If society is not willing to address the homosexual issue on moral grounds, then the medical evidence alone should be enough to convince the fair-minded that homosexuality is incompatible with good public health – Gary L. Morella
The current argument that is being made by sodomites is that confusing a orifice intended solely for waste with one for reproduction is perfectly natural since heterosexuals do this with, per their claim, more frequency than those inclined to homosexual acts do. They argue, "How can you say that this is an unnatural act when heterosexuals do it to?" They even go so far as to say that since there is evidence of homosexual activity among animals, it immediately follows that such activity is natural. How is that possible if animals are to survive preserving the species? Furthermore, how can one sanely map animal activity to that of humans? Are humans reduced to being no better than animals for the sake of making a group comfortable with its vices? Animals also kill their young. Is that a behavior that is to be condoned for humans? Are there no consequences for confusing an orifice used solely for waste with one for reproduction? The Center for Disease Control stats speak otherwise showing the inordinate correlation between HIV/AIDS with homosexuals in comparison with heterosexuals. This statistic has been consistent from the beginning of its track.
Even if such a statistic regarding heterosexual sodomy has some validity to it, which I seriously doubt, does that make the aforementioned confusion right in that, regardless of the sexes involved, we're still talking about a bastardization of the Natural Law? To come to the point, the plumbing doesn't work regardless of whether we're talking about homosexual or heterosexual anal sodomy. The sphincter wasn't designed for reproduction. Thus, if this act were natural, i.e., intended, how does procreation of the species occur? Is physical well-being and survival of the human race not a concern for those who must use illogic in the extreme to accommodate their vices?
The Natural Law is knowable through reason exclusive of any connotations of revelation. Anyone choosing to ignore this Law and its Author will suffer the consequences.
What must be remembered is that an inclination to homosexual behavior is objectively disordered (objectively morally reprehensible) because it can never lead to a morally licit act for the reasons given below.
Where the procreative and unitive aspects of sexuality are violated is by the unnatural acts of homosexuality which is why any orientation to this behavior is objectively disordered, i.e., it is an orientation to a misuse of human sexuality, an orientation to acts which are against the Natural Law. The unitive is violated because the plumbing doesn't work, i.e., man wasn't created physically for homosexual acts; the procreative is a consequence of this fact.
One often hears this objection to the term "objective disorder" being applied to homosexual tendencies: "If a man lusts for a woman or vice versa, this too is an objective disorder." But this is not so, because, if the man or woman controls this natural attraction, and wills to express it in the natural state of marriage, it is a good thing conforming to the Natural Law. But if one has a sexual-genital attraction to another person of the same sex, it can NEVER lead to a morally good act between the two individuals, but rather it will ALWAYS lead to an immoral act. That is why it is called an objective disorder.
The bottom line is that sodomy is serious business, PERIOD! It is a perversion of the Natural Law. Such perversion is GUARANTEED in the case of those homosexuality inclined desiring sexual relations, while for heterosexuals, it is not. That does not mitigate the consequences for heterosexuals who perform acts of sodomy, but there exists the aforementioned distinction, which is why the former is called objectively disordered.
As an aside, the phrase "sexual orientation" is problematic as there is absolutely no evidence that innateness is involved here along with a finality that excludes reparative therapy per NARTH, The National Association of Research and Therapy of Homosexuality. It is a phrase that evolved for political reasons from sexual perversion to sexual deviancy to sexual preference in the same manner that homosexuality was falsely characterized as being "gay". There is nothing gay about it per statements from the objective psychologists, psychiatrists, and behavioral scientists of NARTH as a function of many case studies.
Homosexual activists are able to exploit the fact that most people are ignorant of what homosexuals actually do to one another. As in the abortion debate, where emotionless scientific terminology is used to cover up the horrible things being done to a little human being, homosexual activists employ a sanitized and deliberately misleading language to describe their practices, using to their advantage the willingness of most people to keep public debates clean. Sodomy is a pretty messy business, requiring elaborate preparations and lubrications, and its long term effects include not only AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases, but also frequent rectal bleeding, often requiring the use of a tampon.
We're not just talking about anal sex, which is filthy enough. Homosexuals have a history of pushing the envelope when one considers the degrading acts in which homosexuals engage which are chiefly of three kinds: oral sex, rectal sex, and fecal sex. Since semen contains many of the germs carried in blood, oral sex comes close to the consumption of raw human blood with all its medical risks: hepatitis A, gonorrhea, HIV and hepatitis B. This practice is almost always involved in homosexual activity. Almost 90% of homosexuals engage in rectal sex allowing germs to penetrate the rectal wall, causing immunological damage and tearing and bruising of it, and gain almost direct access to the blood stream. This practice efficiently spreads hepatitis B, HIV, syphilis and many other diseases carried by the blood. A particularly repugnant variation on rectal sex is called "fisting," and involves the insertion of the hand and arm into the rectum! Upwards of 80% of homosexuals admit to participating in anal fecal sex ingesting, orally, medically significant amounts of feces with various diseases following on this. [MEDICAL CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT HOMOSEXUALS DO, Family Research Institute, Inc., Box 2091, Washington, DC 20013.]
Medical specialists have known for some time of the disproportionate impact on the homosexual community of diseases like gonorrhea, syphilis, hepatitis A and B, cytomegalovirus, amoebic bowel disease (“gay bowel syndrome”), and herpes.
A decade’s measurement of “gay rights” laws which have been in effect in San Francisco show that the city has seen a sharp increase in the venereal disease rate to 22 times the national average; hepatitis A and B increased 100 and 300 % respectively; amoebic colon infections increased 2,500 %. Venereal disease clinics in the city saw 75,000 patients every year of whom close to 80 % were homosexual males; 20 % of them carried rectal gonorrhea. [Magnuson, ARE GAY RIGHTS RIGHT?].
Following are some addtional refs of interest:
Hepatitis A, amebiasis, shigellosis and giardiasis are so prevalent among sodomites that they are collectively known to physicians as "gay bowel syndrome." In San Francisco, "the gay capital of the world," 80 percent of the people who visit the city's venereal disease clinics are homosexuals. 20 percent of these patients suffer from deadly and painfulrectal gonorrhea.
It is interesting to note the impact that pro-homosexual laws have on the local VD rates. During the first decade the San Francisco homosexual rights law was in effect, Hepatitis A rose 100 percent; infectious Hepatitis B escalated 300 percent; and amoebic colon infections exploded by an incredible 2,500 percent.
Homosexual men are by no means alone in their diseases; homosexual women ('lesbians') are 19 times more likely to have had syphilis than normal women; 2 times more likely to have had genital warts; 4 times more likely to have had scabies; 7 times more likely to have had an infection from vaginal contact; 29 times more likely to have had an infection from oral-vaginal contact; and 12 times more likely to have had an infection caused by penile contact.
 Brad Hayton and John Eldredge. "Homosexual Rights: What's Wrong?"
Focus on the Family <Citizen>, March 18, 1991, pages 6 to 8. Also see
Joyce Price. "High-Risk Sex Acts Still Common Among Gays, Bisexuals."
<Washington Times>, December 28, 1989.
 H.J. Jaffe and C. Keewhan, <et.al.> "National Case-Control Study of
Kaposi's Sarcoma and Pneumocystic Carinii Pneumonia in Homosexual Men; Part
1, Epidemiological Results." <Annals of Internal Medicine>, 1983, 99(2),
pages 145 to 157.
society is not willing to address the homosexual issue on moral grounds, then
the medical evidence alone should be enough to convince the fair-minded that
homosexuality is incompatible with good public health.
Health and Homosexuality
A Hawaii court recently ruled that same-sex couples cannot be refused marriage licenses, and last year the United States Congress passed legislation designed to give states the right to deny recognition of such "marriages" conducted in another state. Homosexual activists said years ago that this decade would indeed be the "gay" nineties, and with each passing year, homosexuality and gay rights has become more and more a part of mainstream America. Today many Americans are asking, "Is there really anything wrong with homosexuality?"
However, there is a deeper question America should be asking: "Is homosexuality healthy for society?" This question has many moral ramifications often discussed in public forums. However, far too often the issues of public health with regard to homosexuality are casually dismissed or conveniently overlooked.
AIDS is one disease that has captured the attention of the media. Homosexuals make up over 80 percent of the AIDS cases in America. 1 However, AIDS is but one of the many diseases linked to homosexual behavior. A survey of literature in leading medical journals reveals the host of medical dangers associated with the homosexual lifestyle.
Dr. Steven Wexner of the Cleveland Clinic in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, chronicled the diseases in 1990. "Up to 55 percent of homosexual men with anorectal complaints have gonorrhea; 80 percent of the patients with syphilis are homosexuals," he wrote. "Chlamydia is found in 15 percent of asymptomatic homosexual men, and up to one third of homosexuals have active anorectal herpes simplex virus." He went on to point out, "In addition, a host of parasites, bacterial, viral, and protozoan are rampant in the homosexual population." 2
Wexner is not alone in his observations. Dr. Selma Dritz wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine, "Oral and Anal intercourse present physicians with surgical as well as medical problems, ranging from anal fissures and impaction of foreign bodies in the rectum to major diagnostic dilemmas."3 Dr. Marlys Witte et al. noted in The International Journal of Dermatology, that homosexual male practices such as "receptive anal and oral intercourse and oral-anal contact, recurrent rectal trauma associated with 'fisting,'" and venereal and parasitic infections, lead to many medical problems including tissue inflammation, "... intense angiogenesis, and progressive fibrosis." 4 And Dr. Christina M. Surawicz et al. noted Homosexually active men have frequent intestinal and rectal symptoms resulting from sexually acquired gastrointestinal infections." 5
Despite the evidence of the unhealthy nature of homosexuality, medical doctors have often taken a politically correct view of the gay lifestyle in recent years. A doctor treating a heart patient would urge him to stay away from fatty foods. But instead of urging patients to abstain from dangerous sexual behavior, many doctors have encouraged patients to continue the unhealthy behavior -- as long as they take precautions.
