www.familyresearchinst.

org
Getting the Facts: Same-Sex Marriage
Society has a vested interest in prohibiting behavior that endangers the health
or safety of the community. Because of this, homosexual liaisons have
historically been forbidden by law. Homosexuals also do a poor job of raising
healthy, well socialized children.
Homosexuals contend that their relationships are the equivalent of marriage
between a man and woman. They demand that society dignify and approve of
their partnerships by giving them legal status as `marriages. They further
argue that homosexuals should be allowed to become foster-parents or adopt
children.
The best scientific evidence suggests that putting societys stamp of approval
on homosexual partnerships would harm society in general and children in
particular. A large body of scientific evidence suggests that homosexual
marriage is a defective counterfeit of traditional marriage and that it poses a
clear and present danger to the health of the community and childrens well-
being.
Traditional marriage improves the health of its participants, has the lowest rate
of domestic violence, prolongs life, and is the best context in which to raise
children.
Traditional marriage improves the health of its participants, has the lowest rate
of domestic violence, prolongs life, and is the best context in which to raise
children. Homosexual coupling undermines its participants health, has the
highest rate of domestic violence, shortens life, and is a poor environment in
which to raise children.
The Facts About Homosexual Marriage
Fact #: Homosexual marriages are short li!e".
When one examines homosexual behavior patterns, it becomes clear that the
plea for legal homosexual marriage is less about marriage than the push for
legitimacy. Most gays and lesbians are not in monogamous relationships, and
in fact often live alone by preference.
In a study [1] of 2,000 U.S. and European gays in the 1960s,
researchers found that "living by oneself is probably the chief residential
pattern for male homosexuals. It provides the freedom to pursue
whatever style of homosexual life one chooses, whether it be furtive
encounters in parks or immersion in the homosexual subculture. In
addition, homosexual relationships are fragile enough to make this
residential pattern common whether deliberate or not.
A 1970 study in San Francisco [2] found that approximately 61% of gays
and 37% of lesbians were living alone.
1
In 1977, the Spada Report [3] noted that only 8% of the gays in its
sample claimed to have a monogamous relationship with a live-in lover.
The same year [4] over 5,000 gays and lesbians were asked: "Do you
consider or have you considered yourself `married to another
[homosexual]? Only 40% of lesbians and 25% of gays said "yes. The
authors noted that with "gay male couples, it is hard to even suggest
that there are norms of behavior. [One] might expect to find a clear
pattern of `categories emerging from the answers to the questions about
lovers, boy friends, and relationships. In fact, no such pattern emerged.
In the early 1980s, a large non-random sample [5] of almost 8,000
heterosexual and homosexual couples responded to advertisements in
alternative newspapers. The average number of years together was 9.8
for the married, 1.7 for cohabiting heterosexuals, 3.5 for the gay
couples, and 2.2 for the lesbian couples.
#ariety $!er Monogamy
Although gay activists often argue that legalizing homosexual marriage would
help make such relationships
more permanent, the reality is that most gays desire variety in their sex
partners, not the monogamy of traditional marriage.
In 1987, only 23% of gays in London [6] reported sexual exclusivity "in
the month before interview.
In 1990, only 12% of gays in Toronto, Canada [7] said that they were in
monogamous relationships.
In 1991, in the midst of the AIDS crisis, Australian gays [8] were
monitored to see whether they had changed their sexual habits. There
was essentially no change in 5 years: 23% reported a monogamous
relationship, 35% a non-monogamous relationship, and 29% only
"casual sex. The authors reported that "there were almost as many men
moving into monogamy as out of it, and out of casual-only partnerships
as into them. [emphasis added]
In 1993, a study [9] of 428 gays in San Francisco found that only 14%
reported just a single sexual partner in the previous year. The vast
majority had multiple sex partners.
In 1994, the largest national gay magazine [10] reported that only 17%
of its sample of 2,500 gays claimed to live together in a monogamous
relationship.
Even gays who do have long-term partners do not play by the typical
`rules. Only 69% of Dutch gays [11] with a marriage-type `partner
actually lived together. The average number of "outside partners per
year of `marriage was 7.1 and increased from 2.5 in the first year of the
relationship to 11 in the 6th year.
%hy are homosexual marriages shorter an" less committe" than
tra"itional marriages&
At any given time, less than a third of gays and approximately half of lesbians
2
are living with a lover. Because the relationships are so short, the average
homosexual can anticipate many, many `divorces.
At any given time, less than a third of gays and approximately half of lesbians
are living with a lover. Because the relationships are so short, the average
homosexual can anticipate many, many `divorces.
At any instant, about 10% of gays live together in monogamous relationships.
Their monogamy seldom lasts beyond a year. Perhaps half of lesbians live
together in monogamous relationships. These typically dissolve in one to three
years.
These same patterns appear in the scientific literature over the last 50 years -
both long before and during the AIDS epidemic. This consistency suggests a
reality associated with the practice of homosexuality, one unlikely to be
affected by changes in marriage laws.
The Scan"ina!ian 'x(erience
In Denmark, a form of homosexual marriage has been legal since 1989.
Through 1995, less than 3% of Danish homosexuals had gotten married, and
28% of these marriages had already ended in divorce or death. [12] The
Danish experience provides no evidence that gay `marriage is beneficial. Men
who married men were three times more apt to be widowers before the age of
55 than men who married women! Similarly, a woman who married a woman
was three times more apt to be a widow than a woman who married a man.
Though only about 3% of gays get married in Norway and Sweden, gay
marriages more frequently result in divorce. In these countries, divorce is
about 50% more likely in male homosexuals, and 200% more likely in
lesbians. Furthermore, reversing the usual excuse of `staying together for the
sake of the kids, divorce was more common if children lived with the same-sex
couple. [13]
Fact #): Stu"ies show homosexual *marriage+ is ha,ar"ous to one+s
health.
Across the world, numerous researchers have reported that `committed or
`coupled homosexuals are more apt than `single gays to engage in highly risky
and biologically unsanitary sexual practices. As a consequence
of this activity, they increase their chances of getting AIDS and other sexually
transmitted or blood-borne diseases.
In 1983, near the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, gays in San Francisco
[14] who claimed to be in "monogamous relationships were compared
to those who were not. Without exception, those in monogamous
relationships more frequently reported that they had engaged in
biologically unhealthful activity during the past year. As examples, 4.5%
of the monogamous vs. 2.2% of the unpartnered had engaged in
drinking urine, and 33.3% vs. 19.6% claimed to practice oral-anal sex.
In 1989, Italian researchers [15] investigated 127 gays attending an
AIDS clinic. Twelve percent of those without steady partners vs. 28% of
those with steady partners were HIV+. The investigators remarked that
3
"to our surprise, male prostitutes did not seem to be at increased risk,
whereas homosexuals who reported a steady partner (i.e., the same man
for the previous six months) carried the highest relative risk.
During 1991-92, 677 gays in England [16] were asked about
"unprotected anal sex. Those who had `regular
partners reported sex lives which were "about three times as likely to
involve unprotected anal sex than partnerships described as `casual/one-
night stands. Sex with a regular partner "was far more important than
awareness of HIV status in facilitating high-risk behaviour.
