Homosexuality

What this has ultimately come down to is forcing Americans to adopt an immoral standard of morality when it comes to marriage. Otherwise the Gay Rights movement would merely seek to remove government control of marriage, rather than attempting to force their definition on the millions of U.S. Christians who disagree while pushing gay hate crimes laws that sue Christian business owners that don't want to participate in actions which violate their beliefs. When put to a vote, even in the most liberal states, gay marriage has failed almost every time.

In California for example, voters decided on both Proposition 22 (2000) and Proposition 8 (2008) that marriage should be defined as between a man and a woman, but 6 judges overturned the will of 4 million voters, and forced California students to be taught about gay role models in classrooms. That a top priority of the Gay Rights movement is forcing students to be taught about gay role models shows their agenda is forcibly indoctrinating others with their beliefs, and using the courts to tyrannically legislate apart from the process of democracy and Bill of Rights.

31 State Ballot Referendums
Thirty states passes laws via ballot referendum defining marriage as between a man and a woman. In other words, not only did the legislators of those states vote to put the issue on the ballot, but the peoples of those 30 states (including the most populous states of California and Texas) all voted against gay marriage. In spite of that, a few liberal judges overturned the will of the people in direct opposition to the principles of democracy at the heart of the U.S. Constitution.

1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)
In addition, Congress passed the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) defining marriage as between a man and a woman by a vote of 342-67 in the House and 85-14 in the Senate.

Opposing Democracy
To get gay marriage legalized, the LGBT has directly challenged the democratic will of the people, overturning laws passed democratically by not only the elected legislators in both the majority of U.S. states and Congress, but also the peoples of those states. The Supreme Court also struck down the Defense of Marriage Act passed by Congress into law in 1996, via its 2013 ruling, United States v. Windsor. Since judges are sworn to uphold the laws passed by Congress in Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution, the judges who have ruled these laws are unconstitutional have directly violated the U.S. Constitution and their own oaths of office to commit treason. The five liberal judges who ruled in both cases should be impeached.

Thus the Supreme Court not only declared the will of 30 state legislatures and 40 million voters across those 30 states unconstitutional, but also the will of Congress per its overwhelming passage of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, through its two rulings in United States v. Windsor (2013) and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015).

The gay rights movement constitutes the greatest attack on U.S. democracy since the Civil War when the Democrat South rebelled to protect the institution of slavery. Gay marriage has been legalized only by directly attacking the most fundamental principle at the heart of American government, democracy itself.

List of Ballot Referendums
The following is a list of state ballot referendum laws that defined marriage as between a man and a woman, prior to the Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) overturning them.

Notable Cases

 * In June 2019, the head of Sweden's LGBT movement was arrested for attempted solicitation of a 14-year-old boy, in a sex sting set up by undercover Swedish journalists. Over 100 other LGBT members similarly propositioned for sex, despite the profile clearly stating that a 14-year-old boy was involved.
 * In April 2019, hundreds of former Boy Scouts came forward exposing 150 pedophile scout leaders. The Boy Scouts previously allowed LGBT scout leaders in 2015.
 * In February 2017 Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos had his invitation to CPAC as a keynote speaker revoked after he was recorded on video advocating for homosexual pedophilia with 13-year-old boys, and joking about his own case of being homosexually abused by a Catholic priest at age 17.
 * In November 2014 Terry Bean, a cofounder of the largest LGBT movement in America (the Human Rights Campaign), was arrested along with his boyfriend for sexual abuse of a 15-year-old boy. Bean was also a prominent supporter of Barack Obama and a key fundraiser for the Democratic Party. Bean was later charged a second time in a separate case in 2019 of abusing a 15-year-old boy.

HRC Acknowledgement
Even the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ organization in America, acknowledges that LGBT are far more likely to experience sexual abuse then the general population, including childhood sexual abuse.

"Within the LGBTQ community, transgender people and bisexual women face the most alarming rates of sexual violence. Among both of these populations, sexual violence begins early, often during childhood."

-Human Rights Campaign

List of Scientific Studies
Numerous studies document the fact that homosexuals are much more likely to have been abused as children, a fact that does not fit well with a purely biological origin, suggesting instead that circumstances play a role. The following is a list of studies that have documented this. Studies which are freely readable online are indicated as such for convenience.

2017 Studies

 * Disproportionality and Disparities among Sexual Minority Youth in Custody (freely readable online)

2015 Studies

 * Comparing the Rates of Early Childhood Victimization across Sexual Orientations: Heterosexual, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Mostly Heterosexual (freely readable online)

2014 Studies

 * An Epidemiological Overview of Child Sexual Abuse (freely readable online)
 * Homeless Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Youth in New York City: Insights from the Field

2013 Studies

 * Disparities in Adverse Childhood Experiences among Sexual Minority and Heterosexual Adults: Results from a Multi-State Probability-Based Sample (freely readable online)
 * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4195447/
 * Sexual Identity Group Differences in Child Abuse and Neglect

2012 Studies

 * Childhood Sexual Abuse and Adult Sexual Identity Formation: Intersection of Gender, Race, and Sexual Orientation (freely readable online)

2011 Studies

 * Sexual Victimization and Health-Related Indicators Among Sexual Minority Men (freely readable online)
 * A Model of Sexual Risk Behaviors Among Young Gay and Bisexual Men: Longitudinal Associations of Mental Health, Substance Abuse, Sexual Abuse, and the Coming-Out Process (freely readable online)
 * The Prevalence of Sexual Assault Against People Who Identify as Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual in the United States: A Systematic Review(freely readable online)

2008 Studies

 * Disparities in Child Abuse Victimization in Lesbian, Bisexual, and Heterosexual Women in the Nurses' Health Study II

2005 Studies

 * Victimization Over the Life Span: A Comparison of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Heterosexual Siblings

