Making Gay Okay: How Rationalizing Homosexual Behavior Is Changing Everything

Gives an historical perspective which describes the origins of declining sexual morality which is rooted in heterosexual excess, prompted by profit makers in the media tempting an increasingly willing public down insane roads. In such a world unfaithfulness became a virtue, as did all consequent child neglect. How could such a civilisation raise even one eyebrow against gays who wished to do little more than the majority were already doing? Millions in China knew little of Marx yet marched to the tunes of those who did. Similarly in the West millions skip into misery to the tune of philosophers espousing relativistic morality whilst a few retain stable families and relationships by remaining followers of an absolute moral system. Children tend to thrive in such families. They are few.

This is the other side of the argument that many don't want to hear. Although there are still many open-ended questions about the nature of homosexuality, there can be no denying the fact that the media has made the gay-lifestyle a celebrity event and a lifestyle choice. There is much false information being spread by those pushing all things "gay" which really does harm our ability to have a reasoned discussion about the facts and about what we simply do not know. Robert Reilly gives a calm, well-balanced, and fair presentation of those issues which many are trying to hide in this very important matter. Whether you are pro or anti this is a very good book to read.

Very perceptive. It describes how the stability of any society has to rest on truth and truth cannot be something we make up. He describes how modern society is trying to refashion truth to fit in with human desire rather than human fulfillment and how re-inventing truth leads to destruction.

This is a profound examination of the rationalization of what William Blackstone described as "an offense of so dark a nature, the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature, a crime not fit to be named".

This book has been an eye opener for me; it is very readable and explains the historical background and the recent developments in society which led to the political drive to make gay marriage legal.

This superb book demolishes all the sickening propaganda and false arguments of the so-called "gay" movement whose ultimate aim is to destroy the family and impose a frightening tyranny on society.

This is a book which is well researched and explains the present situation clearly.

I bought this book as a text to reference as part of my MA dissertation looking at LGBT issues in education - therefore I can only really comment on the chapters I read looking at promotion in schools and same sex parenting, and I will quote a few limited parts from this.This book is very biased and there is clearly a negative view of LGBT issues or the "gay agenda" to be fair there are some useful incites into what positive steps some have made and reinforcements on the need for policy - although to be honest I think the author wanted these to seen as negative points. there are a lot of 'facts' against LGBT parents I have not come across anywhere else and I need to check the validity of some findings (as you can guess) are negative outcomes for children.Some parts (including the introduction are blatant negativity towards LGBT ([put in my own words] not people themselves but the 'gay' aspects of them and the promotion of the agenda), some paragraphs I read out to others (gay, straight, men and women) and we all found them shocking to be frank.I hope people don't read this thinking it is a good text on LGBT education, I agree there are limits to what we should teach to young children and adapting this as they get older to be more detailed (again within reason) yet this book would like us back in the Victorian period.It is also written for and about the USA.

Es un valiente y necesario análisis sobre cómo ha sido visto el comportamiento homosexual y cómo se ha llegado a aceptar dicho comportamiento, qué implica esto, y por qué es un tema importante no sólo para personas que sientan atracción homosexual, creyentes o provida sino que reclama la atención de todos. Centra la historia del proceso de aceptación en los Estados Unidos de América pero lo sitúa en el contexto de la historia occidental. Fundamenta su argumentación en la ciencia y la filosofía.Es una lástima que no tenga una traducción al español.

Making Gay Ok is a significant contribution to the movement of those who are resisting the erosion of traditional values, the propagation and normalization of homosexual behavior and the deep in-roads it is making in our culture. The author centers his discussion on the conception of Nature (things having implicit ends) versus one that says we make our own ends. The effect of society that was based on a concept of Nature was ordered and rational. A society that suggests that we can make our own undetermined by Nature ultimately will get its strength from Will to Power rather than rational ends. The conception of Nature is tied to the force of rationalization which for those who deny Nature and want to make up their own rules will turn evil into good and ultimately force all others to accept it. After this philosophical underpinning the author show how sodomy has been turned into a "good" and has gradually taken over many public institutions such as courts, the APA, the Education system, the Military and Foreign Policy. The author refutes all conventional arguments for liberalization of attitudes regarding homosexuality along the way in a detailed manner. The only draw-back of the book is that it will lose those who, though sympathetic, may find the philosophical underpinnings and detailed manner difficult to follow. This is a needful work and I heartily recommend it as a resource for those interested in these issues.

