to “roaches voting for Raid.” The steaming pile of ironies keep mounting.

First Hostin, a person of color and member of the diversity-loving, anti-racist crowd, refers to white women as roaches. And then she claims that voting to outlaw the extermination of tiny, weak humans is equivalent to voting for extermination. Hmmm …

Near as I can tell, Hostin is suggesting that outlawing the intentional serial extermination of tiny humans will result in deaths of women, so let’s examine Hostin’s claim to see how sound her analogy is.

In legal abortion, the dead victims are intentionally killed by the choice of their mothers aided and abetted by the law. In illegal abortions, the rarely dead women die accidentally as a result of choices they made.

Thousands of women choose to have their human offspring killed—nearly one million humans annually. Compare that to the statistics for the number of women who accidentally died from illegal abortions a decade before Roe legalized prenatal genocide. According to the liberal Guttmacher Institute, by “1965, the number of deaths due to illegal abortion had fallen to just under 200.

Who do leftists treat like roaches? Who do they want to exterminate? (As an aside, would leftists support the daily serial killing of actual roaches via dismemberment? I’d say there are two chances of that: slim and fat.)

It’s not surprising that apparatchik for the prenatal genocide industrial complex Sarah Resnick Garza believescodifying” human slaughter “on the constitutional level would make sense.” Let’s hope and pray that there are enough decent Illinoisans left in Illinois and the General Assembly to keep that from happening.

The 103rd General Assembly begins on Jan. 11, 2023 and runs for two years. IFI will alert our subscribers about any proposal regarding an abortion amendment to the Illinois constitution and urge them to contact their lawmakers to dissuade them from supporting it.





State University Honors Pervert

On September 9, 2022, Indiana University (IU) issued a press release announcing that in honor of the 75th anniversary of the Kinsey Institute, the university has installed a life-size bronze statue of entomologist and pervert extraordinaire Alfred C. Kinsey after whom the Kinsey Institute is named.

Demonstrating the astonishing ignorance of leftists, the press release says,

The sculpture’s installation on the Bloomington campus demonstrates the university’s pride in the living legacy of research and academic freedom Kinsey helped to forge and the institute’s ongoing commitment to equity regarding sexual diversity established by Kinsey’s research.

Well, Kinsey was inarguably a fan of what IU calls euphemistically “sexual diversity,” and his legacy tragically lives on, but neither his predilection for “sexual diversity” nor his legacy are deserving of prideful honors.

Demonstrating a risible absence of irony, Justin Garcia, executive director of the Kinsey Institute, said this—I kid you not:

Dr. Kinsey left us with the extraordinary legacy of his endless scientific curiosity, his unwavering commitments to academic freedom and his passion for understanding humanity’s sexual diversity. … This spectacular sculpture honors Kinsey’s international scholarly and public impact.

I would agree if by “spectacular,” Garcia means “of, relating to, or being a spectacle.”

“Legacy of “endless scientific curiosity” is Newspeak for unbridled, morally untethered sexual license, which is really not all that extraordinary. Countless numbers of perverts share Kinsey’s endless curiosity. The diverse porn pandemic reveals that sick reality. What Kinsey possessed that ordinary, run-of-the-mill perverts lack is the imprimatur of academia.

Having a life-size bronze sculpture of a creeper/criminal who self-identified as a serious scholar is definitely a spectacle and one wholly unworthy of any institution committed to “Lux et Veritas—”Light and Truth.”

Here are some of the salient features of Kinsey’s salacious life and research:

  • “In Kinsey’s 1948 report he recounted using nine men to ‘observe’ the sexual responses of children for his research. … ‘Some of these adults … are technically trained persons who have kept diaries or other records which have been put at our disposal.’ He included a chart that indicated that these ‘trained’ adults were inducing sexual ‘orgasms’ in babies as young as five months of age. One four-year-old is reported to have had 26 ‘orgasms’ in 24 hours. An 11- month-old baby had 14 ‘orgasms’ in 38 minutes.”
  • In reality, it was revealed in 1995 that all this data came from the diaries of one pedophile named Rex King who attempted to “bring to orgasm boys between the ages of 2 months and 15 years, in some cases over a period as long as 24 hours.” Kinsey eagerly encouraged King to send all his diaries: “I rejoice at everything you send.” In the 2004 movie starring Liam Neeson as Kinsey, the actor portraying King says this:

My grandmother introduced me to sexual intercourse when I was 10. My first homosexual act was with my father. I was 11. The 33 members of my extended family – I’ve had sex with 17 of them. That’s five generations now. … I’ve had sex with 22 separate species of animals. I’ve had intercourse with 9, 412 people. I’ve had sexual relations with 605 pre-adolescent males and 231 pre-adolescent females.

  • “In his 1953 report the sexual data was mainly taken from ‘adult partners’ of 609 pre-adolescent girls. Kinsey called these molestations ‘play’ and claimed them harmless.”
  • Criteria used to determine when infants were experiencing “orgasm” included “violent convulsions, groaning, ‘an abundance of tears’ (i.e., sobbing), extreme trembling and fainting. In other words, what any normal adult would view as a child’s severe reactions to trauma Kinsey interpreted as children enjoying themselves.”
  • Kinsey’s “research” has been criticized for serious methodological and ethical flaws, including using significant numbers of imprisoned child molesters and prostitutes as well as a Nazi pedophile (Friedrich “Fritz” Von Balluseck) but reporting their responses as representative of the population at large.
  • The married Kinsey had sex with many men, including students and research assistants.
  • Kinsey encouraged his wife to have sex with other men.
  • Kinsey recorded sexual activities between his wife and other men, and homosexual acts between men and group sex in his attic.
  • Kinsey circumcised himself with a pocketknife at about age 60.
  • Kinsey had himself filmed masturbating while inserting objects into his urethra.

American historian and art critic Kelly Grovier writing for the BBC about the BLM rioters who went on a statuary-destruction tear offers this about the meaning of statues:

From their earliest inception … statues were … less about the individuals they depict than about how we see ourselves.

Clearly, Kinsey represents favorably how many Americans see themselves.

While the Founding Fathers, whose statues were defaced or torn down in 2020, were men with moral blind spots, it was not their moral failings that were honored. Today’s Americans don’t see themselves in or seek to honor the moral failings of Thomas Jefferson. No, it was the wisdom and noble efforts to create a more perfect union that Americans honor through their statues of the great men of American history. In their statues, Americans see an aspirational picture of themselves and the country that has been a beacon of light to millions.

In contrast, Kinsey’s depravity is not a moral blind spot that his fans overlook. His depravity is what they celebrate. Kinsey is like Harvey Milk in that regard. Both men are honored by leftists because of their depravity–not despite it.

Grovier continues:

Just how engrained that instinct is – to perceive an aspect of oneself in the image of another – is impossible to measure. Such an impulse may explain why it is so agonisingly difficult to tolerate the persistence of memorials that venerate past masters of pain. Theirs is a suffocating weight. The outrage that many feel about having to share the streets with such hulking ghosts of oppression is deep and crushingly real. 

A statue of Kinsey—the abusive father of the sexual revolution and, therefore, master of incalculable pain—is agonizingly difficult to tolerate. His statue is a suffocating weight. The hulking bronze ghost of Kinsey is a painful reminder of the suffering of the many victims—the slaughtered unborn, children without mothers or fathers, single parents, and children whose minds are being deceived and bodies mutilated—of Kinsey’s sexual revolution.

While repugnant, perhaps the bronze statue at the public Indiana University honoring Alfred Kinsey fits the repugnant contemporary era leftists have socially constructed in America where our public schools train up children in the ways sexually perverse leftists want them to go. At the same time, it is a grotesque reminder of the human suffering Kinsey has caused.





The Totalitarian Agenda Behind LGBTQ Sex-Ed Revolution at School

Extreme sexualization and LGBTQ+ indoctrination of children at younger and younger ages in public schools is now ubiquitous nationwide—and it’s part of a much broader agenda that goes well beyond just encouraging confusion and promiscuity for its own sake.

The real goal is ultimately to destroy the nuclear family as the foundation of civilization, experts say. As Karl Marx and countless other totalitarians understood, the state will step in to fill the void left by the family unit. In short, sex-ed is aimed at undermining the very building blocks of society.

In the not-too-distant past, so-called sex-education for young children and normalizing gender confusion in tax-funded schools would have been unthinkable and even criminal.

Today, the most extreme forms of sex education imaginable—including encouraging young children to engage in fornication, sodomy, group sex, abortions, and even “sex-change” surgeries—is a reality in the United States and beyond.

If it were not for exceptions offered to school employees in state obscenity laws, it would still literally be a crime to give children much of the material being used in classrooms nationwide under the guise of “sex education.”

But the worst is yet to come. If the well-funded sex-education behemoth gets its way, sexualization of children in schools masquerading as “health” and “Comprehensive Sexuality Education” (CSE) will undermine the final restraints on unchecked government control over the individual.

Liberty, family, and civilization are all in the cross-hairs now. The stakes could not be higher.

What It Looks Like in School

Virtually all of the curricula being used to teach sex to children are deeply problematic to anyone with a shred of decency, modesty, or common sense.

In many states and districts, the sexualization starts as early as kindergarten, with children being introduced to homosexuality, gender fluidity, homosexual parenting, “anatomy” that includes graphic images of genitalia, and more. Oftentimes, the sexualization and LGBT material is mandated under state law.

One of the most frequently used resources in public schools across America that has been endorsed by state and local officials nationwide as “compliant” with state mandates is known as “Rights, Respect, Responsibility” (3Rs).

Created by sexual revolutionaries at Advocates for Youth, a partner of tax-funded abortion giant Planned Parenthood, the program has shocked parents from across the political spectrum—for good reason.

Starting as young as kindergarten or first and second grade, children learn (pdf) that girls can supposedly have male genitalia and vice-versa. This self-evidently fraudulent claim is emphasized over and over again throughout the child’s younger years, causing widespread confusion among impressionable youngsters.

When they become teens, the program teaches them about “pansexuality,” among other absurdities and perversions.

Throughout elementary school, children are exposed to obscene images that have been widely condemned as pornographic, including “cartoons” in books such as “It’s Perfectly Normal.” The book features cartoon images of naked children, sexual intercourse, children masturbating, and more.

Under 3Rs, by the time the children are around 11, they are taught how to seek out information about sex on the internet. The children are constantly taught to rely on Planned Parenthood for information and “services,” too.

Before becoming teens, they learn about “making changes in the world” through “LGBT advocacy.”

At around age 12, abortion is introduced as an “option” to deal with unwanted pregnancies. And by age 13, years before they reach the legal age of consent, the children are taught how to obtain various forms of contraception and birth control.

Gender Confusion

Throughout the curriculum, which is aligned with the National Sex Education Standards (pdf) developed by Advocates for Youth and other advocates of sexualizing children, young people are led to believe that they can choose their gender and that they may have been born in the wrong body.

Worse, they are taught how to act on it, putting them at risk of seeking out dangerous hormonal and surgical “treatments” with lifelong consequences. Studies show most children confused about their gender end up growing out of it by adulthood.

This indoctrination is despite the fact that the American College of Pediatricians (pdf) argues it’s “child abuse” for adults to try to convince children that a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal or healthy.

Another frequently used resource is “Teaching Tolerance” (now known as “Learning for Justice”) created by the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

As part of promoting “tolerance” to children, the SPLC recommends the highly controversial book “10,000 Dresses” by Marcus Ewert for students in kindergarten through second grade.

Among other lessons, the book teaches the children, typically aged 5 through 8, to ignore their parents and impersonate the opposite sex if they feel they were born in the “wrong” body.

Numerous state education bureaucracies and officials have endorsed the extreme SPLC program despite the objections of parents.

Making matters worse, those officials sometimes act on it, too. From California to Florida, school districts are using “Gender Transition Plans” to help students start “transitioning” to a new gender, even without the consent of parents.

Public-school efforts to confuse children have been so successful that a 2017 UCLA study found more than one in four California children ages 12 through 17 are now “gender non-conforming.”

Even in ultra-conservative Utah, state prescription data show that the number of minor girls undergoing “gender transition” processes increased by about 10,000 percent from 2015 to 2020.

Dangerous Lies and Propaganda

While the creators of the 3Rs program claim it is “medically accurate” to comply with state law, that is objectively false.

On a worksheet for 7th graders purporting to outline the risks of various sex acts, for example, children ages 11 and 12 are taught “anal sex using a condom correctly” is a “low risk” activity.

In reality, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that they are only 60 to 70 percent effective in preventing HIV even with perfect and consistent use. The Food and Drug Administration has never approved condoms for anal sex.