A 1993 British sexual diary study [17] of 385 gays reported that men in
"monogamous relationships practiced more anal intercourse and more
anal-oral sex than those without a steady partner. It concluded that "gay
men in a Closed relationship. exhibit. the highest risk of HIV
transmission.
In 1992, a sample [18] of 2,593 gays from Tucson, AZ and Portland, OR
reinforced the consistent finding that "gay men in primary relationships
are significantly more likely than single men to have engaged in
unprotected anal intercourse.
Similarly, a 1993 sample [19] of gays from Barcelona, Spain practiced
riskier sex with their regular partners than with casual pick-ups.
Even a 1994 study [20] of over 600 lesbians demonstrated that "the
connection between monogamy and unprotected sex,. was very
consistent across interviews. Protected sex was generally equated with
casual encounters; unprotected sex was generally equated with trusting
relationships. Not using latex barriers was seen as a step in the process
of relational commitment. Choosing to have unprotected sex indicated
deepening trust and intimacy as the relationship grew.
%hy is homosexual *marriage+ a health ha,ar"&
While married people pledge and generally live up to their vows of sexual
faithfulness, participants in both gay and lesbian `marriages offer each other
something quite different. They see shared biological intimacy and sexual risk-
taking as a hallmark of trust and commitment. Being exposed in this way to
the bodily discharges of their partner increases the risk of disease, especially
so if that partner was `married to someone else before or engaged in sex with
others outside the relationship.
The evidence is strong that both gays and lesbians are more apt to take
biological risks when having sex with a partner than when having casual sex.
The evidence is also strong that gays disproportionately contract more disease,
especially AIDS and the various forms of hepatitis, from sex with `partners
than they do from sex with strangers.
Like male homosexuals, `married lesbians are more apt to engage in biological
intimacy and risk-taking. However, death and disease rates for unpartnered
lesbians appear to be as high as among the partnered.
4
Fact #-: Homosexual *marriage+ has the highest rate of "omestic
!iolence.
Domestic violence is a public health concern. Among heterosexuals, not only is
it an obvious marker of a troubled marriage, but media attention and tax
dollars to aid `battered women have both grown tremendously in recent years.
What is not reported is the empirical evidence suggesting that homosexual
couples have higher rates of domestic violence than do heterosexual couples.
[21]
In 1996 [22], Susan Holt, coordinator of the domestic violence unit of the Los
Angeles Gay & Lesbian Center, said that "domestic violence is the third largest
health problem facing the gay and lesbian community today and trails only
behind AIDS and substance abuse. in terms of sheer numbers and lethality.
The average rate of domestic violence in traditional marriage, established by a
nationwide federal government survey [23] of 6,779 married couples in 1988,
is apparently less than 5% per year. During their most recent year of marriage,
2.0% of husbands and 3.2% of wives said that they were hit, shoved or had
things thrown at them. Unmarried, cohabiting heterosexuals report [24] higher
rates of violence - a rate of about 20% to 25% per year.
When the same standard is applied to gay and lesbian relationships, the
following evidence emerges:
In 1987 in Georgia [25], 48% of 43 lesbian couples, and 39% of 39 gay
couples reported domestic violence.
In 1988, 70 lesbian and gay students participated in a study [26] of
conflict resolution in gay and lesbian relationships. Adjusted upward
because only one partner in the couple was reporting (i.e., the
researchers got "only one side of the story), an estimated 29% of gay
and 56% of lesbian couples experienced violence in the past year.
In 1989, 284 lesbians were interviewed [27] who were involved "in a
committed, cohabitating lesbian relationship during the last 6 months.
Adjusted for reports by just one partner, an estimated 43% of the
relationships were violent in the past year.
In 1990, nearly half of 90 lesbian couples in Los Angeles reported [28]
domestic violence yearly. 21% of these women said that they were
mothers. Interestingly, of those mothers who had children living with
them, 11 lived in "violent and 11 in "nonviolent relationships. Thus,
unlike traditional marriage where parents will often forego fighting to
shield the children from hostility, there was no evidence from this
investigation that the presence of youngsters reduced the rate of
domestic violence.
Overall, the evidence is fairly compelling that homosexual domestic violence
exceeds heterosexual domestic violence. The limited scientific literature
suggests that physical domestic violence occurs every year among less than
5% of traditionally married couples, 20% to 25% of cohabiting heterosexuals,
and approximately half of lesbian couples. The evidence is less certain for
5
gays, but their rate appears to fall somewhere between that for unmarried,
cohabiting heterosexuals and lesbians.
Homosexual .omestic #iolence A /igger 0roblem Than *Gay /ashing+
Gay activists and the media are quick to assert that discriminatory attitudes by
`straight society lead directly to violence against homosexuals (i.e., `gay
bashing). In fact, evidence suggests that homosexual domestic violence
substantially exceeds - in frequency and lethality - any and all forms of `gay
bashing. That is, the violence that homosexuals do to one another is much
more significant than the violence that others do to homosexuals.
In 1995, a homosexual domestic violence consortium conducted a study [29]
in six cities - Chicago, Columbus, Minneapolis, New York, San Diego, and San
Francisco - where reports of anti-homosexual harassment or same-sex
domestic violence were tabulated.
The harassment incidents ranged from name calling (e.g., `faggot, `queer) to
actual physical harm or property damage. Homosexual domestic violence, on
the other hand, referred only to incidents in which actual physical harm
occurred or was seriously threatened (i.e., met the legal standard for domestic
violence).
The results? Nationwide, [30] as well as in these cities, around half of anti-
homosexual harassment reports in 1995 involved only slurs or insults, thus not
rising to the level of actual or threatened physical violence. In San Francisco,
there were 347 calls about same-sex domestic violence and 324 calls about
anti-homo-sexual harassment. In three of the five other cities there were also
more calls reporting same-sex domestic violence than anti-homosexual
harassment. The same ratio was reported for the study as a whole.
Given that half of the harassment reports did not rise to the level of violence,
while domestic violence meant exactly that, if the data gathered by this
consortium of homosexuals corresponds to the underlying reality, the physical
threat to homosexuals from same-sex domestic violence is at least twice as
great as the physical threat they experience from `the outside.
Rather than being a `shelter against the storms of life, as traditional marriage
is sometimes characterized, being homosexually partnered actually increases
the physical dangers associated with homosexuality.
Fact #1: 'm(irical e!i"ence "emonstrates that homosexuals ma2e
(oor (arents.
Fewer than 40 comparative studies on the effects of homosexual parents have
been published. Only one [31] was based on a random sample, and another
[32] followed the children for 14 years. The rest were based on small samples
of volunteers, and those usually with children under the age of 10. These
studies seldom addressed traditional concerns - for instance, molestation, or
recruitment by parents or their lovers. Nor did they tend to consider the effects
on teenagers. Instead they were `snapshots of a particular moment in the lives
of these children. Yet the empirical evidence supports what common sense
would expect.
6
Molestation an" 3ncest
In the one random survey,[31] 28 (0.6%) of 4,600 children with non-
homosexual parents reported sex with their parents or stepparents. By
contrast, for children with homosexual parents, 3 of 6 sons reported sex with
their father (2 of the 3 said they were homosexual as adults) and 2 of 11
daughters reported sex with a stepmother.
