There are many good reasons to oppose the glorification of homosexuality in society. This does not mean that those who do are racists [like Muslims gays are not a race]; full of bigotry, or are rushing out to the nearest gay bar with a baseball bat. Anyone who says they dislike homosexuality and gays is set upon like unarmed Christians in the Roman Coliseum circa 70 AD. How juvenile and how immature. Sound reasons exist to resist the march to acclaim homosexuality as respectable and normal. It is only a politically immature and intolerant society that refuses to hear the dissenters. As with Global Warming the debate is supposedly closed and the science ‘solid’ that gay-ness is caused by genes. From this idea springs into life, like a group of happy smiling munchkins, all sorts of ideas about gay-rights, gay-marriage, and gay-adoption. While seemingly innocuous and clownish, such ideals are dangerous and perplexing. Like Global Warming there is nothing scientific or closed about what causes homosexuality. The gay gene myth has been exploded and destroyed more times than your average sorry group of Palestinian teenagers in Gaza, itching to die for Allah and partake of those luscious 72 virgins in the big house. Kaboom. The original gay gene theory so trumpeted by the media in 1993 was falsified within one year by peer reviews and savaged every year since by independent scientific research. In countless studies, no one has been able to prove any genetic connection between DNA and homosexual orientation. Evolution would logically ensure that non-procreational DNA would die off after millions of years – real science seems to back up this common-sensical observation. “A research team attempted to replicate Dean Hamer's 1993 assertion that he had found a "gay gene" in his study of 40 pairs of homosexual brothers. The new study utilized 50 gay pairs and found nothing. Even Hamer's team had attempted another study with 32 pairs and found basically nothing. By chance, 50% of the pairs would have shared the supposed gene. For the 82 pairs in the replication samples, the figure was 55%, essentially no different from chance. (Rice et al. Science, 1999, 284, 665-667)” But like Global Warming the science is ‘solid’ and the case closed. The above story comes from the University of Western Ontario in Canada, and was backed up in its conclusions by Stanford and Harvard - three middling know-nothing research institutions. Far better to trust Time Magazine and a gay geneticist [Hamer] who was sued for falsifying his 1993 study regarding the mythical gay gene, then peer reviews which find that they are reviewing hot air and genetic rhetoric. According to a co-researcher [that Hamer had fired] the illustrious Dr. Hamer intentionally lied about his data to make sure the results conformed to his preconceptions. This is probably why no other study in the world can back up his claims of the gay gene theory. In any event Hamer does not care, since he has penned his memoirs, taken his silly ideas into politics [actively campaigning in Colorado, appearing at rallies and smiling on TV] and made his money. But you won’t find the mainstream media covering this side of the gay gene story. So let’s dispense with the idea that gays have special rights because their condition is natural. It is not natural. It is socio-environmental and that is a different ball game now isn’t it. And let’s not insult the black civil rights movement by equating the toleration of gays with the racial struggle for equal rights, equal access and respect. That is nonsense. Deal with homosexuality in its proper context – social and environmental. What then are the issues with homosexuality? Personally I could care less if someone is gay as long as he keeps to himself and does not bother me. I am sure millions of others agree. But there are 3 primary problems I have with homosexuality. First is the constant interference in the non-state institution of marriage. Government, unelected judges and gay lobby groups have no right to use the courts, ignore Parliaments and referenda, to change non-state institutions. The minority does not dictate to the majority. You can’t marry your mother, your sister or your pet rock. Gay marriage is not a marriage but a union that has no claims to marital status and importantly – no claim on taxpayer money and social welfare payments. To allow politicians and gay lobby groups [many which are funded by the state] to circumvent democracy to change a non-state actor is criminal. Second is health and crime. Yes we all know that not every gay is a pedophile – but far too many are. According to statistics in North America and Europe about 35-50% of all pedophilia cases are gay incidents, but gays only make up 2-3 % of the population – quite a massive imbalance [see UC Davis study; http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html]. The danger to young boys is obvious yet politicians and activists continue to pressure groups like the Boy Scouts which don’t allow gay scout leaders to accept homosexual men into the association. They claim it is a ‘right’. Anyone else would claim it a ‘stupidity’ and a threat to young boys. AIDS is another problem. No AIDS is not a heterosexual disease but a homosexual one spread by a sexually perverse and free lifestyle [as well as through needles and drugs] and a lack of condoms. It is extraordinarily costly to treat and that burden falls on heterosexual taxpayers. No media sympathy here for the non-gays who bear the costs of gay sexual promiscuity. Such concerns don’t translate well into Hollywood epics with Tom Hanks, or gay sit-coms with bad actors. Lastly there is the moral aspect. Not the religious intoning that you hear on conservative talk radio about homosexuality being against the biblical code. Give me a break. The ancients liked nothing more than a good game of back-ender with a nubile young, smooth skinned cherub. No the moral argument goes something like this: by extending, accepting and deepening society’s regard for homosexuality we are lowering all of our standards relating to health, sex, relationships, truly normal conduct and high standards of behavior. Homosexuality is not about love – it is about something else and that something is a lowering of standards. People turn to gay-dom for many reasons – acceptance, problems in child-hood, a skewed vision of sex, a desire to be counter-culture, loneliness, low self-esteem and other psychological issues that impact normative behavior patterns. That some people enjoy this life-style is clear. But it is not the optimum arrangement in our world, nor should it be an accepted life style in our society. As William Gairdner [well known Canadian writer and commentator with his own blog] stated: “Homosexuality is the opposite. No one, no parent, no community leader, no one except another (usually older) homosexual, would ever voluntarily induct a child into homosexuality. About half of all homosexuals themselves even say they would "become upset" if a child of theirs became homosexual (Bell and Weinberg). And in no sense is homosexual behaviour immutable, as is skin colour, or ethnicity. Respected sexologists Masters and Johnson have repeatedly shown recovery rates of 70 per cent for homosexuals.” Not even homosexuals are that convinced that their life-style is appropriate with 70% going on to heterosexual lives. What does that tell you? It tells you that gay-dom is for many a half way house of counter culture repose, not a life-style choice that they really desire. When half of gays say they don’t want their kids or any kids for that matter to be gay, you have a problem. Yet society rushes to ensure gay-adoption, gay elementary school teachers and gays working with young children in every sphere of life. Gay rights might sound nice to the liberal media – but where are children’s rights? All of the above is not to suggest that gays should be ferreted out and beaten or that gay-bashing is necessary. Clearly it is unacceptable and immoral to destroy someone’s life, career or social standing because of their sexual orientation. But it is also clear that blithely and happily accepting such a life-style and blocking all debate and criticism of this lifestyle choice, is just as ignorant, and just as demeaning. There is nothing wrong with a society of heterosexuality, morality and high standards. Gays and their life-style choices should be compared against what society wants to cherish and hold dear. Strong heterosexual families, healthy heterosexual children, high standards, some faith, strong morality and solid citizenry is what we want. I doubt very much that the gay lifestyle in the main, fits in with this concept of what constitutes high civilization. In fact it pulls in the opposite direction. Homosexuality is in sum, another indication of low culture and lower standards. It promises rampant anonymous, sex, drugs and disease. It that sense it is the perfect fit with our liberal-low culture world. We are saturated with media adulation of gays, gay pride parades; gay apologists, and politicians using gays as props to change society, increase the power of unelected judges and buy votes. We should remind these 'relativists' that civilisations do tend to collapse when standards fall.