Not all doctors subscribe to this conventional wisdom. In 1990, a study appeared in the Journal of the American Medical Association concluding that homosexuals should use condoms to protect against the transmission of hepatitis B. 6 Dr. Ralph H. Harder wrote to the journal, "I worry about the loss of objectivity and of scientific approach in current research, at least in dealing with certain sacred subjects. . . . A much more valid and useful conclusion, it would seem, is that anal insertive intercourse is inherently dangerous and should be proscribed." 7 Published just below Dr. Harder's letter was the authors' rebuttal. They argued that if homosexual anal intercourse should be proscribed, so should heterosexual vaginal intercourse since it is "a well-known risk factor for transmission of virtually all sexually transmitted diseases."8 But what the authors do not acknowledge is the well-established fact that sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) strike homosexuals at a rate many times higher than that of heterosexuals. 9,10,11
This paper surveys the medical literature dealing with health and homosexuality in an effort to investigate the dangers of this lifestyle to public health. Our study reveals that the spectrum of homosexually acquired diseases is vast and includes everything from viruses to bacterium to cancers. The evidence is so overwhelming that even if all moral judgments and religious biases are set aside, homosexuality -- by its very nature -- cannot play a part in a healthy society.
Over the past decade America has watched as homosexual activists have grown more and more powerful in public life. Today, four members of Congress are open homosexuals. Battles are raging in school systems all across our nation over whether homosexuality should be included in sex education. And in 1996, the Senate only narrowly defeated a measure that would have added sexual orientation to the list of groups granted special protection under the civil rights code for employment. The vote was 49 to 50.
The time has come to examine the medical facts and respond with appropriate public policy. Congress, the courts, and America's school systems would do well to examine the following information before placing their stamp of approval on the homosexual lifestyle.
Homosexuals experience a wide range of bacterial infections, including gonorrhea, syphilis, shigella, and campylbacter. One study of homosexuals in New York city found that "... 64.3 percent of the [homosexual] men reported a history of gonorrhea and/or syphilis."12 The heterosexual community has also experienced many of these sexually transmitted infections -- however it is generally on a smaller scale.
Gonorrhea. Gonorrhea is a common sexually transmitted disease and perhaps the most common STD found in homosexual men.13 Gonorrhea is an inflammatory disease of genital track. In the homosexual communities, this disease has appeared in non-traditional locations. For example, gonorrhea traditionally occurs on the genitals, but recently it has appeared in the rectal region and in the throat.14,15,16
Gonorrhea is strongly associated with homosexual behavior at a rate higher than heterosexual behavior. In a study published by the Canadian Medical Association Journal in 1991, "...gonorrhea was associated with urethral discharge ... and homosexuality (3.7 times higher than the rate among heterosexuals)."17
This is especially true of gonorrhea of the pharynx (throat). A study published in the Journal of Clinical Pathology found, "In homosexual men a much higher prevalence of pharyngeal gonorrhoea (15.2 percent; two of the 13) was observed in comparison with heterosexual men (4.1 percent)."18
As pharyngeal gonorrhea results from oral sex with an infected partner, anorectal (anal) gonorrhea is spread through anal sex with a man infected with urethral gonorrhea. Physicians have promoted "safer sex" in an effort to stem the spread of gonorrhea. While for several years statistics seemed to indicate the plan may be working, the numbers began to rise again in the early 1990s. The American Journal of Public Health published a study of Amsterdam STD clinics that found, "After several years of decline, the number and percentage of diagnosed cases of gonorrhea among homosexual and bisexual clients of sexually transmitted disease clinics in Amsterdam started to increase again in 1989. This rise continued in 1990 and 1991."19 This study mirrors one done in King County, Washington, which yielded similar results.20
Unlike its effect on the genitals, when gonorrhea infects the pharynx and rectal regions, it often emerges without symptoms.21 And even if it does emerge with symptoms, those symptoms can be easily misinterpreted as simply a sore throat or misdiagnosed as part of a simultaneous ailment such as hemorrhoids.22 The Journal of the American Medical Association stressed the importance of properly diagnosing these infections: "Detection and treatment of these occult infections are essential, because gonococcal "carriers" represent reservoirs of potential infection in the community."23
Syphilis. Syphilis is a venereal disease caused by a bacteria known as a spirochet. If left untreated it can progress through three stages: primary, secondary, and tertiary or latent syphilis.
Primary anal syphilis is marked by anal ulcers that typically appear within two to six weeks of exposure to the spirochet. However, the ulcers may not appear for up to three months after initial exposure. The lesion that appears can be one of two types. One is particularly painful. The other causes little irritation. In the case of the painful variety, it may be mistaken for an anal fissure.24 If a patient suffers from the less painful ulcers, he may not seek medical attention and the disease can progress into secondary syphilis.
If left untreated, six to eight weeks after the ulcer sores heal, secondary syphilis sets in. Secondary syphilis is marked by a pale brown or pink lesion or it may surface as a rash. Tertiary or latent syphilis is rare and is composed of another type of rectal lesions.
Medical literature shows homosexuals to be at especially high risk for syphilis. The Archives of Internal Medicine reported on a study in 1991 that found, "Homosexually active men are significantly more likely to report syphilis and less likely to present with primary syphilis than heterosexual men."25 The British Co-operative Clinical Group noted that homosexuals acquired syphilis at a rate ten times that of heterosexuals.26 Other journals also note a high correlation of homosexuality and syphilis. 27,28,29
An enteric infection is one that involves the intestines, and many of these are caused by various protozoa and bacteria. Decades ago many of these diseases were considered "exotic" diseases acquired through foreign travel or consuming contaminated food or water. However throughout the 1970s and 1980s, medical journals have noted their spread in homosexual communities.30,31,32
One study published in the New England Journal of Medicine reported, "At least 80 percent of homosexual men presenting to our sexually transmitted disease clinic with anorectal or intestinal symptoms were infected with one or more sexually transmissible anorectal or enteric pathogens. Such infections were also found in 39 percent of homosexual men presenting to the clinic without intestinal symptoms."33
The Annals of Clinical Research published a study in 1985 that examined 153 homosexual men. "Intestinal protozoa were found in 91 of the homosexual men, altogether 198 organisms were identified ..."34
Shigellosis. Shigella is a bacterium that commonly infects the intestinal tract of homosexual men. Infection with this bacterium is marked by diarrhea, fever, nausea, and cramps. In the early 1970s, public health officials noted it as a problem. "The San Francisco Department of Public Health has recognized a venereal outbreak of enteritis due to Shigella Flexneri 2a during the first half of 1974, " Dr. Selma Dritz noted in the New England Journal of Medicine. "Of the more than 50 cases reported, almost 60 percent occurred in young adult men, a majority of whom were habitués of the city's gay community."35
Campylobacter. Campylobacter is another bacteria that often infects the intestinal tract of homosexual men. One study of 113 patients found, "Campylobacter jejuni was the most common organism in the entire cohort, but Shigella species were most common in homosexual men." While that study did not specifically link campylobacter to homosexuality, other doctors have noted the connection. In 1987 eight physicians wrote Lancet noting, "it seems that the sexual practices of male homosexuals may facilitate colonisation with this organism."36
Amebiasis. An amebiasis is an infection of the large intestine, caused by Entamoeba histolytica. Homosexual populations have been hit hard by various types of amebiasis. The link was noted in the 1970s. "In 1975, 1,235 cases of amebiasis were reported from New York City. This represented 44.5 percent of the total number of cases nationwide," an article in the New York State Journal of Medicine stated. It went on to comment, "Although sexual orientation cannot be assessed from these statistics, a very significant portion of the cases occurring in native New Yorkers were probably within the homosexual community."37
G. Lamblia is a flagellate protozoan that causes giardiasis, which is a disease characterized by diarrhea.38 Harrisonís Principles of Internal Medicine reports, "In one New York Study, all nontraveled immunocompetent males with giardiasis were, in fact, homosexual."39
Both G. Lamblia and Entamoeba histolytica parasites can be transmitted through oral-anal intercourse, as they live in the stool. A study published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that "the most powerful predictors of E. histolytica and G. lamblia infection was homosexuality."40 Interestingly enough, the study went on to note that homosexuality represented a higher risk for these parasites "not because of its unique association with any sexual practices (anilingus was practiced by 17 percent of heterosexuals, 37 percent of bisexuals and 75 percent of homosexuals in our study) but because only in homosexuals is there both a large reservoir of infection (endemic level) and a prevalent mode of transmission."41
A study published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal reports similar findings. In a study of 200 homosexual men and 100 heterosexual men, "Entamoeba histolytica was isolated from 27 percent of the homosexual and 1 percent of the heterosexual men. Giardia lamblia was isolated from 13 percent of the homosexual and 3 percent of the heterosexual men."42 Other studies reinforce these conclusions for E. histolytica 43 and G. Lamblia.44
Hepatitis. Hepatitis is a disease that causes an inflammation of the liver. There are several different types of Hepatitis including hepatitis A, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C.