2002 Studies

 * AIDS-Related Risk Among Adolescent Males Who Have Sex With Males, Females, or Both: Evidence From a Statewide Survey (freely readable online)

1998 Studies

 * Childhood Sexual Abuse and HIV Risk-Taking Behavior Among Gay and Bisexual Men

1994 Studies

 * Emotional, Behavioral, & HIV Risks Associated with Sexual Abuse Among Adult Homosexual and Bisexual Men

1992 Studies

 * A Review of the Long-Term Effects of Child Sexual Abuse

1991 Studies

 * A Review of the Short-Term Effects of Child Sexual Abuse

Higher Crime Rates
Homosexuals are much more likely to be criminals than the general population. They are three times as likely as the general population to be incarcerated, and even more likely to commit violent sexual crimes. Lesbians in particularly are 8 to 10 times as likely to be incarcerated in federal prisons as the general population. To quote MSNBC's Julie Moreau, "Researchers found roughly a third of incarcerated women identify as lesbian or bisexual, 'a proportion that is about 8 to 10 times greater than the 3.4 percent of lesbian or bisexual women in the U.S. population.' When women who engaged in same-sex sexual activity prior to their detention are factored in, sexual minority women account for a staggering 42.1 percent of the female prison population and 35.7 percent of women in jails."

Juvenile Rates

 * See List of Scientific Studies

Numerous studies document that the LGBT are more likely to be sexually abused as children.

Higher Victimization Rates
As such, it is not surprising that the LGBT are far more likely than the general population to experience violence of all kinds, including sexual violence, according to USA Today. Their culture promotes sexual promiscuity and gratification rather than faithfulness, lust over love, sexual perversion instead of holiness and godliness. That LGBT continue to experience much higher rates of victimization at a time when our society is more permissive and actively encouraging of homosexuality than ever before is evidence that their culture preys upon others, harming and endangering those closest to it, particularly its own... particularly since the majority of the sexual violence they experience is homosexual in nature.

"• 44 percent of lesbians and 61 percent of bisexual women experience rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner, compared with 35 percent of heterosexual women.

• 37 percent of bisexual men experience rape, physical violence and/or stalking by an intimate partner, compared with 29 percent of heterosexual men.

• 40 percent of gay men and 47 percent of bisexual men have experienced sexual violence other than rape, compared to 21 percent of heterosexual men." Alia E. Astagir, USA Today

Catholic Priesthood
The Catholic priesthood has concealed thousands of pedophilic homosexual priests for decades, providing them with "money, shelter, transport, legal help and other support." The Catholic Church has moved hundreds of accused priests from country to country in an attempt to protect them from accountability. Although other denominations have had similar scandals, the rates of prevalence are far more vast when it comes to Catholicism, with 6 to 9% of ordained priests from 1950 to 1980 ultimately accused, per the Jay Report. As has been pointed out by BishopAccountability.org, in dioceses that have been forced to release their internal abuse files the rates are even higher, from 7.7% to 11%. According to a New York Times analysis, at least 30 to 40% of priests, and possibly as high as 75%, are closeted LGBT.

Attack On 1st Amendment
This is ultimately not about equal rights, for homosexuals already have the same rights as everyone else, to vote and marry the opposite sex. It is about attacking the rights of Christians using hate crime laws, so that they can force everyone to change their moral beliefs. For all that the left yells about forcing beliefs on others, they themselves are the ones most guilty of doing so. As Matt Walsh has poignantly observed, "I hear that LGBT people are oppressed yet they've spent much of the past decade trying to exact vengeance on a bakery in Colorado and a chicken restaurant. These are not the priorities of an oppressed people."

That to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own

-Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom

Seizing Sermons From Pastors
In October 2014, Houston's first lesbian mayor, Annise Parker, issued subpoenas demanding that pastors surrender all of their sermons criticizing homosexuality, following passage of a non-discrimination ordinance in June.

Forced to Photograph a Gay Wedding
A photographer, Elaine Huguenin, was sued after refusing to photograph a lesbian wedding in 2006 by Vanessa Willock. As pointed out by Russell D. Moore, president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, "At issue is the fundamental question of whether the state can pretend to be a god over the conscience. No one is seeking to outlaw photographers from working at same-sex marriage or civil union ceremonies. At issue is whether these persons will be forced by the coercive power of the state to participate in something they believe to be sinful." The Washington Post's David Bernstein points out that this is similar to forcing an atheist to photograph a Jewish circumcision ceremony.

In 2006, Vanessa Willock sent an email to several wedding photographers in New Mexico asking if they would be willing to photograph her same-sex "commitment ceremony." (New Mexico did not redefine marriage to include same-sex couples until December 2013.) 'This is a same-gender ceremony. If you are open to helping us celebrate our day we'd like to receive pricing information,' the email stated. Elaine Huguenin informed Willock via email, 'We do not photograph same-sex weddings, but again, thanks for checking out our site! Have a great day.' In court testimony, Huguenin made clear that she would serve the couple in other contexts. She was not declining to serve gays. She was declining to serve gay weddings because she believed that doing so would be in violation of her religious beliefs. Huguenin had also previously declined service to clients who asked her to photograph nude images and violent images. -Napp Nazworth, The Christian Post

Justice David Bosson tyrannically decreed in the case that the Huguenins "now are compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives. Though the rule of law requires it, the result is sobering. It will no doubt leave a tangible mark on the Huguenins and others of similar views." This was not discrimination, the Hugeinins were willing to provide portrait photographs to anyone, it was photographing gay weddings that specifically violated their beliefs, and they had objected in the past to photographing similarly indecent actions such as nudity, violence, and polygamy.