This is a vitally important book that cuts to the core of the culture wars that arose in the milieu of the sexual revolution. Reilly's basic contention is that the homosexual demand for the legal right to have heterosexual privileges (for example, civil recognition of what they contend is "marriage") is merely the correlate and logical conclusion of the desire of heterosexuals to act like homosexuals as evinced by their initial severance of the essential connection between sexual activity and procreation. The author traces the philosophical reversal from the objectively teleological conception of the Nature or Essence of Reality (as articulated by the Ancient Greeks, most notably Aristotle) to the modern (Rousseauian and Existentialist) subjectivist utilitarian attitude where each individual is alleged to be free to construct his/her own view of the nature of things (as explicitly stated in the 1992 PP v Casey SCOTUS decree). Reilly concretely illustrates his philosophical diagnosis by a legal examination of recent Supreme Court cases beginning in the 1960s in which this revolt against Human Nature was enshrined in law through decisions favoring contraception, abortion, and no-fault divorce -- ultimately leading to decisions overturning laws against sodomy and the classical perspective on the very definition of marriage. But actually the social groundwork was laid in 1930 at the Lambeth Conference of the Anglican Church, when for the first time in the history of Christendom religious leaders officially sanctioned a rupture between sexual intercourse and what was formerly considered an inherent nexus with an openness to procreation of children. From there it was a downward slide to a now rampant attitude that sexual conduct is primarily for the fulfillment of the emotional needs of the partners -- even for teenagers and young adults who (thanks to indoctrination by Planned Parenthood sex ed and the decadent culture at large) live promiscuous lifestyles of casual "hookups", cohabitation, breakups, and no personal commitment to a vowed marital contract (exclusive, permanent, and indissoluble). Since every manner of anti-conceptive conduct is tolerated and even celebrated in their physical relationships (which often reduce to mutual masturbation through oral and anal "intercourse" rather than the coitus intrinsically ordained to fertilization), it was only a matter of time before the very same sorts of activities would be legally approved for homosexual couples. Children are either irrelevant in the first place amidst egoism run amok, or later disposable when deemed inconvenient for lifestyle "choices", or else procured as trophies by means that violate the natural intimate contact of spouses (say, through in vitro fertilization or adoption by two people who do not constitute a father and mother couplet). Another generation of psychologically and spiritually devastated people is being brewed in this toxic social climate, whose first mandate is selfish concern for one's own personal sense of fulfillment to the detriment of genuine love for the weak and defenseless (even if they manage to survive the womb intact and are provided prolific material and educational benefits later). As E. Michael Jones, editor of Culture Wars (whom Reilly quotes), was asserting decades ago, "Modernity IS rationalized lust" -- and this is true regarding "arguments" advanced in favor of legalization of both heterosexual and homosexual sins.The sole ultimate solution to this monumental social crisis is a sea change of moral conversion: a cultural return to the unbending precepts guiding the virtues of chastity and charity, which are requisite for people with either opposite-sex or same-sex attractions.That having been said, it is nevertheless true, as Reilly elaborates in several chapters, that the militant gay rights movement has had a particularly damaging effect on our culture -- even more than its already sorry state from the decline of the pure ideal of heterosexual marriage that prevailed before the era of contraceptive sex and no-fault divorce. As the subtitle of his book states, "How Rationalizing Homosexual Behavior is Changing Everything". The additional pernicious effect seems to be due to the fact that "laissez-faire" freedom, in which everyone can happily continue to pursue their own objectives, is an illusion. Evidently the government can't grant extra "rights" for one group without taking away the rights of other groups to oppose the new regime being installed by fiat. Dissenters are punished by persecution for speaking out against the tyranny (e.g., being fired from jobs for lack of sensitivity to "diversity"), targeted for supporting campaigns to promote traditional marriage (also losing their career positions, e.g. the CEO of Mozilla), smeared and ruined (Anita Bryant long ago), subjected to fines for the crime of "discrimination" in refusing to provide services that violate their consciences (e.g., wedding photographers and cake bakers), finding it necessary to shut down their operations lest they cooperate in projects they judge as condoning evil (e.g, Catholic Charities being forced out of adoption services), threatened with boycott (e.g., the Boy Scouts), and the list of outrageous injustices (all perpetrated in the Orwellian name of "tolerance") goes on. An egregious consequence of the "out-of-the-closet" and "in-your-face" militant arrogance of radical homo-fascism is the transformation of the military from a comparative atmosphere of truce via the sensible "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, to one that now breeds an atmosphere