In other words, children who believe the sex-ed lies being taught in government schools are at serious risk of becoming infected with deadly venereal diseases.

Similarly, consider Planned Parenthood’s “Healthy, Happy and Hot“ booklet (pdf), which tells youth infected with HIV that they do not have to inform their partners about their infection. In fact, the document even claims that laws requiring disclosure “violate the rights of people living with HIV.”

Another Planned Parenthood sex-ed document (pdf) recommends teaching children 10 and under that “sexual activity” can be part of “commercial sex work,” and that they have a “right” to “decide when to have sex.”

The same toolkit encourages teaching children under 10 about homosexuality, masturbation, gender fluidity, and more. It also teaches them that they have a “right” to abort their unborn child.

Planned Parenthood, funded by the American taxpayer, is one of the world’s largest peddlers of sex-ed resources. Its materials are used and promoted in government schools worldwide.

Incredibly, despite the group’s rhetoric about “choice,” women’s rights advocate Reggie Littlejohn has repeatedly exposed Planned Parenthood’s cooperation with the Chinese Communist Party’s forced abortions and other brutal population-control schemes.

The Last Taboos

The pervasive sexualization of children in public schools is now pushing the boundaries against one of the last taboos: pedophilia, pederasty, and adult sex with children.

Under California’s LGBT mandate for schools, the Brea Olinda Unified School District (BOUSD) was caught including ancient Greek men’s proclivity to have sexual relations with boys—considered child rape in every state in the union—as part of teaching children LGBT history.

When confronted by outraged mother Stephanie Yates of Informed Parents of California, BOUSD Assistant Superintendent of Curricula Kerrie Torres said the children were being taught about it “because we are talking about historical perspectives of how gender relations and different types of sexual orientations have existed in history.”

Yates, the mom, sounded incredulous. “So sex between a man and a boy is a sexual orientation?” she asked.

The assistant superintendent held her ground. “It’s something that occurred in history, and so this is really important for us to include,” Torres said.

Despite there being a video of the exchange, frantic “fact checkers” tried unsuccessfully to quell the outrage, bizarrely defending the lessons.

But the truth is there for all to see. Increasingly, public schools are working to normalize sexual relationships between adults and children.

The message throughout 12 years of sexualization and indoctrination in school in essentially all the sex-ed major programs is simple: If there’s “consent,” nothing else matters, anything goes, and there are no rules when it comes to sex.

This view flies in the face of the teachings of all the world’s major religions and civilizations for thousands of years. In fact, it’s practically unprecedented in human history, with the possible exception of what the Bible records in Sodom and Gomorrah.

Outside ‘Sex Ed’ and Intersection With Critical Race Theory

Even outside of sex-ed classes, where in some states parents can technically opt their children out, the extreme sexualization and perversion has reached epidemic levels.

In English classes, for instance, children are told to read abominable “books” that feature extremely graphic descriptions of sexual acts and sexual violence.

There is also an intersection between the radical sexualization and the Critical Race Theory indoctrination exposed in part 19 of this series.

One exercise with endless variations that has been deployed in government schools nationwide has children “deconstruct” their identities and examine their “power and privilege” based on their race, gender, and sexual identity.

As part of the scheme, children are taught that being “cisgendered” (not transgender) or “heterosexual” gives them power and privilege, along with being white, while being transgender or homosexual makes them oppressed.

In such an exercise forced on 7- and 8-year-old government-school victims in Silicon Valley, the children were offered an example to drive the point home: “a white, cisgender man, who is able-bodied, heterosexual, considered handsome and speaks English has more privilege than a Black transgender woman.”

Just like Marxists have divided populations for over a century, children are classified into “oppressor” or “oppressed” categories based on whatever fault lines the subversives can concoct—with “sexuality” and “gender” now a key part of the mix.

Global Problem

This is not just happening in America. The United Nations Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization (UNESCO), exposed in an earlier part of this series, is at the forefront of the effort to sexualize children worldwide, and especially in the West.

Indeed, many of the most outrageous elements of America’s most frequently used “sex-education” programs are perfectly consistent with UNESCO’s 2018 “International technical guidance on sexuality education.”

Citing Planned Parenthood’s ideologically driven “research” and “evidence” more than 20 times, the UN sex-ed standards call teaching children about “sexual pleasure” before they hit 10.

Incredibly, by age 5, children are supposed to describe how “gender and biological sex” are supposedly “different.”

By age 9, the UN guidelines teach children about masturbation and call for children to “describe male and female responses to sexual stimulation.” Children should also “demonstrate respect for diverse practices related to sexuality” and “explain how someone’s gender identity may not match their biological sex” by 9, the standards say.

By 12, children are expected to believe that “non-penetrative sexual behaviors” are “pleasurable” and less likely to result in infection than normal sex. The UN’s “learning objectives” demand that 12-year-olds “support the right for everyone” to “express their sexual feelings.”

Critics have blasted this as “grooming” children.

The UN document even includes helpful tips for educators on how to handle outraged parents and religious leaders concerned about the indoctrination.

Of course, there’s a reason the UN sex-ed document calls for sexualization of children “from the beginning of formal schooling.”

As UN LGBT czar Vitit Muntarbhorn put it in a 2017 interview with an Argentinian newspaper, to change the mentality of the population in favor of new sexual norms, “it is so important to start working with young people, the younger the better.” (Emphasis added).

Real Agenda

The focus on sex and perversion is clearly and literally ubiquitous in government schools across America and beyond. But why?

This was not seen as even acceptable until very recently—much less necessary. In fact, prior to the grotesque pseudo-science of pervert Alfred Kinsey, it would have been considered a criminal offense to subject children to these obscenities.

Advocates of sexualizing children as early as possible typically frame their arguments in terms of reducing STDs and unwanted or teen pregnancies while pursuing nebulous notions of “health” and “reproductive freedom” or “reproductive justice.”

Despite the fact that the explosion in teen pregnancies and venereal disease coincided with the sexualization of children in school by sexual revolutionaries, the tax-funded behemoths behind the push pump out endless junk studies purporting to support their fraudulent claims.

But obviously, if children were not having sex outside of marriage, the problems that “sex education” purports to solve would virtually cease to exist.

In short, there’s a much darker agenda at work. The sex “educators” themselves barely bother to hide it anymore.

Consider SIECUS, the group that grew out of Kinsey’s perverted pseudo-science. While it was once known as the Sexual Information and Education Council of the United States, now it is just SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change. And indeed, “social change” is the goal—radical, horrifying “social change.”

As far back as 1979, the CDC admitted there was an ulterior motive. In a report headlined “An Analysis of U.S. Sex Education Programs and Evaluation Methods,” researchers revealed that the “goals” of sex education in American schools had become “much more ambitious” than parents realized. Those goals included “the changing of … attitudes and behaviors.”

The government has long understood the consequences of this. Late psychoanalyst Dr. Melvin Anchell, who worked on President Lyndon Johnson’s Commission on Obscenity and Pornography, warned that these sexual indoctrination programs targeting children cause “irreparable harm” to their victims—damage that lasts their entire lives.

Among other dangers, Anchell identified severe damage to children’s future marriages, families, relationships, and lives. In some cases, it can even contribute to psychopathy, suicide, and mass murder, he warned.

Long before that, communist revolutionaries sought to demonize marriage and obliterate the family, too, producing unprecedented disaster. Consider, for example, the horrifying experience of Soviet Russia in the decade after the Bolshevik Revolution.

Sexual revolutionaries in the West have understood this for over a century, too. Atheist “psychiatrist” Dr. Wilhelm Reich, a self-styled “Freudo-Marxist” who was a Communist Party member and an associate of sex fanatic Sigmund Freud, saw what he first termed the “sexual revolution” not as an end in-and-of itself.

Instead, Reich saw it as a means to obliterate the family, and thereby facilitate the destruction of religious values. Ultimately, the hope was to achieve the breakdown of Western civilization by destroying the familial transmission belt by which values are passed on from one generation to the next.

The goal: allow Marxism to truly take root on the blank canvas created by the destruction of the old order.

To that end, Reich strongly encouraged “sex education” in school to “divest parents of their moral authority.”

As the family and the church are weakened through the unleashing of sexual anarchy via “sex education,” the government steps in and takes over in the roles formerly reserved for those two divinely ordained institutions.

The World in the Cross-hairs

Sharon Slater, president of Family Watch International and co-chair of the national Protect Child Health Coalition, told The Epoch Times that the goal is eventually to get the world onboard with this new value system.

“If they can raise up a generation indoctrinated in their harmful abortion rights, promiscuity rights, and radical transgender ideology, they will have indoctrinated the future leaders of the world,” she said.

“In fact, CSE is the number one tool of the abortion rights and LGBT rights lobby to promote their agendas worldwide by shaping the views of youth,” added Slater, who works to counter the agenda at the UN.

One of the most important tools created by her organization is a documentary called “The War on Children: The Comprehensive Sexuality Education Agenda.” It shines a light on the horrors being forced on children.

“CSE is a dangerous worldwide agenda intended to sexualize children at the youngest ages,” she explained. “I couldn’t sleep at night knowing what I knew and knowing most parents had no idea their children were being taught such harmful things.”

Sex Educators Sound the Alarm

Even former sex-ed teachers have blown the whistle on the subversive agenda behind sex ed. Monica Cline, for instance, spent a decade working as a comprehensive sex educator with Planned Parenthood before defecting and starting an organization dedicated to countering that.

“A big piece of this, which for some people, it’s something I think [is] hard for them to understand, is that there is a huge movement through socialism that really wants to do away with the nuclear family,” she explained to The Daily Signal, noting that abolishing private property is also part of the agenda.

“Sex education is a big piece of that, because when you teach children to dehumanize themselves, to take intimacy and family and marriage out of sex, even to the point of killing your own children through abortion, you are essentially killing the family,” Cline continued. “You’re destroying the family.”

Encouraging people to “read any curriculum” being used in sex-ed programs to see the tactics and graphic nature of the material, Cline noted that parents are always cut out of the picture when it comes to sex education.

“They want the children dependent on the government, or on public health, whatever it may be, but they do not want the children to be depending on the parent anymore,” she said. “And so, all of this really is to break down the family. And they’re essentially … we’re watching it happen.”

Disintegration of Family, Sterility, Slavery

In extended comments to The Epoch Times, Kimberly Ells, author of “The Invincible Family” and a longtime researcher and activist against the global sexualization of children, warned that the radical CSE programs have dangerous objectives that must be resisted.

“He who wins the youth wins the future,” she explained, echoing a common axiom. “So if government schools shape children’s views on sex, gender and family formation—and if those views reject the family as the core of civilization—then the core of civilization is up for grabs, and the government intends to grab it.”

Among other concerns, Ells warned that these programs are undermining parental authority, family values, and even family formation by encouraging children to reject their parents’ teachings and view sex as merely a pleasurable “right,” rather than part of a stable marriage.

The results of undermining family and marriage were predictable: over 40 percent of American children are now born out of wedlock (pdf), with almost one in four American children now living in a single-parent household.

The consequences of this family disintegration are horrific—and the problem is getting worse. But even beyond the crime, dependence, and poverty is the danger of tyranny stepping in to fill the void left by parents and families.

“Children who become slaves to the sexual appetites of their bodies early are more likely to become slaves in other areas of their lives,” added Ells, who has spoken at the UN.

Teaching children to reject biological sex as a relevant characteristic of one’s identity is even more nefarious. “At its core, this two-pronged ideology rejects the biological family—based on physiologically oppositional sex—as the fundamental unit of society,” she said.

“The T in LGBT is by far the most problematic,” Ells warned. “Same-sex marriage annihilates the idea that men and women are complementary. But transgenderism annihilates the idea that men and women inherently exist at all.”

Already, she said, legal movements around transgenderism are setting the stage for the “marginalization” of mothers, fathers, and families by law.

“When parents’ ties to their children are obscured or weakened it creates an environment hospitable to government intervention and socialist-communist revolution,” Ells continued. “That is why Marx’s Communist Manifesto openly called for the ‘abolition of the family.’”

“Dethroning the family creates a void that can and must be filled—though it is impossible to adequately fill it,” she said. “If we are to avoid the disembowelment of the family and the domination of the state that follows its disembowelment, we must resist efforts to cancel biological sex.”

Ells called on parents and policymakers to resist the erasing of male and female and end funding for UN agencies peddling the dangerous agenda. She also urged the removal of “sexual rights” advocates such as Planned Parenthood from schools and an end to CSE programming at all levels.

Protecting Children

Governments and school boards all across America have failed in their duty to protect children from the ubiquitous evils that now pervade the so-called “public education” system masquerading as “health” and “tolerance.”

