When they cite Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen's After the Ball as some sort of "Holy Grail" blueprint for the "homosexual agenda."
David Kupelian wrote a new book for WorldNutDaily where "After the Ball" features prominently in "The Marketing of Evil." The only problem is, After the Ball is practically an urban myth. Yes, it was a real book. But no, the way in which the book is portrayed is simply not accurate. Just do a google search on After the Ball and see what comes up. Pro-gay sites? Gays talking about how wonderful a book it is because they can use it to advance their agenda? No. Why? Because the overwhelming majority of "gay activists" have never read and probably never even heard of the book.
So what does pop up on the google search? All antigay conspiracy mongering.
A few years ago, Steve Miller nailed it:
I vaguely remember this book from my years as a GLAAD committee chair in New York (before being pushed out for raising objections to the group's unctuous political correctness). I recall that "After the Ball" did make a good case for a mainstream gay rights movement that focused on placing the normality of our lives before the American public -- and using professional PR strategies to accomplish this. But the book didn't generate much buzz among the lefty lesbigay activists at the helm of "the movement" and certainly was never adopted as any kind of a blueprint. Today it's all but forgotten. To suggest that this book is and has been driving a "gay agenda" is bizarre to say the least. How gullible are these people?
[Update: I expanded on this post over at Positive Liberty.]