The following is a work of irony. It is intended to show how easily anti-gay Christian groups can manufacture "reports" that discredit and dehumanize gay men and women. Even so, all of the figures used below are publicly available and none of them have been massaged in any way. The 1993 research by Janus & Janus is of particularly high repute and much used by academics.

If you, as a fundamentalist and/or evangelical Christian:

• are personally outraged at being lumped in with group statistics such as this
• cannot see what bearing such group statistics have on how others should treat you as an individual

Savour the feeling. And think about it.

Even as we respect the basic humanity of each person; we are compelled to respond to the serious medical and social consequences of allowing some people to act out their christian desires and engage in a christian activity. When a private activity is acted out in the public, and when the public at large is threatened by these activities we have every right and every duty to protect ourselves as a community.

This paper outlines the main arguments against permitting the private act of christianity to damage our society. It covers both the social and medical consequences of such activity, with a special emphasis on why christianity is a danger to the traditional Family. Additional background information about the christian movement is included.

In brief, we need to protect ourselves against the christian rights movement for the following reasons:

• christians are traditionally drawn to violence; particularly when they control important government instruments
• christian "rights" are special rights given at the expense of us all
• christianity threatens the stability of the traditional family
• christianity is an inherently unhealthy lifestyle that spreads disease; particularly those that are sexually transmitted
• christianity causes people to behave in sexually violent and abusive ways
• christianity causes unwanted teenage pregnancies and a high rate of abortion
• The christain condition is instrinsically disordered and against mankind's plan for itself

The authors feel sure you too will gain much from reading this paper and that you will agree that all of us - being decent, loving and law abiding citizens - must do what we can to resist the christian rights movement.

In common, the christians have a belief that a jewish man named Jesus who lived some 2000 years ago is the son of their deity (whom they call God). The christians believe Jesus came to Earth to pass on various messages from their deity regarding how people should live and how society should be reformed. Most christians use a book called The Bible as reference material for their lifestyle. The first section of this book is based on older material from the jews while the second part is based on some people's later and second-hand recollections of what Jesus said; or on their various interpretations of what he might of said in relation to other material.

The christians believe that if they follow their particular lifestyle they will have an additional and never-ending life after they have died in a place called Heaven. The christians believe both God and Jesus live in Heaven and that it is a pleasant place with none of the stresses or challenges experienced as part of their life on Earth.

The christians themselves blame such animosity, of course, on the jews - for both failing to convert and follow Jesus and for killing him in the first place (although paradoxically this death is regarded as an essential part of the christian movement and christianity would be "incomplete" without it).

The history of Europe - where christian groups have gained control from time to time - is one marred by periods during which deadly force has been used against the jews, and others. So common was this behaviour by the christians that a word - pogrom - has been coined to describe their activities. In societies controlled by christian organizations it was common-place for jews to be killed and for their property to be destroyed or stolen. Isolated jewish families were often attacked by large mobs of the christians; behaviour that was either condoned or ignored by christians who headed the government and the military at the time.

The worst example of such anti-jewish activities occurred in Germany in the late 1930's to mid 1940's after the criminal Nazi organization headed by Adolf Hitler (a self-confessed christian) had seized control of the German state. They embarked on a wholesale confiscation of property owned by the jews and slaughtered many millions of their numbers. To this day this remains a dark and terrible part of modern German history and one that lead to a deep and introspective examination of their christian society by the German people.

Given that such inhumane attitudes prevailed, it is should not be surprising that the jews were not the only people to have suffered under the christians.

Because The Bible was subject to many revisions and because there were many competing personal interests there has arisen a large number of conflicting sub-groups within the christian community. Each sub-group has a particular interpretation about Jesus, God and The Bible and this has lead to great inter-group rivalry.

In Europe, again, this has caused centuries of war as each group sought to seize control. At many times famine was used as a weapon against others, leading to tens or millions of innocent deaths. Some of the leading sub-groupings include The Church of Rome (also using the names of The Roman Catholics and The Vatican), The Eastern Orthodox Church and The Protestant Movement (which has splintered into many often short-lived factions such as The Lutherans, The Methodists, The Anglicans, The Presbyterians, The Calvinists and The Baptists and many others).

