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

People are so intimidated by the gay movement that nobody will say why...they won't say why they don't want gay marriage...they don't dare to say because homosexuality is wrong, it's harmful for society, it's abnormal, it's unnatural, the people who are doing it can overcome it and should overcome it

We've seen the transformation of America, when at the pinnacle of its Christianity was probably in the 1950s. Ever since then it has been declining, why? Because of the sexual revolution. Where did the sexual revolution come from? The sexual revolution came from the activists of the American gay movement.

There is a norm, there is a model of the way things are supposed to be. When you find yourself outside of that, when you find yourself not fitting the way things are designed to be, it's a simple matter of just learning how you ought to be and working to restore the way things are supposed to be.

This is a word that is not a scientific term. This is a rhetorical tool of psychological manipulation... Because everyone knows if you dare to say homosexuality is wrong...you are a homophobe, which means you have a mental illness. That's what's built into this terminology.

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?