Forced to Design Cakes for Gay Weddings
Jack Phillips, owner of the Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado, has always been willing to sell homosexuals birthday cakes, cupcakes, brownies, or anything else in his shop, but draws the line at designing wedding cakes where he would have to draw two male names on the cake or put two male figurines on top of the cake. So when Charlie Craig and David Mullins asked him to design such a cake for their wedding he refused, citing his Christian beliefs - resulting in their lawsuit to try and force him to make a cake that would violate what he believed. Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys argue that this is not about discrimination but whether government can force someone to say something that they don't want to say in violation of the First Amendment.

ACLU attorney Amanda Goad, who heads up the organization’s LBGT group, heralded the ruling. 'Religious freedom is undoubtedly an important American value, but so is the right to be treated equally under the law free from discrimination,' she said in a statement.

No, my dear. Religious freedom is a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT...

'Everyone who shops in our stores and conducts business in our state should be treated with equality and dignity,' attorney Paula Greisen said in an ACLU of Colorado statement. 'That’s what this ruling was about.'

No ma’am, it was not. That ruling was about bullying – bullying Christians.

'There’s a collision between religious liberty and the gay rights movement,' Martin told me. 'This collision is coming to the forefront almost every day. Somebody is losing their liberty, their job or both.'

-Todd Starnes, FOX News

Colorado's Civil Rights Commission has since ordered the baker to change his store policies and force his staff to attend training sessions on sexual orientation discrimination, submitting quarterly reports showing he hasn't turned away gay customers.

Gallup Polling
Gallup polling very strongly shows that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, not genetically inherited. An October 2012 Gallup poll revealed that those ages 18 to 29 are twice as likely as those 30 to 49 to identify as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, or Transexual (LGBT), 6.4% to 3.2%, and over three times as likely as those ages 65 or older. (6.4% to 1.9%) Furthermore, of those ages 18 to 29, women are almost twice as likely as men to identify as LGBT, 8.3% to 4.6%. This is very striking evidence showing homosexuality is a trend more popular among youth than previous generations, and more popular among young women than young men.

Furthermore, there is noticeable regional variation as well. If homosexuality were genetic, there should not be so much variation by both age and region, which suggests that the lifestyle is the result of cultural trends, not genetic.

In Nature?
Despite efforts to use homosexuality in nature to argue that homosexuality is a natural phenomenon, in actuality homosexuality has been induced in nature and within humans specifically by scientists using artificial drugs which imitate male and female hormones, androgen and estrogen respectively. As such, the increasing prevalence of homosexuality appears attributable to scientists deliberately creating hormone-imitating chemicals to influence sexuality (particularly since many of the scientists studying homosexuality are themselves homosexual ), possibly in an attempt to slow the rate of global population growth.

Xenoestrogens and Xenoandrogens
Xenoestrogens and xenoandrogens are commonly used in foods, cosmetics, pesticides, and even baby toys. Over the past 70 years unnatural estrogen and androgen-imitating chemicals and pesticides have been introduced into nature through industrial, agricultural, and chemical companies which mimic male and female pheromones. Thus ironically, even if there is a genetic cause for homosexuality, it is an unnatural one caused by scientific tampering with hormones.

A xenoestrogen is a synthetic form of estrogen, and it is found in a lot more things than just plastic. Xenoestrogens are also found in pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, household chemicals, dry cleaning chemicals, body creams, shampoos, soaps, and even commercial meats that come from animals that are pumped full of estrogen-laden drugs. In other words, they are pretty much everywhere. The term xenoestrogen simply means 'foreign estrogen' or 'estrogen mimicker.' Once introduced in the body, xenoestrogens try to fool the body into thinking they are natural estrogens, but they are far from it. The accumulations of these xenoestrogens quickly create hormonal imbalances and endocrine system disruption. The end result can be felt all the way from mood swings, weight gain and depression to full blown cancer. In the last 70 years, xenoestrogens have not only found their way into products that we use every day, but alarmingly, traces of xenoestrogens are found in food containers or even food itself. This allows these synthetic compounds a direct path into our body via our unsuspecting mouths. -Brad King, TotalHealth Magazine

Per the following NCBI paper, scientists are able to control sexual urges in animals and humans largely at will through use of sex steroids that disrupt the endocrine system:

"Male-typical sexual orientation is controlled at least in part by the POA (like sexual behavior), and it differentiates under the influence of pre-/perinatal sex steroids. Many Sex Differences in Humans Are Organized by Embryonic Sex Steroids: Do these endocrine mechanisms demonstrated in animals have any significance in humans? The answer to this question should be considered in two steps. 1) Do we have any evidence that sex steroids are, in humans like in animals, implicated in the sexual differentiation of morphology (e.g. genital structures) but also of brain (e.g. SDN-POA) and sexual behavior? And 2) are there any data indicating that embryonic sex steroids have, like in animals, organizational effects on sexual orientation in humans? The answer to the first of these questions is clearly yes, and there is probably no need to elaborate on the arguments supporting this conclusion especially in an endocrine journal... A potential implication of the embryonic hormonal environment in the control of sexual orientation is also supported by studies of various clinical disorders that affect the endocrine system during fetal life. In some cases, these early endocrine disruptions lead to a complete sex reversal, so that, postnatally, subjects are raised assuming a sex (gender) that is opposite to their genetic sex." -Jacques Balthazart, "Minireview: Hormones and Human Sexual Orientation," Endocrinology 152(8): 2937–2947.

In 2007, the attempts by researchers to turn sheep gay ironically caused outrage from the LGBT, who thought the results could be used against their agenda. As such, the liberal Slate Magazine argued at the time that the researchers' actions were supportive of the LGBT.