In an earlier part of this series, the gut-wrenching history of this abusive sexualization of children in school was exposed featuring extensive interviews with Dr. Judith Reisman, who recently passed away. It literally goes back to perverts who sexually molested large numbers of children under the guise of “science.”

Americans are now confronted with a tax-funded monster that threatens not just the innocence of their children, but their liberties, families, and even the very future of their civilization.

Obviously, government at all levels has failed to protect children from the dangerous agenda they themselves unleashed. That leaves parents as the last barrier.

If the grotesque sex-ed extremism destroying America and her youth is going to be stopped, it will be up to loving moms and dads to lead the fight.


This article as originally published by The Epoch Times, and is one report in a series of articles examining the origins of government education in the United States.


More information:

Reasons to Exit Illinois Government Schools

Illinois School Proficiency FAILURE

Did You Know?

How to Rescue Our Children

“Comprehensive” Sex Education

For Parents, Grandparents and Church Leaders

Overcoming Objections





The Sordid History and Deadly Consequences of ‘Sex Ed’ at School

This article was originally published in April 2020.

Very few people realize that the reason children today are being sexualized at school is because pedophiles sexually abused hundreds of children, then claimed that the victims enjoyed it. That’s a fact, and the documents prove it.

In government schools all across the United States today, young children are literally being encouraged to experiment with fornication, masturbation, sodomy, oral sex, and all manner of sexual activities. It often begins as early as kindergarten and elementary school.

In fact, what passes for contemporary “sex education” in the United States and around the Western world would have been unthinkable just a generation ago—even a few years ago. And believe it or not, it’s getting more and more radical by the day.

In California, a top school district official defended teaching pedophilia to children because it’s one of a number of “different types of sexual orientation” that “have existed in history.”

The consequences of all this sex-ed mania have been devastating, too.

But it wasn’t always this way. And the history of how the United States got here will blow your mind.

The proliferation of “sex education” in American government schools has its roots in the pseudo-scientific quackery of sexual revolutionary Alfred Kinsey.

Hundreds, maybe thousands, of children were allegedly raped, molested, and brutalized, and their experiences recorded under the guise of “science.”

Even before Kinsey unleashed his perversion on an unsuspecting American public, though, communist butchers had experimented with the use of so-called sex education to break down family, culture, traditional morality, and nations. It worked well.

Kinsey’s ‘Research’

Long before Kinsey came on the scene, sex educators say, there was a sort of sex education being taught in schools. But it wasn’t called that. And comparing it with what Kinsey and his fellow sex fiends and perverts would unleash on America would be like comparing alfalfa to meteors.

In the early to mid-1900s, sex education in the United States, often described as “hygiene,” consisted primarily of religious and moral teachings on the subject. The programs also warned children about the horrifying consequences of extramarital and premarital sex—venereal disease, mental scars, the moral and emotional problems, and so on. That was the norm for generations.

The relatively new idea that children must be taught graphic and obscene sex education only emerged seriously in the United States in the middle of the last century. It came from Kinsey, who was financed by the Rockefeller foundations and the American taxpayer.

In his “Kinsey Reports” published in the late 1940s and early 1950s, Kinsey dropped what was described as an “atom bomb” on American society. Widely viewed as perhaps the worst books to have ever been published in America, the “findings” would unleash a wave of perversion and a “sexual revolution” that continues to claim more victims with each day that passes.

One of the elements of his “sex research” involved pedophiles, who sexually abused children while gathering “scientific data,” experts have concluded. Kinsey’s own data show that potentially hundreds of children were raped or molested by one or more pedophiles using a stopwatch to figure out when the children might experience “orgasm.”

About 200 boys under the age of 12 were among the victims.

Table 34 in Kinsey’s report documents, for example, that one 4-year-old boy supposedly endured 26 alleged “orgasms” in a 24-hour period.

Even babies a few months old were repeatedly abused. One 11-month-old baby was reported to have had 14 “orgasms” in a period of 38 minutes, as documented by the child abuser himself and then afterward recorded as Kinsey’s data. Even a 4-month-old baby girl reportedly had an “orgasm.”

However, experts noted that it isn’t even physically possible for children so young to have an orgasm. Instead, Kinsey’s report reveals that one way the “subjects” defined an orgasm in their “partners” was marked by “violent convulsions of the whole body; heavy breathing, groaning, sobbing, or more violent cries, sometimes with an abundance of tears (especially among younger children).” Does that sound like an orgasm? Perhaps to a pedophile seeking to justify his monstrous crimes.

Experts such as Dr. Judith Reisman, the world’s top expert on Kinsey and the author of multiple books on his research, have pointed out that this would be the equivalent of claiming adult-female rape victims enjoyed being raped, as evidenced by their screaming, crying, and convulsing. And yet this is exactly what Kinsey did. And America, tragically misled by Kinsey and his media dupes, believed him. (Editor’s Note: Dr. Reisman passed away in April 2021.)

Why Americans should trust child molesters and rapists for insight into “child sexuality” has never been adequately explained by Kinsey or his disciples. As Reisman put it, why in the world would somebody ask a rapist whether his victim enjoyed it, and then present that to the world as “science” and “evidence” that children enjoy being molested?

“If he would do that to kids, how can you trust anything this psychopath would have to say?” she asked.

Kinsey’s so-called sex research has been widely debunked and ridiculed by other experts as well. Professor of constitutional law Dr. Charles Rice of Notre Dame University, for instance, denounced Kinsey’s work. “Any judge, legislator or other public official who gives credence to that research is guilty of malpractice and dereliction of duty,” he said.

Incredibly, Kinsey even claimed the children enjoyed this abuse, and that sex with adults—even incest—could be beneficial to them. Among other outrages, Kinsey, citing what critics have blasted as his “junk science,” also posited that children are actually “sexual beings” from birth. As such, they must be “educated” in every manner of sexual activity and perversion conceivable.

This radical idea is literally the foundation of all modern sex education today.

Using Pedophiles’ ‘Data’ to Sexualize Children

Based on his fraudulent findings that children experience orgasms from birth, Kinsey declared that children need early, explicit sex education throughout their school lives. He also claimed children should be taught masturbation, homosexual acts, and heterosexual acts. He even claimed sexual abuse of children didn’t produce serious damage to children, which is self-evidently ludicrous.

According to Reisman, Kinsey’s claims and pseudo-science have produced unprecedented levels of child sexual abuse, pedophilia, sexual torture, and more. Laws were changed and repealed based on Kinsey’s fraudulent data, leaving women and children unprotected and sparking a deadly avalanche of sex education that may bury civilization beneath its icy embrace.

In the May 1954 edition of “Sexology,” a “sex science” magazine that styled itself as the “authoritative guide to sex education,” Kinsey is quoted making an astounding claim. After arguing that it was possible to sexually stimulate infants as young as 2 months or 3 months old, Kinsey claimed it was “clear” that “the earlier” children are started on “sex education,” the “more chance they will have” to supposedly “develop adjusted personalities and wholesome attitudes toward sexual behavior.”

By 1958, inner-city public schools serving primarily black children in the District of Columbia became testing grounds for the radical sexual reeducation envisioned by Kinsey and company. This included showing children “explicit” films that featured details of “barnyard animals mating,” “animated drawings of male ejaculation,” and even the use of a torso model with male and female genitalia.

Reisman writes that children as young as 3 years old were targeted for this sort of “education,” according to reports from the now-defunct Sunday Star newspaper.

The effects were predictable. Soaring rates of out-of-wedlock pregnancies, devastation of the family unit, skyrocketing numbers of fatherless homes, an explosion in venereal diseases, surging crime levels, massive increases in mental health problems, and more.

After those “successes,” the Kinsey-inspired sex education began spreading across the United States.

Many of the early sex-education curricula—often under misleading names such as “family life education,” as it was known in Virginia—openly cited Kinsey’s data as the source.

Pedophile advocacy groups such as the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) also have openly recognized the importance of Kinsey’s “research” to their cause.

Long after Kinsey died, his disciples continued to push the idea that these fraudulent findings by child rapists were foundational to the sexualizing of children in public schools. “The specific findings about these children are totally relevant to modern sex education,” former Kinsey Institute boss Dr. John Bancroft told CBS in a televised interview.

The institute had previously included responses to controversies by Bancroft on their website, which, while expressing concerns about the data, confirmed that Kinsey had obtained information on orgasm in children from men who “had been sexually involved with young boys and who had in the process observed their orgasms,” and one man in particular.

SIECUS Is Born

One of Kinsey’s first major speeches was about the supposed need for sexual education for children, explained Reisman, who has worked with the Department of Justice and now serves as a research professor of psychology at Liberty University. But Kinsey claimed only properly trained “experts” could do the teaching.

Thus, in 1964, the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, now known just as SIECUS, was officially born. These operatives would be Kinsey’s specially trained “sex experts.”

Indeed, the formation of SIECUS was among the most crucial milestones on the road to the ubiquitous sexualizing of America’s children—and the destruction of their innocence and future families.

The organization, which received plenty of money from tax-exempt foundations and American taxpayers, was founded by Dr. Mary Calderone. The highly controversial figure had previously served as the medical director for Planned Parenthood.

In the late 1950s, Calderone went to the Kinsey Institute in Indiana. At a meeting, the group of radical sexual revolutionaries plotted how to advance their cause, and even assigned roles, Reisman told The Epoch Times during a series of interviews. It was decided that SIECUS would handle sex education, with multiple Kinsey Institute representatives serving on the board.

“SIECUS emerged out of the Kinsey Institute after this meeting, where they decided SIECUS should carry out the sex-education that Kinsey envisioned,” Reisman said. “SIECUS was really Kinsey’s arm—and the Kinsey Institute’s arm—into the schools.”

In 1979, despite receiving all sorts of government funding, Calderone compared the task ahead for SIECUS to the “spreading of a ‘new religion,’” according to Reisman. First, Calderone said, adults would have to be converted, so that children could eventually “flourish” and have an understanding that “sexuality” unrestrained by any moral standards was supposedly “healthy.”

SIECUS actually has been rather open about this. In the May–July 1982 SIECUS Report, on page 6, the outfit dropped a bombshell about its links with the Kinsey Institute:

“Few people realize that the great library collection of what is now known as the Kinsey Institute in Bloomington, Indiana was formed very specifically with one major field omitted: sex education,” the report stated, according to Reisman. “This was because it seemed appropriate, not only to the Institute but to its major funding source, the National Institute of Mental Health, to leave this area for SIECUS to fill.”

The report also revealed that SIECUS applied for a “highly important grant” from the taxpayer-funded National Institute of Mental Health that “was designed to implement a planned role for SIECUS.” This role, according to the same report, was to “become the primary data base for the education for sexuality.”

Today, SIECUS peddles its raunchy sex education all across the nation. For some perspective, the organization’s “National Sexuality Education Standards” call for starting the process in kindergarten, teaching children its values on homosexuality, genitalia, sexual activity, and more.

It brags about this, too. “SIECUS is not a single-issue organization because sex ed, as SIECUS envisions it, connects and addresses a variety of social issues,” the group says on its website. “Sex ed sits at the nexus of many social justice movements—from racial justice and LGBTQ rights to the #MeToo movement.”

The group’s new tagline reveals a great deal, too: “Sex Ed for Social Change.”

In addition to the nexus with the large foundations—and especially those tied to the Rockefeller dynasty—the humanist movement played a role in all this, too. In fact, so significant were the links that SIECUS boss Calderone became “Humanist of the Year” in 1974, continuing the long and well-documented humanist takeover of education in the United States that began with John Dewey, as covered in part 4 of this series.

Planned Parenthood, which today specializes in aborting children by the hundreds of thousands, also has played a key role in sexualizing American children with sex education.

More than a few critics have highlighted the conflict of interest here: On one hand, the tax-funded abortion giant encourages children to fornicate, while on the other, it charges big money to abort the children produced by those children fornicating.

Before Kinsey

Even before Kinsey, subversives had realized the potential horrors that sexualizing children and undermining sexual morés could wreak in society—and they loved it.

In 1919, German homosexual activist Magnus Hirschfeld created the Institute of Sex Research. Among its goals was the promotion of “free love,” masturbation, homosexuality, euthanasia, population control, abortion, feminism, and more. In the United States, this agenda was peddled as a way to fight back against the spread of sexually transmitted disease and poverty.

Communists also played a key role. Prior to the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, Russian communists vigorously promoted perverted sex education and “free love.” However, after realizing that society (and their regime) would collapse if it continued, that was stopped in 1924—at least in Russia, while the “New Soviet Man” was being created.