of suspicion, necessitating even different living conditions (barracks, shower-areas). Similarly, during a time of comparative innocence prior to the "gay" juggernaut that invaded America in the late 60s and early 70s, it was common practice for boys to swim naked at YMCA pools and high school gym classes and summer camps, but now (since the 80s or 90s) high school students after gym class (and, I can testify, even men in their twenties and thirties at sports clubs) refuse to use the showers and will not even change in the locker rooms (except without doing an elaborate "towel dance"), lest they be exposed for even a second to the potential sight of someone who may have (for all they know) a homosexual interest in them. Of course, their reaction is paranoid and undoubtedly based in a prudish neo-Victorianism (something America seems prone to by contrast with other Western and Far Eastern advanced nations). But the point is that this distortedly exaggerated interpretation of the meaning of "modesty" would have been inconceivable in former times as recent as a few decades ago. What was once deemed innocent (gender-segregated nudity in well-defined contexts) has come to be regarded as a lascivious intrusion into private personal space. In this sense, the overtly public cause of "Making Gay Okay" has NOT made it okay for the grassroots people who are forced to endure the results of the movement's legal successes. Reilly is correct: what was once proposed as a plea for tolerance for the minority by the majority has indeed become an all-pervasive dictatorship of the minority over the majority.Reilly issues the disclaimer that the causes of homosexuality are not known. Perhaps he is being disingenuous or merely careful. A short-coming of the book is its failure to delve at least somewhat into this vital topic, although he would probably claim that that was not the intent of his book's philosophical, legal, and social critique. Nevertheless, be that as it may, psychological researchers have long ago uncovered the broad fundamental outlines of the etiology of same-sex attraction, at least for boys. The profoundly serious work of the people at NARTH (and their predecessors in traditional psychiatry before the politically pressured changes in the 1970s to remove SSA as a mental disorder from their DSM versions) has made it abundantly clear that in the vast majority of cases there are grievously harmful environmental factors that trigger the emotional maladjustment of SSA (whatever may be the biological predispositions on the part of temperamentally sensitive youth who may need some extraordinary support from elders). Such environmental disturbances may include outright disasters such as same-gender sexual abuse that "hard-wires" the brain to act out in similar ways in the future. But more commonly therapists encounter the situation of the good lonely boy who never emotionally bonded with (or defensively detached himself from) an unavailable or non-affirming father, and who felt isolated from his peers in their rough-and-tumble masculine play (the classical "sports phobia"). Sometimes the mother becomes smotheringly overly solicitous for her son's welfare, sensing his unhappiness but not knowing what to do to fix it; other times, she deliberately plays off his affections against what she perceives as an unrewarding relation with her husband. Whatever the multi-faceted and variable pathological dynamics at work, upon puberty the young man compensatorily attempts to repair the breach in the establishment of normal male relationships, in order to satisfy the longings for same-gender affection of which he was deprived as a boy. But at this point maleness itself has become alienated and mystified, taking on the aura of the "other" (instead of the female being shrouded in the mystery of "otherness", as happens in the scenario of normal male adolescent development). Hence, the reparative drive becomes eroticized, and the clueless youth, not understanding the psychodynamics that have victimized him, is tempted to believe he was "born that way" and to self-identify as "gay". This process has essentially nothing to do with heredity. The majority of men with SSA (excluding those who do appear to have an effeminate demeanor perhaps influenced by estrogenic hormones in the womb) are totally normal in their physical and hormonal development and may even be hyper-masculine (think Rock Hudson, who was abused by his step-father). No, the psychological disorder (not a mental illness, but rather more akin to a personality neurosis based on warped emotions) all began with a familial and societal failure in the spheres of adequate knowledge about healthy psychological development and a proper response of loving concern to rectify the inadequacies in a boy's upbringing.This entire social malaise of chaotic sexual dysfunction has reached catastrophic proportions, having dire implications for the breakdown of the classical family unit, with a further relativization of morality as interest-groups promote public rationalizations for their favorite vices, amidst the rapidly growing peril of loss of religious liberty through persecution of dissident traditionalists. The only cure for the disease is widespread repentant abandonment of the premises of the sexual revolution and a contrite return to an ethics of virtuous conduct according to the foundational precepts of Western civilization, especially a cultural appreciation of the inviolable natural ordination of sex to procreation -- in other words, a grateful adherence to the Nature of Things whose Author is NOT mankind.

