United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Demands a New Moniker?
By: Michael John McCrae
A recent â€œWashington Timesâ€ article entitled: â€œUSDA gay-sensitivity training seeks larger audienceâ€ by Rowan Scarborough caught my attention the other day. The article got me to thinking the USDA is opting for a new designation. Instead of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), perhaps they might be better known as the USDGA â€“ United States Department of Gay Activism!
From Mr. Scarboroughâ€™s first paragraph: â€œU.S.Department of Agriculture activists want to impose their intense brand of homosexual sensitivity training government-wide, including a discussion that compares “heterosexism” â€” believing marriage can only can be between one man and one woman â€” to racism.â€
I find this very interesting. The USDA is a â€œgovernmentâ€ agency that is supposed to represent the entire country. Here, the USDA wants to advocate for a single special interest (the Gay community) above all other special interests. They have developed their own, special, â€œintense brand of homosexual sensitivity trainingâ€ that they want spread through all other government agencies. They want to declare â€œheterosexismâ€ a form of racism. They want to be able to call the 97 percent of the Americans who are heterosexual â€œracistsâ€!
Their definition of â€œheterosexismâ€ is: â€œbelieving marriage can only be between one man and one womanâ€. EGAD! Does that mean the USDA believes that â€œmarriageâ€ can be between two guys and one girl, two girls with one guy, two girls with two more girls and two or more boys with two or more other boys? How confusing is that? How â€œun-racistâ€ is that?
From Mr. Scarboroughâ€™s report: â€œThe push for the training is coming from Agriculture Secretary Thomas J. Vilsack… [who] launched a department-wide “Cultural Transformation” that includes the “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender [LGBT] Special Emphasis Program.”
So the USDA is looking for a â€œCultural Transformationâ€ that will openly and happily accept the immoral lifestyles of various gay, bisexual and transgendered individuals through the use of a â€œSpecial Emphasis Programâ€.
Well, that leads me to ask about the sensitivities of the 97 percent of the population who do have a moral background and believe the words of scripture that explain the evils associated with lust? As Homosexuality is a special interest; requiring â€œSpecial Emphasisâ€; why would we not include a program that specially emphasizes the sensitivities of Christians, Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus; having all Department of Agriculture homosexuals forced to attend that? Why do homosexuals get their special emphasis above that of blacks, Hispanics, Jews, the handicapped, the elderly or any other special interest for that matter? Is America a land â€œof the homosexual, by the homosexual and for the homosexual? I thought America was for all the people?
From Mr. Scarborough: â€œIf accepted by the Obama administration, that move could mean more sessions for military service members already undergoing gay-sensitivity indoctrination. Critics fear additional gay-oriented training would be an unnecessary added burden for combat troops and encourage some to leave.â€
I donâ€™t believe there is an â€œIFâ€ here. I believe the very pro-gay President Barack Hussein Obama with happily endorse the USDA program. The administration, in their hatred for all things military will be overjoyed to see service members â€œleaveâ€. That will be encouraged for anyone who objects to homosexuals openly serving in the ranks. Instead of training to fight against Americaâ€™s many enemies, the military will have to endure â€œmore sessionsâ€ of intensive â€œgay-sensitivity indoctrinationâ€. I like that word â€œindoctrinationâ€ for that is exactly what this whole process has become. Homosexual indoctrination from kindergarten through high school, right into the military ranks and any government department one might be hired into upon college graduation. The propaganda of gay activism has permeated every segment of Americaâ€™s educational and governmental establishment; becoming more intensive daily.
From the Scarborough article: â€œThe USDA’s senior training coordinator, Bill Scaggs, has developed a sensitivity program far more extensive than the Pentagon’s [program] … His training program, which OPM (Office of Personnel Management) calls “groundbreaking [and a] model for other agencies,” delves more into gay issues and terminology. It also justifies pro-homosexual political positions.â€
Apparently the USDA believes the Pentagon program doesnâ€™t take the lifting of the â€œDonâ€™t Ask, Donâ€™t Tellâ€ policy of former President Bill Clinton seriously. Since President Obamaâ€™s decision not to defend President Clintonâ€™s â€œDefense of Marriage Actâ€ which happens to be American law; the USDA can define marriage to mean whatever it wants it to mean. The USDA program â€œdelves more into gay issues and terminologyâ€. Well thatâ€™s probably a good thing. We should all know how to properly call a queer a queer. (Oh, before you condemn me as insensitive you may want to Google the term â€œqueerâ€ as a term of endearment between gay folks or you can Google the term â€œQueer Theoryâ€).
You need to read the entire article to know that militant homosexuals are trying to change the culture of America by having all â€œheterosexualsâ€ condemned as racists if they happen to believe in the â€œone man with one womanâ€ marriage concept. Those of us who do believe and follow that concept of a true and proper marriage are on the morally correct side of this argument. It is not we who need â€œsensitivityâ€ training. I believe all the gays who are upset that we know they are morally corrupt and have chosen a lifestyle condemned by God are those needing sensitivity training to learn how to cope with their choices and leave the rest of us alone. We are quite content to leave homosexuals trapped in their immorality. They, in turn, should be content to leave us heterosexuals alone with our chosen lifestyle.