"The sheep researchers—Charles Roselli of Oregon Health and Science University and Fred Stormshak of Oregon State University—are investigating biological factors in homosexuality... Nor has Roselli tried, in any experiment, to make sheep turn out straight. He has tried the opposite: to make them turn out gay. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals accuses them of trying to “cure” homosexuality. Not true. Roselli and OHSU’s publicist, Jim Newman, have spent months dousing this fire. Roselli has never said or written anything against homosexuality. In fact, he has said that studies suggesting a biological basis for homosexuality tend to encourage tolerance... PETA thinks this study threatens to advance the eradication of homosexuality. But look more closely. The paper’s title is 'Influence of castration and estrogen replacement on sexual behavior of female-oriented, male-oriented, and asexual rams.' And that’s what the study examines: All the rams, not just the gay ones, are castrated and given estrogen. The point isn’t to make the gay rams straight; it’s to 'restore sexual behavior' in general." -William Saletan, Slate Magazine.

Unnaturally Altering Sexual Preferences and Genitals
Mankind's genetic tampering increasingly appears to be the reason for homosexuality in nature. Scientists deliberately manipulate newt pheromones to introduce homosexuality in nature, as one example. Xenoestrogens have been shown to produce homosexual urges in snakes by confusing genders through smell. Estrogen has also been shown to alter gender preference in quail and chicken as well. Artificial sex hormones have also been used to induce homosexuality in fruit flies, rats, hamsters, ferrets, pigs, zebra finches, and dogs:

"A new study finds that both drugs and genetic manipulation can turn the homosexual behavior of fruit flies on and off within a matter of hours. While the genetic finding supports the thinking that homosexuality is hard-wired, the drug finding surprisingly suggests it's not that simple. In fact, homosexuality in the fruit flies seems to be regulated by how they interpret the scent of another... In the new work, University of Illinois at Chicago researcher David Featherstone and coworkers discovered a gene in fruit flies they call 'genderblind,' or GB. A mutation in GB turns flies bisexual. GB transports the neurotransmitter glutamate to brain cells. Altering levels of glutamate change the strength of nerve cell junctions, called synapses, which play a key role in human and animal behavior. Post-doctoral researcher Yael Grosjean found that all male fruit flies with a mutation in their GB gene courted other males." -Robert Roy Britt, LiveScience.

"In rats, hamsters, ferrets, pigs, zebra finches, and possibly dogs, either early castration of males or early testosterone treatment of females or both have been shown to change or reverse sexual orientation." -Elizabeth Adkins Regan, "Sex Hormones and Sexual Orientation in Animals," Psychobiology 6(4): 335-347.

Scientists were able to produce homosexuality in nature in rodents and rhesus monkeys by exposing them to xenoandrogens and diethylstilbestrol. In the case of mice, they tampered with the genetic code in an attempt to produce homosexuality without the use of steroids.

"The reproducibility of this effect has been questioned, but if the effect of DES is real, which will be difficult to confirm given that this treatment has been abandoned for a long time, it would indicate that estrogens as well as androgens (testosterone) are able to masculinize sexual orientation. This would fit with rodent data, where many effects of testosterone on sexual differentiation are produced after conversion into estradiol by aromatase in the brain, but would be in conflict with other data from humans that assign a prominent role to androgens in sexual differentiation. Note, however, that in rhesus monkeys, fetal exposure to DES was shown to increase adult mounting behavior although not to the male-typical level." -Jacques Balthazart, "Minireview: Hormones and Human Sexual Orientation," Endocrinology 152(8): 2937–2947.

"These studies indicated that the type of sexual behaviour (male- or female-typical) displayed by an adult individual is determined by exposure to steroids during the early stages of life... researchers took advantage of a mutated mouse model in which the SRY gene was no longer functional, so that it could no longer induce the formation of testes (the XYSRY2 mouse). In another mouse line, they additionally translocated the SRY gene to an autosome, so that XX females would develop testes during the early embryonic life (XXSRY mouse)." Jacques Balthazart, "Sex Differences in Partner Preferences in Humans and Animals.", Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 371:20150118.

Xenoestrogens and xenoandrogens have resulted in fish, amphibians, and aquatic reptiles becoming homosexual as well, including cases where they have intrasex genitalia.

"That synthetic chemicals in the environment can wreak havoc on the endocrine system of animals is irrefutable when considering aquatic species. Exposure from pesticide runoff, industrial waste, and oral contraceptives in effluent of water treatment plants are the primary sources, with fish, amphibians and aquatic reptiles literally swimming in the stuff, and illustrating the price with abnormal genitalia, increased incidences of intrasex individuals, and infertility." -Margaret M. McCarthy, Physiological Reviews 88:91-134,American Physiological Society

Xenoestrogens and xenoandrogens not only alter sexual preference, but can unnaturally alter genitals as well, producing male-like genitals in females and vice versa.

"These results may or may not apply to humans, of course, but some researchers have investigated human females who were 'androgenized' in the womb because of drugs given to their mothers to prevent miscarriage. By and large, the results of these studies are similar to the experimental studies-androgenized human females show similar patterns of higher aggression. Some scholars take these results to indicate that biological differences between males and females are responsible for the male-female difference in aggression; others suggest that even these results are not conclusive because females who get more androgen show generally disturbed metabolic systems, and general metabolic disturbance may itself increase aggressiveness. Furthermore, androgen-injected females may look more like males because they develop male-like genitals; therefore, they may be treated like males." -Carol R. Ember, Melvin Ember, and Peter N. Peregrine, Anthropology: Fourteenth Edition.

"Butyl benzyl phthalate (BBP) is another endocrine disruptor that has been reported to be an estrogenic compound and a partial agonist for ER (Jobling et al., 1995; Zacharewski et al., 1998; Andersen et al., 1999). It is used as a plasticizer, and is widely used in food wraps and cosmetic formulations. The International Program of Chemical Safety (IPCS) concluded that BBP exposure to the general population is based almost entirely on food intake, because the concentrations of BBP in air, drinking water, and soil are very low making intakes from these routes essentially negligible... When administered during sexual differentiation, BBP also causes male reproductive tract malformation of the external genitalia, sex accessory glands, epididymides and testes (Gray et al., 2000)." -S.V. Fernandez and J. Russo, "Estrogens and Xenoestrogens in Breast Cancer," Toxicol Pathol 38(1): 110–122.