Some of the most savage activities were reserved for use against both non-christians and those people who were regarded as failing to observe a christian lifestyle as defined by whatever sub-group was in control at the time.

Great efforts have also been exerted by the christians to either recruit or destroy other non-christian societies. Particular efforts have been made against less technically advanced (the christians often refer to these people as "primitive" or "aboriginal") peoples who worshipped either many gods, their ancestors or animals. When persuasion failed these people were often forcibly converted to christianity by the threat of use or by the actual use of superior military or economic forces - forces often controlled locally by the christian recruitment agents (called missionaries).

It was once remarked by a non-christian leader in New Zealand that the christians appear to have a distinct patten of penetration into such societies - "First they send alcohol to ruin us, then they send the missionaries to convert our weakened peoples and then they send guns to protect their gains". (Note: this is paraphrased from the original Maori language).

When the christians did not have a superior military or economic position they often resorted to open warfare in an attempt to seize both land and resources. As example, the border regions between christian Europe and the moslem Near East has been a battlefield for the competing interests for nearly 1500 years.

Of further note; societies in which the christians had gained power most commonly saw the persecution of such diverse groups as women, gay men and lesbians and non-white skinned people to greater or lesser degree depending on which christian faction was in control and which particular interpretation of The Bible was in vogue at the time. Such persecution lessened whenever the christian forces were weakened.

As education has spread through Europe some christian groups have evolved into rather benign organizations that regard guidelines such as contained in The Bible to be a matter of personal interpretation. Many of these groups are actively involved in genuinely humanitarian activities - regarding such efforts as the best possible way they can express concern, compassion and interest in the well-being of their fellow humankind.

While this is regarded by some as just a more subtle form of continuing recruitment of non-christians and an attempt to subvert societies by stealth rather than by force it must be stated that such christians tend to be more accepting of others and more tolerant of other people's ways of life, even if such christians do not wish to follow such life paths themselves. Recruitment by Example perhaps, but it is usually non-coercive and often not a threat to public safety.

There remains, however, a core group of the christians who appear untouched by modern notions of knowledge, tolerance or democracy. Such christian groups remain a substantial blockage to education (particularly of science) and many fear the historical attitudes of such organizations towards "outsiders" remains substantially unchanged from little more than a century ago. It takes no stretch of the imagination to see forward and guess at what sort of society would be formed should such christians ever again seized power.

As example, The Church of Rome itself remains implacably opposed to the use of contraceptive methods despite long-held concerns about the steady destruction of the Earth due to human over-population. Some regard this stance as nothing less than an attempt by this christian group to dominate by strength of numbers, to dominate by any means even if means the ruination of life for all. On a related issue is the further opposition by The Church of Rome to access to safe methods of abortion - despite it being well established that preventing such access only has the result of ensuring women undergo secret and dangerous "back yard" abortions. Claiming a pious regard for human life, they in fact cause the opposite outcome.

In order to see their own such views prevail The Church of Rome is forced to campaign vigorously against wholesome and complete sex education of young people and against women taking an equal role within society. One only needs look to how women are deliberately and specifically excluded from any positions of importance within this church to see how their methods work when they can control the process. Likewise, the modern history of the Republic of Ireland has been a decades long struggle to establish basic human rights in a country long dominated by the power of The Vatican and it's local agents.

Similarly, the United States has become a battleground over recent years with a revival by the christians who take a hard-line towards those people who do not follow their own christian lifestyle. Known variously as The Religious Right and as Fundamentalist Christians by themselves and as The Religious Reich or Fundamentally Bigoted People by others these groups are seeking to re-establish the control of legislature and of society that they once held.

From their roots as pro-slavery organizations these christians have moved through time to attack each successive wave of extended tolerance and basic human rights. After each defeat they have simply re-grouped and focussed their efforts on another group within society.

