We Cannot Ignore The Slippery Slope Of ‘Minor Attracted’ Behavior

When I saw the footage, I didn’t know how to react. Scream at the top of my lungs? Break down and weep? Or call the police?

I’m talking about a short video clip featuring drag queens engaging in despicable behavior with little children. (Let the viewer be forewarned.) The clip begins with a little girl touching one of the drag queens inappropriately, seemingly at the performer’s direction. I kid you not.

The Chattanooga, Tennessee, bar that hosted the event, however, assured concerned citizens the drag queen was a biological female. Well, that’s a relief.

For many years now, conservative activists have warned that the normalizing of deviant sexual behavior would one day lead to the normalizing of pedophilia, a charge vehemently rejected by far-left activists. Now, in front of our eyes, it seems to be happening.

The question is, will we let it happen on our watch?

To be clear, no one is talking about normalizing the raping of children. And not only are most gays not pedophiles, they are as sickened as anyone by predators who victimize children. Yet, for years a small subset within the gay community has openly sought to destigmatize pedophilic attraction.

And there is no denying the growing trend of drag queens displaying themselves sexually to little children, all while other adults watch with amusement.

Is this not the very slippery slope of which we have warned?

As for pederasty in homosexual history, Jim Kepner, formerly curator of the International Gay and Lesbian Archives in Los Angeles, noted:

“if we reject the boylovers in our midst today we’d better stop waving the banner of the Ancient Greeks, of Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Oscar Wilde, Walt Whitman, Horatio Alger, and Shakespeare. We’d better stop claiming them as part of our heritage unless we are broadening our concept of what it means to be gay today.” 

Kepner also said:

“Many of the men who picked me up so lovingly, would today be stigmatized as pedophiles. They were all kind and respectful and were very important to me. I’ve seen that same considered manner in most pedophiles I’ve known, though I don’t share their love for children. … Most, not all, men I’ve known who were as boys befriended by boy-lovers were grateful to them.”

This is hardly a secret.

As proudly announced by the notorious NAMBLA website (NAMBLA stands for the North American Man Boy Love Association):

“From famous couples such as Oscar Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas, to cultural institutions such as that of ancient Greek pederasty, to cultural concepts such as China’s ‘passion of the cut sleeve’, to iconic figures such as Francis Bacon or Walt Whitman. From the earliest known homoerotic couple, Smenkhkare and Akhenaten, to medieval Andelusian troubadors, to 20th century figures such as Allen Ginsburg [sic] and Arthur C. Clark, man/boy love spans every dimension of history, both Western and non-Western.”

It is little wonder, then, that pioneer gay activists like Harry Hay and Allen Ginsberg, were open advocates of “man-boy love.”

And it is little wonder that one of the demands of the 1972 Gay Rights Platform, formulated in Chicago, Illinois, was:

“Repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent.”

I know this is repulsive to read. I can assure you that it is repulsive to write. (I’m sure it’s repulsive to most gay men as well.) But there is no denying that this has been a major part of homosexual history through the centuries.

That’s also why prominent psychiatrists like the late Dr. Richard Green, who advocated for the removal of homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the authoritative work in psychiatry) in the 1970s also advocated for the removal of pedophilia from the DSM. (See Green’s article in the Archives of Sexual Behavior 31 [2002].)

As expressed by the famous Dutch psychiatrist and Columbia University professor Dr. Theo Sandfort:

“If paedophiles are no longer forced to live underground and to be secretive about their relationships, but instead their desires are recognized as legitimate, and they are guided towards a responsible expression of their desires, we might prevent some cases of genuine sexual abuse.”

I discovered writings like this, which can be quoted at length (and ad nauseam) when doing research for my 2011 book A Queer Thing Happened to America. Talk about a dark, ugly subject. But it is a subject we cannot ignore.

Back then, the term I found most commonly used to describe these attractions (and to destigmatize them) was “intergenerational intimacy.” It sounds so innocent.

More recently, the term “minor attracted people” has been suggested.

Anything but calling it for what it is.

