Moral Dyslexia
                       By Chuck Colson

 In June Dr. Louis Sullivan stood at the microphone,
struggling to continue his speech to the Sixth  International
Conference on AIDS in San Francisco. The secretary of Health
and Human Services had to shout to make himself heard as
homosexual activists danced the aisles, hurling condoms at
Sullivan and Screaming for more AIDS funding.

 That riot at the AIDS conference made me angry, as crude and
abusive behavior invariably does. But the hypocrisy - and
danger - of the activists's attitudes didn't hit home until I
heard about Doralyn, the 12 year old daughter of a Washington
area pastor.

 Doralyn developed a rare form of sinus cancer last October;
the malignant tumor began inexplicably and grew relentlessly.
She received radiation treatments and chemotherapy, and as she
lost weight and hair, her parents anguished. What hope was
there for finding a cure?

 Little, it seemed: Doralyn's father was quietly told that
available funds for head and neck cancer in the US ar being
funneled instead into AIDS research.

 "It's ironic," says Doralyn's father. "On one hand is a
disease whose cause is known; on the other, an illness that
strikes randomly without a traceable cause.  Yet all the funds
are being gobbled up by the preventable disease."

 I understand that medical resources are finite and that
stopping AIDS, a highly infectious virus that poses a deadly
public health risk, may be considered more urgent than finding
a cure for cancer. But when I pair the image of an innocent 12
year old prayerfully struggling against cancer with that of
AIDS activists throwing condoms at governmental officials, I
realize something is not right.

 Many of us who sense this unease feel guilty, subconsciously
accepting the homosexual lobby's charge that we are being
intolerant and narrow-minded. After all, many homosexuals
portray Christians as Bible-beating bigots, hysterical
moralists long on condemnation and short on compassion.

 But I know of countless believers who befriend AIDS
sufferers, reading to them, holding their hands as they die.
I've prayed with AIDS patients in prisons across the US. In
the Maryland Penitentiary, Christian inmates and outside
volunteers refurbished and unused part of the prison to
construct what's called the Living Room, a special wing for
AIDS infected prisoners. There, in a loving and cheerful
atmosphere, believers have shared the living Christ with those
who are dying.

 There will always be more that we Christians can do to help
the suffering. But one thing we must not do: allow ourselves
to be manipulated by the guilt AIDS activists count on to
propel their movement. We can feel free to speak the truth in
love.

 The truth is, two things are wrong about the clamor for
homosexual rights and more AIDS funding.

 First, the  pressure on governmental agencies is
hypocritical. Though AIDS can be transmitted by blood
transfusions and accidental exposure, those are the exceptions.
The primary cause for the disease is the transmission of body
fluids through homosexual intercourse. Yet one study release
at the AIDS conference showed that "safe" sexual practice is
actually on the decline among homosexuals. While they demand
that taxpayers cough up the funds to find a cure, they
continue the very behaviors that perpetrate their disease.

 It seems logical that some one might suggest that the burden
is on them to change their ways. After all, stigmas against
illness-causing behaviors do exist in the medical world.
Imagine if meetings of the American Lung Association were
interrupted by noisy lung-cancer victims, puffing on
cigarettes and pelting the speakers with smoldering butts.
What if workshops of the Skin Cancer Institute were besieged by
bronzed sun-worshipers turned melanoma patients screaming for
more research funds?

 In both cases, empathy for the sufferers would be coupled
with an intolerance for the behaviors that produced the
disease. I believe the same should apply toward homosexually
contracted AIDS sufferers: compassion, yes; funding for
research and treatment, yes; but not an uncritical opening of
the coffers generated by the fear of being accused intolerant.

 The second troublesome aspect of all this is that the bold
hypocrisy of gay activists apparently is not baldly obvious to
national media.

 Coverage of the AIDS lobby has been overwhelmingly
sympathetic.  On lonely critical political cartoon, in the
"Arizona Republic," depicted two gay men entering a bath house
while complaining about the government's failure to invest
more in research. Its creator was instantly labeled a "hate
mongerer," the cartoon, a "crime." The Phoenix chapter of the
National AIDS Coalition attached condoms to 2,000 coin box
dispensers of the "Arizona Republic."  So much for the First
Amendment right of free speech.

 I realize that many in our society do not consider gay
behavior immoral. But shouldn't people at least see that it is
immoral to demand that society bear the cost and
responsibilities for the conduct of a few who cavalierly
refuse to accept any responsibility of their own?

 In allowing itself to be manipulated and intimidated by the
gay rights activists, the US is suffering from a disease even
more deadly than AIDS:  moral dyslexia, the inability to see
the difference between right and wrong.  And throughout
history it has been terminal for even the greatest of empires.

**
 This article was taken from Jubilee, September 1990 issue,
page 7. This file may not be altered in any way, Please feel
free to distribute this file under the conditions that it is
not modified in any way.

../