Friday, June 4, 2010

Homophobia: The Untold Story pt. 5

Oh homophobia, you are so deeply seated it will take me even more posts to address you properly. So far, we 'velearned how Christians are being persecuted by not being allowed to marginalize fellow employees who are gay, that there is no gay gene and it's all a conspiracy anyway, and that you're gay because you don't conform to gender roles, or it's just because you're a narcissist. Yeah, so let's see what and Susan have for us today.
Health Risks of the Homosexual Lifestyle part 3 of 6
"As a nurse, I watched 100 of my friends and acquaintances die of AIDS and AIDS related illnesses. After that, I stopped counting."
This statement was made by Greg Quinlan, a former member of the homosexual community, who testified before the Ohio Defense of Marriage Act in November, 2003. Quinlan claimed that the physical and mental devastation caused by homosexual behavior, and the cumulative effect of that behavior "is incalculable."
Not to downplay the serious health condition AIDS is, but I have to wonder if he also stopped counting the number of patients who died of car accidents and related injuries, or else cancer and related treatments. Since Quinlan is being sourced, let's go look him up, shall we?

According to Ex-Gay Watch, Quinlan was an ex-gay activist, and spent a lot of time trying to stop hate crimes laws, anti-bullying laws, and of course, marriage equality. Here's a post about him quote-mining Francis Collins. He hasn't been on the scene much since his "ex-lesbian" wife left him in 2008.
The American public has been left largely in the dark about the extent of the medical problems associated with homosexual activity because of the influence of pro-homosexual political agendas. Some even believe they are being "compassionate" by not disclosing vital health information for fear of offending homosexuals.
Boy that's some loaded snarky language. (I would know.) Susan's claiming a conspiracy theory. Oh goody!
For those health professionals like Greg Quinlan who minister to the dying, compassion is the last word they would use to describe the deliberate withholding of potentially life-saving information from active homosexuals.
Who exactly is proposing withholding life-saving information? It's not Equality Now or the Human Rights Campaign. Oh yeah, it's Oklahoma (where now a doctor can't be sued from withholding important information from a woman about her pregnancy or the viability of her fetus!) Oh, and Quinlan quit his volunteer nursing as part of his attempt to turn straight. Yeah, so he stopped ministering the dying and started campaigning against gay rights.
The following is a brief review of what is currently known to medical science about the health risks associated with homosexual activity.
Bring. It. On.
Homosexual activity remains a major source of transmission of the HIV/AIDS virus.

A 1997 New York Times article reported that a young male homosexual has about a 50 percent chance of getting HIV by middle age. (Sheryl Gay Stolberg, "Gay Culture Weighs Sense and Sexuality," New York Times (Late edition, east coast), November 23, 1997, section 4, p.1)
Okay, so here's the article in question. It's about a fringe group called Sex Panic! that wants to promote sexual liberation and promiscuity, and how that group was received by other gay-rights activists concerned about the prevalence of HIV/AIDS. Men who have sex with men (MSM) are most at risk of spreading and contracting HIV. Condom usage is tantamount to preventing this, particularly for men who have anal sex (with other men or with women), as anal intercourse is the most reliable method of transmission for the virus. The article focuses on the problem of "bareback" (condom-free) sex within the gay community, and with the exception of SexPanic, that's what all the gay-rights activists promote. So, this is a question of safe sex, more than it is a question of sexual orientation. If a men is homosexual but has very few partners in his life and always uses protection, he has less risk of contracting HIV than a heterosexual woman who practices unsafe sex.

While anal intercourse may be the highest risk form of sex in terms of HIV transmission, it's not like never taking it up the bum guarantees a person won't contract the disease. Not only are MSM more likely to contract HIV than men who sleep with women, African-American women are more likely to contract HIV than white women. Should we start "converting" all the black women now, because they're at greater risk for HIV? (No.) In both cases, consistent condom usage, abstinence, and faithfulness greatly reduce the risks, as those things do for all of us.
As of 1998, 54 percent of all AIDS cases in America were homosexual men and according to the Center for Disease Control (CDC) nearly 90 percent of these men acquired HIV through sexual activity with other men. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1998, June, HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report 10 (1)).
Again, what does this have to do with turning gay people straight?
Even more alarming, the Center for Disease Control & Prevention reported in 1998 that an estimated half of all new HIV infections in the United States are among people under 25. Among 13-to 24-year-olds, 52 percent of all AIDS cases reported among males in 1997 were among young men who have sex with men. (CDC Fact Sheet: "Young People at Risk," Center for Disease Control & Prevention, National Center for HIV, STD and TB Prevention Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, July 24, 1998.)
According to the CDC's website, that first statistic isn't exactly reliable. See, in 2007 for example, the three populations with the highest numbers of new AIDS cases ages 35-39, 40-44, and 45-49. Huh, that's not exactly allowing for more than half of cases to be among people under 25 now does it? As for 52 percent of the AIDS cases being among men who have sex with men, that means 48% of the cases were among men who do NOT have sex with men. Yet I don't see huge warnings about the dangers of the heterosexual lifestyle all over conservative hate groups websites.
Researchers at St. Paul's Hospital in Vancouver conducted a study to assess how HIV infection and AIDS is impacting the mortality rates for homosexual and bisexual men. Lead by R.S. Hogg, et al and published in the International Journal of Epidemiology (vol. 27, no. 3, 1997, pp 657-661) they reached an alarming conclusion.