How Scientists Created LGBT Urges in Humans: Diethylstilbestrol
The most prominent xenoestrogen, diethylstilbestrol (DES), was created in 1938 and from 1940-71 was given to as many as 5-10 million pregnant women in the United States by the USDA under the mistaken belief it would prevent miscarriages. It was also distributed in France, Spain, and the Netherlands. Studies have shown that those taking diethylstilbestrol have increased likelihood of homosexuality.

"Treatment of pregnant mothers with diethylstilbestrol (DES): Between 1939 and 1960, about 2 million pregnant women were treated with DES in Europe and the United States to prevent spontaneous miscarriages. This treatment turned out to be ineffective and also to have detrimental long-term consequences, but one of the unexpected outcomes was that girls born from these treated mothers showed a significant increase in nonheterosexual (bisexual or homosexual) fantasies or sexual activity, whereas the socialization of these subjects was fundamentally consistent with their genetic female sex." -Jacques Balthazart, "Minireview: Hormones and Human Sexual Orientation," Endocrinology 152(8): 2937–2947.

The FDA continued to approve diethylstilbestrol for estrogen-replacement therapy until the late 1980s. It is now known that DES causes serious health problems including breast cancer, vaginal and cervical cancer, clear cell cancer, testical cysts, premature births, infertility, and genital abnormalities.

The U.S. Military's 'Gay Bomb' Proposal
In 1994, the U.S. Air Force proposed use of a gay bomb against foreign combatants as a way to weaken opposing enemy forces through chemical hormones by making soldiers "sexually irresistible to one another." The project's originators even won a 2007 IG Nobel Award from Harvard University for the unorthodox proposal. As such, the possibility exists that either A) the U.S. government is targeting people with chemical warfare (e.g. DES) to make them homosexual, or that B) a foreign government (like China) is doing so.

"The unusual weapon, confirmed by Pentagon sources, is a 'gay bomb.' The project, which officials say has now been scrapped, was to come up with a device to release unspecified hormones that could be absorbed through the skin or lungs, thereby incapacitating soldiers who—according to the plan—would be too busy swooning over each other in homosexual ecstasy to waste any time dashing about planting roadside bombs." -BBC News

"The Pentagon maintains that the love affair with the gay bomb idea was brief. However, the Sunshine Project thinks the Pentagon doth protest too much, finding that they 'submitted the proposal to the highest scientific review body in the country for them to consider.' Indeed, the proposal’s information was submitted to the National Academy of Sciences in 2002... For the attempt at making a gay bomb, the Wright Lab had the honor of winning the Ig Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. As the prize is organized by the Annals of Improbable Research, it seems to be an excellent home for the project, though perhaps a step down from the National Academy of Sciences." -O'Rene D. Ashley, Gizmodo

Hormone Replacement Therapy
Xenoestrogens are used in Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) which is used to treat 'Gender Dysphoria' / 'Gender Identity Disorder.' In essence, estrogen-imitating chemicals are used to change the sexual characteristics of those who aren't happy with the gender they are born with. HRT has also been used extensively to treat menopause symptoms with Menopausal Hormone Therapy (MHT). Like their counterparts xenoestrogens, xenoandrogens (which imitate the male hormone, testosterone) likewise cause reproductive disorders and occur in persistent organic pollutants (POPs). Part of the debate over homosexuality involves whether taxpayers should be required to pay for others' Gender Reassignment surgeries.

Cancer Risk if Mixing Hormones
When women take estrogen, the female hormone, their risk of breast cancer declines. However, if taking more than just estrogen, their risk of breast cancer increased substantially, but declined once they stopped using artificial hormones.

"Women who took estrogen alone had a lower risk of breast cancer than women who took placebo. After nearly 11 years of follow-up, the risk of breast cancer among women who took estrogen alone remained lower than that among women who took placebo. Women who took estrogen plus progestin were more likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer than women who took placebo. The breast cancers in these women were larger and more likely to have spread to the lymph nodes by the time they were diagnosed. The risk of breast cancer was greater the longer women took the combined hormone therapy, but it decreased markedly when hormone use stopped." -National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute

Former Homosexuals
Another strong evidence that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, not genetic, is the fact that there are those who stop being homosexual. The most notable case would be Michael Glatze, one of the leaders of the Gay Rights movement before announcing in July 2007 that he was no longer gay. Yet another example would be Christopher Doyle, leader of Voice for the Voiceless who states of Sexual Orientation Change Efforts (SOCE) that "Our goal is not to change gays, but to offer an alternative for those who believe they are inherently heterosexual and experience unwanted homosexual feelings."

Often times, the issues that clients work through include painful trauma from the same gender (parent/peers) such as rejection, not feeling wanted, not fitting in, bullying, and feeling inferior because of their gender non-conforming behavior and interests. When clients work through those issues in therapy and experience acceptance and intimacy in non-sexual relationships with heterosexual friends (males with males/females with females), the desire for sex with the same gender gradually decreases as they begin to understand what they are really looking for, emotional connection with the same gender, not sex. When that emotional intimacy is experienced, it’s amazing to the client, because they have rarely or never experienced it before! Over time, emotional fulfillment with same gender friends takes the place of sexual eroticism, and having now bonded with the same gender, opposite sex attractions begin to emerge.