Outside of the enslaved communist nations, though, Marxists would continue promoting their radical sex revolution in free nations, something that continues to this day.

Bolshevik Deputy Commissar for Education and Culture Gyorgy Lukacs, who assumed his post in Hungary’s Bela Kun regime in 1918, pioneered this strategy in Hungary, with catastrophic results. Upon taking power, Lukacs and his comrades mandated raunchy sex education very similar to what is used today in the United States.

His goal was to obliterate Hungary’s Christian civilization and values on the road to a Marxist Utopia. His tools included mandating puppet shows featuring perverted sex acts to young school children, encouraging promiscuity in sex education, and mocking Christian-style family values at the bedrock of civilization.

While the Bela Kun regime in Hungary didn’t last long, Lukacs became a crucial player in the Frankfurt School, as exposed in part 6 of this series. This group also played a key role in spreading sex education and sexual immorality throughout the West. They did this not just by encouraging sex education, but by deliberately and strategically breaking down traditional values, especially those having to do with sexuality, marriage, monogamy, and family life.

By the early 1900s, the socialist-controlled National Education Association, which was the subject of part 8 in this series, began advocating for “sex hygiene” to be taught in schools as well. The excuse was combating venereal diseases, which of course in the real world have exploded in response to the promiscuity unleashed by widespread sexual liberation.

Another key figure in promoting the idea of sex education was G. Stanley Hall, the progressive who trained Dewey, the architect of today’s “progressive” indoctrination program masquerading as public education. Hall’s pretext for pushing sex education was that some girls believed they could get pregnant by kissing.

Changing Values

Ultimately, sex education was a means to an end: Changing the values of children and undermining the family in order to fundamentally transform society away from a free, Christian civilization and toward a new “Utopia.”

Indeed, in a 1979 report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) headlined “An Analysis of U.S. Sex Education Programs and Evaluation Methods,” researchers revealed that the “goals” of sex education in American schools had become “much more ambitious” than parents realized. Those goals included “the changing of … attitudes and behaviors,” something that the authors acknowledged wouldn’t be supported by many Americans.

Even before that, the United Nations and its U.N. Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which has been crucial in indoctrinating humanity as documented in part 9 of this series, got on board with the sex education, too. A report on the February 1964 UNESCO-sponsored International Symposium on Health Education, Sex Education and Education for Home and Family Living recommended “sex education [should] begin at the primary school level.”

The document also called for sex ed to be “integrated into the whole curriculum” and argued that “boys and girls should be taught together.” Taking a cue from Kinsey, the U.N., which has always been close to the Rockefeller dynasty that financed Kinsey, called for “anti-dogmatic methods of teaching” to be used, also claiming “moral norms are relative concepts which change with time.”

The “anti-dogmatic” teaching and the moral relativism would be crucial. Thus, all of the sex education has been combined with what is known as “values clarification,” a scheme that UNESCO—an outfit dominated by communists, socialists, and humanists from day one—has encouraged in education for decades.

This subversive process is aimed at having children reject moral absolutes—in sexuality and everything else—by using mental and emotional manipulation.

It works by giving children hypothetical situations in which the ethical solution appears to be doing something that they were taught was wrong. For instance, a common example involves a hypothetical life raft that can only hold eight people, but there are currently nine in it. The students are told who is in the boat—a doctor, an engineer, a nurse, a cop, and so on—then asked who should be sacrificed for the “greater good.”

A better answer than choosing a victim to murder would be for the passengers to take turns swimming alongside the raft, of course. But that would ruin the whole point of the exercise, which is to get children to reject the idea of right and wrong, as well as the teachings of their own parents and pastors.

Combined with the raunchy sex education that encourages an “anything goes” mentality and offers children tantalizing claims about “safe” pleasure with no moral standards and no consequences (babies can be aborted, after all), the result has been absolutely catastrophic.

The Effects

The fruit of all this radical sex education is now clear to see. The institutions of marriage and family are in free-fall. Half of marriages now end in divorce. And even the couples that stay together often struggle, big time.

Birth rates, meanwhile, have plummeted below replacement levels across the West.

Civilization is literally dying amid a cocktail of loveless sex, drug abuse, suicide, despair, venereal disease, pornography, and sexual chaos.

The effects on the individual are horrific, too. “Little brains are not designed to process sexual stimuli of any kind,” said Reisman, adding that sex education is confusing and creates anxiety for any normal child. Indeed, these stimuli rewire their brains to accommodate the “new” information, she said.

It also causes children to mimic the behaviors they are exposed to, leading to addiction to sexual stimuli.

“The addiction to sexual stimuli and acting out leads to depression, identity disorders of various kinds, STDs, mental health problems, emotional distress, anger, loss of academic achievement, and more,” said Reisman, one of the world’s leading academic experts in this field.

“In the past, shocking sex stimuli often confused many kids into assuming they were homosexual,” she added. “Now many youngsters will assume that they are transgender, especially as they are encouraged everywhere they turn, and often by their own very troubled parents.”

The data already show this, with a 2017 study from the University of California–Los Angeles finding that more than one-quarter of Californian children aged 12 through 17 identify as “gender non-conforming” or “androgynous.” In Sweden, where sex education is even more radical and ubiquitous than in the United States, reports indicate that the number of “transgender” children is doubling each year.

“Juvenile mental health as well as physical and sexual health have deteriorated in every measurement of well-being historically identified by our society,” Reisman said, adding that this downward trend continues.

Another expert who has explored the horrific consequences of sex education on children is the late psychoanalyst and medical doctor Dr. Melvin Anchell, who wrote the minority report for President Lyndon Johnson’s Commission on Obscenity and Pornography and also served as an expert witness for the attorney general’s 1985 Commission on Pornography and Obscenity.

Among other concerns, he said these sexual indoctrination programs targeting young children cause “irreparable harm” to their victims that lasts their entire lives.

Anchell, who has a great deal of experience in the field of sex education, documented the damage done to children in books including “Killers of Children: A Psychoanalytic Look At Sex Education” and “What’s Wrong With Sex Education.”

Citing vast amounts of data and evidence, Anchell argued that sexualizing children causes unspeakable and often permanent harm, severely damaging the children’s future marriages, families, relationships, and lives. In some cases, it can even contribute to psychopathy, suicide, mass-murder, and more.

Unwed child-bearing also exploded right around the time sex-education schemes became ubiquitous in the 1960s. The evidence shows children growing up without a father on average do much worse on every metric than children in homes with a mother and a father.

In the black community, consider that only about 15 percent of children were born out of wedlock between 1940 and 1950. By 2008, after 60 years of sex education, almost 3 out of 4 black babies were born to unwed mothers.

Among whites, less than 5 percent of babies were born out of wedlock prior to 1960. By 2008, that exploded to about 30 percent.

Of course, comprehensive sex education is often marketed to the public as a tool for combating unwed teenage pregnancy and STDs. In fact, the data is clear: After the introduction of sex education, STDs and unwed teen pregnancies skyrocketed. Obviously, reducing STDs and unwed pregnancies was never the goal. If it had been, the experiment would have been stopped by the 1960s at the latest—not turbocharged.

Going Forward

Comprehensive sex education in the United States and around the world is becoming progressively more extreme, with tiny children now being exposed to obscenity, perversion, sexualization, LGBT propaganda, and more.

In 2018, UNESCO released “international technical guidance on sexuality education” urging schools to teach children about “sexual pleasure,” masturbation, and “responses to sexual stimulation” before they even turn 10. By 12, the standards call for children to be taught that “non-penetrative sexual behaviors” can be “pleasurable.”

If the epidemic of perversion, sexualization, and grooming of children isn’t brought under control, Reisman warned of “dark” consequences such as “cultural collapse.” Also, Americans can expect a continued crumbling of families, an explosion in crime, far more suicide, escalating government tyranny, even more drug abuse, widespread poverty, and much more.

“‘The Brave New World’ really was never brave,” Reisman said, a reference to Aldous Huxley’s famous book about a future of free sex and total government regimentation of every aspect of life. “We may find ourselves living it.”

Asked why governments and other powerful institutions seem so determined to sexualize children at younger and younger ages, Reisman said it was partly a matter of following the money. “Governments are backed by people and organizations with money, increasingly the pornography industry, pharmaceutical industry, and the Sex Industrial Complex,” she said.

“Big-government advocates nurse mind-numbed subjects to be dependent upon them,” she added. “If they get children early with sex training, the victim child will have limited critical thinking capability, little real education. Government will have willing subjects to regurgitate propagandistic barbarisms—like Social Justice Warriors, college kids/professors, repeatedly screaming the F word at anyone with another thought.”

Solutions

To deal with the existential crisis, Reisman had two main points: Remove children from public school, and open criminal investigations into Kinsey’s sex-education machine.

“Remove children from public schools; return to parents or grandparents the training of their children,” she said. “Parents are the primary educators of their children and need to reclaim that mantle and responsibility.”

Beyond that, she also called for restoring Judeo-Christian moral standards and repealing exemptions to obscenity laws that protect public-school officials who distribute obscene material to children—something that would be a felony in most circumstances.

On top of that, she called on lawmakers to resurrect H.R. 2749 to investigate the Kinsey Institute for any “past and present criminal activity.” The institute has argued that “patient confidentiality” precludes sharing the information, but Reisman and other advocates say it is essential that Americans learn the truth about what happened.

The sex-education craze unleashed by the communists, then given credibility by “Dr.” Kinsey, combined with the “progressive” government takeover of education, have brought family, civilization, and political liberty to the brink of collapse.

It’s time for Americans to seriously address these matters before it all comes crashing down.


The Illinois General Assembly is considering another “comprehensive” sex education bill (SB 818) that so-called “progressives” and their evil allies–Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and Equality Illinois–are using to indoctrinate children starting in kindergarten. This horrible bill passed earlier this month by a partisan vote of 37 to 18. It is now up for consideration in the Illinois House of Representatives.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to your state representative to ask him/her to vote against SB 818. Impressionable students in public schools should not be exposed to body- and soul-destroying messages that promote leftist beliefs about sexuality.


This article was originally published by The Epoch Times, and is one report in a series of articles examining the origins of government education in the United States.




This American Life of Sexual Perversity

There is a new reality makeover show on The Learning Channel (TLC) titled Dragnificent in which four men who impersonate women (also known as “drag queens”) travel the country exploiting the desire of humans to grasp the cheap brass ring: fifteen minutes of fame. While behaving like clownish juveniles, these men-children with wounded pasts teach women with wounded pasts how to dress for their body type and wear makeup. The spectacle of grown men prancing about like children in cartoonish outfits pretending their work is good is a grotesque and tragic deceit that mars the image of God imprinted on them and harms society.

Dragnificent is just the newest effort of America’s entertainment industry to use storytelling to refashion this once-admirable American life into a cesspool of hedonism, profligacy, and perversion. By crafting stories that portray corrosive sexuality as joyful, carefree, cost-free, and even noble, our storytellers, in thrall to the father of lies, erode and corrode the principles, beliefs, and values that made this American life commendable.

However did we get here? How did we arrive at a cultural place in which ordinary people—moms and dads, grandmas and grandpas—tolerate, watch, approve, and even celebrate such depravity?

Remember when the truly sick Alfred Kinsey abused infants and polled pederasts in prison to advance his notion that sexual immorality is good for society? Remember when profligate pornographer Hugh Hefner mainstreamed porn, mainlining it into the synapses of men’s brains? Remember the sexual revolution of the 1960s that fertilized the weeds first planted by Kinsey and then watered by Hefner? Remember when homosexuals claimed they just wanted homosexuality to be tolerated? Approval—so they claimed at the time through lying lips and under growing noses—was neither requested nor required. Remember the claim that eradicating the social taboo against homoerotism would affect no one, no way, no how except for those who wanted to engage in it? Remember when self-identifying homosexuals said they just wanted civil unions—not marriage? Remember the snarky, mocking, scornful and idiotic rhetorical question spit at conservatives by homosexuals: “How will my marriage affect your marriage?”

Well, starting with Kinsey, too many Americans decided pleasure trumped self-restraint, the almighty Self trumped God, and being cool trumped being uncool. We stopped fighting for marriage, for our children, and for our country. And now this American life is dragnificent.