Hepatitis A and B can be sexually transmitted and homosexuals are at high risk for both.45 One study of a community-wide outbreak of Hepatitis A concluded, "Hepatitis A infection among homosexual and bisexual men is associated with oral-anal and digital-rectal intercourse, as well as with increasing numbers of anonymous sex partners and group sex."46 Another study found that Hepatitis B is easily spread through homosexual contact. The study stated: "These data suggest that HBV [hepatitis B virus] is transmitted 8.6-fold more efficiently than HIV-1 among homosexual men studied ..."47
Hepatitis C appears to be less of a threat to the homosexual community. The Journal on Infectious Disease found, "In a cross-sectional study of homosexual or bisexual men in San Francisco, only 4.6 percent of 735 men were positive for anti-HCV [hepatitis C virus] antibody while 81 percent were positive for any HBV [hepatitis B virus] serologic marker ..."48
Human papillomavirus. Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a virus that causes genital or anal warts and is associated with cancer. For years HPV was linked to vaginal and cervical cancer in women. In recent years, medical studies have noted the spread of HPV in homosexual communities. One study published in the Journal of Infectious Diseases stated, "Reports of an association between clinically identified anal warts and homosexual behavior predate the AIDS epidemic and undoubtedly reflect increased exposure of this population to HPV during receptive anorectal intercourse."49
Today, studies suggest a link between HPV and anal cancer in homosexual males -- particularly those who are HIV+. An article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association stated, "These studies indicate that immunosuppressed male homosexuals have a high prevalence of anal human papillomavirus infection and anal intraepithelial neoplasia, and this population may be at significant risk for the development of anal cancer."50
Along the same lines, an article published in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded: "Anal intercourse may predispose to anal cancer through the transmission of an infection, most probably infection with human papillomavirus."51
Herpes Simplex. Herpes simplex is a common STD marked by watery blisters on the genitalia. It can also occur in the anorectal area, primarily in passive homosexual men.52 Homosexuals suffering from herpes simplex proctitis experience severe anorectal pain and may have difficulty urinating.53
While Herpes is a disease that affects both homosexuals and heterosexuals, a side-by-side comparison of heterosexual males to homosexual males shows that homosexual men are at a higher risk.
The Journal of the American Medical Association found that "among men, report of any lifetime homosexual activity was associated with an elevated risk for HSV-2 [herpes simplex virus - 2]."54 The link between homosexuality and herpes simplex-2 has also been noted in other journals.55
Cytomegalovirus. Cytomegalovirus is a virus that commonly infects homosexual men and can be serious when the patient suffers immunosuppressed conditions such as AIDS. This virus can infect both heterosexuals and homosexuals, but again, homosexuals seem to suffer from cytomegalovirus at a much higher rate. A study published in the American Journal of Medicine showed,"... heterosexual men in a sexually transmitted disease clinic have a substantially lower prevalence of cytomegalovirus seropositivity than do homosexual men."56
In fact, an article published in the British Journal of Venereal Disease noted "Sexual orientation was shown to be the most important determinant of antibody to CMV [cytomegalovirus] in this population."57
In a population that represents the majority of AIDS cases, CMV is particularly frightening. A study published in the Journal of Infectious Diseases reported, "DMAC [disseminated Mycobacterium avium] and CMV are causing substantial and increasing morbidity among AIDS patients."58
AIDS is the one disease that most Americans are familiar with and readily associate with homosexuality. It has captured the mediaís attention and won the nation's sympathies. AIDS is a terrible and tragic syndrome that attacks the patient's immune system so that it cannot fight off disease, making common ailments potentially fatal. It is not unusual for AIDS patients to die from pneumonia that begins as a common cold.
While no one would deny the horrible nature of AIDS, some confusion has erupted over who is at risk for contracting it. In 1987, the federal government embarked upon an education campaign to protect the nation against the spread of AIDS. It was called "America Responds to AIDS." This media campaign flooded the airwaves with the horrifying message that "anyone" could get AIDS. The risk of contracting AIDS through heterosexual vaginal intercourse is many times lower than anal intercourse or IV drug use. Consider the odds:
The problem was that although that message may be technically true, it is terribly deceptive. AIDS remains primarily a disease of homosexuals and IV drug users. Homosexuals and IV drug users make up more than 80 percent of AIDS cases in the United States.59
Health officials understood AIDS enough in 1987 to know how the disease was spreading and who was at risk. But the campaignís job was to bring an understanding of AIDS to the masses. Dr. Walter Dowdle, a virologist at the Centers for Disease Control involved with the education campaign, told the Wall Street Journal, "As long as this was seen as a gay disease or, even worse, a disease of drug abusers, that pushed the disease way down the ladder" in priority in Americans' minds.60
And so the deception began. John Ward, a health official involved with the tracking of AIDS cases at CDC, told the Wall Street Journal, "I don't see much downside in slightly exaggerating [AIDS risk]."61 But the exaggeration was more than slight, and the downsides were enormous.
Not only did the 1987 campaign institute a lie into American government, media, and education, it led the government to waste millions in research on the spread of HIV in populations who are least likely to acquire it.
In March 1994, the headlines once again filled with the threat of heterosexual AIDS. The New York Times reported with tabloid sensationalism: "In a development that reflects the changing demographic face of the AIDS epidemic in this country, heterosexual transmission accounted for the largest proportionate increase in AIDS cases reported last year..."62 However, when non-drug abusing heterosexuals comprise only 8 percent of the total AIDS population, it doesn't take but a small shift in figures to create "the largest proportionate increase."
The latest statistics from the <I< i>reveal that homosexuals and IV drug abusers make up 83 percent of all AIDS cases in America. Heterosexual contact accounts for only 8 percent of the cases, and nearly half (47 percent) of heterosexuals who have contracted AIDS were the sexual partners of drug abusers.63
Cancers and Tumors
Homosexual behavior, especially when practiced by those infected with HIV, places people at an especially high risk for various cancers, as well.
ANAL CANCER. Homosexual men's practice of anal sex has left many of them victims of anal cancer. One article in the New England Journal of Medicine commented, "Our study lends strong support to the hypothesis that homosexual behavior in men increases the risk of anal cancer: 21 of the 57 men with anal cancer (37 percent) reported that they were homosexual or bisexual, in contrast to only one of 64 controls."64 The Journal of the American Medical Association also published similar findings: "Epidemiological studies have shown that risk factors for anal cancer include homosexuality, history of receptive anal intercourse, presence of anal condylomata, and smoking."65 And the International Journal of Cancer stated, "Being single and having practised anal intercourse appears to be associated with anal cancer and case reports have suggested a recent increase in the number of cases of anal cancer."66 Other studies have yielded the same conclusions.67,68
Kaposi's Sarcoma. Kaposi's sarcoma (KS) is an AIDS-related cancer that affects the mucous membranes and the skin of its victims. It is marked by reddish-brown or bluish tumors. In years past it was primarily a benign disease that affected older men in the Mediterranean regions. In recent years it has earned a reputation for being a deadly disease in AIDS patients.
Homosexuals' sexual behavior places them at high risk for this disease. The International Journal of Dermatology explains why: "In this high risk group [the gay male population], the predominant portal of entry of free and cell-bound HIV as well as the brunt of associated cofactors and opportunistic infections can be traced to both ends of the gastrointestinal tract (mouth and anus) and also the genitalia, which happen to be common sites for KS lesions in addition to their lymphatic watersheds."69
Kaposiís sarcoma has taken a particularly tragic toll on HIV-infected homosexual men, sending them to an earlier grave than their IV-drug user counterparts. AIDS reports: "According to our data, homosexual men had a significantly higher risk of progression to AIDS and shorter survival compared with IDU [IV drug users] and other categories. In a multivariate analysis the increased risk was found to be independent of demographic and clinical characteristics but was accounted for by the higher probability of developing Kaposi's sarcoma."70 The Journal of the American Medical Association noted the difficulty in treating this disease in the mid-1980s, "Kaposi's Sarcoma as currently seen in young, homosexual men is less responsive to chemotherapy, and in many cases displays a more aggressive, rapidly progressive course. "71
Hodgkin Disease. Homosexual men suffering from HIV/AIDS also suffer from other cancers and lymphomas. One study published in the Annuls of Medicine noted the connection between homosexual AIDS patients and Hodgkin disease. The study concluded, "An excess incidence of Hodgkin disease was found in HIV-infected homosexual men."72 The Journal of Clinical Oncology published a study that further supports a connection between homosexual male AIDS patients and Hodgkin disease.73
Another unhealthy aspect of the homosexual population is their vulnerability to dependance on drugs and alcohol. A study that surveyed 3,400 homosexuals found, "Substantially higher proportions of the homosexual sample used alcohol, marijuana, or cocaine than was the case in the general population."74 Other studies support these findings.75,76
One study published in Nursing Research noted that lesbians experience alcohol problems at a rate three times that of American women as a whole. The study also found: "Like most problem drinkers, 32 (91%) of the participants had abused other drugs as well as alcohol, and many reported compulsive difficulties with food (34%), codependency (29%), sex (11%), and money (6%). Forty-six percent had been heavy drinkers with frequent drunkenness; ..."77
Homosexual activists would argue that this population suffers from a higher rate of drug and alcohol problems because society will not accept their sexual orientation. However, a psychological study of nearly 2,000 lesbians from all 50 states found that most lesbians (57 percent) considered money the biggest worry in their life. The study went on to state, "Only 12 percent of respondents indicated that they were concerned about people knowing that they were lesbian."78
When gay rights activists concede to the health facts regarding their lifestyle they argue that homosexuals simply need to be taught how to perform their sex acts safely. However, despite innumerable education efforts, the homosexual male population remains plagued by disease.