-Christopher Doyle

The existence of ex-gays has revealed a disconnect between the claims of tolerance and reality. As pointed out by Linda Jernigan, another ex-gay, "The conversions of alcoholics, drug addicts, gamblers, fornicators, porn addicts, and adulterers are never disputed or challenged. When someone exits homosexuality, however, they are not merely challenged; they are maligned and rejected as liars from the community that preaches acceptance and tolerance. While the homosexual community accepts the transformation from heterosexuality to homosexuality as truthful and morally legitimate, they reject any transformation in the other direction and the value of chastity for those who never experience heterosexual attraction."

Legal Hypocrisy of the Supreme Court
There are numerous problems from a legal, Constitutional standpoint with the Supreme Court's recent assault on democracy.

Supreme Court Sworn to Uphold the Laws Passed by Congress
First and foremost, the U.S. Supreme Court is sworn to uphold the laws passed by Congress under Article VI of the U.S. Constitution. As such, unless the Constitution explicitly forbids an Act of Congress, Supreme Court justices violate their own oaths by refusing to uphold the laws passed by Congress.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Hypocritical Reversing of Bowers v. Hardwick
Secondly, it makes no sense for the Supreme Court to hypocritically uphold abortion in cases like Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) by declaring that precedent must be adhered to despite the acknowledgement in Casey that Roe v. Wade (1973) was a fundamentally flawed ruling, while rejecting the principle of precedent (stare decisis) when it comes to the matter of homosexual marriage. That is because the Court ruled that state sodomy laws banning homosexual intercourse were Constitutional in Bowers v. Hardwick (1986).

In other words, over a half century, the Court hypocritically adhered to precedent when necessary to protect abortion, and overturned precedent when necessary to legalize gay marriage, in a drastic display of legal liberal hypocrisy.

Stare Decisis and a Strict Adherence to Precedent is Ridiculous
Furthermore, the Supreme Court has been wrong many times before, so a strict adherence to precedent; a pretense that the Court is somehow infallible, is absurd. Examples include:


 * Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857): The Supreme Court declared slavery Constitutional just before the Civil War.
 * Plessy v. Ferguson (1896): The Supreme Court declared racial segregation Constitutional.
 * Korematsu v. United States (1944): The Supreme Court upheld the Japanese internment, which the U.S. later apologized for, as Constitutional.

In each of those cases, it was Congress or the President that led the way in fixing problems the Court refused to fix. Right after the Court upheld slavery, Congress created the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to stop slavery and provide equal protection to all. After the Court upheld racial segregation, General Eisenhower desegregated the armed forces in the 1940s, although the Supreme Court did finally act with Brown v. Board of Education (1954) to desegregate schools. However, this was after nearly a century of it refusing to uphold the will of Congress and the states which had attempted to outlaw racial segregation through the 14th Amendment. In Korematsu the Court upheld the Japanese internment which was later apologized for by Congress, with reparations made by the 1988 Civil Liberties Act passed by Congress under President Ronald Reagan.

The Supreme Court has, throughout history, consistently lagged well behind Congress and the Presidency in righting wrongs. To pretend that it is somehow infallible when it comes to its decision-making, and that it has never made mistakes, will only lead to additional entrenchment as it clings to flawed decisions like Roe and Obergefell.

14th Amendment Was Never Intended to Legalize Gay Marriage
Most U.S. states at the time of the 14th Amendment's passage in 1868 had laws prohibiting sodomy. In spite of this, the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause is now used by the Supreme Court to dishonestly justify legalizing gay marriage, when the states and legislators who passed it clearly supported anti-sodomy laws.

No Judicial Review
All legislative, law-making authority and powers are vested in the legislative branch according to Article I, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution. The President, whose responsibility it is to appoint Justices of the Supreme Court, is required to take care that the laws of the United States are faithfully executed per Article III, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. As such, those he appoints must likewise be expected to uphold the laws passed by Congress, or the President by appointing those who would violate them would himself be violating his own oath of office. Judges are explicitly commanded to uphold all laws passed by Congress under Article VI of the U.S. Constitution.

That Congress has power over the Judiciary, to regulate it, not the Judiciary to regulate Congress, is further evident from the Constitution’s delegation of control to Congress in defining the Judiciary’s appellate jurisdiction (Art. III, Sec. 2), provision of a lengthy list of powers to Congress which are never provided to the Judiciary (Art. I, Sec. 8), delegation of authority to Congress in constituting all courts below the Supreme Court (Art. I, Sec. 8), allowance of the Senate to authorize the appointment of Supreme Court Justices (Art. II, Sec. 2), delegation of the power to impeach Supreme Court Justices to Congress (Art. I, Sections 2 and 3), and authorization of Congress to define trial locations of interstate crimes such as those presided over by the Supreme Court. (Art. III, Sec. 2)

That the Supreme Court has overstepped its constitutional bounds in tyrannically opposing the democratic will of the American people is evident from Obergefell v. Hodges when the Supreme Court overturned the ballot referendum-based laws of 30 states that had been voted upon by the American people. As such, the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction should be restricted from declaring any laws passed by Congress unconstitutional, and only those laws passed by state legislatures which directly contradict by the strictest letter of the law that which is in the Constitution or laws passed by Congress should be declared unconstitutional.

'Incorporating' the Bill of Rights Makes No Sense
The Supreme Court is essentially arguing that it gets to pick and choose which Constitutional rights Americans can have, rejecting some rights that are explicitly provided in the Bill of Rights by claiming that the Bill of Rights don't apply to the individual states unless "incorporated" through the 14th Amendment, and making up entirely new rights such as gay marriage and abortion through the 14th Amendment - even though most of the states which passed the 14th Amendment in 1868 had laws restricting abortion and sodomy at the time, and certainly never intended the amendment to legalize things they themselves had made illegal at the time.

However, the Bill of Rights, authored primarily by Thomas Jefferson, logically exists primarily to enumerate the inalienable, God-given rights that Jefferson himself alludes to in the Declaration of Independence, and as such, the Bill of Rights was identifying rights that apply broadly and generally to all. Furthermore, amendments are passed by not only two-thirds of both houses of Congress but three-quarters of all state legislatures. As ‘amendments to the Constitution’ they should be considered to have the same weight as the Constitution itself which they are changing; i.e. amending.

