Homosexual activist predicted takeover of nation

Stephanie

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2004
70,230
10,865
2,040
I have never seen this before. Anyone here? If you go to the afa site, they point out things that are happening now, according to their take on this movement. I thought it would be to much to post all of it here.

Randy Sharp
Projects Director
June, 2004

In 1987, gay revolutionist Michael Swift accurately outlined the homosexual movement in America. In less than two decades, Swift's predictions have come to pass.

When first published, American Family Association reprinted it in the October 1987, edition of the National Federation for Decency (NFD is now American Family Association (AFA)) Journal. Ironically, many in the Christian community scoffed at the contention that the homosexual movement could actually attain the article's outrageous goals.

In the text below are the ominous predictions by Michael Swift, "Gay Revolutionary," printed in bold type, from The Congressional Record, first printed in Gay Community News, February 15-21, 1987.
This essay is outre, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed dream of being the oppressor.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

We shall sodomize your sons1, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools2, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups3, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses4 in your truck stops, in your all-male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons will become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.

Women, you cry for your freedom.5 You say you are no longer satisfied with men; they make you unhappy. We, connoisseurs of the masculine face, the masculine physique, shall take your men from you then. We will amuse them; we will embrace them when they weep. Women, you say you wish to live with each other instead of men. Then go ahead and be with each other. We shall give your men pleasures they have never known because we are foremost men too and only one man knows how to truly please another man; only one man can understand with depth and feeling the mind and body of another man.

All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked.6 Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men.

All homosexuals must stand together as brothers; we must be united artistically, philosophically, socially, politically and financially. We will triumph only when we present a common face to the vicious heterosexual enemy.7

If you dare to cry faggot, fairy, queer, at us, we will stab you in your cowardly hearts and defile your dead puny bodies.8

We shall write poems of the love between men; we shall stage plays in which man openly caresses man9; we will make films about the love between heroic men which will replace the cheap, superficial, sentimental, insipid, juvenile, heterosexual infatuations presently dominating your cinema screens. We shall sculpt statues of beautiful young men, of bold athletes which will be placed in your parks, your squares, your plazas [public funding of homosexual pornography by the National Endowment for the Arts, National Public Broadcasting Service]. The museums of the world will be filled only with the paintings of graceful, naked lads.

Our writers will make love between men fashionable and de rigeur, and we will succeed because we are adept at setting styles. We will eliminate heterosexual liaisons through usage of the devices of wit and ridicule which we are skilled in employing.10

We will unmask11 the powerful homosexuals who masquerade as heterosexuals. You will be shocked and frightened when you learn that your presidents and their sons, your industrialists, your senators, your mayors, your generals, your athletes, your film stars, your television personalities, your civic leaders, your priests are not the safe, familiar bourgeois, heterosexual figures you assumed them to be. We are everywhere; we have infiltrated your ranks. Be careful when you speak of homosexuals because we are always among you; we may be sitting across the desk from you; we may be sleeping in the same bed with you.

There will be no compromises. We are not middle class weaklings. Highly intelligent, we are the natural aristocrats of the human race, and steely-minded aristocrats never settle for less.

We shall raise vast, private armies, as Mishima did, to defeat you. We shall conquer the world because warriors inspired by and banded together by homosexual love and honor are invincible as were the ancient Greek soldiers.

The family unit12 — spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy and violence — will be abolished. The family unit, which only dampens imagination and curbs free will, must be eliminated. Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory. They will be bonded together in communal setting, under the control and instruction of homosexual savants.

All churches who condemn us will be closed13. Our only gods are handsome young men. We adhere to a cult of beauty, moral and esthetic. All that is ugly and vulgar and banal will be annihilated. Since we are alienated from middle-class heterosexual conventions, we are free to live our lives according to the dictates of the pure imagination. For us too much is not enough.