For a few years, activists had some statistics to back up this philosophy as rates of gonorrhea and syphilis dropped after education efforts. However, homosexuals, even after receiving education, did not sustain their "safe" activities for very long. A study conducted in Amsterdam and another study conducted in Washington state found a drop in gonorrhea and syphilis for several years in the 1980s. In both studies, that trend was followed by a marked increase in the rate of these diseases in the homosexual population, while the rate in the heterosexual population continued to fall.79,80
The relapse into "risky" behavior has been documented in relation to other STDs as well, including HIV. One study published in the British Journal of Medicine stated, "This study provides evidence of continuing unsafe sexual behavior among homosexual or bisexual men infected with HIV-1 attending genitourinary medicine clinics up to the end of 1993." The study further pointed out, "This is consistent with other data indicating an increase in the incidence of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV, within the male homosexual or bisexual community in England and Wales between 1988 and 1990."81
While it appears clear that homosexual men have a difficult time sustaining "safe" sexual behavior, the inevitable question is why? Medical and psychological experts have developed several explanations. Some homosexual men believe that once they have established a monogamous relationship, they aren't at risk. The American Journal of Public Health published a study in 1990 that found, "Being in a monogamous gay relationship was associated with higher risk sex throughout the entire study."82
Another theory is that the few years of decline in the rates of HIV and other STD infections have led homosexual men to let down their guard. The Journal of the American Medical Association reported, "Because of declining incidence of STD and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections, some homosexually active men may have relaxed behaviors regarding sexual safety."83
A journal known as Sexually Transmitted Diseases developed a more psychological explanation. Dr. Edward W. Hook III wrote, "After all, if higher risk behaviors for HIV/STD remain desirable albeit dangerous for some, their status as 'forbidden fruit' might paradoxically serve as a stimulus rather than a deterrent to those practices."84 In other words, the very fact that these behaviors are dangerous may make them all the more titillating.
The simple ineffectiveness of condoms likely also contributed to the spread of disease. A study published in Social Science and Medicine found that the rate of condom effectiveness in protecting against HIV infection is only 69 percent. The study noted, "Thus, efficacy may be much lower than commonly assumed ..."85
All of these factors may well play a part in explaining why there appears to be no such thing as "safe sex."
Born or Bred?
Despite the clear medical evidence that homosexual behavior is at its very essence unhealthy, many advocates and activists insist that we cannot counsel these people to change their behavior, because it is an innate genetic trait.
These advocates make reference to several medical studies that claim to have established a biological link to homosexuality. However, fair evaluation of these studies proves that they are anything but conclusive.
One of the most often touted studies was conducted by Simon LeVay. His study, published in Science in 1991, noted a difference in a brain structure called the hypothalamus when evaluating homosexual and heterosexual men. LeVay found that in the specimens he studied, the hypothalamus was generally larger in heterosexual men than in homosexual men. Therefore he concluded that these findings "suggest that sexual orientation has a biologic substrate."86
While LeVay's study received top-notch billing in the media, it was anything but conclusive. An analysis of the study and its methodology reveals some notable weaknesses. The first problem, which LeVay himself readily admits, is the fact that all 19 of his homosexual subjects had died of complications associated with AIDS. Therefore the difference in the hypothalamus might well be attributed to the AIDS rather than homosexuality. LeVay attempted to compensate for the weakness by including a few heterosexuals who died of AIDS complications in the heterosexual sample. However, LeVay did not know for sure whether all subjects in his heterosexual sample were indeed heterosexual; all of these subjects were simply "presumed heterosexual."
Moreover, Dr. William Byne argued in Scientific American that "[LeVay's] inclusion of a few brains from heterosexual men with AIDS did not adequately address the fact that at the time of death virtually all men with AIDS have decreased testosterone levels as the result of the disease itself or the side effects of particular treatments.... Thus it is possible that the effects on the size of the INAH3 [hypothalamus] that he attributed to sexual orientation were actually caused by the hormonal abnormalities associated with AIDS."87
Finally another weakness of LeVay's study is the fact that even in his sample there were "exceptions" -- that is, there were some homosexuals who had larger hypothalamus structures than some of the heterosexuals examined. Even LeVay admits that these exceptions "hint at the possibility that sexual orientation, although an important variable, may not be the sole determinant of INAH3 [hypothalamus] size."88
LeVay is an open homosexual, and his interview with Newsweek appears to indicate he had an agenda from the outset. LeVay lost his gay partner to AIDS, an event that made him re-evaluate what he was doing with his life. As a result, he took on this project. LeVay believes America must be convinced that homosexuality is determined biologically. "It's important to educate society," he told Newsweek. "I think this issue does affect religious and legal attitudes."89
In 1993 a group of medical researchers at the National Cancer Institute led by Dr. Dean H. Hamer released a study that linked homosexuality to the X chromosome. While the study won a great deal of media attention, it also offered little proof of a biological link to homosexuality.
Hamer's results are often misunderstood. Many believe that the study found an identical sequence (Xq28) on the X chromosome of all homosexual brothers. In reality, what it found was matching sequences in each set of brothers who were both homosexual. Dr. Byne argues that in order to prove anything by this study, Hamer would have had to examine the Xq28 sequence of gay men's heterosexual brothers. Hamer insisted that such an inclusion would have confounded his study. Byne responded, "In other words, inclusion of heterosexual brothers might have revealed that something other than genes is responsible for sexual orientation."90
Hamer's motives are also questionable. Although Hamer's research is sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, his work has had little to do with cancer. This study alone took $419,000 of the instituteís taxpayer-backed funds, according to the Washington Times.91
One of Hamer's researchers told the Times that homosexuality is "not the only thing we study," but it is "a primary focus of study." Hamer reportedly stated that he has pushed for an Office of Gay and Lesbian Health inside the National Institutes of Health. And he testified in opposition to Colorado's Amendment 2. Sen. Robert C. Smith (R-NH) accused the doctor of "actively pursu[ing] ... a gay agenda."92
Another study that has advanced the theory that homosexuality is a biological phenomenon is the famed "Twin Study" by J. Michael Bailey and Richard C. Pillard. Bailey and Pillard examined identical and fraternal twin brothers and adopted brothers in an effort to establish a genetic link to homosexuality. The study results yielded some statistics that seem to support the hypothesis and other statistics that appear to refute it. Fifty-two percent of the identical twins shared the same homosexual sexual orientation while only 22 percent of fraternal twins fell in the same category. This finding appears to support the argument for biology since identical twins share the same genes. However, the rate of non-twin conformity should mirror that of fraternal twins. In the Bailey and Pillard study, the rate was only 9.2 percent. And the rate in adopted brothers -- which, if the biological hypothesis were true, should have been even lower than non-twin brothers -- was actually higher (11 percent).93
In his article analyzing the medical evidence supporting a biological cause of homosexuality, Dr. Byne noted other twin studies. He wrote, "Without knowing what developmental experiences contribute to sexual orientation ... the effects of common genes and common environments are difficult to disentangle. Resolving this issue requires studies of twins raised apart."94
Other physicians have also criticized the study for overvaluing the genetic influence.95
Dr. Byne's arguments might lead some activists to label him a "homophobe." He is, in reality, quite the contrary. Byne readily advocates societal acceptance of homosexuality, but nevertheless concludes, "Most of the links in the chain of reasoning from biology to social policy [regarding homosexuality] do not hold up under scrutiny."96
Homosexuality has become an increasingly prevalent part of modern society. It has infiltrated our schools, our news media, our entertainment media and may soon redefine our concept of marriage.
However, homosexuality is by its very nature dangerous to those who practice it. And society is doing homosexuals a disservice when it endorses and promotes homosexuality as normal. In doing so, it is encouraging these Americans to engage in self-destructive behavior.
Homosexuality is an issue of morality. But it is also a fundamental issue of public health. The evidence is clear. American government, educational systems, and courts should note the facts presented in this paper and advance public policy and curricula that encourage sound behavior rather than offering special protection and endorsement to a behavior that threatens individuals as well as public health.
The future of America hangs in the balance. If society is not willing to address the homosexual issue on moral grounds, then the medical evidence alone should be enough to convince the fair-minded that homosexuality is incompatible with good public health.
If you read the following article in its entirety and do not feel at least
slightly sickened, you are a robot. Those with weak stomachs -- you
have been warned.
After reading this article, I do not think you have to be told -- DO NOT
eat in restaurants where cooks, or food handlers are gay.
Would you believe that this is the normal alternative lifestyle that our
school districts are selling to our children and this is what we must
After reading it, one would have to come to the conclusion that most
animals are more civilized.
Please spread this around, so that the entire country knows the truth,
so they can protect their families.