Passage of an amendment is even more difficult than passage of a law, requiring two-thirds of both houses of Congress as well as passage by three-quarters of all state legislatures. As such, amendments should be considered to have even more authority than laws passed by Congress. Judges are sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution and laws passed by Congress under the 6th Amendment, and thus any judge which refuses to uphold Amendments to the Constitution (which are part of the Constitution) or the laws passed by Congress (unless they explicitly contradict the Constitution) is violating their own oath of office.

First of all, the fact that 75% of state legislatures pass an amendment is essentially a binding vote of agreement by the states as a whole to submit to such an amendment. It makes no sense for the Court to rule that the states are not bound by amendments they themselves, as a body, passed; not by a 50% majority vote but an overwhelming 75% majority.

Secondly, the Constitution and its Amendments are the framework for passage of laws by Congress. If laws passed by Congress can be held to broadly apply to all peoples of the United States, not only nationally but at state and local levels, how much more so should amendments be similarly viewed as broadly applying to all?

Constitutional Solutions

 * See also Reforms

The entire judiciary, with the exception of the Supreme Court, is based around a series of judiciary acts passed by Congress. The U.S. Constitution, as seen from Article III, merely necessitates the institution of a Supreme Court. How many justices are on the Supreme Court is not stated by the Constitution, and the Supreme Court is given only limited power to hear cases constitutionally. Congress passed numerous judiciary acts throughout history changing the structure and scope of the courts, including the number of Supreme Court Justices.

Judicial Reform Bill

 * For more detailed legislation on judicial reform, see Judicial Reform Bill.

The entire judiciary, with the exception of the Supreme Court, is based around a series of judiciary acts passed by Congress. The U.S. Constitution, as seen from Article III, merely necessitates the institution of a Supreme Court. How many justices are on the Supreme Court is not stated by the Constitution, and the Supreme Court is given only limited power to hear cases constitutionally. Congress passed numerous judiciary acts throughout history changing the structure and scope of the courts, including the number of Supreme Court Justices.

Modern Judiciary Act

 * For a list of judiciary acts, see judiciary acts.

A modern judiciary act is sorely needed, as the judiciary has begun the decline to tyranny which Thomas Jefferson predicted when he warned "That to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own." A modern judiciary act should be created to implement broad reforms to the judicial system in the same way that numerous judiciary acts have done so in the past.

This would be entirely consistent with Article III of the U.S. Constitution which delegates to Congress structuring of the court system, and with Article VI which mandates that judges uphold laws passed by Congress. The President himself is likewise responsible for upholding the laws passed by Congress, and appointing judges he knew would obstruct Congressional laws would violate his own oath of office (Article II, Sec. 3).

Article III clearly states, from the beginning, that the judicial power is subject to Congressional determination, and further states that Congress has the right to specify what the punishments for specific crimes should be, as well as where trial jurisdiction should lie. Not only does Congress have complete authority to institute lower courts at will, but even the Supreme Court can be regulated, since Congress can determine where Supreme Court trials are held and what the punishment for crimes such as treason should be.

"The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish."

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

"...but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed."

"The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason..."

Restricting Court Jurisdiction
The single most important reform needed from a modern judiciary act is restriction of court jurisdiction, mandating that the courts be accountable to laws passed by Congress (as the Constitution says they should be in Art. VI). Without that reform, the Supreme Court and lower courts will continue to declare laws passed by Congress (e.g. the Defense of Marriage Act) are unconstitutional, that Presidential Cabinet appointments (e.g. Matthew Whitaker) are unconstitutional, and that executive orders are unconstitutional (e.g. the travel ban).

Judicial Term Limits in Lieu of Impeaching Unconstitutional Judges

 * See also Attack on Democracy

Such a judiciary act should implement term limits on federal judges and Supreme Court Justices, requiring them to be reappointed by the President every 8 years in order to retain their positions. This would remove many liberal justices who have been unconstitutionally opposing the will of the American people.

Judges who have voted for gay marriage and against voter-approved ballot referendums (per Obergefell v. Hodges and United States v. Windsor) should be impeached and removed whenever possible at both the federal and state levels, given their opposition to the principle of democracy fundamental to the U.S. Constitution. However, since impeachment requires 67 votes in the U.S. Senate, use of term limits for judges is the best way to remove the many unconstitutional judges who have been opposing democracy until such time as impeachment becomes an alternative.

Is It Wrong?
The Bible makes very clear that homosexuality is wrong, both in the Old and New Testaments. And contrary to popular belief Jesus does briefly address it also in Matthew 11:8 and Luke 7:25, using the Greek word malakos which the KJV there translates soft, but translates as "effeminate" in 1 Corinthians 6:9.

Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

1 Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

1 Timothy 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

Not About Hatred or Being Better
Biblically everyone is sinful before God, rather than singling out homosexuals, the Bible states that everyone is guilty before God and worthy of death.

Romans 3:9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; 10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Romans 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

All Guilty of Sexual Sins
As Christians we believe everyone has been guilty of similar sins, and that homosexuality is just one of a number of wrong sexual actions grouped together as fornication.

Romans 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. [See Judge Not?]

1 Corinthians 6:18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.

Others include divorce, adultery, incest, bestiality, lusting after others in one's heart, and prostitution. Even excessive sexual lust in general seems to be wrong regardless of gender (1 Thessalonians 4:3-7, 1 Corinthians 6:12-20), something I personally admit to having struggled with.

Matthew 19:7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? 8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Leviticus 18:6 None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the LORD.

Leviticus 18:23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.

Matthew 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

1 Corinthians 6:15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. 16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.