As example, The Southern Baptists - the largest grouping of protestant christians in the US - has moved from pro-slavery campaigns last century through campaigns directed against women being permitted the vote, against inter-racial marriages, against black civil rights, against the entry of women into the workforce, against full and complete sex education, against communist beliefs (which many would regard as simply another competing religion) and latterly against the equal inclusion of gay men and women in society.

While The Southern Baptists have in recent years apologized for their activities against black people in the 1950's and 1960's such a realization of their behaviour seems to have had little effect on how they treat their newest campaign targets. Almost inevitably they will apologize for their current activities against gay men and women, but such an acknowledgement is likely to come only after many years of despicable behaviour towards such people.

Somewhat ironically, the very Bible they now claim categorically tells them not to treat non-white people or women as inferior was used by them in previous years to support such behaviour. Such a stance was used, for example, by a christian Judge who ruled against an inter-racial marriage. This judgement lead finally to the US Supreme Court where christian-inspired laws against inter-racial marriage were finally declared unconstitutional in 1967. One can imagine what the outcome would have been had the US Supreme Court had been dominated by similarly inspired christians as that Judge in Virginia.

Too often basic civil rights are only achieved because we resist the activities of bigots, and not because people deserve them as a matter of course.

But this is a false argument, and one calculated to deceive and to play on our own good sense of fairness and tolerance. It is designed to turn our own sense of equality back on ourselves.

As later discussed; while we should be mindful of treating those individuals ensnared in the christian lifestyle with respect for their rights as a human being this does not mean we need to tolerate or protect the acts of christian behaviour.

The christian should have the same Constitutional and human rights as any other citizen. No right-minded person would ever consider taking these away. But the law should not and must not be permitted to protect a form of freely chosen behaviour that is dangerous to society as a whole. To go beyond protecting the rights everyone has and to begin to protect a chosen and medically dangerous form of behaviour means giving special rights to one sector of society at a cost to us all.

As we will shall see, the christian lifestyle is demonstrably damaging to both the individual involved and to all of us as a society. It is very easy to show the effects when someone gets involved in such activities:

No-one has a Constitutional right to harm either themself, or others. It is on these grounds that we are fully correct to resist the efforts of the "christian rights" activists. What these people are seeking are not the same rights as everyone else but a form of special government endorsement of their own freely-chosen lifestyle.

The christians, as a group, fail to meet any of the requirements for protected status under the Constitution:

1. Immutable Characteristic - there is no medical or scientific proof that the christian condition has a genetic cause. Expert opinion views the christian condition as changeable, and probably caused by poor family backgrounds and bad parenting. While the christian lifestyle appeals most strongly to the lesser educated and to the mentally frail these disabilities are not a result of being a christian, as such, but of other factors. We could debate whether these conditions deserve protected status; and not seek to protect christianity itself. To act on christian feelings is a deliberate choice and many millions of personal testimonies prove that it is possible to leave the lifestyle. While people may chose to act on their christian feelings they certainly do not have the right to expect society to give them special protection for doing so.

2. Social Oppression - There is simply no reason to believe the christians are subjected to a lack of income, education or cultural expression because of social pressures. Some of the wealthiest individuals within American society are christian religious leaders; if their congregations can afford to support their leaders in such material wealth it obviously shows that the christians as a group are not suffering financially. That christians chose to reject science as a foundation for knowledge and suffer from lowered average educational levels as a result is not the fault of society. And the very fact that there is barely a community that does not contain at least one christian centre, bar or sex-venue indicates that the christians do not suffer from lack of cultural expression.

3. Political Powerlessness - The christians rate as one of the most powerful lobby groups and people with a christian preference have penetrated the highest levels of government - even to that President and Prime Minister. This graphically shows that christians claims to be a down-trodden and powerless group are baseless.