Frank Joseph MD
MEDICAL CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT HOMOSEXUALS DO
By Paul Cameron, Ph.D.
Dr. Cameron is Chariman of the Family Research Institute of Colorado
Springs, Colorado USA. You may contact him at: Family Research
Institute, PO Box 62640, Colorado Springs, CO 80962 USA. Phone
number: (303) 681-3113.
Throughout history, the major civilizations major religions condemned
Until 1961 homosexual acts were illegal throughout America.
Gays claim that the "prevailing attitude toward homosexuals in the U.S.
and many other countries is revulsion and hostility....for acts and desires
not harmful to anyone."3 The American Psychological Association and
the American Public Health Association assured the U.S. Supreme
Court in 1986 that "no significant data show that engaging in...oral and
anal sex, results in mental or physical dysfunction."4
What Homosexuals Do:
The major surveys on homosexual behavior are summarized below.
Two things stand out:
1) homosexuals behave similarly world-over, and 2) as Harvard Medical
Professor, Dr. William Haseltine,33 noted in 1993, the "changes in
sexual behavior that have been reported to have occurred in some groups
have proved, for the most part, to be transient.
For example, bath houses and sex clubs in many cities have either
reopened or were never closed."
ORAL SEX Homosexuals fellate almost all of their sexual contacts
(and ingest semen from about half of these). Semen contains many
of the germs carried in the blood.
Because of this, gays who practice oral sex verge on consuming raw
human blood, with all its medical risks. Since the penis often has tiny
lesions (and often will have been in unsanitary places such as a rectum),
individuals so involved may become infected with hepatitis A or
gonorrhea (and even HIV and hepatitis B). Since many contacts occur
between strangers (70% of gays estimated that they had had sex only
once with over half of their partners17,27), and gays average somewhere
between 106 and 1105 different partners/year, the potential for infection
RECTAL SEX Surveys indicate that about 90% of gays have engaged
in rectal intercourse, and about two-thirds do it regularly. In a 6-month
long study of daily sexual diaries,3 gays averaged 110 sex partners and
68 rectal encounters a year.
Rectal sex is dangerous. During rectal intercourse the rectum becomes
a mixing bowl for 1) saliva and its germs and/or an artificial lubricant, 2)
the recipient's own feces, 3) whatever germs, infections or substances
the penis has on it, and 4) the seminal fluid of the inserter.
Since sperm readily penetrate the rectal wall (which is only one cell thick)
causing immunologic damage, and tearing or bruising of the anal wall is
very common during anal/penile sex, these substances gain almost
direct access to the blood stream.
Unlike heterosexual intercourse (in which sperm cannot penetrate the
multilayered vagina and no feces are present),7 rectal intercourse is
probably the most sexually efficient way to spread hepatitis B, HIV
syphilis and a host of other blood-borne diseases.
Tearing or ripping of the anal wall is especially likely with "fisting,"
where the hand and arm is inserted into the rectum. It is also common
when "toys" are employed (homosexual lingo for objects which are
inserted into the rectum--bottles, carrots, even gerbils8).
The risk of contamination and/or having to wear a colostomy bag
from such "sport" is very real. Fisting was apparently so rare in Kinsey's
time that he didn't think to talk about it. By 1977, well over a third of
gays admitted to doing it. The rectum was not designed to accommodate
the fist, and those who do so can find themselves consigned to diapers
FECAL SEX About 80% of gays (see Table) admit to licking and/or
inserting their tongues into the anus of partners and thus ingesting
medically significant amounts of feces. Those who eat or wallow in it
are probably at even greater risk. In the diary study, 570% of the gays
had engaged in this activity--half regularly over 6 months. Result? --the
"annual incidence of hepatitis A in...homosexual men was 22 percent,
whereas no heterosexual men acquired hepatitis A." In 1992,26 it was
noted that the proportion of London gays engaging in oral/anal sex had
not declined since 1984.
While the body has defenses against fecal germs, exposure to the fecal
discharge of dozens of strangers each year is extremely unhealthy.
Ingestion of human waste is the major route of contracting hepatitis A
and the enteric parasites collectively known as the Gay Bowel Syndrome.
Consumption of feces has also been implicated in the transmission
of typhoid fever,9 herpes, and cancer.27 About 10% of gays have eaten
or played with [e.g., enemas, wallowing in feces]. The San Francisco
Department of Public Health saw 75,000 patients per year, of whom 70
to 80 per cent are homosexual men....An average of 10 per cent of all
patients and asymptomatic contacts reported...because of positive
fecal samples or cultures for amoeba, giardia, and shigella infections
were employed as food handlers in public establishments; almost 5
per cent of those with hepatitis A were similarly employed."10 In 1976,
a rare airborne scarlet fever broke out among gays and just missed
sweeping through San Francisco.10
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control
reported that 29% of the hepatitis A cases
in Denver, 66% in New York, 50% in San Francisco, 56% in Toronto,
42% in Montreal and 26% in Melbourne in the first six months of 1991
were among gays.11 A 1982 study "suggested that some transmission
from the homosexual group to the general population may have occurred."12
URINE SEX About 10% of Kinsey's gays reported having engaged in
"golden showers" [drinking or being splashed with urine]. In the largest
survey of gays ever conducted,13 23% admitted to urine-sex. In the
largest random survey of gays,6 29% reported urine-sex. In a San
Francisco study of 655 gays,14 only 24% claimed to have been
monogamous in the past year. Of these monogamous gays, 5%
drank urine, 7% practiced "fisting," 33% ingested feces via anal/oral
contact, 53% swallowed semen, and 59% received semen in their
rectum during the previous month.
OTHER GAY SEX PRACTICES
SADOMASOCHISM as the Table indicates, a large minority of gays
engage in torture for sexual fun. Sex with minors 25% of white gays17
admitted to sex with boys 16 or younger as adults. In a 9-state study,
30 33% of the 181 male, and 22% of the 18 female teachers caught
molesting students did so homosexually (though less than 3% of men
and 2% of women engage in homosexuality31). Depending on the study,
the percent of gays reporting sex in public restrooms ranged from 14%
16 to 41%13 to 66%,6 9%16, 60%13 and 67%5 reported sex in gay
baths; 64%16 and 90%18 said that they used illegal drugs.
Fear of AIDS may have reduced the volume of gay sex partners, but
the numbers are prodigious by any standard. Morin15 reported that
824 gays had lowered their sex-rate from 70 different partners/yr. in
1982 to 50/yr. by 1984. McKusick14 reported declines from 76/yr.
to 47/yr. in 1985. In Spain32 the average was 42/yr. in 1989.
Medical Consequences of Homosexual Sex
Death and disease accompany promiscuous and unsanitary sexual
activity. 70%25 to 78%x,13 of gays reported having had a sexually
transmitted disease. The proportion with intestinal parasites (worms,
flukes, amoeba) ranged from 25%18 to 39%19 to 59%.20 As of
1992, 83% of U.S. AIDS in whites had occurred in gays.21 The Seattle
sexual diary study3? reported that gays had, on a yearly average:
1.. fellated 108 men and swallowed semen from 48;
2.. exchanged saliva with 96;
3.. experienced 68 penile penetrations of the anus; and
4.. ingested fecal material from 19.
No wonder 10% came down with hepatitis B and 7% contracted
hepatitis A during the 6-month study.
Effects on the Lifespan
Smokers and drug addicts don't live as long as non-smokers or non-
addicts, so we consider smoking and narcotics abuse harmful.
The typical life-span of homosexuals suggests that their activities are
more destructive than smoking nd as dangerous as drugs.
Obituaries numbering 6,516 from 16 U.S. homosexual journals over
the past 12 years were compared to a large sample of obituaries from
regular newspapers.23 The obituaries from the regular newspapers
were similar to U.S. averages for longevity; the medium age of death
of married men was 75, and 80% of them died old (age 65 or older).
For unmarried or divorced men the median age of death was 57, and
32% of them died old. Married women averaged age 79 at death; 85%
died old. Unmarried and divorced women averaged age 71, and 60% of
them died old.
The median age of death for homosexuals, however, was virtually the
same nationwide--and, overall, less than 2% survived to old age. If
AIDS was thecause ofdeath, the median age was 39. For the 829 gays
who died of something other than AIDS, the median age of death was
42, and 9% died old. The 163 lesbians had a median age of death of
44, and 20% died old.
Two and eight-tenths percent (2.8%) of gays died violently. They were
116 times more apt to be murdered; 24 times more apt to commit
suicide; and had a traffic-accident death-rate 18 times the rate of
comparably-aged white males. Heart attacks, cancer and liver failure
were exceptionally common. Twenty percent of lesbians died of murder,
suicide, or accident--a rate 487 times higher than that of white females
aged 25-44. The age distribution of samples of homosexuals in the
scientific literature from 1989 to 1992 suggests a similarly shortened
The Gay Legacy
Homosexuals rode into the dawn of sexual freedom and returned with
a plague that gives every indication of destroying most of them. Those
who treat AIDS patients are at great risk, not only from HIV infection,
which as of 1992 involved over 100 health care workers,21 but also
from TB and new strains of other diseases.24 Those who are housed
with AIDS patients are also at risk.24 Those who are housed with
AIDS patients are also at risk.24 Dr. Max Essex, chair of the Harvard
AIDS Institute, warned congress in 1992 that "AIDS has already led
to other kinds of dangerous epidemics...If AIDS is not eliminated,
other new lethal microbes will emerge, and neither safe sex nor drug
free practices will prevent them."28 At least 8, and perhaps as many
as 30 29 patients had been infected with HIV by health care workers
as of 1992.