In the only other relevant study, [33] 1 of 11 adult sons with homosexual
fathers reported having been seduced by him.
A review of 78 appeals-court cases (through 1998) involving one homosexual
and one heterosexual parent - contesting custody of 142 children - revealed
4 cases of molestation involving homosexual parents, but none involving the
heterosexual parents. In another 154 custody cases involving heterosexuals
used as a study control, one stepfather molested his stepdaughter. [34,35] In
one of the five clinical studies of children of homosexuals, [36] a client
complained that his lesbian mother had forced him to have his first sexual
experience with a homosexual.
It is difficult to obtain facts regarding the nations foster children. Nevertheless,
in 2003, responding to a Freedom of Information request, the state of Illinois
reported that from 1997-2002, of 270 foster- or adoptive-parents who
engaged in "substantiated sexual abuse, 34% were homosexuals. [37] An
exhaustive review of the 50 largest-circulation newspapers and wire services
from 1980 through 2003 found that 169 foster parents had sexually abused
351 foster children. [38] Of these, 88% were men and 53% of these men
practiced homosexuality.
The same study found that in 21 "group home stories, the molestation was
homosexual in 71%. Also, at least 334 of the 349+ victims in group homes
were boys. Findings from both individual placements and group homes indicate
a disproportionate homosexual footprint in the sexual molestation of foster
children.
School an" Family 4ife
Children with homosexual parents lead troubled lives. The only randomly
drawn sample[31] found 17 who reported a homosexual parent. These 17 were
more likely to report sex with a parent, to engage in homosexuality for their
first sexual encounter, to be sexually molested, to become homosexual, and to
report dissatisfaction with their childhood.
The largest comprehensive comparative study was based upon teacher-reports
as well as interviews with the students and their parents. [39] 58 elementary
school children being raised by homosexual couples were closely matched (by
age, sex, grade in school, and social class) with 58 children of cohabiting
heterosexual parents, and 58 children of married parents. Children with
married parents did best at math and language skills, second-best in social
studies, were most active in sports, experienced the highest levels of parental
7
involvement at school and at home (their parents also most closely monitored
them at home), and had parents with the highest expectations for them.
Children of cohabiting heterosexuals were in-between, while children of
homosexuals scored somewhat higher in social studies, lowest in math and
language skills, were least popular (often socially isolated), most restrained
and formal, experienced the lowest levels of parental involvement both at
school and at home, did more household tasks, and were more frequently
tutored. Their parents less frequently expressed high educational and career
aspirations for them. In fact, teachers said children of homosexuals were `more
confused about their gender.
5orroborating 5ourt 5ases
Through 1998 [40], 142 children with homosexual parents were involved in 78
custody disputes. According to the court records, parents who lied, engaged in
criminal activity, or practiced homosexuality were more apt to be recorded as
harming their children. Again according to the record, homosexual parents
more frequently lied and/or engaged in criminal activity.
Parents or their associates were recorded as having exposed their children to
"harm in 70% of homosexuals, as opposed to only 5% of heterosexuals.
"Harm in this study included neglect, violence, seduction, and
hypersexualization. Overall, homosexuals were held responsible for 97% of the
115 recorded harms to children.
Homosexual 0arents More 4i2ely to Ha!e Homosexual 5hil"ren
In a 14-year study [32] comparing 25 children of 18 lesbian mothers against
21 children of 16 single mothers, when asked what they thought their mother
wanted them to become, 40% of the lesbians children but none of the children
of divorced heterosexuals said that they believed their mother wanted them to
be homosexual. Not surprisingly, 67% of the daughters and 57% of the sons of
the lesbian mothers vs. 13% of the heterosexual mothers daughters and 20%
of their sons said that they would consider homosexual relations. Also, 29% of
the daughters of lesbians and 13% of their sons (but none of the children of
single mothers) reported a homosexual relationship. In fact, two of the
lesbians daughters said that when it came to sex, they primarily enjoyed
homosexuality.
Adding together the various studies of children of homosexuals published
through 1999, at least 19% of 115 daughters and 16% of 120 sons said that
they themselves engaged in homosexuality; that is, 17% of 235 offspring. In
the comparison groups that were employed in these studies, only 2% of 66
children of heterosexuals said they practiced homosexuality. [34]
5hil"ren of Homosexual 0arents Suffer 'mbarrassment an" 3solation
When one researcher [41] interviewed 39 adult children of gays, 56%
"expressed some concern over the burden of keeping a part of their lives
8
secret, and 44% "stated that they had felt that their parents sexuality had
placed special demands or constraints upon their friendships. Childrens
"positive responses to a parents homosexuality declined as the child became
an adolescent. The study noted that "[o]ver half of the sample reported having
gone through a period when they feared the ostracism or ridicule of their
peers.
Gay parenting advocates like to respond that even if children raised by
homosexuals experience greater social difficulty, it is only because homosexual
marriage is not yet legal. If it were, the basis for the ridicule and ostracism
would cease. While there is no doubt that legalizing gay marriage would place
a `stamp of approval on homosexual relationships and their `families, the
problems such children will face are unlikely to evaporate.
For one, the worst excesses of homosexual behavior - promiscuity, bizarre
and dangerous sex acts, sexual disease transmission, alcohol and drug abuse
- occur most frequently in those places where homosexuality is most tolerated
and accepted, such as San Francisco or Key West, FL. [42] Rather than
practicing more responsible behavior in `non-discriminatory, tolerant
environments, the reverse typically occurs. For another, many of the harms
children experience at the hands of homosexual parents have very little to do
with social isolation or rejection, especially when it comes to parental neglect,
seduction, or violence.
Assessing the Facts: %hat 5an %e 5onclu"e&
Homosexual marriage is a bad idea. While traditional marriage delivers benefits
to its participants as well as to society, `gay marriage harms everyone it
touches - especially children. Not only does it place homosexuals at increased
risk for HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases, but it also subjects them
to an increased threat of domestic violence.
Homosexual marriage is nothing like traditional marriage. Homosexual unions
are not built around lifetime commitments, nor are they good environments in
which to raise children. Those who support legalizing homosexual marriage
include the same `compassionate people who championed the right of singles
to become parents. We know the results of that campaign: a third of the
nations children do not have a father. We also know that children without
fathers much more often do poorly in school, get in trouble with the law, and
become dysfunctional parents themselves.
It would be foolish to tamper with something as vital to personal and social
health as traditional marriage in order the placate the same troubled souls that
pushed for our current cultural mess.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2009/02/getting-the-facts-same-sex-
marriage/
How 4ong .o Homosexuals 4i!e&
Do those involved in homosexuality live as long on average as non-
homosexuals? Hard evidence is difficult to come by, but the data we do have
9
suggests that homosexuality tends to shorten life by many years. This briefing
summarizes some of the key data.