Now we are witnesses to an epidemic of drag queens reading to toddlers in libraries, with the enthusiastic support of the American Library Association, along with overt sexual acts being committed in other drag queen settings.

So, I ask once again: we will let this happen on our watch?

Dr. Michael Brown (www.askdrbrown.org) is the host of the nationally syndicated Line of Fire radio program. He holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and has served as a professor at a number of seminaries and is the author of 40 books. Connect with him on FacebookTwitter, or YouTube.

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

‘I Had One Hand On The Door’: Young Couple Praises DOJ-Targeted Mark Houck For Helping Them Choose Life

A young couple from Philadelphia says Mark Houck, a DOJ-targeted pro-life activist facing 11 years behind bars, helped them choose life for their baby girl, Nevaeh.

Houck was arrested by some 20 FBI agents at his rural Pennsylvania home and hit with charges under the federal Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act last month for allegedly pushing an abortion escort last year.

Notably, local authorities never pursued charges against Houck, and a private criminal complaint over the alleged incident was dropped when the accuser neglected to show up to court.

“I had one hand on the door about to go into Planned Parenthood, and then Mark stopped us and he was like, ‘You guys don’t have to do this,’’ the young mother told Pro-Life Union of Greater Philadelphia in a video published last month.

The woman said she felt “shame and guilt” when she found out she was pregnant. Though she was uneasy about abortion, she scheduled one at a Planned Parenthood clinic.

Without Houck’s intervention, the mother said, “I really felt like I would have went through with it and I would have been living with regret.”

The young father recalled Houck intervening just before the couple went through the doors of the Planned Parenthood facility. “We talked to him, and he really got through to us, like, literally before we walked into the doors,” he said.

“He was really just trying to get to know us on a deeper level than us just trying to get an abortion, and that’s another reason why it was real easy and quick to open up to him, because it wasn’t a judgmental thing at all,” the mother said of Houck.

“He made sure he told us and made us feel like, you got it … and he was right,” the emotional father said. “He opened my eyes to a lot of stuff.”

The couple said they named their baby Nevaeh, Heaven spelled backward, because they believe the child was sent from God.

“The pro-lifers definitely were there for us every step of the way,” the father added. “There are times I can’t think of [Nevaeh] without thinking about y’all.”

“We don’t even know where we would be without you guys,” the couple said.

Houck has pleaded not guilty to the federal changes, and his legal team says the Catholic pro-lifer is the victim of blatant “political prosecution” by the Biden administration.

Related: New Information Raises More Questions About Federal Arrest Of Pro-Life Father Mark Houck

Biden’s ‘Fist-Bump Diplomacy’ With Saudi Prince Becomes Slap In The Face

When Joe Biden faced off with other Democrats at a presidential nomination debate in November 2019, he carried a big stick — and spoke loudly.

The subject at hand was Saudi Arabia and the killing of Washington Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi agents.

“I would make it very clear we were not going to in fact sell more weapons to them,” Biden said. “We were going to in fact make them pay the price, and make them in fact the pariah that they are.”

Biden went further, saying there is “very little social redeeming value in the present government in Saudi Arabia.”

But that was then. Biden was talking big, and as a mere candidate, he didn’t have to follow up in any way.

As president, it’s a whole different ballgame. Saudi Arabia, like China, is not a “friend” of the United States but rather a “strategic partner.” In layman’s terms, that means they have something we need, and we’ll turn a blind eye to all the bad stuff they do to get it.

So it was no surprise when Biden was forced to fly into Riyadh in July and, hat in hand, beg Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman for more oil. So chummy was Biden that he fist-bumped the prince in the gilded royal palace in Jeddah.

In a piece on July 15, 2022, even the friendly New York Times said the visit didn’t go so well, with a headline that read, “Biden’s Fraught Saudi Visit Garners Scathing Criticism and Modest Accords.”