The Biological Swapmeet
The typical sexual practices of homosexuals are a medical horror
story --imagine exchanging saliva, feces, semen and/or blood with
dozens of different men each year. Imagine drinking urine, ingesting
feces and experiencing rectal trauma on a regular basis.
Often these encounters occur while the participants are drunk, high,
and/or in an orgy setting. Further, many of them occur in extremely
unsanitary places (bathrooms, dirty peep shows), or, because
homosexuals travel so frequently, in other parts of the world.
Every year, a quarter or more of homosexuals visit another country.
20 Fresh American germs get taken to Europe, Africa and Asia. And
fresh pathogens from these continents come here. Foreign homosexuals
regularly visit the U.S. and participate in this biological swapmeet.
The Pattern of Infection
Unfortunately the danger of these exchanges does not merely affect
homosexuals. Travelers carried so many tropical diseases to New
York City that it had to institute a tropical disease center, and gays
carried HIV from New York City to the rest of the world.27 Most of
the 6,349 Americans who got AIDS from contaminated blood as of
1992, received it from homosexuals and most of the women in
California who got AIDS through heterosexual activity got it from men
who engaged inhomosexual behavior. 23 The rare form of airborne
scarlet fever that stalked San Francisco in 1976 also started among
Society is legitimately concerned with health risks-- they impact our
taxes and everyone's chances of illness and injury. Because we care
about them, smokers are discouraged from smoking by higher
insurance premiums, taxes on cigarettes and bans against smoking in
public. These social pressures cause many to quit. They likewise
to stay non-smokers.
Homosexuals are sexually troubled people engaging in dangerous
activities. Because we care about them and those tempted to join
them, it is important that we neither encourage nor legitimize such
a destructive lifestyle.
1. Karlen A. SEXUALITY And HOMOSEXUALITY. NY Norton, 1971.
2. Pines B. BACK TO BASICS. NY Morrow, 1982, p. 211.
3. Weinberg G. SOCIETY AND THE HEALTHY HOMOSEXUAL. NY
St. Martin's, 1972, preface.
4. Amici curiae brief, in Bowers v. Hardwick, 1986.
5. Corey L. & Holmes, K.K. Sexual transmission of Hepatitis A in
homosexual men. "New England Journal of Medicine," 1980302435- 38.
6. Cameron P et al Sexual orientation and sexually transmitted disease.
"Nebraska Medical Journal," 198570292-99; Effect of homosexuality
upon public health and social order "Psychological Reports," 1989, 64,
7. Manligit, G.W. et al Chronic immune stimulation by sperm alloan-
tigens. "Journal of the American Medical Association," 1984251 237-38.
8. Cecil Adams, "The Straight Dope," THE READER (Chicago, 3/28/86)
[Adams writes authoritatively on counter-culture material, his column is
carried in many alternative newspapers across the U.S. and Canada].
9. Dritz, S. & Braff. Sexually transmitted typhoid fever. "New England
Journal of Medicine," 19772961359-60.
10. Dritz, S. Medical aspects of homosexuality. "New England Journal
of Medicine," 1980302463-4.
11. CDC Hepatitis A among homosexual men --United States, Canada,
and Australia. MMWR 199241155-64.
12. Christenson B. et al. An epidemic outbreak of hepatitis A among
homosexual men in Stockholm, "American Journal of Epidemiology,"
13. Jay, K. & Young, A. THE GAY REPORT. NY Summit, 1979.
14. McKusick, L. et al AIDS and sexual behaviors reported by gay
men in San Francisco, "American Journal of Public Health," 1985 75493- 96.
15. USA Today 11/21/84.
16. Gebhard, P. & Johnson, A. THE KINSEY DATA. NY Saunders, 1979.
17. Bell, A. & Weinberg, M. HOMOSEXUALITIES. NY Simon & Schuster, 1978.
18. Jaffee, H. et al. National case-control study of Kaposi's sarcoma.
"Annals Of Internal Medicine," 198399145-51.
19. Quinn, T. C. et al. The polymicrobial origin of intestinal infection
in homosexual men. "New England Journal of Medicine," 1983309576-82.
20. Biggar, R. J. Low T-lymphocyte ratios in homosexual men. "Journal
Of The American Medical Association," 19842511441-46; "Wall Street
Journal," 7/18/91, B1.
21. CDC HIV/AIDS SURVEILLANCE, February 1993.
22. Chu, S. et al. AIDS in bisexual men in the U.S. "American Journal
Of Public Health," 199282220-24.
23. Cameron, P., Playfair, W. & Wellum, S. The lifespan of homo-
sexuals. Paper presented at Eastern Psychological Association
Convention, April 17, 1993.
24. Dooley, W.W. et al. Nosocomial transmission of tuberculosis in a
hospital unit for HIV-invected patients. "Journal of the American Medical
25. Schechter, M.T. et al. Changes in sexual behavior and fear of AIDS.
26. Elford, J. et al. Kaposi's sarcoma and insertive rimming. "Lancet,"
27. Beral, V. et al. Risk of Kaposi's sarcoma and sexual practices
associated with faecal contact in homosexual or bisexual men with
AIDS. "Lancet," 1992339632-35.
28. Testimony before House Health & Environment Subcommittee, 2/24/92.
29. Ciesielski, C. et al. Transmission of human immunodeficiency virus
in a dental practice. "Annals of Internal Medicine, 1992116 798-80; CDC
Announcement Houston Post, 8/7/92.
30. Rubin, S. "Sex Education Teachers Who Sexually Abuse Students."
24th International Congress on Psychology, Sydney, Australia, August 1988.
31. Cameron, P. & Cameron, K. Prevalence of homosexuality. "Psychology
Reports," 1993, in press; Melbye, M. & Biggar, R.J. Interactions between
persons at risk for AIDS and the general population in Denmark. "American
Journal of Epidemiology," 1992135593-602.
32. Rodriguez-Pichardo, A. et al. Sexually transmitted diseases in
homosexual males in Seville, Spain, "Geniourin Medicina," 1990 66;423-427.
33. AIDS Prognosis, Washington Times, 2/13/93, C1.
By Kathleen Melonakos, M.A.,
Delaware Family Foundation
The writer of this article, health professional and medical reporter Kathleen Melonakos, describes the impact of male-with-male sex upon physical health.
I worked as an RN for several years during the eighties and nineties at Stanford University Medical Center, where I saw some of the damage homosexuals do to their bodies with some of their sexual practices. As a result of that eye-opening experience, I much admire the work of NARTH in the research and treatment of homosexuality.
I have long been concerned about the serious medical consequences which result from the gay-affirming attitudes that predominate in the San Francisco Bay Area. For example, I knew personally a prominent dermatologist, a dentist, an engineer, and a hairdresser that died in their mid-forties of infectious diseases related to their homosexual behavior patterns. I know of many others that have died young as a result of living a gay lifestyle.
The co-author of my own medical reference book, Saunders Pocket Reference for Nurses,[i][i][i] was the head of the surgery department at Stanford. She related case histories of homosexuals needing emergency surgery due to "fisting," "playing with toys," (inserting objects into the rectum) and other bizarre acts. I am certain--in light of my clinical experience, and since doing considerable amount of studying about it since that time--that homosexuality is neither normal nor benign; rather, it is a lethal behavioral addiction as Dr. Jeffrey Satinover outlines in his book, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth.[ii][ii][ii]
As far as I know, there is no other group of people in the United States that dies of infectious diseases in their mid-forties except practicing homosexuals. This, to me, is tragic, when we know that homosexuality can be prevented, in many cases, or substantially healed in adulthood when there is sufficient motivation and help.
I now live in Delaware and work in conjunction with the Delaware Family Foundation to inform the public about homosexual issues. We are debating gay activists who want to add "sexual discrimination" to our anti-discrimination code. In trying to make the case that homosexuality is not healthy and should not be encouraged, we come up against the fact that neither the American Psychiatric Association, nor the American Psychological Association recognize it as a disorder. Our opponents say we are using "scare tactics."
Dr. Satinover brilliantly laid out in his book, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth the solid, irrefutable evidence that there are lethal consequences of engaging in the defining features of male homosexuality--that is, promiscuity and anal intercourse.
It doesn't take someone trained in medicine to recognize that, as Brian Camenker of the Parent Right's Coalition said on national TV, "A lifetime of anal sex does not do great things for the body." Brian also said, "As troubling as that statement sounds, there is no logical argument against it." Thus, even lay people recognize what should be obvious, especially to those trained in medicine, and who know the basic facts about homosexuality. It seems to me that medical professionals should be more aware and concerned about the consequences of habitually engaging in promiscuous anal intercourse, and other oral-anal practices of active homosexuals.[iii][iii][iiia]
The risk of anal cancer soars for those engaging in anal intercourse. According to one report, it rises by an astounding 4000%, and doubles again for those who are HIV positive.[iv][iv][iiib]
Can anyone refute that anal intercourse tears the rectal lining of the receptive partner, regardless of whether a condom is worn, and the subsequent contact with fecal matter leads to a host of diseases?
