Ex-Gay Activist’s Warning Of Threats To ‘Heterosexual Rights’ Mirrors Other Anti-Gay Organizations

Greg Quinlan, president of the ex-gay group PFOX, has a distorted perspective on the world. In his new screed at LifeSiteNews, he reiterates the false claim that child molestation can cause homosexuality, conflates affirming a child’s gender identity with rejecting a child’s sexual orientation, and accuses gays of having a “dread and absolute fear of heterosexuality.” But what’s noteworthy about his post is not the harmful ex-gay rhetoric but his framing that “homofascism” is threatening liberty with “anti-heterosexual legislation.”

Quinlan’s interpretation of the LGBT equality movement may read as a fringe view, but his argument is the same as more mainstream anti-gay groups like the National Organization for Marriage:

But when I decided to leave homosexuality after seeing hundreds of my friends and acquaintances die of AIDS, I was demonized and excoriated as an ex-gay traitor, which continues to this day. Now I see that same hate against the ex-gay community being targeted against African-Americans who refuse to equate sodomy with their skin color and against heterosexuals who will not recognize homosexual behavior as a civil right.

So what does that mean for heterosexuals? Just look at what is happening. In addition to banning heterosexual therapy, individual homosexuals are filing lawsuits against heterosexuals by using gay rights laws to force mandatory recognition and approval of homosexual behavior. Businesses and individuals who do not approve are fired from their jobs, threatened, or publicly castigated — as witnessed by the attempted but failed nationwide Chick-fil-A boycott by homosexuals.

The culture war is not slowing down; it’s just beginning to gain steam as gay organizations turn to anti-heterosexual legislation, mandatory public approval of sodomy, federal funding of gay youth activist organizations and homosexual initiatives, required government training against “homophobia,” “heterosexism,” and “transphobia,” etc., etc. This is more than a culture war; it is a war for our very own freedoms — a war for the character and future of our nation.

Homofascism will soon be, if it is not already, the greatest threat to our individual liberties in this country. So-called equality marriage is just the beginning.

Just like NOM, Quinlan tries to drive a wedge between gays and African Americans, erasing individuals who belong to both communities in the process. Just like NOM, he defends individuals who discriminate against gays and lesbians as victims just defending their anti-gay “religious liberty.” And just as NOM manipulates the notion of what is being taught in schools, Quinlan reduces the full lives of gays and lesbians to their sexual “behavior.” He doesn’t have a single claim that isn’t one of the mainstream arguments against LGBT equality, but what makes his perspective unique is its candor.


Achieving full LGBT equality means achieving full straight equality too. When one group is treated as less than — denied legal securities for their families, fired or denied housing for their identities, etc. — the other group adjusts to expectations that they are “more than.” The term “white supremacy,” for example, is an apt description for those who oppose civil liberties based on race, because they want people who are white to have power and privilege in society that non-whites do not. In the same way, anti-gay groups are arguing for a “heterosexual supremacy,” a culture in which those with opposite-sex attractions can expect to have advantages that those with same-sex attractions or divergent gender identities do not. The landscapes for those two struggles are of course so historically different as to be incomparable, but the nature of advocating for social justice in both cases is a fair parallel.

Quinlan’s article offered nothing substantively new in terms of arguments against LGBT equality, but by defending “Heterosexual Rights,” he has pulled away the curtain on the motives of the entire anti-equality movement. The “individual liberties” Quinlan feels are at threat is nothing more than the opportunity for one group of people to discriminate against another, which has nothing to do with liberty whatsoever.