Lust and fleshly desires are contrasted with walking in the Spirit.

Galatians 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. 17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

1 John 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. 17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

Repentance and Turning
The Gospel of Salvation is that all must turn from their wrong actions to follow God's will, not just some, but all. Christianity at its heart is not about denying guilt, but admitting it, one cannot repent if they don't accept they have done what is wrong. Christianity is about a lifetime of repentance, attempting to admit wrong actions and forsake them to follow God. We are ultimately called to judge ourselves first. Repentance means not only sorrow for wrong actions but turning from them, changing and doing works befitting repentance.

Proverbs 28:13 He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.

1 Corinthians 11:31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.

Luke 13:1 There were present at that season some that told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. 2 And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things? 3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. 4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem? 5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

Acts 26:20 But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

John 8:10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? 11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

Galatians 6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. 8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

Christianity is all about admitting our guilt, trusting in Jesus, and asking Jesus to save us through His sacrifice on our behalf on the cross.

John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Romans 10:8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; 9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

Conclusion
For Christians, this is not about considering one group worse than others, simply about forsaking wrong actions, including homosexuality, in order to follow God and holiness. Homosexuality is just one of many wicked sins to be repented of, Biblically.

Westboro

 * Main Article: Westboro

Left-Wing Democrats
For all that Westboro gets portrayed as conservative and Christian, it is actually a left-wing Democrat organization unaffiliated with and denounced by major Christian organizations such as the Baptist World Alliance and Southern Baptist Convention.It is unaffiliated with all Baptist and Christian organizations, and the two largest Baptist denominations, the Baptist World Alliance and the Southern Baptist Convention, have denounced Westboro.

Fred Phelps, the church's founder, has run six times in Democrat primary elections. The Westboro Church assisted Al Gore's Kansas campaign in 1988 and provided rooms for his campaign workers. Fred Phelps Jr. was a Gore delegate to the 1988 Democratic National Convention and invited to the first Clinton-Gore inauguration in 1993 as a result.


 * In 1990, Phelps Sr. ran for Governor of Kansas in the Democratic primary election and received 6.7% of the vote.
 * In 1994, Fred Phelps Sr. ran for Governor in the Democratic primary election and received 5,300 votes.
 * In 1998, Fred Phelps Sr. ran for Governor in the Democratic primary election and received 14.7% of the vote.
 * In 1992, Fred Phelps Sr. ran for U.S. Senate in the Democratic primary election and received 30.8% of the ballots cast.
 * In 1993, Fred Phelps Sr. ran for Topeka mayor in the Democratic primary election and received 1.8% of the ballots cast.
 * In 1997, Fred Phelps Sr. ran for Topeka mayor in the Democratic primary election.

A Law Firm Disguised As A Church
Westboro Baptist Church consists of a family of lawyers working for the Phelps Chartered Law Firm who reap massive monetary awards from suing communities that try to keep their offensive protests out, under the First Amendment. Fred Phelps graduated from Washburn University School of Law in Topeka in 1962 and designed his church/family as a giant law firm used to sue those angry enough to retaliate against the "church" or to bar its offensive activities from their communities. Eleven of Phelps' thirteen children are lawyers. All five of the attorneys for the Phelps Chartered Law Firm, which Fred Phelps founded in 1964, are his children. The firm is located at 1414 S.W. Topeka Blvd. in Topeka, Kansas. As of 2001, at least 14 of Westboro's 22 adult members had law degrees.

Protests
Westboro does not just protest funerals of homosexuals but massacre victims, celebrities, and anything else that will get them media attention. Westboro first began picketing in 1991 and has protested or otherwise targeted the following:

Groups

 * Homosexuals, including Matthew Shepard, Ellen DeGeneres, and Diane Whipple.
 * Jews.
 * The Catholic Pope and the Catholic Church.
 * The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) and the funeral of Gordon B. Hinckley its former president.
 * Islam and Muslims.
 * The Ku Klux Klan.
 * The nations of Sweden, Canada, and Ireland.
 * Joseph Estabrook Elementary School in Massachusetts.

Victims of Massacres/Disasters

 * Funerals for victims of 9/11.
 * Funerals for victims of the Virginia Tech massacre.
 * Funerals for victims of the Westroads Mall massacre.
 * Funerals for victims of the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake.
 * Funerals for U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan including Spc. Edward Myers.
 * Funerals for the 17 soldiers killed aboard the USS Cole in Yemen in 2000.
 * Funerals for Amish schoolgirls murdered in Pennsylvania.
 * Funerals for victims who died when the I-35W Mississippi River bridge collapsed.
 * Funerals for AIDS victims including Kevin Oldham.
 * Funerals for Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting victims.
 * Funeral for Canadian bus victim Tim McLean.

Celebrities

 * Billy Graham.
 * Santa Claus.
 * Musicians, including Justin Bieber, Lady Gaga, Sonny Bono, Frank Sinatra, Heath Ledger, Taylor Swift, Vince Gill, Kesha, and Blake Shelton.
 * Actors and television personalities, including Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Fred Rogers, Jerry Falwell, and Cory Monteith.
 * Political figures, including Bob Dole, Bill Clinton's mother, Ronald Reagan, Princess Diana, Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist, former Senator David Norris, Coretta Scott King, Topeka Mayor James McClinton, and Princess Madeleine of Sweden.
 * Reggie White.

No-Fault Divorce
A favorite claim of gay rights advocates is that because divorce allows short marriages that there is no sanctity of marriage as is. However, this ignores the fact that no fault divorce allowing divorce for any reason or no reason did not exist until the 1970s. What is more, no-fault divorce, like the Gay Rights movement, began in California in 1969, same time, same place. This is, in other words, the second time that the definition of marriage has been changed, and the last time it caused single mothers and broken homes following false promises that changes to marriage would not harm society.