Diseases to which active homosexuals are vulnerable can be classified as follows:
Classical sexually transmitted diseases (gonorrhea, infections with Chlamydia trachomatis, syphilis, herpes simplex infections, genital warts, pubic lice, scabies); enteric diseases (infections with Shigella species, Campylobacter jejuni, Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia lamblia, ["gay bowel disease"], Hepatitis A, B, C, D, and cytomegalovirus); trauma (related to and/or resulting in fecal incontinence, hemorroids, anal fissure, foreign bodies lodged in the rectum, rectosigmoid tears, allergic proctitis, penile edema, chemical sinusitis, inhaled nitrite burns, and sexual assault of the male patient); and the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS).[v][v][iv]
Can anyone refute that increased morbidity and mortality is an unavoidable result of male-with-male sex--not to mention the increased rates of alcoholism, drug abuse, depression, suicide and other maladies that so often accompany a homosexual lifestyle?[vi][vi][v] People with this whole cluster of behavior patterns are somehow "normal"?
My primary question is: why isn't homosexuality considered a disorder on the basis of its medical consequences alone? Dr. Satinover and others have made a solid case for why homosexuality parallels alcoholism as an unhealthy addiction. It should have a parallel diagnosis.
There is a lot of literature, including on the NARTH website, discussing the 1973 removal of homosexuality as a diagnosis. The arguments against the change in diagnosis seem to center around "societal standards," moral relativism, "subjective distress" of the client, and whether or not there is any objective standard for "psychological" normalcy (for instance, the debate between Joseph Nicolosi and Dr. Michael Wertheimer in A Clash In Worldviews: An Interview with Dr. Michael Wertheimer).
While these considerations are important, it seems like we can set aside, for the moment, the debate on whether homosexuality should be classified as a developmental disorder. Very simply, it seems, an objective person just looking at homosexuality's lifestyle consequences would have to classify it as some kind of pathology. Does it or does it not lead to a dramatically shortened lifespan? Studies say it does, some by as much as 40%; the Cameron study being only one of many other studies that suggest this.[vii][vii][vi]
Taken together, these studies establish that homosexuality is more deadly than smoking, alcoholism, or drug addiction. However, it appears that far too few physicians or other professionals are making arguments in favor of homosexuality as a diagnosis based on its adverse health consequences.
While doing research into the history of the 1973 decision to remove homosexuality from the diagnostic manual of disorders, I have been shocked to find out the specious reasoning upon which the decision was based, and that qualified physicians have allowed the decision to stand.
On Feb. 5, 2002, I corresponded by e-mail with Dr. Robert Spitzer of the APA and asked him to send me references for the position papers and studies upon which his committee based its decision to remove the diagnosis. He told me to read Ron Bayer's book,[viii][viii][vii] the "closest thing to a position paper" (American Journal of Psychiatry,130:11, 1207-1216), and he said, "There was no specific list of references, but what was influential too was the Evelyn Hooker Rorshach study and the Eli Robins community study."[ix][ix][viii]
I have read many of the criticisms of the Hooker study--how respondents were specifically selected rather than at random, and other methodological limitations.[x][x][ix] Dr. Charles Socarides, who was also on the Task Force on Nomenclature, informs us also that Spitzer was influenced by the Kinsey Report, which was recognized as early as 1976 by "social progressives" like Prof. Paul Robinson of Stanford as "a pathetic manifestation of Kinsey's philosophical naivete.. a mechanical contrivance, which...bore little relation to reality,"[xi][xi][x] and since has been discredited by the work of Judith Reisman and others.
It is clear that Dr. Socarides was right when he said that the decision to remove homosexuality as a diagnosis "involved the out-of-hand and peremptory disregard and dismissal not only of hundreds of psychiatric and psychoanalytic research papers and reports, but other serious studies by groups of psychiatrists, psychologists and educators over the past seventy years..."[xii][xii][xi]
It appears even more obvious that the Task Force on Nomenclature cavalierly ignored (and the APA's continue to ignore!) the substantial and unambiguous evidence that homosexuality involves a life-threatening behavior with an addictive component which has serious health implications.[xiii][xiii][xii]
That the APA's have escaped accountability for their lack of scientific and professional integrity is especially incredible since the advent of the AIDS epidemic. There are currently an estimated 900,000 people in the United States that are infected with the HIV virus, or 1 in 300 Americans. Though there has been a decrease in AIDS deaths per year due to drug therapy, (which costs an average of $12,000 per patient per year) the rate of new infections per year has remained the same, at 40,000, despite the twenty year "safe-sex" campaign.[xiv][xiv][xiii]
These facts demonstrate the failure of current policies in containing the AIDS epidemic. While drug therapy will briefly extend the life of these patients, AIDS remains the fifth leading cause of death among those aged 25-44, and 60% of new cases are contracted by men who have sex with men.[xv][xv][xiv] According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), homosexual men are a thousand times more likely to contract AIDS than the general heterosexual population[xvi][xvi][xv]
Dr. Satinover has said in an interview with NARTH:
"A recent article in a psychiatric publication informed us that 30% of all 20-year-old homosexual men will be HIV positive or dead by the age of thirty. You would think that the objective, ethical approach would be: let's use anything that works to try to take these people out of their posture of risk. If it means getting them to wear condoms fine. If it means getting them to give up anal intercourse, fine. If it means getting them to give up homosexuality, fine. But that last intervention is the one intervention that it absolutely taboo.
"There is no doubt that a cold, statistical analysis of this epidemic would lead you to believe that this attitude of political correctness is killing a substantial proportion of these people. I think there is an element of denial, in the psychological sense, of what gay-related illnesses really mean."[xvii][xvii][xvi]
It seems to me that the APA's should be aggressively pressed to recognize the facts about the morbidity and mortality directly attributed to homosexuality, or be exposed for the recklessly irresponsible "guardians of the public health" they have become, at least on this issue.
When will doctors and other health care workers demand that officers in the American Psychiatric Association respond to the clear evidence in the following: Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth: the mortality rates listed in their own "APA's Practical Guidelines for Treating Patients with HIV/AIDS";[xviii][xviii][xvii] and other important reports, such as the Monograph put out by the Institute of Sexual Health, Health Implications of Homosexuality?[xix][xix][xviii]
Lest we think that APA officers justify their neglect of medical consequences of homosexuality on the basis that sexual orientation cannot be changed, we note that Robert Spitzer acknowledged in his original 1973 position paper on Nomenclature that "modern methods of treatment enable a significant proportion of homosexuals who wish to change their sexual orientation to do so."[xx][xx][xix]
He has now confirmed the fact that sexual orientation can be changed with his recent study.[xxi][xxi][xx] We know that changing sexual orientation only became "impossible" in the nineties, as part of a political strategy by gay activists.[xxii][xxii][xxi]
Spitzer and his allies' rationale for removing homosexuality as a diagnosis in 1973 was that to be considered a psychiatric disorder,
"it must either regularly cause subjective distress, or regularly be associated with some generalized impairment in social effectiveness or functioning....Clearly homosexuality per se does not meet the requirements for a psychiatric disorder, since, as noted above, many are quite satisfied with their sexual orientation and demonstrate no generalized impairment in social effectiveness or functioning." (Spitzer, et.al, p. 1215).
The Task Force's reasoning fails for several reasons. First, even if we grant the validity of their stated criteria (which is questionable), the fact that many homosexuals "are satisfied with their sexual orientation," fails to take into account the large number of homosexuals who are not satisfied with their sexual orientation and who do experience "subjective distress and generalized impairment in social functioning." The removal of the diagnosis is not just unfair, but cruel to those who would seek treatment for their condition.
Secondly, there are unambiguous reasons to think that homosexuality per se does cause "generalized impairment in social effectiveness or functioning." If in fact it is a lethal addiction, and the many studies documenting the behavior patterns of homosexuals are correct (that show compulsive patterns of promiscuity, anonymous sex, sex for money, sex in public places, sex with minors, concomitant drug and alcohol abuse, depression, suicide), for the APA to argue that these features do not constitute an "impairment of social effectiveness or functioning," stretches the boundaries of plausibility. To argue that early death does not constitute an "impairment of social effectiveness or functioning" is absurd.
The APA claims its mission is "to promote a bio-psycho-social approach to understanding and caring for patients, in all aspects of health care, including illness prevention" (APA's Stategic Goals Statement). Thus the APA violates its own goals then when it ignores evidence that homosexuality can in many cases be prevented, and denies reorientation therapy to those who want it.
A careful reading of the articles opposing reorientation therapy reveals their authors' rationale that they find such therapy to be "oppressive" to those who do not want therapy.[xxiii][xxiii][xxii]
What if this logic was applied to any other lethal illness? What if doctors said, "We refuse to treat cancer (or, say, alcoholism) because we only achieve a 50% cure rate--and many people who don't want to be cured find it oppressive that we do cure the others?" Why wouldn't the lawsuits for malpractice be filed?