6.S. $bituaries $!er - 7ears
6,737 obituaries from 18 U.S. homosexual journals, compared to obituaries
from 2 mainstream newspapers
5ategory Mean Age At
.eath
8 %ho .ie" Age"
9:;
Heterosexual Married Men 75 80%
Heterosexual Married Women 79 85%
Homosexual Males, AIDS Deaths 39 1%
Homosexual Males, Non-AIDS
Deaths
42 9%
Lesbians 44 20%
Statistics .enmar2< ==>-)>>)
Official death tallies - Ever married individuals vs. ever homosexually-
partnered (561 gays, 91 lesbians)
5ategory Mean Age At
.eath
8 %ho .ie" Age"
9:;
Ever Married Men 74 79%
Ever Married Women 78 85%
Ever Homosexually Partnered Men 51 22%
Ever Homosexually Partnered
Women
56 24%
?eferences:
Cameron P, Playfair WL, & Wellum S (1994) The longevity of
homosexuals: before and after the AIDS epidemic. Omega, 29:249-272
Cameron P, Cameron K (2007) Federal distortion of homosexual footprint
(ignoring early gay death?). Eastern Psychological Assn Convention,
Philadelphia
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2012/01/how-long-do-homosexuals-live/
How Much 5hil" Molestation is Homosexual&
Do homosexuals disproportionately molest children? Gay activists vehemently
deny it, yet the empirical evidence says otherwise. The key concept is
proportionality. Probably a numerical majority of child molestations involve a
10
male adult and a female child, but given the small fraction of homosexual
practitioners, the number of homosexual molestations is disproportionate to
the percentage of homosexuals. This briefing summarizes some of the key
evidence.
Three 5ritical Facts
Homosexuals comprise < 2% of adults
90+% of child molesters are male
The Gay Report - 23% of gays reported sex with boys aged <16; 7%
with boys aged <13
From Facts to .is(ro(ortionate ?eality
Human Rights Watch 2! World Report - ~150 million girls, ~73
million boys "have experienced rape or other sexual violence
U.S., Canadian reports - girl/boy ratio also about 2:1
25-40% of molestations are thus same-sex, far in excess of the
percentage of homosexuals
Homosexual Molestation in 0ositions of Authority
~43% of sex between teachers & pupils
~50% of sex between foster parents & foster children
21 group home sex scandals - 71% were same-sex
Sex %ith $ne+s $wn 5hil"ren
Homosexual parents - 18%; Heterosexual parents - 0.6%
?eferences:
Sahil (2009) Cruel "um#ers 2$
Freund K, Watson RJ (1992) The proportions of heterosexual and
homosexual pedophiles among sex offenders against children: an
exploratory study. %ournal o& 'e( ) *arital Therapy 18:34-43
Jay K & Young A (1979) The Gay Report. NY: Summit
Cameron P (2007) Teacher-pupil sex, how much is homosexual?
Empirical %ournal 'ame+'e( 'e(ual ,ehavior;1:1-19 (on-line)
Cameron P (2005) Child molestation by homosexual foster parents:
Illinois, 1997-2002. Psychological Reports 96: 227-230
Cameron P (2005) Are over a third of foster parent molestations
homosexual? Psychological Reports 96:275-298
Cameron P & Cameron K (1996) Homosexual parents. Adolescence 124,
Winter, 757-776
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2012/01/how-much-child-molestation-is-
homosexual/
11
.o Homosexual Teachers 0ose A ?is2&
5urrent '"ucational @%is"omA B ==:
Major educational associations tell U.S. Supreme Court there is no "foundation
in fact to the claim that gay teachers "are more likely than heterosexual men
to molest children
The 'm(irical Truth
Every comparative study indicates gay teachers are the most likely -
and heterosexual female teachers the least likely - to sexually molest
students
Homosexuals comprise 4% of teachers, but far out-do their share of
teacher-pupil molestations
Me"ia Cews ?e(orts< =D>-)>>9
902 teachers molested 3,457 students; 43% of perpetrators were
homosexual
Disproportionate homosexual `footprint around the world: Ireland
(63%), New Zealand (62%), Canada (60%), Scotland (54%), Australia
(48%), England (47%), U.S. (35%), Africa (26%), Asia (13%)
Sur!ey of 0rinci(als
1400 principals asked about teacher-student sex complaints
7% reported homosexual contact, 13% heterosexual contact; 35% of all
complaints were about homosexual teachers
?e(orts by Su(erinten"ents
New York State - 225 reported cases of student sexual abuse by
"professional staff; 27% of abuses were homosexual
North Carolina - 21 high school teachers disciplined for sexual contact
with students in "past 3 years; 29% were homosexual
.isci(linary Actions
199 teachers disciplined for molesting pupils in 10 western U.S. states
32% of perpetrators engaged in homosexuality
?eferences:
Amicus brief, p. 22, quoted in Cameron P, Cameron K, Landess T (1996)
Errors by the American Psychiatric Association, the American
Psychological Association, and the National Educational Association in
representing homosexuality in amicus briefs about Amendment 2 to the
U.S. Supreme Court. Psychological Reports, 79,383-404
Cameron P (2007) Teacher-pupil sex across the world: how much is
homosexual? Empirical %ournal o& 'ame+'e( 'e(ual ,ehavior, 1;1-19.
(on line)
Hechinger G & Hechinger FM (1978) Should homosexuals be allowed to
teach? *cCall-s 105(6), 100f
12
Shakeshaft C & Cohan A (1995) Sexual abuse of students by school
personnel. Phi .elta /appan 76, 513-520.
Wishnietsky DH (1991) Reported and unreported teacher-student sexual
harassment. %ournal o& Educational Research 84, 164-169
Rubin S (1988) Sex education: teachers who sexually abuse students.
Paper presented at 20th 1nternational Congress o& Psychology, Sydney,
Australia
Cameron P & Cameron K (1996) Do homosexual teachers pose a risk to
pupils? %ournal o& Psychology 1996;130:603-613
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2012/01/do-homosexual-teachers-pose-a-
risk/
Are Homosexuality an" #iolence 4in2e"&
A Shoc2ing Mur"er
2011 begins with news reports of the "corkscrew murder: 21 yr-old
male model murders his lover, a 65 yr-old Portuguese gay activist; cuts
off his testicles with a corkscrew
Shocking aberration? One-time event? Or part of a pattern?
Homosexuality an" #iolence Are Co Strangers
Top six U.S. serial killers were all involved in homosexuality
Past 5 years: 22% of 2,281 male homosexuals reported gay-on-gay
physical violence; 5.1% reported gay-on-gay rape
.is(ro(ortionate .omestic #iolence
Yearly domestic violence reports are disproportionately homosexual
Married adults reporting domestic violence: men = 0.04%; women =
0.24%
Homosexually-partnered adults reporting domestic violence: gays =
4.6%; lesbians = 5.8%
5ana"ian 5entre for Eustice Statistics< )>>1
Homosexuals more apt to report being raped, robbed, or assaulted each
year
Homosexuals = 3.2%; heterosexuals = 1%
?eferences:
Greenwood, et al (2002) Battering victimization among a probability-
based sample of men who have sex with men. American %ournal Pu#lic
Health 92:1964-1969
Rennison CM (2001) 1ntimate partner violence and age o& victim2 3$$4+
$$. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Special Report, NCJ 187635.