So, let’s take a moment to look at the dragnificent world that deception, selfishness, and cowardice have created:

  • Five unelected Supreme Court Justices decided that the single most enduring, cross-cultural constituent feature of marriage—i.e., sexual differentiation—is irrelevant to marriage and imposed their radical notion on the entire country.
  • Children are being created to be intentionally fatherless or motherless in order to satisfy the desires of people who choose to be in relationships that are by design non-reproductive.
  • There are now scads of picture books and Young Adult novels for children that depict positively homoeroticism, motherless and fatherless families with homosexual parents, and “trans”-cultism.
  • Ten percent of characters on scripted television shows are homosexual or opposite-sex impersonators with the goal of the “LGBT” community to double that rate within five years.
  • Restrooms, locker rooms, shelters, and athletics are being sexually integrated, thereby robbing girls, boys, women, and men of rights.
  • Pornography of the vilest and most shameful forms is easily available even to children.
  • There is a pandemic of child sexual abuse and trafficking that dwarfs COVID-19 in the human suffering it causes.
  • “The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that nearly 20 million new STIs occur every year in this country, half of those among young people aged 15–24.”
  • Women have renamed prostitution “sex work,” call it “empowering,” and are fighting for its legalization.
  • Young men are unable to perform sexually with women because of their decade-long porn addiction.
  • Degrading “kink” practices are becoming normalized in the same ways homoeroticism and “trans”-alchemy were.
  • There are “sex weeks” at prestigious universities.
  • There are state laws mandating that kindergartners be taught positively about homoeroticism and science-denying “trans”-alchemy.
  • There are state laws prohibiting counseling for those who experience unwanted homoerotic desires and gender dysphoria.
  • Medical professionals are blocking the natural process of puberty in physically healthy children who experience gender dysphoria.
  • Medical professionals are administering untested and risky cross-sex hormones to physically healthy children who experience gender dysphoria.
  • Medical professionals are amputating the healthy breasts of teenage girls and castrating teenage boys who experience gender dysphoria.
  • There is a decade-long reality show in which drag queens compete to be America’s next drag superstar. In 2020, a U. S. Congresswoman (AOC) appeared as a judge on that show.
  • There’s a reality show on (TLC) that follows the troubled life of a young boy whose parents exploit him as he seeks to pass as a girl.
  • There are drag queen story hours all across the country in which perverse cross-dressing men groom and indoctrinate toddlers while lying through their lips and under their growing noses, falsely claiming their repugnant acts honor diversity, foster tolerance, and cultivate creativity, all under the approving eyes of parents.
  • There’s a YouTube series for preschoolers called Queer Stuff for Kids hosted by “gender non-binary” lesbian Lindsay Amer.
  • The mainstream press calls pregnant women who masquerade as men “pregnant men.”
  • The polyamorous or “sexually non-monogamous” community is growing and demanding—like the homosexual community and “trans”-cult before them—to be affirmed.
  • Adults and teens send photos of their naked bodies to acquaintances.
  • “Trans”-cultists command society to mis-sex them by using opposite-sex pronouns, or using plural pronouns for singular people, or using newly invented pronouns, all in the service of concealing their sex and facilitating a false and destructive ideology.
  • Religious liberty is being attacked through lawsuits to force Christian business owners to violate their religious beliefs, policies to force Christians to participate in lies, and laws like the Equality Act that will force people of faith to subordinate objective material reality (i.e., biological sex) to disordered subjective immaterial feelings about biological sex in violation of their beliefs.

Ideas do, indeed, have consequences.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/This-American-Life-of-Sexual-Perversity.mp3


If you appreciate the work and ministry of IFI,
please consider a tax-deductible donation to sustain our endeavors.




The Sensation Nation

A common refrain when people lament violence, sex and f-bombs in movies, goes: “How did we get from the golden days of Hollywood to this?”

Actually, Hollywood, with many notable exceptions, has been at war with decency and American values since its inception. It just wasn’t as starkly apparent.

If you don’t think so, take in some of those black and white films on the Turner Classic Movies channel. Sure, you won’t get nudity, gratuitous violence, or profanity, and some are delightful.  But many are not very good, with stilted dialogue and ham acting, and certain films from the Golden Era are surprisingly subversive.

A case in point is “Theodora Goes Wild,” a 1936 “screwball comedy” that netted Irene Dunn an Oscar nomination for her role as a prim, church organ-playing small-town girl who secretly writes racy novels under a pseudonym.  Upon meeting the randy illustrator of her book covers (Melvyn Douglas), she flees from the New England home she lives in with her two uptight aunts and goes hog wild in New York as the scandalous novelist “Caroline Adams.”  We’re supposed to think this is great.

What’s most subversive is the acidic portrayal of small-town America, and particularly the church ladies. They’re uniformly unattractive, small-minded gossips, backbiters and hypocrites.

The Christian life in “Theodora” is cold, boring and the enemy of a good time.   The only spark of life comes in nightclubs, parties or scenes when the protagonists put it over on the uptight yokels.  Absent is fellowship and community, the pursuit of truth, love of family and neighbor, happiness, mutual sacrifice, and God’s love, all of which are found in a vibrant church.

The deal is sealed for hedonism when the entire town turns out with a marching band to welcome home their heroine once her cover is blown. She’s now famous for writing smut, and lives happily ever after with the illustrator. Nobody but a prude would object. Life is colorful once more.  A literal version of this theme of salvific sex is expressed in “Pleasantville” (1998).

In a larger sense, this is where we find ourselves today. There’s no need for Hollywood to employ subtexts to attack the moral order when we’re already drowning in a sea of sensations. Unless you’re Amish, staying free from the pornified culture is like trying to focus on small print with a tiny book lamp in the middle of the Vegas strip.

Recent columns in Politico.com, the New York Times and National Review have explored America’s acquiescence to the porn culture. They point to the Internet tidal wave and the invention of the smart phone in 2007, which is putting adults –and children – at risk in ways undreamed of a dozen years ago.

Still, technology is only one powerful element.  The main factor is the mid-20th Century sexual revolution, in which morality, sexual roles, family and what constitutes the good life were upended.

In his 1941 opus “The Crisis of Our Age,” Harvard sociologist Pitirim Sorokin traced the waning of traditional American norms to just before World War II, when advertising imagery and movies became increasingly sensual.  America was an ideal-driven culture that honored virtue, duty and delayed gratification.  Then it began to slide toward a sensate culture that valued cultivating and sating appetites above all. Sorokin compared it to the decline of Greece and Rome, whose art evolved toward the sensual as the empires declined.

In “Kinsey, Sex and Fraud” (1990) and subsequent books, Judith Reisman has chronicled the enormous impact of Alfred Kinsey’s fraud-packed sex studies in 1948 and 1953.  Hugh Hefner drew inspiration from them to launch the Playboy empire, which mainstreamed porn and helped fund Roe v. Wade’s legalization of abortion. With the advent of the birth control pill and the explosion in visual stimuli, the wheels came off.

In his classic “Brave New World,” Aldous Huxley envisioned a future in which every need was met and sex was noncommital.  Anyone experiencing discomfort could take the drug “soma” to zone out on “soma holiday.”  Unlike our opioid crisis, people did not overdose on soma, but both dull the body and soul.

So here we are, with every conceivable way to gratify our appetites.

Are we happier? Does constant pursuit of sensations bring sustained joy? Not likely. That comes from purpose, accomplishment, and close bonds with family and friends.  It comes from knowing that we’re valued and loved by a creator God Who cares enough to give us rules to live by, and, as shown in Jesus’s parable of the prodigal son, forgiveness and reconnection.

Perhaps not all is lost.  There seems to be genuine concern among some in the intelligentsia over the culture’s destination. The campaign to label porn as a public health hazard is finding purchase, and what actually produces health and happiness is becoming more evident by the day.

Hollywood turns out some good flicks now and then, and there’s always hope for more uplifting fare even beyond the wholesome stuff on the Hallmark Channel. Three years after scripting “Theodora Goes Wild,” Sidney Buchman was nominated for a screenplay Oscar for “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.”


Robert Knight’s latest book is “A Nation Worth Saving: 10 Steps to Restore Freedom” (djkm.org/nation, 2018).

This article was originally published at Townhall.com




The Law of the Harvest: America Sows Free Love and Reaps Heartbreak

America was founded as a beacon of light, a refuge to those who only wanted to worship the God of the Bible as they saw fit. Our founding documents, the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution, were infused with biblical precepts and a presumption of a Creator and His transcendent Truth.

For over 200 years this experiment in liberty flourished, lighting the world with the light of Truth and Righteousness.

At times during our nation’s history, Americans en masse veered toward the broad path to destruction. And at every departure from upright and moral living, a preacher or prophet of sorts would proclaim the words of God’s inspired Book, people would repent, and our national character would be righted.

God told Israel the truth, which still applies today:

This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live. Deuteronomy 30:19

But in the twentieth century, culture-changers assaulted our society, teaching people to exchange the truth for lies, with cascading and calamitous results. The following have deceived people to choose death, rather than life.

Margaret Sanger (September 14, 1879 – September 6, 1966), a nurse and proponent of birth control and eugenics, inspired the Nazis with her notions of breeding and forced sterilization to weed out the less than desirable races. “Nurse” Sanger was the Founder and first president of Planned Parenthood.

As I wrote in 2014:

she formed the organization, American Birth Control League [est. 1921], which would eventually become Planned Parenthood [est. 1952].

And like the modern day organization, cloaking its true agenda in palatable verbiage such as “family planning” and “choice,” Margaret’s goal was far more evil than the respectable facade she presented.

. . .

Sanger was a Darwinist who embraced a utilitarian view of human life, and proposed to rid our nation of the criminal element and “inferior races” through abortion and breeding programs.

Thanks to Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood has cruelly slaughtered approximately 300,000 pre-born children a year since Roe v. Wade, or about 13.2 MILLION total.

Thanks to Sanger, life has been cheapened, and sexual intimacy divorced from the God-ordained, relationship of marriage.

Sanger pushed America to sow the seeds of destruction and the devaluation of life with abortion and a utilitarian view of human life.

Subsequently we’ve reaped the harvest of catastrophic and crippling depression in generations of women.

Alfred Kinsey (June 23, 1894 – August 25, 1956) was a biologist, professor of entomology and zoology, and a sexologist. He is known as the “Father of the Sexual Revolution” and founded the famed Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction. Kinsey shook the nation with his books, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953).

These books revealed to a shocked and somewhat titillated population things they had never known about themselves: That between 30-45% of men had affairs, 85% of men had had sex prior to marriage, that a staggering 70% of men had slept with prostitutes, and that between 10 and 37% of men had engaged in homosexual behavior.

Alfred Kinsey’s studies, in retrospect, paved the way for hedonistic depravity. And how did Kinsey obtain the findings reported in his books?

Kinsey himself was a pervert and a sex criminal.

For example, where did he get all of his data on the “sexual behavior of children”? The answer is nothing short of chilling. Dr. Judith Reisman (whose research has since been confirmed time and time again) explained in her groundbreaking work Sex, Lies and Kinsey that Kinsey facilitated brutal sexual abuse to children as young as two months old, to get his so-called research:

Kinsey solicited and encouraged pedophiles, at home and abroad, to sexually violate from 317 to 2,035 infants and children for his alleged data on normal “child sexuality.” Many of the crimes against children (oral and anal sodomy, genital intercourse and manual abuse) committed for Kinsey’s research are quantified in his own graphs and charts.

. . .

The Father of the Sexual Revolution was a sado-masochistic bi-sexual sex criminal who facilitated the sexual torture of infants and children.

Thanks in large part to Alfred Kinsey, sexual deviancy and pedophilia were heralded as normal, and any and all sexual activity divorced from the God-ordained, relationship of marriage.

Kinsey taught America to sow the seeds of depraved sexual activity without the good and protective constraints of the previously held Judeo-Christian worldview.

Subsequently our nation has reaped the harvest of lives ruined, marriages wrecked, and all-time high venereal disease — now called Sexually Transmitted Diseases.

More than two million cases of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis were reported in the United States in 2016, the highest number ever, according to the annual Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance Report released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

“Increases in STDs are a clear warning of a growing threat,” said Jonathan Mermin, M.D., M.P.H., director of CDC’s National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention. “STDs are a persistent enemy, growing in number, and outpacing our ability to respond.”

An epidemic accelerating in multiple populations—impact growing in women, infants, and gay and bisexual men.

Timothy Leary (October 22, 1920 – May 31, 1996) was an American psychologist and writer. He was an enthusiastic advocate of LSD and other psychedelic drugs. Leary’s famous quote “turn on, tune in, drop out” affected a generation of rebellious youth in, for the most part, the 1960’s and 1970’s.

Leary’s disciples turned onto drugs, tuned into sex, rock and roll, and dropped out, in many cases dropped dead, including: Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Brian Cole (The Association), Gram Parsons (The Byrds), Tommy Bolin (Deep Purple), Gregory Herbert (Blood, Sweat & Tears), Keith Moon (The Who), Sid Vicious (Sex Pistols), Lowell George (Little Feat), and more.