“In the most fraught foreign visit of his presidency to date, Mr. Biden’s encounter with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman gave the de facto Saudi leader a measure of the international rehabilitation he sought, while securing steps toward closer relations with Israel and an unannounced understanding that the kingdom would soon pump more oil to relieve high gas prices at home,” the Times wrote.

But the accords between the two nations were vague. One said simply that Saudi Arabia would “support global oil market balancing for sustained economic growth” but never said how much petroleum would be released.

And for his part, Biden said he wasn’t there for oil but added that he and the prince “privately reached an understanding that oil-producing states would agree to increase output at an Aug. 3 meeting,” the Times said.

In August, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) announced a boost in output — 100,000 barrels per day. The increase, equivalent to 0.1% of global demand, certainly wouldn’t help the U.S., which consumes about 20 million barrels a day.

“The increase of 100,000 bpd will be one of the smallest since OPEC quotas were introduced in 1982, OPEC data shows,” Reuters reported at the time.

But that was great news compared to what OPEC and the Saudi prince did on Wednesday.

While gas prices in the U.S. dropped for 99 days in a row, they’ve risen again in recent weeks. Yet OPEC thinks there’s a glut in the world market for crude oil and announced it would slash oil production by 2 million barrels a day.

Biden, stickless and speaking softly, said in a Wednesday statement that he was “disappointed by the shortsighted decision.” He left it to his press secretary to wield the big stick.

“Look, it’s clear that OPEC+ is aligning with — with Russia with today’s announcement. And I’ll leave it — I’ll leave it as that,” Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters.

Biden’s fist-bump diplomacy has utterly failed, and Americans are about to pay a hefty price — at the pump.

Expect them to express their displeasure on Election Day.

The views expressed in this piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Joseph Curl has covered politics for 35 years, including 12 years as White House correspondent for a national newspaper. He was also the a.m. editor of the Drudge Report for four years. Send tips to josephcurl@dailywire.com and follow him on Twitter @josephcurl.

Democrat Uses Video Of Her Own Child’s Birth To Push Abortion Access

Louisiana congressional candidate Katie Darling (D) used a video of her own son’s birth in a campaign ad promoting access to abortion.

Darling’s campaign released the ad on Monday — a 75-second video that showed a very pregnant Darling talking about life on her family’s farm, where they grew their own food and raised chickens, among other things. The scene quickly changed to a hospital setting, and while the video showed Darling in labor with her son, the voice narrating was hers — touting the importance of access to abortion.

“Louisiana ranks 50th in crime, 48th in education, and 46th in health care,” she captioned the ad on Twitter. “I’m running for Congress to stop this race to the bottom because our children deserve better.”

WATCH:

“I’m Katie Darling, and I live on a farm in St. Tammany Parish,” Darling said as the ad began, showing her walking around the family farm with her husband and daughter. In the ad’s voiceover, she talked about growing her own food, composting, and teaching her daughter to help feed the chickens.

She then pivoted to the hospital setting, lamenting Louisiana’s strict abortion ban — which only makes exceptions for cases where the fetus would not survive birth or the mother’s life is at risk — even as the video showed her in active labor, delivering her son. “We should be putting pregnant women at ease. Not putting their lives at risk,” she asserted.

The ad concluded with a shot of Darling, appearing to nurse her newborn, as she argued that fewer restrictions on abortion would make the world a better place for him.

A Washington Post profile of Darling and her new ad explained that she had been seven months pregnant in June when the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization prompted the overturning of two landmark abortion cases — Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey — and that had caused her to panic.

Because she was considered high risk, Darling told the Post that her initial response was to inform her husband that they had to move out of Louisiana. “My doctors wouldn’t know what kind of care they were allowed to provide me,” she worried.

Instead, she chose to stay and run for Congress — challenging House Minority Whip Steve Scalise — explaining, “If we don’t codify Roe, there won’t be anywhere in the country we could go that’s safe.”

Texas Gov. Sends Another Bus Of Migrants Near Home Of Kamala Harris

A bus of migrants from Texas arrived near the Naval Observatory in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, where Vice President Kamala Harris and second gentleman Douglas Emhoff live.