(www.ncjrs.org)
Beauchamp DL (2008) 'e(ual orientation and victimi5ation6 20.
Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
13
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2012/01/are-homosexuality-and-violence-
linked/
How Many Homosexuals Are There&
/eginning of a Myth B =1D
Dr. Alfred Kinsey claims "37% of all men had engaged in homosexuality;
"10% were more or less homosexual
Gay activists and academicians treat 10% figure as fact; endlessly repeat
it
The 0roblem
Kinseys sampling method was woefully defective; heavily overloaded
with prisoners, gay bars, and prostitutes; completely non-random
Distorted picture of American sexual habits; severely overestimated the
prevalence of homosexuality
/est '!i"ence To"ay
< 2% of adults are currently `homosexual in large-scale probability
surveys
Sexual preference/orientation is not `fixed or `frozen, even in adulthood;
some try or abandon many kinds of sex, including homosexuality
==9< 6S 5enters for .isease 5ontrol
National Household Survey of Drug Abuse, 12,381 non-institutionalized
adults, aged 18-59
1.3% of men, 1.1% of women participated in homosexual activity during
the past year
)>>1< Statistics 5ana"a
121,300 adults
"1.0% of Canadians aged 18 to 59 considered themselves homosexual,
and 0.7% considered themselves bisexual
)>>< /ritish $ffice of Cational Statistics
o 238,000 adults aged 16+
o Response rate close to 96%
o 1.6% of men, 1.3% of women said they were homosexual or
bisexual
?eferences:
1. Anderson JE, Wilson RW, Barker P, Doll L, Jones TS, &
Holtgrave D (1999) Prevalence of sexual and drug-related HIV risk
behaviors in the U.S. adult population: results of the 1996 national
household survey on drug abuse. %ournal o& Ac7uired 1mmune
.e&iciency 'yndromes 21:148-156. [CDC report]
14
2. Statistics Canada (2004) The .aily2 %une 382 Canadian Community
Health 'urvey. [Canadian data]
3. Joloza T, Evans J, OBrien R (2010) *easuring se(ual identity6 an
evaluation report. Sept, Office for National Statistics [British data]
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2012/01/how-many-homosexuals-are-
there/
/orn %HAT %ay&
/y .r. 0aul 5ameron
Dr. Cameron is Chariman of the Family Research Institute of Colorado Springs,
Colorado USA. Click here for more information about this organization. You
may contact him at: Family Research Institute, PO Box 62640, Colorado
Springs, CO 80962 USA. Phone number: (303) 681-3113.
Gay activists regularly claim that they were "born that way
and thus cannot change their desires or stop their activities.
Yet there are numerous documented cases in which
homosexuals have changed. The Masters-Eohnson
3nstitute reported that: "A 25-year-old man had had his first
sexual experience when he was 13 years old. It was arranged
by his lesbian mother with an older gay man. After that
episode, his imagery and interpersonal sexual experience
were exclusively homosexual.. The man was motivated to
establish a heterosexual life style because he was sincerely
distressed by public disapproval of homosexuality and his
personal loneliness. [After treatment, he] has been followed
for 3 1/2 years. His sexual interaction has been exclusively
heterosexual. He has moved out of the gay community and
has changed. his life style.
(1)

Was this mans sexual orientation #iologically
deturmined?
If so, how was it initially set - toward heterosexuality or homosexuality?
And if it was set initially, how was he able to change?
The answers to these seemingly "esoteric questions matter a great deal. For
one thing, the political stakes are high. The March 3, 1993 Cew 7or2
TimesF5/S Cews 0oll reported that a majority of those who believe that
gays "cannot change favored permitting homosexuals to serve in the military.
Only a third of those who believed it is a choice felt the same way.
Many opinions about gay rights hinge on the question of whether gays are
"born that way and/or "cant change. For instance, 57% of those who believe
it is immutable consider homosexuality an acceptable life style vs 18% of those
who consider it a choice. But if homosexual activity is no more inevitable or
unchangeable than drunkenness or drug use, most people seem willing to
insist that homosexuals abandon their destructive behavior.
15
Two prominent `homosexual psychiatrists, examining the evidence of their own
lives as well as those of others, came to different conclusions in this long-
running debate. The first of these, Sigmund Freud, saw his homosexual urges
as pathological. Through self-analysis, he overcame them and eventually
rejoiced in the "greater independence that results from having overcome my
homosexuality.
(2)
The second of these, Richard Isay, confronted his desires,
pronounced them "natural, divorced his wife and joined the gay subculture.
(3)

In 1992 Isay admitted that the "conviction among most, though not all,
dynamically oriented psychiatrists in general and psychoanalysts in particular
[is] that homosexuality can and should be changed to heterosexuality.
(4)
Yet,
while acknowledging this consensus among his colleagues, Isay called attempts
to change homosexual desire "the greatest abuse of psychiatry in America
today. Why? Because the "attempt to change is extremely harmful.
(3)
Instead,
society should change to accommodate homosexuality.
Dr. Isay, who chairs the American 0sychiatric Association+s committee on
Gay2 9es#ian2 and ,ise(ual 1ssues, argues that homosexuality "is constitutional
[that is, biological in origin].
(4)
To support his position, he cited as proof two
1991 studies - the "gay brains research of Simon LeVay
(5)
and the "gay twins
study of Bailey & Pillard.
(6)

In 1993, Drs. William Byne and Bruce Parsons, researchers at the Cew 7or2
State 0sychiatric 3nstitute, critically reviewed "the evidence favoring a
biologic theory presented by LeVay and Bailey & Pillard.
(7)
They concluded in
the Archives o& General Psychiatry that "[t]here is no e!i"ence at (resent to
substantiate a biologic theory of sexual orientation!
How could these researchers dismiss as inadequate the very studies that were
fundamental to Dr. Isays argument - and that even conservative columnist
William- F. Buckley referred to in 1993 as proving that homosexuals are `born
that way?
Byne & Parsons remembered that from the 1940s through the 1970s it was
widely argued and #elieved in the scientific community that male homosexuals
had a deficiency of male hormones. However, only 3 "studies had indicated
lower testosterone levels in male homosexuals, while 20 studies found no
differences based on sexual orientation, and two reported elevated
testosterone levels in male homosexuals. In spite of these other studies,
textbooks alluded to the supposed "fact of hormonal differences for three
"eca"es. But this "scientific belief was false.
Gay /rains: Byne & Parsons observed that the LeVay study was based upon a
supposed functional correlation between the SDN-POA brain center in male rats
and a brain center called INAH3 in humans. LeVay reasoned that since the
SDN-POA had an effect on male rat crouching/mounting behavior, then a
corresponding difference in the same part of the brain would make men
homosexual. He assumed that the INAH3 in men was essentially the same as
the SDN-POA in rats. But, as it turns out, the "effective lesion site within the
anterior hypothalamus for disrupting mounting behavior [in male rats] lies
16
abo!e< not within, the SDN-POA. Thus, the SDN-POA "oes not play a critical
role in male-typical behavior in male rats, and the correlation between its size
and mounting frequencies clearly does not reflect a causal relationship. LeVay
compared human brains with rat brains #ut &ailed to locate the analogous
region. Instead of the "bullseye that Isay and the mass media celebrated, it
was an embarrassing miss!