In conclusion, it is obvious that the christians have no grounds for special protection under the Constitution. Not only is their condition a choice but it is possible for them to change. As a group christians suffer none of problems faced by the truly deserving groups in society; groups that would be deprived of much needed resources if Constitutional protection was to be extended to christian behaviour.

It is well established that many extremist christian groups have taken to cloaking their anti-family attitudes in a fabric of lies and deception. Often they will even make the outrageous claim that they are the only ones holding the true pro-family position!

Should you pose an open question to a christian about what they are most concerned about your are likely to get a patent answer of "the Family". There has been a deliberate campaign by christian activists to encourage christians to give this response and research confirms how widespread such a deceptive answer can be expected from a christian.

The observant will also note - somewhat ominously - that "the Family" as a patent answer rates as only slightly higher than their more real concerns about recruiting their own children into their christian lifestyle.

While organizing yourselves as a group to give a standard answer to investigations into the group members lifestyle may give an outwardly comforting answer to many people in society there are those who do bother to question a little further. Rather than accept the answer at face value a good researcher will always ask linked questions that will give comparative answers. When asked what they actually do it can be clearly seen that christians are anything but pro-family, regardless of what they say.

People involved in the christian lifestyle show markedly high rates of both pre-marital sex and sexual affairs when they are married.

Anyone following the recent campaigns against gay men and women, for example, would have noted that these issues are frequently hurled as accusations by the christians. This is a typical and deliberate trick played on the unsuspecting public by christian groups - they organize to prevent gays being permitted to marry, and then they "claim" gay men and women are anti-Family because they have sex outside of marriage. This is done by christian groups even though it is well established their own members are actively involved in fornication and adultery.

Let us consider what the christian activists handbook - The Bible - has to say in it's own words about what is demended of the christian:

If any man come to me, and not hate his father , and mother, and wife, and children, and brethrem, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. (Luke's gospels, Chapter 14, verse 26 as written for King James).

It would appear that in order to be a "good" christian one must first hate both your own family and your community at large. Clearly, Family Values are not part of the christian lifestyle.

To make matters even worse in terms of the hypocrisy involved; research has further shown that such self-confessed conservatives who dominate the christian organizations are more likely to be involved in on-going adultery than are people who are not involved in such a lifestyle!

One can only conclude that christians - both individually and as a group - are not only without the morals they attempt to impose on others but that they are actively seeking to destroy marriages and to cause hurt and harm to their often innocent partners.

Hidden by this data is, of course, the enormous psychological damage done to children because of Family breakdowns as a direct result of this sinful behaviour. Children in such broken Families are harmed not just at the time of the activity but for many years after the selfish event. This leads to such things as:

• increased crime rates
• decreased performance at school
• stress related illnesses
• a mistrust towards all adults
• increased drug and alcohol abuse
• a continued pattern of marriage and relationship failure in later life

And of course it is all of us - as taxpayers - who are forced to pay these costs associated with the christian lifestyle.

Not only are Americans most likely to get involved in the christian lifestyle, but activists within their christian rights movement are heavily invested in manipulating the political process to their own gain. They are easily the single most dominant political force in the country and they are willing to use their power to influence how and when the government intervenes in the lives of all Americans. One of the most frightening aspects is that the majority of these christians believe the entire American society should be dominated by their particular lifestyle choices.

Having established that the christians dominate United States society to an extent that would be viewed as obscene by most people in Western European countries it is also very easy to dramatically show the consequences of such domination.

When speaking publicly about their morals christian activists almost always claim that they are against fornication and adultery. As we have seen, they obviously behave quite differently within their own closed community. But rarely are christians content to merely be left to their own perverted views about sexuality - so determined are they in their campaign to controlling societies that they actively work to prevent important and life-saving work in such as the following areas:

• honest and complete sex education, particularly that directed to young people who are most in need of such information
• public health campaigns
• open access to medical assistance, again particularly directed as young people

In the United States the result of this dominance by christian activists has been a public health crisis of alarming degree. Research (Snyder, Eldon & Spreitzer 1976) has shown sex education is supported by the better educated, liberals, young adults, less religious and never married. As a result, no other developed nation comes close to matching the very poor figures from the US in as diverse concerns as the spread of HIV/AIDS, gonorrhoea, syphilis and other Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs).