The exquisite society to emerge will be governed by an elite comprised of gay poets. One of the major requirements for a position of power in the new society will be indulgence in the Greek passion.14 Any man contaminated with heterosexual lust will be automatically barred from a position of influence. All males who insist on remaining stupidly heterosexual will be tried in homosexual courts of justice and will become invisible men.15

We shall rewrite history, history filled and debased with your heterosexual lies and distortions. We shall portray the homosexuality of great leaders and thinkers who have shaped the world.16 We will demonstrate that homosexuality and intelligence and imagination are inextricably linked, and that homosexuality is a requirement for true nobility, true beauty in a man.

We shall be victorious because we are filled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed who have been forced to play seemingly bit parts in your dumb, heterosexual shows throughout the ages. We too are capable of firing guns and manning the barricades of the ultimate revolution.17

Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.
http://www.afa.net/homosexual_agenda/takeover.asp
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: 007
And faggots wonder why we like to kick thier ass.

Where's our board queers? Why aren't they in here telling us this isn't true?
 
I believe this dude has a fixation with ancient Greece...sees himself as one of the Spartans who stood against the tens of thousands of Persians in the small gorge...however at the end of the day all the homosexual Spartans... all 300... were slaughtered by sheer mass! This dude truly should seek professional help! :cof:
 
Here's the thing: this guy is like the Muslim fundies in Arabia and Iraq and Afghanistan. He's a militant shithead who doesn't understand strongarming will do no good and make things worse.
 
Kagom said:
Here's the thing: this guy is like the Muslim fundies in Arabia and Iraq and Afghanistan. He's a militant shithead who doesn't understand strongarming will do no good and make things worse.

Well, there is one exception. People in his 'group' are denouncing him. ;)
 
Kagom said:
Here's the thing: this guy is like the Muslim fundies in Arabia and Iraq and Afghanistan. He's a militant shithead who doesn't understand strongarming will do no good and make things worse.

Well... you sound as though you disagree with him. Why? When the majority of what he claims is true?

Better yet... you tell me... what part of the above do think ISN'T true?
 
Pale Rider said:
Well... you sound as though you disagree with him. Why? When the majority of what he claims is true?

Better yet... you tell me... what part of the above do think ISN'T true?

I think he's saying that he disagrees with the guy's tactics rather than his predictions.

He seems to typically have a very admirable outlook, consistant with many of the more Christ-like Christians, and that is that he'd rather not convert somebody at all than convert by the sword. Correct me if I'm wrong, Kagom, but I think it's an admirable view, to say the least.
 
Hobbit said:
I think he's saying that he disagrees with the guy's tactics rather than his predictions.

He seems to typically have a very admirable outlook, consistant with many of the more Christ-like Christians, and that is that he'd rather not convert somebody at all than convert by the sword. Correct me if I'm wrong, Kagom, but I think it's an admirable view, to say the least.
Bingo. That's my outlook on things. I don't believe conversion by the sword will do any good, it ends up too much like a sort of red China outlook in life. I detest violence and violent tactics to make ends meet as well as propaganda. I believe you should speak the truth and be able to back up what you say.

This guy, though, is just pathetic. He's as bad as Ingrid Newkirk.
 
Kagom said:
Bingo. That's my outlook on things. I don't believe conversion by the sword will do any good, it ends up too much like a sort of red China outlook in life. I detest violence and violent tactics to make ends meet as well as propaganda. I believe you should speak the truth and be able to back up what you say.

This guy, though, is just pathetic. He's as bad as Ingrid Newkirk.

I see. So you agree with his agenda, but not his tactics.

Homosexual conversion by subversion rather than oversion right?
 
Pale Rider said:
I see. So you agree with his agenda, but not his tactics.

Homosexual conversion by subversion rather than oversion right?
I've said nothing about whether I agree with him or not. I've only skimmed and I didn't like his approach.
 
Also, I don't think we should "convert" people into being gay, mainly because that gets into my beliefs of Social and Natural homosexuality and I don't believe you can change sexuality.
 
Kagom said:
Bingo. That's my outlook on things. I don't believe conversion by the sword will do any good, it ends up too much like a sort of red China outlook in life. I detest violence and violent tactics to make ends meet as well as propaganda. I believe you should speak the truth and be able to back up what you say.