I must confess that I am only in the first stages of this book but its treatment of what nature and natural law really are and how they are unavoidable as they are reality. There is no escaping the consequences of ignoring or defying our very nature. This book is brilliant, concise and clear. Do we really want to steal from children their relationships with their own bodies as "teachers" are doing in the west today? Are we the worst child abusers in world history; stealing their minds and souls?

Robert Reilly's new study of the roots and ends of the movement pushing homosexual marriage is a brilliant and well resourced contribution to civilized dialogue. His return to the sources of western philosophy in the ancient Greek Philosophers is the best written and easily understandable text I have seen in years. For those who want to understand the relationship between reason and nature, virtue and political order, and the true Greek understanding of the relationship between unleashed eroticism and the destruction of the polis, this is a very fine summary of Greek Philosophy as the ground of western civilization and the moral order that grounded it. This line from his Chapter on Greek thought sums up the challenge that the steamrolling of traditional institutions to adopt a homosexual agenda presents the real challenge to our society: “The lesson is clear: once Eros is released from the bonds of family, Dionysian passions can possess the soul. Giving in to them is a form of madness, because erotic desire is not directed toward any end that can satisfy it. It is insatiable—what Plato calls in the Laws “endless and insatiate of evils”. Once loosed, it will destroy the rational order of things. “That which causes evil in the soul”—in which Plato includes homosexual intercourse—will ultimately result in political disorder. The liberation of Eros is not freedom but annihilation.” (Kindle Locations 498-502) What is at stake is the survival of the political order itself. This the case because "The central insight of classical Greek political philosophy is that the order of the city is the order of the soul writ large." If this Greek insight to the relationship between objective moral virtue and the political order is correct, as Reilly asserts, then rethinking this whole modern deviation in the political order is in the interest of everyone, and especially the gay community itself. If the price for recognizing the moral legitimacy of homosexual actions and honoring that legitimacy in social and political institutions is the destruction of objective moral norms and the notion of natural rights grounded in an objective notion of nature itself, the ultimate threat is to the gays themselves who will almost certainly become among the first victims of the moral chaos generated by this movement and the breakdown of societal institutions which ultimately protect minorities. As Thomas more said in A man for All Seasons, if you tear down the laws that have made by men, and the devil turns around on you, who will stand in the winds that blow then? Reilly has written a fine book, and everyone can benefit from giving his thought serious reflection and not just a dismissal for politically motivated reasons.