The real medical costs of christian activities becomes even clearer if one compares "Godly Christian America" with the humanist society established in Sweden. American christians made a great deal out of running down Sweden, claiming they are "immoral" etc, but at least Swedish parents can rest assured their children aren't going to come down with a social disease. It appears proper knowledge will defeat "Just say No" at every turn!

As can be seen, if the christian United States was to have been as "immoral" as humanist Sweden they would have had nearly 10 million less cases of gonorrhoea after 1981! Over the many decades Sweden has worked for the proper sex education of their children, the costs to American society of this one STD alone would amount to some billions of dollars. Surely nothing shows up the selfish and immature behaviour of the christians better than these two simple graphs.

To further emphasise the real danger to public health posed by the christians one need only examine regional differences within the US. As noted by a leading researcher (Stump, 1986) "regional variation in the predictors of church attendance is substantial. Regional cultural context account for the difference".

In those southern States most controlled by christian activists both gonorrhoea and syphilis are are very high levels in comparison to those States least under their influence.

These figures - released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - should provide sobering thoughts for anyone who may be contemplating choosing to live the christian lifestyle. Parents with children who are drawn to these groups have every right to be alarmed for their child's welfare.

For any outsider, it is simply too easy to locate where christian groups are strongest - one need only look for those areas with high levels of STDs!

Of special note is that even non-christian dominated States bordering are subjected to increased rates. The health consequences of allowing these organizations unchallenged access to society at large should be clearly obvious to all thinking people.

Naturally it is women (once again) who bear the fullest consequences of christian involvement in public health. As the American Social Heath Association has recently commented:

"...untreated, chlamydia and gonorrhoea are particularly destructive to women, causing pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), infertility and ectopic or tubal pregnancies. Some strains of HPV are associated with cervical cancer."

But women are not the most unfortunate victims of the ignorance forced on American society by the christians. The most unfortunate victims are those infants least able to protect and provide for themselves.

American christian groups often recall "the good old days" when they controlled US society to a greater degree than they do even today - but it is clear what those "good old days" meant for American babies:

Not that American adults fared much better, suffering as they did from much higher rates of sexually transmitted syphilis and gonorrhoea. (The graph below looks bad for the 1945-1960 period and it does so despite this paper's authors deliberately excluding the even higher rates from the war years of 1941-45!).

Given all of the documented evidence if should be plain to every right-thinking person that christians present a real and present health danger when they control a society. When a christian comes into your community you can expect the social diseases to follow.

Of most concern for anyone who has a loved one ensnared in the christian lifestyle is the bizarre linkage christian activists draw between the loving act of sexual intercourse and an unhealthy and dangerous attraction to causing physical pain.

Not only do they achieve sexual excitement through inflicting violence on others but the christians are so captured by their own lustful thoughts that they are actually deluded at higher rates into believing such behaviour is just "something everyone does". Nothing, of course, could be further from the truth.

Such information should surely concern any parent who's child has been recruited into christian behaviour.

Patrick Fagan of the Heritage Foundation reveals that going to church is the secret to better health and a happier life. In a new report called Why Religion Matters, Fagan argues that religious practice "strengthens individuals, families, communities, and society as a whole. It significantly affects educational and job attainment and reduces the incidence of such major social problems as out-of-wedlock births, drug and alcohol addiction, crime, and delinquency."

We have already seen how christians contribute towards drug and alcohol abuse and towards crime and delinquency among young people because of their inability to maintain stable relationships through involvement in fornication and adultery. Research (St. George & McNamara 1984) has also shown religiosity has no relation to people's sense of well-being, as common-sense would suggest. But the issue of teenage pregnancy and out-of-wedlock births is worth examining by itself.