This guy, though, is just pathetic. He's as bad as Ingrid Newkirk.

I agree with your outlook especially when it comes to religion and morality. I would also say however that to my mind this freak is not so out there in his desires, and if you were a fly on the wall you might even hear the faint clapping of those who apsire to this kind of world although no one who is Gay would dare say so outwardly. Three steps foward and two steps back is the way you get this kind of agenda slowly through so that no one really catches on until...
 
I happened to look up Michael Swift and came across this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_Agenda

"Homosexual Agenda
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the Michael Swift essay. For homosexual agenda as a political term, see Gay agenda
The Homosexual Agenda is an article authored by Michael Swift and first appearing in a February 1987 issue of GCN (Gay Community News). Originally titled Gay Revolutionary, it is also often referred to as The Homosexual Agenda. In short, the article describes a fantasy wherein homosexual men take over society and suppress all things heterosexual.

At first glance, the essay's first line

This essay is an outré, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor
suggests it is not to be taken literally.

Nonetheless, the piece has been repeatedly cited by members of the Christian right as evidence that the gay community seeks to dominate and destroy "traditional" American family values. It has also been entered into the Congressional Record (as evidence of these claims?). It's perhaps noteworthy that, in the congressional case as well as many others, the essay has been reproduced with its opening line (cited above) omitted. Gay supporters typically see this as an attempt to take the essay out of context and use it to misrepresent what homosexuals actually believe. In contrast, some opponents of homosexuality claim that the first line was added to the essay long after it was written, in an attempt to make it seem less extreme than it actually was."
 
That article is the biggest piece of bullshit I've ever seen. If you REALLY think that's the "homosexual agenda," then you are just ignorant.
 
Kagomie said:
I've said nothing about whether I agree with him or not. I've only skimmed and I didn't like his approach.

You've said nothing about whether or not you "disagree" with him either. Only that you think he's boorish.

Kagomie said:
Also, I don't think we should "convert" people into being gay, mainly because that gets into my beliefs of Social and Natural homosexuality and I don't believe you can change sexuality.

There is nothing *natural* about being a queer. It goes directly against the very core of all things created and nature. It's a sickness.

And yes, since it is a "choice", one can be either queer, or not. Or choose to be cured, or not. I've seen it. It has a great deal to do with perception and morals. An immoral person with low self esteem could quite possibly be coaxed into homosexuality, even though he may have never had any tendencies to be. He may even find the filthy sex act of inserting his penis into another man's ass tittilating, because he knows this is perverted and shameful behavior. When in reality, what he really needs is for a psychiatrist to talk to him, and get him back on the right track. Not to be steered down the path of perversion by some sick, freak homo looking for a new butt buddy.

You people are pushing your agenda every day. Harder and harder... (no pun intended). Trying to sneak this sick shit into schools and tell young impressionable minds that it's "OK" to be "gay". And having queer parades, queer TV programs, etc., etc., and now, more and more queer movies like Slam Cock Mountain. The author of the posted article is ridiculed by you only because he exposes you people's sick agenda. When the fact of the matter is, what he say's you want to do is exactly what you want to do, you just want it kept real quite.
 
Pale Rider said:
You've said nothing about whether or not you "disagree" with him either. Only that you think he's boorish.



There is nothing *natural* about being a queer. It goes directly against the very core of all things created and nature. It's a sickness.

And yes, since it is a "choice", one can be either queer, or not. Or choose to be cured, or not. I've seen it. It has a great deal to do with perception and morals. An immoral person with low self esteem could quite possibly be coaxed into homosexuality, even though he may have never had any tendencies to be. He may even find the filthy sex act of inserting his penis into another man's ass tittilating, because he knows this is perverted and shameful behavior. When in reality, what he really needs is for a psychiatrist to talk to him, and get him back on the right track. Not to be steered down the path of perversion by some sick, freak homo looking for a new butt buddy.

