If homosexuality is not caused by genetic factors...then that means it can be acquired... And if it can be acquired, shouldn't we be doing everything in our power to protect people from acquiring it? Shouldn't we lean to the side of protecting the children instead of affirming a scientific hypothesis that has no actual truthful foundation?

When you then establish the law that says you can't discriminate against people who are homosexual, what you're really saying is you're putting the power of law behind the idea that these are people who cannot change and therefore we must protect them from other people who disagree with them.

You have got to compete with them...you have to be working toward a future of your own. A picture of the future of your own that is contradictory to theirs, in which the things that they want to do have no place because you have been so successful at promoting the idea of sex within marriage...focus on transforming the society to be reinforcing of all these ideas...everywhere...When you do that then you create a climate in which these things really cannot get very far.

Gender, race, ethnicity - these are all morally neutral. But homosexuality is - involves voluntary sexual conduct with serious public health, social, sociological implications. It's not irrational to discriminate on that basis.

...Dealing with these sexual disorders, you ask 'what is it supposed to look like?' 'what's the norm?' The norm is the heterosexual design of the body

The gay movement doesn't care about what you think...they're focused on the young ones because if you can put the ideas into their minds it's just a matter of time before you die off and they take your place and their value system will then allow all the rules to be changed.

The real danger of the gay movement is its necessary goal of the elimination of this moral system in order to achieve this [sexual freedom]