Thanks to the influence of Timothy Leary, a generation or more of Americans chose to escape life via drugs, and became enslaved by LSD, heroin, barbiturates, and other dangerous substances. Thousands of young Americans followed Leary’s direction into an untimely death.

Timothy Leary cajoled Americans to sow the seeds of escapism and societal anarchy and substance abuse.

Subsequently America has reaped the harvest of crime, ruined lives, and death.

Helen Gurley Brown (February 18, 1922 – August 13, 2012) was an author, publisher, and businesswoman. She pushed women in America to throw off their sexual inhibitions. Brown’s book, Sex and the Single Girl (1962) “encouraged women to become financially independent and experience sexual relationships before or without marriage.”

Brown gained further prominence as the Editor-in-Chief of Cosmopolitan magazine from 1965 – 1997. Continuing her mantra of sex without boundaries, Cosmo under HGB “set itself apart by frankly discussing sexuality from the point of view that women could and should enjoy sex without guilt.”

To this day Cosmopolitan is known for its edgy (aka immoral) sexual agenda and in September of this year alone reached over 32 million readers.

Thanks to Helen Gurley Brown, millions of young women were led to believe that sexual intimacy can and should be enjoyed without the burden of marriage and fidelity.

Ms. Brown deceived teen girls and women to sow the seeds of wanton, narcissistic sexuality.

Subsequently American women reaped the harvest of babies out of wedlock, abortion, sexually transmitted diseases, and ruined lives and marriages.

Hugh Hefner (April 9, 1926 – September 27, 2017) was an American businessman, magazine publisher and playboy. He rejected the Christian faith of his parents in exchange for a life of rampant sexual conquest. “Hef” was Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Playboy magazine. Wikipedia describes Playboy:

Playboy is an American men’s lifestyle and entertainment magazine. It was founded in Chicago in 1953, by Hugh Hefner and his associates, and funded in part by a $1,000 loan from Hefner’s mother. Notable for its centerfolds of nude and semi-nude models (Playmates), Playboy played an important role in the sexual revolution and remains one of the world’s best-known brands, having grown into Playboy Enterprises, Inc.

After his death in September of this year, many in the world were lauding Hugh, such as frequent Playboy model and one-time Playmate of the Year, Jenny McCarthy, who gushed:

[Hugh was] the most good-hearted, caring, generous, supportive friend, and mentor…his zest for life was contagious

McCarthy tweeted:

But what is the truth?

The truth is that Hugh Hefner disseminated the lies that women are playthings (i.e. Playmates), objects of men’s desires and lust, and tools for gratification.

Contrast that with God’s admonition for love within marriage:

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her. Ephesians 5:25

However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband. Ephesians 5:33

Thanks to Hugh Hefner, pornography became commonplace in America and women were stripped, not only of their clothing, but of their intrinsic worth. Thanks to Hef, sex became a meaningless pastime, a means to a few moments of physical pleasure, rather than the height of intimacy between husband and wife and a means of procreation.

God created sex to be beautiful and meaningful. Satan, the great liar who loves to offer counterfeits, twists it into a vile, animalistic act.

Hugh Hefner and Playboy magazine led our culture to sow seeds of dehumanizing women, and separating sexual intimacy from the safe, loving environment of true marriage.

And subsequently America has reaped a culture teaming with sexual users and predators. Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey and the other users in Hollywood and elsewhere didn’t happen in a vacuum, or by accident.

The Apostle Paul tells us in Galatians:

Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. Galatians 6:7

If we repent, as individuals, and as a nation, we can re-light our beacon. But Americans must follow Truth and Life. We must choose Blessing not Cursing. We must reject the false promises and evil teaching of Margaret Sanger and Alfred Kinsey and Timothy Leary and Helen Gurley Brown and Hugh Hefner and others.

There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death. Proverbs 14:12

If Americans choose Truth, then we’ll reap blessing and life and life abundantly.

But only if we choose Truth.


IFI depends on the support of concerned-citizens like you. Donate now

-and, please-

like_us_on_facebook_button




Culture War Victory Still Possible for Conservatives

Written by Pastor Scott Lively

What we call the pro-family movement is a component of the larger conservative movement and deals with matters of sexuality and the natural family. Its American roots are in the cultural backlash to the Marxist revolution of the 1960s that turned family-centered society on its head and swapped the Judeo-Christian morality of our founding for Soviet-style “political correctness.”

Before the 1960s there wasn’t any need for a “pro-family” movement because family values had been the overwhelming consensus of the western world for centuries. Indeed, so surprised were Americans about the cultural revolution that it took nearly twenty years for the conservatives to mount a truly effective response to it. That came under Ronald Reagan in the 1980s.

The 60’s revolution was not grounded in the Marxist orthodoxy of Lenin and Stalin, but the Cultural Marxism of Herbert Marcuse’s Frankfort School, which envisioned sexual anarchy, not a “workers revolt,” as the key to dismantling Judeo-Christian civilization. The natural core constituency for this ideology was the underground “gay” movement whose dream of social acceptance was not possible without a complete transformation of American sexual morality. Thus, beginning in the late 1940s, Marxist organizer Harry Hay, so-called “father of the American gay movement” was also “father” of the (then hidden) army of “gay” activists most responsible for the “culture war” that exploded in the 60’s and continues today.

America’s Marxist revolution was therefore a “sexual revolution” whose overwhelming success vindicated Marcuse’s destructive vision and became the primary tool of the one-world government elites for softening resistance to their domination by breaking the family-centered society which is every nation’s greatest source of strength, stability and self-sufficiency.

Importantly, though primarily driven behind the scenes by “gays,” the first goal was not legitimization of homosexual sodomy but the normalization of heterosexual promiscuity. This was the motive and strategy that drove “closeted” 1940s and 50s homosexual activist Alfred Kinsey’s fraudulent “science” attacking the marriage-based sexual ethic as “repressive” and socially harmful. It also drove the launch of the modern porn industry, beginning with Hugh Hefner’s Playboy Magazine (Hefner called himself “Kinsey’s pamphleteer”). It drove and defined the battles in the courts where sexual morality was systematically “reformed” by Cultural Marxist elites on the U.S. Supreme Court: contraception on demand to facilitate “fornication without consequences” (Griswold v Connecticut 1966), abortion on demand as the backup system to failed contraception (Roe v Wade 1973), and finally legalization of homosexual sodomy (Lawrence v Texas 2003).

Note the thirty year gap between Roe v Wade and Lawrence v Texas. That major delay in the Marxist agenda was achieved by the election of Ronald Reagan, under whom the pro-family movement became a major political force. That gap also highlights a critical fact: that “street activism” may be essential to any political cause but the real key to the culture war is the U.S. Supreme Court. By 1981 when Ronald Reagan took power the Marxists had nearly succeeded in collapsing the nation’s family and economic infrastructure and the LGBT juggernaut had come completely out of the shadows and taken its place at the head of the cultural blitzkrieg it had been steering from the beginning. Reagan stopped that juggernaut by putting Antonin Scalia on the U.S. Supreme Court, the lion of constitutional originalism who wrote the majority opinion in Bowers v Hardwick (1986) which affirmed (not created) the constitutional right of states to criminalize homosexual sodomy and other harmful sexual conduct in the public interest.

Reagan and Scalia stopped the sexual revolution in its tracks and made it possible for the pro-family movement to begin restoring family values in society, which we strove diligently to do. I got my start in Christian social activism in those heady days and served as State Communications Director for the No Special Rights Act in Oregon in 1992 which forbade the granting of civil rights minority status based on sexual conduct. We fell short in Oregon but a Colorado version of our bill passed the same year. We had in essence won the culture war with that victory given that the Supreme Court had previously ruled that minority status designation required three things: a history of discrimination, political powerlessness, and immutable (unchangeable) status (such as skin color). We had a slam-dunk win on at least two of the three criteria and it would have been just a matter of time before we passed the No Special Rights law from coast to coast.

However, Reagan had been prevented by the elites from putting a second Scalia on the court in the person of Robert Bork, and was forced by the unprecedented political “borking” of Mr. Bork to accept their man Anthony Kennedy to fill the seat instead. Just ten years later, Kennedy served his function by writing the majority opinion killing the Colorado law in Romer v Evans (1996), audaciously declaring that the court didn’t need to apply its three-part constitution test to the No Special Rights Act because it was motivated by “animus” (hate) and thus did not represent a legitimate exercise of the state’s regulatory authority. The ruling was all the more outrageous given that it was only possibly through a blatant abuse of the court’s own judicial authority. Kennedy’s “disapproval = hate” lie set the tone for the political left from that point forward.

In Lawrence v Texas, Kennedy delivered the coup-de-grace to Justice Scalia by striking down Bowers v Hardwick and brazenly ruling that “public morality” cannot be the basis for law. Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority in all five SCOTUS opinions that have, in essence, established homosexual cultural supremacy in America, including the infamous and utterly unconstitutional Obergefell v Hodges (2015) “gay marriage” decision. He is, in my opinion, the worst and most culturally destructive jurist in the history of the court: the culprit (among many villainous candidates) most responsible for the current dysfunctional state of the family in America.

So where’s the “bright future” amidst this lamentation? It’s in the promise made and so-far kept by President Donald Trump to appoint only constitutional originalists to the supreme court. It is in the pleasantly surprising discovery that his first pick, Neil Gorsuch, seems from his first comments as a “supreme” to be a perfect choice to fill the “Scalia seat” on the court. It is in the hopeful rumors that Anthony Kennedy is about to retire, and the simple fact that ultra-hard leftist Ruth Bader Ginsberg and leftist Steven Broyer are of an age that their seats could at any time be vacated by voluntary or involuntary retirement.

In short, the bright future of the pro-family movement is in the hands of the man we hired to drain the swamp in Washington DC, and who hasn’t yet backed down in that fight despite the remarkable scorched-earth campaign of destruction and discreditation being waged against him by the establishment elites of both parties, Hollywood and the media.

I must admit that after Obergefell I began to think that the pro-family movement had lost the culture war, but I now believe there is real hope, not just for reclaiming some lost ground, but possibly of reversing all of the “gains” of the hard left over the past half century. A solid majority of true constitutional originalists could actually restore the legal primacy of the natural family in America fairly quickly, and our cultural healing could quickly follow.

As the leftist elites and street activists continue their all-hands-on-deck attempted “borking” of President Trump, let’s not forget why they’re doing it. His political survival means the end of theirs. I can’t think of a brighter future than that for our nation.


This article was originally posted at ScottLively.net




The Satanic Bible’s ‘Golden Rule’

“Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.” Aleister Crowley, Satanic priest and paragon to Alfred Kinsey, father of modern sex education

Order and anarchy. Good and evil. Truth and lies. Natural sexuality (within marriage) and homosexuality (of any kind).

The contrast is bright as day is to night. While Christ repeatedly condemned all “sexual immorality” as defined in the Old Testament Jewish moral code (which includes homosexual behavior), God’s Word, throughout both the Old and New Testaments, specifically denounces as evil rising to the level of “a detestable sin” all same-sex sexual conduct – be it “loving, monogamous and committed,” or otherwise.

Leviticus 18:22, for instance, admonishes, in no uncertain terms: “Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin.”

1 Corinthians 6:9 warns: “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality.”

Yet deceived they are, and without the Kingdom of God they remain.

Indeed, today there persists a burgeoning racket of apostate biblical revisionists who rationalize sexual sin. Notwithstanding a level of deception rooted in a deeply heartfelt and genuinely emotional variety of wishful thinking, the Holy Bible, thousands of years of history and uncompromising human biology nonetheless remain incontrovertible: Unrepentant homosexual behavior is, always has been and always will be 100 percent and irredeemably wrong.

Still, few people realize that there is a “Bible” that not only affirms homosexuality (all forms of sexual immorality, in fact), but that goes so far as to make sin the centerpiece of its doctrine – its “golden rule,” if you will.

In his fantastic new book, “Gay Awareness: Discovering the Heart of the Father and the Mind of Christ On Sexuality,” author and minister Landon Schott devotes an entire chapter to this “gay”-affirming “Bible.” “[O]ut of the 31,102 verses in the Bible,” he writes, “not one supports a homosexual lifestyle in any way – not one. If you are still looking for a scripture that supports homosexuality you need to close your Holy Bible and open The Satanic Bible!”

That’s right. The Satanic Bible is the only “gay-affirming” Bible in existence (save a handful of heretical and intentionally mistranslated Bible counterfeits).