The latest busing effort by Texas Republican Governor Greg Abbott followed seven buses of migrants arriving in New York City on Wednesday and two more on Thursday, Fox News confirmed.

“Operation Lone Star continues to fill the dangerous gaps left by the Biden Administration’s refusal to secure the border,” Abbott said in a press release last week regarding his state’s effort to crack down on the border crisis.

“Every individual who is apprehended or arrested and every ounce of drugs seized would have otherwise made their way into communities across Texas and the nation due to President Biden’s open border policies,” he added.

Many of the migrants, including men, women, and children, told NBC News that they had come to the U.S. from Venezuela. Volunteers from SAMU First Response, a humanitarian nonprofit, arrived to assist the migrants.

It’s not the first time Abbott has sent migrants near the vice president’s home. In September, buses arrived on two different occasions.

Texas has sent 8,100 migrants to Washington, D.C., since April, over 2,900 migrants to New York City since August 5, and more than 870 migrants to Chicago since August 31, according to the governor last week. The statistics do not include the latest migrants sent to the capital and New York City.

Abbott is one of three Republican governors who have sent migrants to other locations in response to President Joe Biden’s border policies. Arizona Republican Governor Doug Ducey has reportedly sent nearly 2,000 migrants to Washington over the past four months, according to KTVK-TV.

Last month, Florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis flew two planes of migrants from Florida to Martha’s Vineyard.

“Yes, Florida can confirm the two planes with illegal immigrants that arrived in Martha’s Vineyard today were part of the state’s relocation program to transport illegal immigrants to sanctuary destinations,” an official for DeSantis’ office said in a statement.

“States like Massachusetts, New York, and California will better facilitate the care of these individuals who they have invited into our country by incentivizing illegal immigration through their designation as ‘sanctuary states’ and support for the Biden Administration’s open border policies,” the statement added.

Democrats have widely condemned the practice of busing or flying migrants. California Governor Gavin Newsom has called for the Justice Department to investigate.

Chicago Democratic Mayor Lori Lightfoot blasted Abbott after the first migrants arrived, despite her claim that Chicago is a sanctuary city.

“He is a man without any morals, humanity or shame,” Lightfoot claimed, arguing that Abbott had “inhumanely load[ed] them onto buses” and then cited “Gov. Abbott’s racist and xenophobic practices of expulsion.”

Appeals Court Rules Obama-Era DACA Program Unlawful

A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, is unlawful.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals stopped short of ordering the program dismantled, though it did affirm a lower court’s ruling that stopped the program from growing. Current members of DACA can stay within the program and receive its legal protections, according to The Wall Street Journal.

After failing to convince Congress to pass some form of comprehensive immigration reform, former President Barack Obama’s Department of Homeland Security created the DACA program in 2012 to protect migrants who arrived in the U.S. illegally as children from deportation. At the time of the program’s creation, the DHS estimated that 1.5 million migrants would qualify for the program. Roughly 600,000 have applied and been approved.

A three-judge panel on the Fifth Circuit found that the decade-old order violated federal procedures outlined in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The DHS program also ran afoul of federal immigration law by taking on authorities that Congress had not authorized the executive branch to take, the court said.

The Fifth Circuit remanded the case back down to the lower court to review DACA in light of recent attempts by the Biden administration to rectify DACA’s APA shortfalls.

President Joe Biden criticized the Fifth Circuit’s ruling in a statement, calling it a result of “the extreme agenda being pushed by MAGA-Republican officials.”

“I am disappointed in today’s Fifth Circuit decision holding that DACA is unlawful. The court’s stay provides a temporary reprieve for DACA recipients but one thing remains clear: the lives of Dreamers remain in limbo,” the president said in a statement.

“Today’s decision is the result of continued efforts by Republican state officials to strip DACA recipients of the protections and work authorization that many have now held for over a decade,” he continued. “And while we will use the tools we have to allow Dreamers to live and work in the only country they know as home, it is long past time for Congress to pass permanent protections for Dreamers, including a pathway to citizenship.”