Activists with the christian movement are determined to ensure only inadequate and misleading information about sexuality is given to both young people and adults. The result has been an extraordinarily high rate of teenage pregnancies and it is worth noting the great differences between the "christian" United States and the nations of both Sweden and the Netherlands where little effort is placed into pandering to the selfish whims of christian activists. Those who follow politics will be aware both Sweden and the Netherlands are constantly attacked for being "un-Godly" societies by those same activists. But the data shows a different result than that which the christian would have you believe:

Having got the United States into a position of very high rates of unwanted pregnancies the end result is - not surprisingly - a commensurately high rate of abortions; an outcome christians claim to be against but which in fact is a direct consequence of their influence.

In conclusion, anyone concerned about high rates of unwanted pregnancies and about high rates of abortion would do well to resist any movement by christian activists into their community. They may say all "the right things" in public but you can be certain it will be your daughter who pays the ultimate cost.

To greater or lesser degree many people fantasize about following a dead jewish man as their chosen saviour. It should be noted these feelings are not uncommon even if they are not normal. People who struggle with a christian condition should not be shunned by others simply because of these feelings they have no control over and we must strive as a community to provide a society where those with a christian orientation can feel free to admit their failings and seek help.

For, without us to support them as they struggle with their passions such friends and family members may slip and be lost in the labyrinth that is the christian lifestyle. Many people who are involved in christianity claim that for the first time in their lives they felt truly free to be who they are when they first "came out" as a christian and went to a christian centre, bar or sex venue.

Let us never forget that christian activists are constantly pointing to their own communities "acceptance" of someone who is questioning and that this is often times in contrast to the general communities poor attitudes towards the christian struggler. Our own often intolerant behaviour is something we should resist, both for it's own sake and because it makes the work of recruiters to the christian lifestyle all the more easy.

While we should feel great sympathy and love for such a person, and while we should seek to learn as much as we can about the christian condition in order to give these individuals the support and treatment they deserve we certainly do not have to accept or tolerate christian behaviour.

In this way we should regard someone struggling with a christian condition in a similar way to that with which we may regard the alcoholic. A person may be born with a pre-disposed weakness for alcohol but this does not mean we should allow them to damage both themself and society at large through becoming an alcoholic.

In brief - we should love the christian, but hate the christianity.

Firstly, and importantly, you are not alone.

With the increasing breakdown in social order and the blurring of long-held notions of what is right and what is wrong many people are faced with your problem. Across this country parents, friends, husbands and wives and community leaders are faced with the dreadful realization that someone they love has been drawn into christian behaviour. It is heartbreaking for anyone to watch a person go in such a direction and particularly so if that person is young and has so much to live and hope for.

You may not be able to fully control their behaviour but you can certainly control your own.

You are called, as a good human, to continue to love this person unconditionally; even as you detest what they are doing. It is a tough love, but it is love in it's highest form if you work to help guide this person away from such a destructive lifestyle.

Continuing to love the person they have always been does not mean you must condone their behaviour. Tolerance goes in both directions and you must never allow this misguided individual to fail to respect your right to disagree with their choice of lifestyle. Freedom of speech and following the correct ethical guidelines are both something you have a right to. From time to time it would do well to remind the christian struggler that you have rights too.

Even as you help your loved one emerge from christianity you should also look inward to yourself and ask forgiveness for any of the things you may have done that have possibly contributed to their condition. Were you a good parent? Did you protect them as a child and remove all references to christianity from your home? Did you sub-consciously reject that person and force them to seek out love in the wrong places?

There are also many support groups for those people exiting a christian lifestyle - these groups can help both the individual and their families. For further information contact:

• Exocist : a Worldwide group for ex-christians and those still struggling - with a track record of success
• Accepted : a group for those attempting to leave the Roman Catholic lifestyle
  
• Evergrinning : for those trapped in the Mormon lifestyle
• NARTCh : The National Association for the Research and Therapy of Christianity - a group of highly respected professionals who seek to understand and treat the christian condition
• Eagle Winds Administration : guidance and support for all those in transition