Schott quotes The Satanic Bible verbatim:

“Satanism condones any type of sexual activity which properly satisfies your individual desires, be it heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, or even asexual, if you choose. Satanism also sanctions any fetish or deviation which will enhance your sex life, so long as it involves no one who does not wish to be involved.”

Satanism? Sounds more like the “values neutral” “comprehensive sex education” curriculum pushed on children in most of today’s public schools.

Contrast this with Christianity. Romans 13:13-14, for example, commands, “Let us behave properly as in the day, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual promiscuity and sensuality, not in strife and jealousy. But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh in regard to its lusts.”

“Satan’s existence is consumed with a mission,” continues Schott, “to defy and mock God, to defy His order of creation, and to mock His governing orders. … The Church of Satan reverses the order of the Lord’s Prayer, saying it backwards as they begin their services, to defy God. God says love; the Church of Satan says hate. God says heterosexual relationships; the Church of Satan says homosexual relationships. God says monogamous marriage between a man and woman; the Church of Satan says polygamous and sexually open relationships. God gave the Ten Commandments; the Church of Satan established their version, called the Nine Tenets, shown below:”

  1. Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence!
  2. Satan represents vital existence instead of spiritual pipe dreams!
  3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom instead of hypocritical self-deceit!
  4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted!
  5. Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek!
  6. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development,” has become the most vicious animal of all!
  7. Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification!
  8. Satan has been the best friend the Church has ever had, as He has kept it in business all these years!
  9. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.

Consider The Satanic Bible’s following sex-centric passages. They read like the mission statements of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) or GLSEN:

  • Each person must decide for himself what form of sexual activity best suits his individual needs.
  • Satanism ENCOURAGES any form of sexual expression you may desire so long as it hurts no one else.
  • If all parties involved are mature adults who willingly take full responsibility for their actions and voluntarily engages in a given form of sexual expression – even if it is generally considered taboo – then there is no reason for them to repress their sexual inclinations … you have no cause to suppress your sexual preferences.
  • It is important to point out here that spiritual love and sexual love can, but do not necessarily, go hand in hand.
  • The Satanist realizes that if he is to be a sexual connoisseur (and free from sexual guilt) he cannot be stifled by the so-called sexual revolutionist any more than he can by the prudery of his guilt-ridden society.

“That last verse from The Satanic Bible,” observes Schott, “reminds me of a powerful proverb on the adulterous woman. Proverbs 30:20 says, ‘This is the way of an adulterous woman: She eats and wipes her mouth and says, “I’ve done nothing wrong.”‘ Again and again The Satanic Bible tells its readers that there is nothing wrong with giving in to your natural sexual desires. The Bible tells us to resist the sexual desires of the flesh,” he concludes.

Schott points out, and I agree wholeheartedly, that homosexual practitioners are not necessarily demonic (or demon possessed) and that they are desperately in need of Christ’s Truth, in love, as well as much prayer.

Even so, it remains true that homosexual sin is demonic.

All good things come from God the Father, and all wickedness comes from the father of lies. If God designed biblical marriage and natural human sexuality, and He did, then we are left no doubt as to who designed its counterfeit – as to who fabricated pagan “gay marriage” and otherwise perverted God’s perfect purposes for human sexuality.

Sin is from Satan. Homosexual behavior is sin. Therefore, homosexual behavior is from Satan.

Yes, “gay marriage” is evil.

Yes, homosexuality is evil.

For the Bible – and The Satanic Bible – tells me so.




‘Gay Marriage’ Rooted in Fraud

The very notion of “gay marriage” is an artificial construct. It’s the aberrant byproduct of the sexual revolution, which, itself, was largely instigated by bug doctor turned “sexologist,” Alfred Kinsey.

Though married to a woman who took part in his many filmed “scientific” orgies, Kinsey was a promiscuous homosexual and sadomasochist. He managed to completely upend and twist the world’s perception of human sexuality in the 1950s and ’60s with his world famous “Kinsey Reports.”

While his “research” has been universally discredited and exposed as fraudulent, ideologically motivated and even criminal, it remains, nonetheless, the primary source behind today’s “sexual orientation science.”

For this reason, and many others, the novel notion of “gay marriage” sits atop a house of cards.

On April 28, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on whether to attempt, once and for all, the deconstruction and redefinition of the institution of marriage. The court will then hand down a decision by the end of June. In anticipation of this landmark case, civil rights law firm Liberty Counsel has submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court a friend of the court brief that reveals the criminally fraudulent foundation upon which the “marriage equality” Tower of Babel has been raised.

Among other things, the brief features the findings of Dr. Judith Reisman, the foremost expert on Kinsey’s pseudo-scientific cultural activism. Reisman has served as scientific consultant to four U.S. Department of Justice administrations, the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). She is a visiting professor of law at Liberty University School of Law and works hand-in-hand with Liberty Counsel.

As the brief reveals, most people are completely unaware that during his tenure at Indiana University, Kinsey facilitated, with stopwatches and ledgers, the systematic sexual abuse of hundreds, if not thousands, of children and infants – all in the name of science.

Kinsey asserted that children are “sexual from birth.” He further concluded, based upon experiments he directed and documented in his infamous Table 34, that adult-child sex is harmless, even beneficial, and described child “orgasm” as “culminating in extreme trembling, collapse, loss of color, and sometimes fainting. …” Many children suffered “excruciating pain,” he observed, “and [would] scream if movement [was] continued.” Some “[would] fight away from the [adult] partner and may make violent attempts to avoid climax, although they derive[d] definite pleasure from the situation.”

It’s little wonder that Dr. Reisman identifies Kinsey as a “sexual psychopath.” These children were as young as 2 months old.

Kinsey’s research also determined that rape doesn’t really hurt women. In his 1953 volume “Sexual Behavior in the Human Female” at page 122, Kinsey wrote, “Among the 4,441 females [reporting rape] on whom we have data, there was only one clear cut case of injury … and very few instances of vaginal bleeding, which however, did not appear to do any appreciable damage.”

Kinsey claimed that, like himself, over 30 percent of men are homosexual (today’s legitimate research has established this figure to actually fall somewhere between 1-3 percent). There can be no doubt that, if he were alive today, Alfred Kinsey would be one of the loudest voices clamoring for the redefinition of marriage.

“For the past 67 years, scholars, lawyers and judges have undertaken fundamental societal transformation by embracing Alfred Kinsey’s statistically and scientifically fraudulent ‘data’ derived from serial child rapists, sex offenders, prisoners, prostitutes, pedophiles and pederasts,” notes the brief. “Now these same change agents, still covering up the fraudulent nature of the Kinsey ‘data,’ want this Court to utilize it to demolish the cornerstone of society, natural marriage.”

“Changing millennia of history must always be approached with trepidation,” the brief continues. “In this case, the change must be rejected outright not only because it is seeking to redefine something which cannot be redefined, but also because the proposed change is grounded in fraudulent ‘research’ based on skewed demographics and the sexual abuse of hundreds of infants and children.”

The brief pleads with the U.S. Supreme Court not to “erase millennia of human history and dismantle the granite cornerstone of society in favor of an experimental construct that is barely a decade old.” Instead, Liberty Counsel asserts, “This case presents the Court with the opportunity to affirm and preserve the unique, comprehensive union of a man and a woman, the foundational social institution upon which society was built and the future of the nation depends.”

In the past, the Supreme Court has upheld marriage as a foundational social institution that is necessarily defined as the union of one man and one woman:

  • Marriage is “fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race.” Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942).
  • “An institution in the maintenance of which in its purity the public is deeply interested, for it is the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress.” Maynard v. Hill, 125 U. S. 190 (1888).

“Older than the Constitution and the laws of any nation, marriage is not a creation of any government, but it is an obvious relationship between one man and one woman. Marriage is a natural bond that society or religion can only ‘solemnize,’” said Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel.

It is a tragic commentary on America’s moral freefall that the highest court in the land would consider, even for an instant, perverting the cornerstone institution of marriage to reflect the psychotic image and anti-social activism of a man who, himself, was a criminal pervert.

Illinois Family Institute is joining Liberty Counsel in calling Christians to unite in fasting and prayer for three days before the U.S. Supreme Court hears the case – on April 23, 24 and 25.

At this point, prayer alone may save marriage and keep, at bay, the wrath of a just and Holy God.


Read more about the Kinsey’s fraudulent research and cover up at Dr. Reisman’s website.

 




Republican Party Elites Abandon Traditional Marriage

Only six of 54 Republican members of the U.S. Senate signed a pro-traditional marriage legal brief to the U.S. Supreme Court that was submitted on Friday. USA Today noted, “By contrast, 44 Democratic senators and 167 Democratic House members filed a brief last month urging the court to approve same-sex marriage. The brief included the full House and Senate [Democratic] leadership teams.”

These developments strongly suggest that while the homosexual movement remains solidly in control of the Democratic Party, the tactics of harassment and intimidation that we saw wielded against the religious freedom bill in Indiana last week are taking their toll on the Republican Party as a whole.

In the Indiana case, a conservative Republican governor, Mike Pence, abandoned the fight for religious freedom in the face of homosexual and corporate pressure.

It appears that more and more elite or establishment Republicans are simply deciding to give up on the fight for traditional values and marriage.

While this may seem politically expedient, this dramatic move to the left by the GOP could result in millions of pro-family conservatives deciding to abandon the Republican Party in 2016, a critical election year.

USA Today also noted that “…while some members of the 2012 Republican National Convention platform committee filed a brief against gay marriage Friday, it notably did not include GOP Chairman Reince Priebus.”

The Republican senators signing the brief included:

  • U.S. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas
  • U.S. Senator Steve Daines of Montana
  • U.S. Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma
  • U.S. Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma
  • U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky
  • U.S. Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina

Fifty-one members of the House of Representatives signed the brief. But U.S. House Speaker John Boehner’s (R-OH) name was not on it.

Taking the lead for traditional marriage in the House was U.S. Representative Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), who not only signed the pro-marriage brief but has also introduced U.S. House Joint Resolution 32, the Marriage Protection Amendment, to amend the United States Constitution to protect marriage, family and children by defining marriage as the union between one man and one woman. The resolution has 33 co-sponsors and has been referred for action to the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary.

Huelskamp is the only Member of Congress who has authored one of the 30 state constitutional amendments that prohibits homosexual marriage and polygamous marriage. In 2005, when he was a state senator, 71 percent of Kansans voted for the state constitutional amendment that he authored.

In reintroducing the federal marriage amendment, Huelskamp said, “In June 2013 the Supreme Court struck down section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which had defined marriage for federal purposes as the union of one man and one woman, but upheld the right and responsibility of states to define marriage. Since then, though, numerous unelected lower court judges have construed the U.S. Constitution as suddenly demanding recognition of same sex ‘marriages,’ and they struck down state Marriage Amendments—including the Kansas Marriage Amendment—approved by tens of millions of voters and their elected representatives.”

However, on April 28 the U.S. Supreme Court will review the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, which upholds marriage laws in Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee. A ruling is expected in June.

USA Today noted that scores of prominent Republicans last month joined a brief on the homosexual side filed by former Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman, a former lieutenant to Karl Rove who came out of the closet and announced in August of 2010 that he was a homosexual. He has since launched a “Project Right Side” to make the “conservative” case for gay marriage.

Big money Republican donors such as Paul Singer, David Koch, and Peter Thiel have either endorsed homosexual rights and same-sex marriage or funded the homosexual movement. Thiel is an open homosexual.

A libertarian group funded by the Koch brothers, the Cato Institute has been in the gay rights camp for many years and its chairman, Robert A. Levywrote a “moral and constitutional case for a right to gay marriage.”

Other signatories to the Mehlman brief included Governor Charlie Baker of Massachusetts, U.S. Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Mark Kirk of Illinois, and former presidential candidates Rudolph Giuliani and Jon Huntsman.

The signers of this brief at the U.S. Supreme Court in support of same-sex marriage were described as “300 veteran Republican lawmakers, operatives and consultants.” Some two dozen or so had worked for Mitt Romney for president.

One of the signatories, Mason Fink, who was the finance director of the Mitt Romney for president campaign, has signed on with a super PAC promoting former Florida Republican governor Jeb Bush for president. In another move signaling his alignment with the homosexual movement, Bush has reportedly picked Tim Miller, “one of the most prominent gay Republicans in Washington politics,” as his communications director.

A far-left media outlet known as Buzzfeed has described Bush as “2016’s Gay-Friendly Republican,” and says he has “stocked his inner circle with advisers who are vocal proponents of gay rights.”

But some conservative Christians are fighting back against the homosexual movement.

A brief to the court filed by Liberty Counsel notes that, in the past, the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld marriage as “a foundational social institution that is necessarily defined as the union of one man and one woman.” It cites the case of Skinner v. Oklahoma, in which marriage was declared to be “fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race,” and Maynard v. Hill, in which marriage was declared “the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress.”