"In a major Canadian center, life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is eight to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality continues, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday. Under the most liberal assumptions, gay and bisexual men in this urban center are now experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by all men in Canada in the year 1871."
It definitely sounds like something needs to be done to improve quality of life and longevity for gay men, assuming those findings are valid. People with Cystic Fibrosis don't have a great life expectancy either; in 2008 the median survival rate went up to 37.4 years. While it is impossible to cure someone of CF (it's genetic) newer treatments for health complications can improve quality of life and delay onset of death. Woo-hoo! (Since finding out I'm a carrier for CF, I've followed the treatments and research on the condition.)

Also - you notice how they say homosexuality is dangerous, when in reality it's anal intercourse that's risky? Yeah, because lesbians who do not have sex with men are just not that likely to contract HIV. But Susan wouldn't want to mention that, as it doesn't fit with her agenda.
Physical Health Risks
In addition to AIDS, there is a long list of maladies attendant upon the homosexually active population. Of particular concern is anal cancer. According to J. R. Daling, "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, the risk of anal cancer soars by 4000 percent among those who engage in anal intercourse.
Again, anal intercourse is the high risk factor, not sexual orientation. And you know, 4000 percent is an awfully huge number. That would mean people engaging in (presumably receptive) anal sex, male or female, are 40 times as likely to develop anal cancer as us "Exit Only" types. According to the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, it's not so much 40 times as it is 7. And this isn't so much because doing it up the butt automatically gives you cancer; it's because anal intercourse facilitates the transmission of HPV (which also causes ovarian cancer among women.) It's a cancer-causing sexually transmitted disease and that's pretty damn scary, so go on and get your vaccines please. Homosexuality - sexual orientation towards members of the same sex - does not give you cancer. HPV does.
Other maladies include chlamydia trachomatis, cryptosporidium, giardia lamblia, herpes simplex virus, human papilloma virus (HPV) or genital warts, isospora belli, microsporidia, gonorrhea, viral hepatitis types B & C and syphilis.
Those are risks of sex. They are all available to all of us. Safe sex is important, so please remember your condoms, kiddies.
Emotional/Mental Health Risks
Two extensive studies published in the October 1999 issue of American Medical Association Archives of General Psychiatry confirmed the existence of a strong link between homosexuality and suicide, as well as other mental and emotional problems.
Because calling someone "fag" can make their life fucking miserable.
Youth who identify themselves as homosexual, lesbian and bisexual are four times more likely than their peers to suffer from major depression; three times more likely to suffer anxiety disorders, four times more likely to suffer conduct disorders, six times more likely to suffer from multiple disorders and more than six times more likely to have attempted suicide.
Citations? References? Sources? Also, correlation is NOT causation. Even if these statistics are 100% true and not exaggerated or misused as so many of Susan's other "factoids", she has done nothing to show that homosexuality is the cause of any of these concerns.
Many homosexual activists point their finger at homophobia as the cause of these disorders, but the most extensive studies have been done in the Netherlands and New Zealand where homosexuality is widely accepted.
Which of these studies are most extensive? What studies? Do I know that homosexuality is widely accepted in New Zealand, or I'm just taking your questionable word, Susan?
In an interview with Zenit News, Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, a child and adult psychiatrist in practice for more than 27 years, said, "Compared to controls who had no homosexual experience in the 12 months prior to the interviews, males who had any homosexual contact within that time period were much more likely to experience major depression, bipolar disorder, panic disorder, agoraphobia and obsessive compulsive disorder. Females with any homosexual contact within the previous 12 months were more often diagnosed with major depression, social phobia or alcohol dependence."
I think I've done a pretty thorough job of casting doubts on Fitzgibbon's professional credibility, so I'll just ask, What the hell does "homosexual contact" mean? Oh yeah, and I'll be asking for sources, too.
He concluded by saying, "Men and women with a history of homosexual contact had a higher prevalence of nearly all psychiatric disorders measured in the study. These findings are the result of a lifestyle marked by rampant promiscuity and an inability to make commitments, combined with unresolved sadness, profound insecurity, anger and mistrust from childhood and adolescence."
It's funny how these gay people, with their profound mistrust and their inability to make commitments keep wanting to get married. Those kooky queers - don't they know they're promiscuous?