LeVays study also had numerous technical problems. For instance, his samples
included 19 brains of gays who died of AIDS and 16 brains from men whose
sexual orientation was unknown. He assumed the 16 were heterosexual, even
though 5 had died of AIDS. More importantly, although LeVay argued that a
small INAH3 "caused homosexuality, some of the gays had an INAH3 that was
larger than the average size of the INAH3 of the "heterosexuals, and some of
the "heterosexuals had an INAH3 that was smaller than those of gays. So
some of his gays "should have been heterosexual and vice-versa.
Gay Twins: Bailey & Pillard reported that 52% of identical twins of
homosexuals were also homosexual. But after the media finished hyping Bailey
& Pillards results, King & McDonald
(8)
published a new `sexual orientation of
twins study, which found concordance rates for homosexuality of 25% in
identical twins. Thats half the 52% reported by Bailey & Pillard. Drs. Byne &
Parsons noted the large proportions of identical twins in both studies "who
were discordant for homosexuality despite sharing not only their genes but
also their prenatal and familial environments. [which] underscores our
ignorance of the factors that are involved, and the manner in which they
interact, in the emergence of sexual orientation.
The evidence supporting the "born that way claim of Isay and other gay
activists is tenuous. It has been uncritically accepted and hyped by the media
and some less-than-careful researchers. But it hasnt been replicated by others
and is riddled with technical problems.
On the other side is a body of scientific evidence that suggests that
homosexuality is a"o(te" by (eo(le who are confuse"< sexually
a"!enturous an"For rebellious. This evidence suggests that sexual
orientation is flexible< not immutable. And the evidence comes from the
largest studies on the subject, conducted by researchers on both sides of the
gay rights debate.
Sexual 0reference Shifts
That sexual desire and behavior are flexible was demonstrated by the Kinsey
Institute in 1970. It reported
(9)
that D8 of 9D1 gays and 93% of 293
lesbians had changed or shifted either their sexual feelings or behaviors after
age 12.58% of the gays and 77% of the lesbians reported a second shift in
sexual orientation; 31% of the gays and 49% of the lesbians reported a third
shift; and 13% of the gays and 30% of the lesbians reported even a &ourth
shift in sexual orientation before "settling into adult homosexuality. The shifts
reported by these subjects varied in degree, but some were quite dramatic -
about a quarter of gays and a third of lesbians once had heterosexual desires
and 5% of heterosexual men and 3% of heterosexual women once had
17
substantial homosexual desires. Heterosexuals in the study were much less
likely to report shifts in their orientation. Even so, 29% of 337 heterosexual
men and 14% of 140 heterosexual women reported at least one shift; while
4% of the men and 1% of the women reported at least three shifts. Immutable
things like eye color or skin color dont change once, much less three or four
times!
Unlike biological changes, the shifts in sexual orientation began at age 18 or
later for half of both gays and lesbians. Sexual changes, five or more years
after puberty, are e(ceptionally late and without biological precedent in
development. But changes in tastes (e.g., food or entertainment) often take
place around age 18.
$ther '!i"ence
The same Kinsey study also produced other evidence that can not be explained
in terms of biological determinism, but would readily support the idea that
choice is involved in sexual orientation and behavior:
74% of their gays admitted to having been sexually aroused by a female
and 80% of lesbians said that they had been sexually aroused by a male;
19% of their gays and 38% of lesbians had been heterosexually married;
20% of gays, 5% of heterosexual men, 7% of lesbians and no
heterosexual women had had sex with animals.
Consistent with these results, the Family ?esearch 3nstitute GF?3H
10

conducted a nationwide random survey of 4,340 adults drawn from 5 U.S.
cities in 1983 and found:
82% of those currently lesbian and 66% of those currently gay said that
they had been in lo!e with someone of the o((osite sex;
88% of lesbians and 73% of gays ha" been sexually arouse" by
someone of the o((osite sex;
67% of lesbians and 54% of gays reported current sexual attraction
to the o((osite sex;
85% of lesbians and 54% of gays, as a"ults, had sexual relations with
someone of the o((osite sex;
32% of gays and 47% of lesbians had been heterosexually marrie";
and
17% of gays, 3% of heterosexual men, 10% of lesbians and 1% of
heterosexual women reported sex with animals.
These are the kinds of sexual choices one would expect from the sexually
adventurous or confused. Unless Dr. Isay and his supporters are willing to
believe that people are "born to fall in love, get married or to have sex with
animals, some measure of choice, rather than biological inevitability, must
have been involved.
The ability to change explains the FRI findings that:
18
Overall, 7.8% of women and 12% of men claimed to have been
homosexually aroused at some point in their life. Yet 59% of the once
homosexually aroused women and 51% of the once homosexually
aroused men were currently heterosexual;
5.1% of the women and 9.4% of the men admitted to at least one
homosexual partner. Of these, only 58% of the women and 61% of the
men were currently gay;
4.1% of women and 5.8% of men reported that they had, at least once,
been "in homosexual love. Yet only 66% of those who had fallen in love
with a member of the same sex were currently gay; and
almost a third of those who admitted to homosexual relations in
adulthood were now heterosexual.
0eo(le 5an 5hange
Where is the "biological inevitability or "immutability in these findings? The
evidence suggests that people can modify their sexual tastes. The FRI survey
in Dallas,
(11)
similar to the Kinsey survey in San Francisco, found that 1% of
heterosexual females and 3% of heterosexual males at one time considered
themselves homosexual (i.e., were ex-gay when interviewed).
And a survey of 50 wives who had no homosexual experiences or interests up
to age 30, but who participated in homosexual sex acts as part of "swinging
(where married people swap partners) reported that all of these women
eventually considered themselves to be bisexual.
(12)

These are among the findings that seriously challenge the claim that sexual
orientation is predetermined before or after birth, or even that it is
permanently fixed in adulthood.
%hat is at Sta2e&
If sexual orientation is actually a matter of choice like drug use, we can expect
that more of our youth will try homosexuality the more that it is tolerated and
encouraged. Along these lines, Dr. Christopher Hewitts
(13)
analysis of the
frequency of homosexuality in various societies is summarized in the Table:
societies that acce(t homosexuality ha!e more of it an" those that
"isa((ro!e of an" (unish it ha!e consi"erably less of it
With the above in mind, consider our societys future in light of D. Minkowitzs
December 29, 1992 editorial in the national gay magazine, The Advocate: "I
am increasingly impatient with the old chestnut that our movement for public
acceptance has not increased and will not increase the number of gay men and
lesbians in existence. `There are more o& us than there used to be,` historian
John DElmilio has written. Firmly believing this, I wanted to. argue the
morality of teaching kids that gay is OK even if it means that some will join our
ranks..
Indeed. Youth are often attracted to excitement and rebellion. The gay
movement is growing.
Minkowitz also argued that the `born gay claim is nothing more than a
19
smokescreen: "most of the line about homosex[uality] being ones nature, not
a choice, was articulated as a response to brutal repression.. `We didnt
choose this, so dont punish us for it! One hundred years later, its time for us
to abandon this defensive posture and walk upright on the earth. Maybe you
didnt choose to be gay - thats fine. But I did.