Liberty Counsel said the court is being asked to affirm a false notion of marriage based upon fraudulent data about homosexual activity in society. It said, “For the past 67 years, scholars, lawyers and judges have undertaken fundamental societal transformation by embracing Alfred Kinsey’s statistically and scientifically fraudulent ‘data’ derived from serial child rapists, sex offenders, prisoners, prostitutes, pedophiles and pederasts. Now these same change agents, still covering up the fraudulent nature of the Kinsey ‘data,’ want this Court to utilize it to demolish the cornerstone of society, natural marriage.”

The homosexual movement has long maintained that Kinsey validated changes in sexual behavior that were already taking place in society. In fact, however, the evidence uncovered by Dr. Judith Reisman shows that Kinsey deliberately exaggerated those changes in a fraudulent manner by using data from pedophiles and prisoners.

Commenting on the impact of the acceptance of the fraudulent Kinsey data, Accuracy in Media founder Reed Irvine noted, “Gradually over the years, acceptance of the Kinsey morality has grown to the point where premarital and extramarital sex raise no eyebrows, where, in some communities, out-of-wedlock births are in the majority, homosexuality is glorified and aggressively promoted in our schools and the last taboo—adults having sex with young children—is now under attack in some of our institutions of higher learning.”

The Mattachine Society, a gay rights organization started by communist Harry Hay in 1950, cited the flawed Kinsey data in an effort to convince the public that homosexual behavior was widespread in American society.

The book, Take Back! The Gay Person’s Guide to Media Action, said the Kinsey Report on male sexuality “paved the way for the first truly positive discussion of homosexuality in the mainstream media.”

Today, this same Kinsey data is being used to convince the Supreme Court to approve homosexual “marriage” as a constitutional right.


This article was originally posted at the Accuracy in Media website.




Federal Judge Envisions ‘Rape License’ for ‘Right to Rape’

Judge Richard Posner, a federal judge with the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, recently become a hero to the pro-”gay marriage” left when, by way of a “legal analysis” free from the troublesome constraints of logic, case precedent, biology, tradition and reality in general, he managed to somehow divine a long-hidden constitutional “right” for two dudes to get “married.” “How can tradition be a reason for anything?” an incredulous Posner demanded last month of attorneys defending marriage protection amendments in both Wisconsin and Indiana.

It would seem that Posner’s contempt for tradition extends to all things sexual, up to and including the puritanical presupposition that it’s always wrong for a man to rape a woman. This idea, according to Posner in his 2011 book “Economic Analysis of the Law” (8th edition), is evidently an equally archaic tradition that, like the institution of natural marriage, needs a significant overhaul.

Posner’s suggestion? Perhaps it’s time the government begin issuing “rape licenses” (I kid you not) since, and based upon an exclusively utilitarian and morally relative cost-benefit analysis, the “right to rape,” for some men at least, “exceeds the victim’s physical and emotional pain.”

On page 216, Posner, a Reagan appointee considered “conservative” in “progressive” circles, writes, “Rape bypasses the market in sexual relations (marital and otherwise) in the same way that theft bypasses markets in ordinary goods and services, and it should therefore be forbidden.”

OK, while this is an oddly detached and clinical start to a discussion on rape, it is, so far, not entirely unreasonable. Posner would have been well served to stop here. But, and much like those who are the subject of his rape analysis, he does not stop.

“But,” continues Posner – I didn’t know there were any “buts” when it comes to rape – “But some rapists derive extra pleasure from the fact that the woman has not consented. For these rapists, there is no market substitute … and it could be argued therefore that, for them, rape is not a purely coercive transfer and should not be punished if the pleasure to the rapist (as measured by what he would be willing to pay – though not to the victim – for the right to rape) exceeds the victim’s physical and emotional pain. There are practical objections [No, really? Practical objections to rape?] … [b]ut the fact that any sort of rape license is even thinkable [what kind of bigoted rape-o-phobe would suggest otherwise?] … is a limitation on the usefulness of that theory.

“What generates the possibility of a rape license,” he persists (hold off, fellas, they’re not available yet), “is the fact that the rapist’s utility is weighted the same as his victim’s utility. If it were given a zero weight in the calculus of costs and benefits, a rape license could not be efficient. The only persuasive basis for such a weighting, however, would be a moral principle different from efficiency.”

And herein lies the rub. We all know what Posner thinks about “moral principles.” He’s a moral relativist. There are no moral principles, most especially “traditional” moral principles. I mean, “How can tradition be a reason for anything?”

But wait, there’s more. You gals trapped in one of those “traditional” marriages needn’t fret. Posner’s got you covered, too. “Marital rape?” C’mon, is there really such a thing?

“In a society that prizes premarital virginity and marital chastity [I know, sheesh, right?], the cardinal harm from rape is the destruction of those goods and is not inflicted by marital rape,” he writes.

“… The nature of the harm to the wife raped by her husband is a little obscure,” he continues. “If she is beaten or threatened, these of course are real harms inflicted by an ordinary assault and battery. Especially since the goods of virginity and of chastity are not endangered, the fact of her having intercourse one more time with a man with whom she has had intercourse many times before seems peripheral to the harm actually inflicted but is critical to making the offense rape.

“Most of the reasons for not making marital rape a crime have lost force with time,” he laments.

Of late a fanciful meme has taken root among the “progressive” left. It’s one that imagines ours as a patriarchal “rape culture,” which fosters an environment wherein women are systematically raped with impunity (especially on our nation’s college campuses).

Apparently, the solution is for chicks to pierce and tattoo themselves, declare “slut pride” and parade nude in “slut walks” across the globe. But that’s an outlier.

I finally get it. Posner is the “rape culture.” I wonder how these mouth-frothing “marriage equality” lefties will react to his permissive approach to rape. In much the same way, I suppose, they reacted to myriad accusations of sexual harassment and assault lodged against Bill “depends-on-what-is-is” Clinton. With total silence and self-serving hypocrisy.

None of this should surprise anyone. Richard Posner is a faithful disciple of Alfred Kinsey, the anti-science, anti-morality left’s sexual messiah. Kinsey was a bug doctor turned “sexologist.” Though married to a woman who took part in his many filmed “scientific” orgies, Kinsey was a promiscuous homosexual and sadomasochist. He managed to completely upend and twist the world’s perception of human sexuality in the 1950s and ’60s with his world famous “Kinsey Reports.”

Even today, most are completely unaware that during his tenure at Indiana University, Kinsey facilitated, with stopwatches and ledgers, the systematic sexual abuse of hundreds, if not thousands, of children and infants – all in the name of science. His research also “found” that rape doesn’t really hurt women. In his 1953 volume “Sexual Behavior in the Human Female” at page 122, Kinsey wrote, “Among the 4,441 females [reporting rape] on whom we have data, there was only one clear cut case of injury … and very few instances of vaginal bleeding, which however, did not appear to do any appreciable damage.”

Starting to see what makes Posner click? “His Honor” is a dyed-in-the-wool Kinseyite.

Though Kinsey’s “research” has long since been completely debunked and discredited, the elitist left, to include Judge Posner, even still relies on it to push its own sexual anarchist worldview. Writing in his 1992 book, “Sex and Reason,” for instance, Posner gushed, “The two Kinsey reports remain the high-water mark of descriptive sexology.” He calls Kinsey the “central figure” in the “scholarly science” of sexology.

Raped? Well, suck it up, walk it off and congratulate yourself.

You’ve reached Posner’s “high-water mark.”




Gays Are 1 in 50, Not 1 in 4

According to a 2011 Gallup poll, Americans thought that 25 percent of the population was gay (meaning one out of every four people), while those aged 18-29 put the figure at closer to 30 percent (meaning almost one in every three people). The reality is that less than 2 percent of the population is gay (meaning fewer than one in 50 people), and many gay leaders know this is true.

People of America, you have been duped.

For many years, we were told that “one in every 10 Americans” was gay, a figure based on the massively flawed 1948 study of Alfred Kinsey. (Kinsey actually relied on data from male prisoners to come up with his statistics.)

Even though gay activists knew the figure was inflated, they used it as a convenient lie, since, as two leading gay strategists noted in the late 1980s, “there is strength in numbers.” (For details, go here.) As expressed by a gay leader a few days ago, “The truth is, numbers matter, and political influence matters.”

In other words, if Americans realized that less than 2 percent of the population was gay rather 10 percent (let alone 25 percent), they would have a very different view of “gay rights.”

To be sure, it is wrong to bully or oppress or mistreat anyone based on gender or ethnicity or romantic attractions, so that is not the question. And whether gays are 1 percent of the population or 90 percent, they should not be mistreated.

But you don’t overhaul the legal system to the point of attacking freedoms of speech, conscience, and religion based on the sexual and romantic desires of a tiny percentage of the population, nor do you engage in a massive social experiment, like redefining marriage, because of a statistically tiny group of people.

Back in 2003, in their official brief in the landmark Lawrence v. Texas U.S. Supreme Court decision, a major coalition of 31 gay and pro-gay organizations used the figures of 2.8 percent of the male population and 1.4 percent of the female population as identifying as gay, lesbian, or bisexual.

This means that these activist organizations were fully aware that the 10 percent figure was completely bogus and yet they never protested when that figure was used to advance their cause. Why expose such a useful lie?

In 2011, UCLA law school’s Williams Institute released a study done by Dr. Gary J. Gates, who serves as the Williams Distinguished Scholar at the Charles R. Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Law and Public Policy. His official bio also states that, “Dr. Gates co-authored The Gay and Lesbian Atlas and is a recognized expert on the geography and demography of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender  population. … Many national and international media outlets regularly feature his work.”

According to Dr. Gates, just 1.7 percent of the population identifies as gay, with about the same figure identifying as bisexual.

Contrast this with an informal poll I conducted while speaking at a Christian youth conference last month, asking these committed young people what percentage of the population was gay. (Some of these kids were home schooled and most seemed less aware of the more notorious cable TV shows, so they were less worldly wise than your average young people.) The first teen answered, “Thirty percent.” The second said, “Forty percent.”

Where in the world did they get such ridiculous figures? You can thank the media for that, by which I mean the sitcoms, dramas and movies along with the major news outlets. (For an enlightening Pew Research survey, go here.)

But this is where things get very interesting. For years gay activists worked to get a sexual-orientation question on the CDC’s National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), a document of major importance in both government policy and public perception.

That question was included in the 2013 survey, and the results, released last month, made for shocking story lines: “1.6 percent of adults self-identify as gay or lesbian, and 0.7 percent consider themselves bisexual.”

These figures approximated the ones used by conservative leaders for years, because of which we were mocked as liars and vilified as haters. Now the government confirmed what we knew to be true.

Gay and lesbian leaders weren’t happy with the results, with Dr. Scout, director of the nonprofit CenterLink’s Network of LGBT Health Equity, stating, “If we really are 2 percent vs. 4 percent, it means people are going to say, ‘OK, I’m only going to care half as much.'”

How about changing that to, “If we really are 2 percent vs. 25 percent, people are going to say, ‘OK, I’m only going to care one-twelfth as much.'” And take note: Dr. Scout only claimed that 4 percent were gay.

Bisexual leaders were concerned as well, with Ellyn Ruthstrom, president of the Bisexual Resource Center in Boston, opining, “For such a respected survey as the NHIS to produce such a small number is a blow.”

“It’s just going to make it harder for us when we’re going out and talking to people about the bisexual population,” she said. “We have a real hard time already with people not taking the bisexual identity seriously.”

But it gets more interesting still. An article in the Washington Post entitled, “Gay rights groups dispute federal survey’s estimate of population,” notes that the 2013 National Adult Tobacco Survey came up with results that “more resembled what gay-rights groups had expected. It found that 3.5 percent of Americans considered themselves gay, lesbian or bisexual, with 1.9 percent labeling themselves gay or lesbian, and 1.6 percent identifying as bisexual.”

This means that gay-rights groups knew full well that, rather than being one in 10, their numbers were closer to one in 50, with fewer than one in 60 identifying as bisexual.

The truth is that America has been lied to and duped, and gay activists have been complicit in the deception, if not actively leading the way in the ruse. With the new survey out, it’s time to expose the lies.

The reality is that fewer than one in 50 Americans identify themselves as gay, out of which only a minority wants to be “married.”

How foolish, then, to redefine marriage, restrict freedoms of conscience, speech, and religion, and engage in a massive social experiment based on such a tiny percentage of the population.

We won’t be duped again.


This article was originally posted on the ChristianPost.com website.