You people are pushing your agenda every day. Harder and harder... (no pun intended). Trying to sneak this sick shit into schools and tell young impressionable minds that it's "OK" to "gay". And having queer parades, queer TV programs, etc., etc., and now, more and more queer movies like Slam Cock Mountain. The author of the posted article is ridiculed by you only because he exposes you people's sick agenda. When the fact of the matter is, what he say's you want to do is exactly what you want to do, you just want it kept real quite.

Ok, now tell us how you really feel. :D
 
Pale Rider said:
There is nothing *natural* about being a queer. It goes directly against the very core of all things created and nature. It's a sickness.

And yes, since it is a "choice", one can be either queer, or not. Or choose to be cured, or not. I've seen it. It has a great deal to do with perception and morals. An immoral person with low self esteem could quite possibly be coaxed into homosexuality, even though he may have never had any tendencies to be. He may even find the filthy sex act of inserting his penis into another man's ass tittilating, because he knows this is perverted and shameful behavior. When in reality, what he really needs is for a psychiatrist to talk to him, and get him back on the right track. Not to be steered down the path of perversion by some sick, freak homo looking for a new butt buddy.

You people are pushing your agenda every day. Harder and harder... (no pun intended). Trying to sneak this sick shit into schools and tell young impressionable minds that it's "OK" to be "gay". And having queer parades, queer TV programs, etc., etc., and now, more and more queer movies like Slam Cock Mountain. The author of the posted article is ridiculed by you only because he exposes you people's sick agenda. When the fact of the matter is, what he say's you want to do is exactly what you want to do, you just want it kept real quite.
We've discussed this many times. I say it's natural to me and others (whom of all are not always gay). You can believe what you want, I've defended myself and I've backed myself with Psychological sites and other sources that I tried to keep as non-biased as humanly possible.

You can't change a person's sexuality. It's not psychologically possible nor is it physically possible. You can delude them into going back into the closet because it seems to be "the right thing to do" or they find out they're bisexual and try to avoid men/women (depending) to feel like they're okay and normal. If it was something to be cured, it would've been. If it could've been controlled, it would've been.

Do you not know history? People have been trying to control homosexuality since the Middle Ages (look up Giovanni di Giovanni for an example of their trying to control).

I'm not pushing an agenda. The extremists are. That's how it seems to always be in cultures. Muslim extremists are trying to push a "Death to America" bit, Jewish extremists are all "Kill the Palestinians and restore Israel!", Christian extremists are all "Big brother society!", gay extremists are all "Make everyone accept every little thing about us!", and black extremists are all "Censor anything that can even be considered racist against blacks and other groups, but not whites!".

I want people to determine for themselves that being gay's okay. I can only try and persuade and if it doesn't work, boo hoo. No use in crying over spilt milk. No one is being forced to see Brokeback Mountain, are they? Find me someone who is having a gun put to their head and being told to go see it. We're trying to show the diversity that is in America and that we should be more tolerant of the diversity (and don't you even think of pulling that pedophile/bestiality bullshit that so many people just seem to love pulling out of their asses. Pedophilia/ebophilia HARMS children emotionally, psychologically, and physicallly. Animals cannot make the choice to be consenting partners in sexual intercourse and are therefore not right for any kind of sexual activity).

You can like it or leave it. No one is forcing you to accepting homosexuality, more in lines of at least making you tolerate it more. But you don't have to. That's why our forefathers FOUGHT for this land, for this ideal of freedom. They wanted us, their descendants, to be able to decide things for themselves and be able to do and think what they wanted without having a harmful effect on people. I'm not asking you to think it's normal and I'm not asking you to accept it. I can't do that. You're set in your ways as I am in mine. We can only get along a bit better and at least try to keep things on a friendly level with debates, but that is up to you. Tolerating is not the same as having to be okay or liking something. Remember that.
 
I'm intrigued by those who are so adamant that homosexuality is a choice. I personally could never be horny enough to ever consider engaging in homosexual sex. I was born straight and the thought of homosexual sex repulses me. Those who believe it a choice must believe that they themselves could be persuaded into it. I can only assume that their conviction must come from either a soul searching where they could envision themselves taking one for the other team, or perhaps they've already done so.
 

Forum List

Back
Top