Physical Abuse
A recent study published in the American Journal of Public Health has shown that 39 percent of males with same-sex attraction have been abused by other homosexual men.A study by Susan Turrell entitled "A descriptive analysis of Same-Sex Relationship Violence for a Diverse Sample," and published in the Journal of Family Violence (vol 13, pp 281-293), found that relationship violence was a significant problem for homosexuals. Forty-four percent of gay men reported having experienced violence in their relationship; 13 percent reported sexual violence and 83 percent reported emotional abuse.

Levels of abuse ran even higher among lesbians with 55 percent reporting physical violence, 14 percent reporting sexual abuse and 84 percent reporting emotional abuse.
Okay, let's compare statistics, shall we? According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 34 percent of survey respondents had witnessed a man beating his wife or girlfriend. Up to 33% of women and 22% of men showing up at the ER are there because of domestic violence. In all, women (including gay women) are victims of intimate partner violence at a rate five times higher than men (including gay men.) Obviously, domestic violence is a serious problem in America. But heterosexuality is by no means a guarantee of safety from violence, especially for women.
As outrageous as it might sound, "Most medical groups have embraced the homosexual agenda and are advocating that lifestyle despite all the scientific studies and medical evidence that demonstrate medical and psychological risks," said Joseph Nicolosi, President of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality. "Homosexual activism and political correctness are clearly trumping science."
Because NARTH is such a bastion of science, right? I'd like to point out here that no one is promoting a "homosexual lifestyle." What medical groups have realized is that attempts to change someone's orientation are fruitless, and detrimental to mental health (which you were all concerned about a minute ago.)
Church Teaching
The same forces are also attempting to stifle authentic Church teaching on this subject by labeling it as "homophobic" and "hate speech." However, once one is made fully aware of the medical facts, it's much easier to understand why the Church teaches that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered. They are contrary to the natural law." (CCC2357)
Um, isn't this chapter supposed to be on Health Risks of homosexual lifestyle? So how come church teaching is in here? I don't get how you can possibly claim this is a risk to the individual. Oh wait, this isn't about gay people - it's about Catholic doctrine. Now I get it! Well, let us absolutely take our moral example from the legion of pedophiles. No, wait - that sounds like a terrible idea.

Oh yeah, and authentic church teaching is homophobic. Calling someone an abomination or disordered simply because they don't share your sexual orientation is quite hateful. And hang on! For a minute I forgot this was Catholocism we were dealing with. You remember up above, all that concern about the gay lifestyle giving people STIs? Well, as I mentioned, the ABCs are what works best at preventing those: A-Abstience, B-Be Faithful, and C-Consistent Condom Usage. So if the Catholic Church is so concerned about the physical health of people, why do they actively discourage condom usage, and lie about how HIV/AIDS is spread? Surely that is 1,000 times more evil than loving your fellow man could ever be (and how on earth can love be evil?)
Unfortunately, the word 'disordered' steals all the attention and leaves much of Church teaching drowned out by angry invectives. Father John Harvey, founder of Courage, a support group for people with same sex attraction who are seeking to live a chaste life, laments the fact that far too many people, including Catholics themselves, are left with the impression of ". . .an authoritarian Church that makes decisions arbitrarily, without considering the nature of things. Nothing could be further from the truth."
Um, that actually does sound a lot like the Vatican. And yeah, "disordered" is offensive. You don't get to call people names, and then cry "Persecution!" when they stand up for themselves, and call you the hateful liars that you are.
Even from an immunological point of view, the body itself considers homosexual acts to be disordered. For instance, there are substances in seminal fluid called "immuno-regulatory macromolecules" that send out "signals" that are only understood by the female body, which will then permit the "two in one flesh" intimacy required for human reproduction. When deposited elsewhere, these signals are not only misunderstood, but cause sperm to fuse with whatever somatic body cell they encounter. This fusing is what often results in the development of cancerous malignancies. ("Sexual Behavior and Increased Anal Cancer", Immunology and Cell Biology 75 (1977); 181-183))
The "purpose" of our species may very well be simple propogation, but that is not the entirety of who or what people are. Despite the Catholic Church's obsession with large families, regions with higher societal health also have smaller family sizes (and better access to contraception.)
Clearly, Church teaching on human sexuality is not founded upon pious patriarchal prudery, but is soundly based in science, biology and anthropology — all of which is illumined by the added gift of faith.
*Retch* It is ridiculous to claim the Church's long-standing Biblically-justified hatred of homosexuals is founded in biology. And it's a LIE.

More soon!