We know that Ronald Gold of the Gay Activist's Alliance, an openly gay man, was a member of the committee to remove homosexuality as a diagnosis in 1973. We know that gay activists were disrupting meetings, threatening doctors, and using other strong-arm tactics to get their way at that time.[xxiv][xxiv][xxiii]
We also know that homosexual activists like Dr. Richard Isay in the APA have pressed for resolutions to punish therapists for practicing reorientation therapy, and that threats of lawsuits appear to be the main reason the APA has not implemented his proposals.[xxv][xxv][xxiv]
We know homosexual advocates in the APA continue to suppress debate about Spitzer's new study documenting that sexual orientation can be changed (and to suppress debate about other supporting studies).[xxvi][xxvi][xxv] We also know that active homosexuals such as Clinton Anderson at the American Psychological Association refuse to permit NARTH to engage in open debate or announce NARTH meetings in APA publications simply because he disagrees with the premises upon which reorientation therapy is based.[xxvii][xxvii][xxvi]
For these reasons, I do not think it is far-fetched to use the analogy that the "drunks are running the rehab center," in reference to the APA's--at least as far as homosexuality is concerned. Active homosexuals can hardly be objective about an addictive behavior they engage in themselves. In light of the medical evidence, it seems that the Galenic dictum, "physician heal thyself," should apply, as it did it in the past, as Dr. Satinover suggests.[xxviii][xxviii][xxvii]
It seems to me the situation in this country will only get worse until the APA is held directly responsible for what is arguably their criminal negligence. In failing to reckon with serious medical consequences of the homosexual behavior pattern, they are harming our whole society, and especially the upcoming generation.
The recent decision by the American Academy of Pediatrics to endorse gay adoptions is yet another disturbing example of how the decision to "normalize" homosexuality by the APA has had a broad ripple effect. Health professionals especially, should heed Dean Byrd's outcry on the NARTH web site that it is time that the American people "insist on truth, not politics, from all of our professional organizations."
What will it take to insist on truth? Lawsuits? Protests? In my opinion, doctors and other health professionals must exert pressure, or share culpability.
What if every person reading this article sent a copy of it to the president of the American Psychiatric Association and asked for a response? Reasoned debate is the least that psychiatrists owe our society--especially those whose lives and loved ones are at risk.
The following is relevant contact information If interested in contacting these organizations, remember that our aim is to open up a principled, civil debate:
American Psychiatric Association
Richard Harding, M.D.
Paul Appelbaum, M.D.
Or: American Psychiatric
1400 K Street N.W., Washington, DC 20005
(888) 357-7924 -- FAX 202-682-6850 -- firstname.lastname@example.org
[i] Melonakos, Kathleen, Saunders Pocket Reference for Nurses, Philadelphia: Saunders, 1990, (2nd ed)., with Sheryl Michelson, , 1995.
[ii] Satinover, Jeffrey, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth, Hamewith/Baker Books, 1996.
[iiia] For an eye-opening survey of the medical studies and journal reports describing the unhygienic and disease-producing practices of homosexuals, see http://www.cprmd.org, "Homosexual Myths--Male Homosexuals are Healthy and Have Normal Sex Lives."
[iiib] Fenger, C. "Anal Neoplasia and Its Precursors: Facts and Controversies," Seminars in Diagnostic Pathology 8, no. 3, August 1991, pp.190-201; Daling, J.R. et al., "Sexual Practices, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, and the Incidence of Anal Cancer," New England Journal of Medicine 317, no.16, 15 October 1987, pp. 973-77; Holly, E.A. et al., "Anal Cancer Incidence: Genital Warts, Anal Fissure or Fistula, Hemorrhoids, and Smoking," Journal of the National Cancer Institute 81, no. 22, November 1989, pp. 1726-31; Daling, J.R. et.al, "Correlates of Homosexual Behavior and the Incidence of Anal Cancer," Journal of the American Medical Association 247, no.14, 9 April 1982, pp. 1988-90; Cooper, H.S., Patchefsky, A.S. and Marks, G., "Cloacogenic Carcinoma of the Anorectum in Homosexual Men: An Observation of Four Cases"; Diseases of the Colon and Rectum 22, no. 8, 1979, pp. 557-58. Also see Between the Lines, Michigan's statewide gay newspaper, reporting on the risk of anal cancer for men who have sex with men, http://www.afa.net/homosexual_agenda/ha031901.asp
[iv] W.E. Owen Jr., "Medical Problems of the Homosexual Adolescent," Journal of Adolescent Health Care6, No.4, July 1985, pp. 278-85.
[v] See O'Leary, Dale, "Recent Studies on Homosexuality and Mental Health," http://www.narth.com/docs/recent.html. O'Leary gives a summary of health findings and references for specific studies.
[vi] Mr. Trey Kern, President of the Citizen's for Parent Rights, in Pasadena, Maryland has collected an impressive amount data on studies documenting the diminished lifespan of active homosexuals. See www.cprmd.org, "Homosexual Myths: Homosexuals Live Long Lives, Fact Sheet. Studies include: (G. Tardieu, 1858; M. Hirschfield, 1914, Kinsey, 1930's, 1940's; Mattachine Society, 1950's: Berger, 1960's, Kinsey Institute, 1969; Spada Report 1978; M. Mendola, 1979; Cameron, Playfair, Wellum, 1994; Hogg, R.S., et. al, International Journal of Epidemiology, 1997; Cameron, P, Cameron, K, Playfair, WL., Psychological Reports, 1998.
[vii] Bayer, R. Homosexuality and American Psychiatry, Princeton University Press, 1987. Mr. Bayer chronicled the story of how homosexuality was removed as a diagnosis. It confirms that the APA did not officially investigate or study the issue thoroughly before it gave formal approval of the deletion of homosexuality from the DSMII.
[viii] Personal e-mail correspondence with Dr. Spitzer, Feb. 5, 2002.
[ix] Socarides, Charles, W., "Sexual Politics and Scientific Logic: The Issue of Homosexuality," The Journal of Psychohistory, 10:3, 1992, p. 309 Dr. Socarides explains that a task force within the APA itself concluded in 1973 that Hooker's study was full of methodological errors, and did not warrant her conclusions. See also, Joseph Nicolosi, "Clash of Worldviews: Interview with Michael Wertheimer", www.narth.com.
[x] Socarides, p. 324.
[xi].Socarides, p. 315
[xii] Spitzer, R.L, et. al, in "Symposium: Should Homosexuality Be in the APA Nomenclature?" American Journal of Psychiatry, 130:11, 1973 make no mention whatsoever of any health implications of homosexuality. Also, I asked Dr. Spitzer in an e-mail correspondence April 4, 2001, whether there was any chance the APA might change its policy in light of evidence that sexual orientation can be changed and the negative impact of homosexual practices upon lifespan. He acknowledged nothing about shortened lifespan, but gave a one-sentence reply that said there was no possibility that APA would change its policy on homosexuality at that time.
[xiv] Ibid, Anti-Viral Treatment section.
[xv] The HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control, National Center for Infectious Diseases, Division of HIV/AIDS, January, 1992, p. 9.
[xvi] Satinover, Jeffrey, "Reflections: Interview with NARTH," Feb. 5, 2001, http:www.narth.com/docs/satinover.html.
[xviii] Monograph is available from The Institute of Sexual Health, P.O.Box 162306, Austin, TX 78716, ph (512) 328-6268, fax (ph) 538-6269.
[xix] Spitzer, R.L, et. al, "Symposium: Should Homosexuality Be in the APA Nomenclature?" p.1215.
[xx] Spitzer, R.L, "Two Hundred Subjects Who Claim to Have Changed Their Sexual Orientation from Homosexual to Heterosexual," presentation made at the American Psychiatric Association, May 9th, 2001, in New Orleans, available from NYS Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, 10032, phone (212) 543-5524.
[xxi] Rev. Dr. Earle Fox, former president of the chapter of Exodus Intl. whose members picketed the 2000 APA convention to protest the denial of therapy to those who want it (which resulted in Dr. Robert Spitzer's 2001 study on reorientation therapy), tells in "Homosexuality Wrongly a Civil Right," Delaware State News, January 13, 2002, how no one was disputing that sexual orientation could be changed until gay activists, Kirk and Madsen, in After the Ball: How America will Conquer It's Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's, Doubleday, 1989, outlined their plan to convince America gays were "born that way," and "beyond the realm of moral choice," p. 189.
[xxii] For an extensive survey of the articles promoting the view opposing reorientation therapy, see Diamond, Eugene, et.al, Homosexuality and Hope, the results of a two-year study, published by the Catholic Medical Association, p. 14, obtainable at P.O. Box 757, Pewaukee, WI, 53072 or http://www.cathmed.org. Some of the articles quoted are Davison, G., 1982; Gittings, 1973; Begelman, 1975, 1977; Murphy 1992; Sleek 1997; Silverstein, 1972; Smith, 1988. See also, "Psychiatrists Reject Therapy to Alter Gays: Efforts aimed at Turning Homosexuals into Heterosexuals are Harmful, Professional Board Declares, Even for Those Not Being Treated," Los Angeles Times, Dec. 12, 1998.
[xxiii] Socarides, p. 310. See also, Satinover, p. 31-40.
[xxiv] See Satinover, p. 36,180-182, and Stern, Mark, E, "The Battle Against the A.P.A. Resolution", www.narth.com, Interviews/Testimonies.
[xxv] Rev. Dr. Earle Fox, Delaware State News, Jan. 13, 2002.
[xxvi] NARTH Bulletin, Vol. 10, No. 3, Dec. 2001, Letter from Clinton W. Anderson to Drs. Nicolosi and Byrd, p. 16.
[xxvii] Satinover, p. 47.Copyright © NARTH. All Rights Reserved.