When Kinsey
(14)
asked 1700 homosexuals in the 1940s how they "got that
way, only 9% claimed that they were "born gay. In 1970, a similar
percentage was recorded for 979 gays in San Francisco.
(9)
But in 1983, after
the gay rights movement started to politicize the issue of homosexual origins,
35% of a random sample of 147 gays
(10)
said that they were "born that way.
Perhaps those who commit adultery, molest children or practice homosexuality
are "born with unusual biological influences. But there is no hard evidence of
this. In fact, it appears that participation in these activities, like drug abuse or
any other chosen behavior, is a combination of will and opportunity. No matter
how such desires come about, members of society are rightly expected to
control their behavior and not endanger others.
?eferences
1. Schwartz MF & Masters WH The Masters and Johnson treatment program for
dissatisfied homosexual men. Amer J Psychiatry 1984:141;173-81.
2.1910 letter to Sandor Ferenczi.
3. Wall Street Journal 4/21/93 A6.
4. Homosexuality and psychiatry, Psychiatric News, Feb. 7,1992, p.3.
5. LeVay S A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and
homosexual men. Science 1991;253:1034-1037.
6.Bailey JM & Pillard RCA genetic study of mate sexual orientation. Arch Gen
Psychiatry 1991;48: 1089-1996.
7. Human sexual orientation: the biologic theories reappraised. Arch Gen
Psychiatry 1993:50;228-239.
8. King M & McDonald E Homosexuals who are twins: a study of 46 probands.
Brit J Psychiatry 1992,160:407-419.
9. Belt AP & Weinberg MS Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men
and Women. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1978. /& Hammersmith SK Sexual
Preference: Statistical Appendix. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981.
10. Cameron P, Cameron K. & Proctor K Effect of homosexuality upon public
health and social order. Psychol Rpts, 1989,61,1167-79.
11. Cameron P, Cameron K. & Proctor K. Homosexuals in the Armed Forces,
Psychol Repts, 1988,62,211-219.
12. Dixon, JK. The commencement of bisexual activity in swinging married
women overage thirty. J Sex Research, 1984,20,71-98.
13.1993, after Broude GJ & Greene SJ Cross cultural codes on twenty sexual
attitudes and practices. Ethnology 1976;15;409-430.
14. Gebhard P & Johnson AB The Kinsey data Philadelphia: Saunders, 1979.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2009/02/born-what-way/
20
#iolence an" Homosexuality
/y 0aul 5ameron< 0h. ..
.r. 5ameron is Chariman of the F amily ? esearch 3 nstitute of Colorado
Springs, Colorado USA. Click here for more information about this
organization. You may contact him at: Family Research Institute, PO Box
62640, Colorado Springs, CO 80962 USA. Phone number: (303) 681-
3113.
In 1992 two Jeffersonville, Indiana lesbians, aged 17 and 16,
abducted a 12-year-old girl whom they accused of trying to
"steal a girlfriend. The little girl was pushed into the trunk of
a car, stabbed repeatedly, and beaten with a heavy metal bar.
While still struggling, they poured gasoline on her and set her
ablaze. Later that year a Fort Lauderdale, Florida 14-year-old
was convicted of first-degree murder for helping to kill his 40-
year-old father. The father "was stabbed 45 times and beaten
so badly with an iron skillet that the skillet shattered. The
boy confessed that he helped his fathers former homosexual
lover and roommate kill him so he and the 31-year-old "could
live together.
These murders fit traditional psychiatric opinion: excessive
violence is naturally associated with other forms of social
pathology. From this perspective, those who rebel against
societys norms - homosexuals, prostitutes, alcoholics, etc. - are more apt to
be violent also. Gay leaders reply that they are not pathological, rebellious, or
sexually deviant. They contend that gays are gentle, loving people and that the
violence they experience proves that they need special `hate crime laws to
protect them from non-homosexual `gay bashers.
Whos right? Does the excess of violence naturally well up from within a
pathological gay subculture or do outsiders direct it toward homosexuals?
21
Keeping in mind that only about 2%-3% of adults are homosexual or
bisexual,
(1)
lets examine varieties of violence.
Murder and Mass Murder
Although the total number of victims dispatched by a given killer is often in
doubt, (e.g., homosexual Henry Lucas claimed that he killed 350), it appears
that the modern world record for serial killing is held by a Russian homosexual,
Andrei Chikatilo, who was convicted in 1992 of raping, murdering and eating
parts of at least 21 boys, 17 women and 14 girls. The pathology of eating ones
sexual victims also characterized Milwaukees Jeffrey Dahmer in 1992. He not
only killed 17 young men and boys, but cooked and ate their body parts.
The to( six 6.S. male serial 2illers were all gay:
- Donald Harvey claimed 37 victims in Kentucky;
- John Wayne Gacy raped and killed 33 boys in Chicago, burying them under
his house and in his yard;
- Patrick Kearney accounted for 32, cutting his victims into small pieces after
sex and leaving them in trash bags along the Los Angeles freeways;
- Bruce Davis molested and killed 27 young men and boys in Illinois;
- A gay sex-murder-torture ring (Corll-Henley-Brooks) sent 27 Texas men and
boys to their grave; and
- Juan Corona was convicted of murdering 25 migrant workers (he "made love
with their corpses).
Lesbian Aileen Wuornos laid claim in 1992 to "worst female killer with at least
7 middle-aged male victims. She singlehandedly topped the lesbian nurse team
of Catherine Wood and Gwen Graham, who had killed 6 convalescent patients
in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
The association between serial murder and homosexuality isnt recent. Two
gays compete for the spot of "worlds worst murderer. During the Nazi reign of
terror, Auschwitz executioner Ludwig Tiene strangled, crushed, and gnawed
boys and young men to death while he raped them. Though his grand total is
uncertain, he often murdered as many as 100 a day. Gilles de Rais (Bluebeard)
brutally destroyed the lives of 800 boys. Each lad was lured to his home,
bathed and fed. Just as the poor boy thought "this is my lucky day, he was
raped, then killed by being ripped or cut apart and either burned or eaten.
A study of 518 sexually-tinged mass murders in the U.S. from 1966 to 1983
determined that 350 (68%) of the victims were killed by those who practiced
homosexuality and that 19 (44%) of the 43 murderers were bisexuals or
homosexuals.
(2)
22
Though probably less than a majority of mass murderers are homosexual,
given that no more than 3% of the populace is gay, homosexual murderers
show up much more frequently than one would expect (even Richard Speck
engaged in homosexuality). Along with serial murder, there appears to be a
connection between homosexuality and murder. Evidence from before the gay
rights movement is limited. Of 444 homicides in one jurisdiction from 1955-
1973, investigators noted 5 clear "sexual motivation murders. Three of the 5
involved homosexuality and 2 involved heterosexuality.
(3)
Probing more deeply into the connection between murder and homosexuality,
Jim Warren, who worked as a counselor at the Washington State Corrections
Center, did the intake interview for almost all the younger murderers (i.e.,
under age 36) in the state of Washington from 1971-82 (during the growth of
the gay rights movement). He was "probably the only one who examined the
entirety of each of their case files. Warren testified
(4)
that he was struck with
how frequently homosexuality turned up in the cases.
Starting with a trickle of 2 or 3 murders/year in 1972 until dozens/year by the
1980s, he noted a recurrent pattern: Although the motive listed in the report
was often robbery or theft, "about 50% of the time it was also associated with
homosexuality. Typically, a homosexual would meet someone at a bar or park
and invite him to his home. Before the morning, an argument would ensue and
he or his visitor would be dead.
Violent Sexual Practices
A substantial minority of homosexuals (between 22%
(5)
to 37%
(6,7)
) indulge in
painful or violent sex (e.g., bondage and discipline [B/D], where the partner is
physically restrained and mildly tortured, or sadomasochism [S/M], where
partners are tortured or hurt during sex). Even in the 1940s, psychiatrist David
Abrahamsen (

noted, "It is well known that homosexual inclinations may be
accompanied by sadistic or masochistic tendencies.. These perversions play a
great part in many sexual offenses and in many cases of murder. In a national
survey of random samples of homosexuals and heterosexuals, (
7)
32% of those
males who called themselves homosexual or bisexual versus 5% of
heterosexual males reported having engaged in sadomasochism; 17% of
lesbians versus 4% of heterosexual women also admitted to S/M. Likewise,
gays and lesbians were about four times more apt to engage in bondage than
were heterosexuals.
- Homosexual books and magazines celebrate the "fun of violent sex. For
instance, a Denver gay columnist (the "leathersex fairy), told his readers how
to strangle and flog ones partner during sex. He also extolled the practice of
"hanging from a tree by meat hooks through the pectoral muscles and
described "guys who like to have burning cigars, cigarettes, or matches held
near or pressed into their skin.
(9)
Likewise, national and international gay tour
books matter-of-factly list places where sadomasochistic sex can be obtained.
(
10)

- In 1993, London gays raised 100,000 to appeal a conviction in which the
23
judge ruled that "sex is no excuse for violence.. Pleasure derived from the
infliction of pain is an evil thing. The crime? "Nailing a foreskin and scrotum to
a board and "pouring hot wax in a urethra.
(11)
- The 1980 CBS-TV documentary, Gay Power2 Gay Politics reported that about
10% of the accidental deaths among young men in San Francisco resulted
from sadomasochistic sex gone awry.
Deliberately Infecting Others During Sex
Gay activists often argue that what consenting adults do in private is nobody
elses business. However, gays have sex with so many different partners
(5,6,7)

that they increase their risk of getting or transmitting sexually transmitted
diseases (STDs). Indeed, homosexuals are considerably more apt to get STDs
than are non-homosexuals.
(12)

Most who get an STD decide that they will do all in their power not to infect
others. But others - an important minority - decide that they will make their
partners suffer as much as they have. As Mirko Grmek (
13)
noted "every
historian of disease knows that such an attitude of vengeance, or at least of
recklessness, had contributed in other times to the spread of tuberculosis and
syphilis. Limited evidence suggests that, compared to heterosexuals,
homosexuals are more apt to harm their sexual partners deliberately. The only
comparative study
(5,9)
on this issue found that about 1% of male and female
heterosexuals compared to 7% of gays and 3% of lesbians admitted to
deliberately passing on STDs that they had acquired.
When the disease is AIDS, the personal and social costs of deliberate infection
are exceptionally high. Several examples of homosexuals who were deliberate
spreaders of AIDS have been documented,
(13)
but the most notorious is that of
"patient zero, the Canadian flight attendant who, until his death at age 32,
shared his body and infection with 250 men every year. From the late 1970s
through the early 1980s he was personally responsible for at least 40 of the
first 248 American cases of AIDS and told public health officials in San
Francisco it "was nobody elses business but his own.
There also appears to be a
connection between the practice of
violent sex and ones willingness to
deliberately infect someone else.
Dividing our random national sample
(
7,12)
into those with no interest in
homosexual activity (non-H) and
those with at least some homosexual
interest (H) - and combining males
and females - we found that 4.0% of
the non-Hs vs 21.8% of those with
at least some homosexual interest
said that they had participated in
sadomasochism (S/M); 7.8% of the
24
non-Hs admitted to bondage (B/D) vs 27.5% of the Hs. Further, those who had
engaged in violent sex of either type were twice as likely to have deliberately
attempted to infect a partner than those without such violent experience (see
Figure).
In 1992 three London STD clinics reported that almost half of their homosexual
patients who :new they were infected with HIV had then gotten rectal
gonorrhoea.
(14)
These gays were not permitting their deadly infection to spoil
their sexual fun. By 1993 over 100,000 U.S. gays had died of AIDS and tens of
thousands had died of hepatitis B. Most of these had been infected, many
deliberately or carelessly, by other homosexuals.
Homosexual Rape
The National Crime Survey
(15)
reported that about 1 of every 10,000 males
over the age of 11 is raped each year (vs 13 of every 10,000 females) - that
is, about 7% of rapes are homosexual. In two jurisdictions, Columbia, SC (
16)

and Memphis, TN,
(17)
males accounted for 5.7% of the victims of rape reported
to authorities - in only one instance was the assailant a woman.
Along with the rise of the gay rights movement, homosexual rape of men
appears to have increased in the past few decades.
(5,15,16)
Homosexual rape is
twice as common in urban areas where gays congregate than in suburban or
rural areas.
(15)
It may also be more common where the gay subculture is
accepted: a 1970 study in San Francisco found that 9% of male heterosexuals
and 24% of gays; 2% of female heterosexuals and 11% of lesbians reported
having been homosexually raped. (
18)
In our 1983 national urban survey (which
did not include San Francisco), 1.3% of heterosexual men vs 12.5% of gay
men and 0.6% of heterosexual women vs 8.6% of lesbians reported having
been homosexually raped. (
5,10)

More alarmingly, between 15% to 40% of statutory rape (child molestation)
involves homosexuality.
(19)
In one study, 25% of white gays (
18)
admitted to
sex with boys 16 or younger when they were aged 21 or older.
Rape at any age is violent and emotionally devastating. But it can also edge
victims toward homosexuality. In our national study, almost half the lesbians
said they had been heterosexually raped - perhaps gravitating to
homosexuality because of the experience. Males often react differently. Thus
the Masters and Johnson Institute reported that a "25-year-old man had had
his first sexual experience when he was 13 years old. It was arranged by his
lesbian mother with an older gay man. After that episode, his imagery and
interpersonal sexual experience were exclusively homosexual.
(20)
Likewise,
"Mr. K, age 22, felt that his change in sexual preference was related to his
having been raped by two men.. After the assault he experienced sexual
identity confusion and began engaging voluntarily in homosexual activity.
When he was seen for evaluation he labeled himself as openly homosexual.
(21)
25
Impact of Violence On The Homosexual Lifespan
A study of 6,714 obituaries
(22)
in gay newspapers across the U.S. revealed that
3% of 6,574 gays and 20% of 140 lesbians had died violently:
- 1.4% of gays and 7% of lesbians were murdered (rates over a hundred times
those of non-gays);
- 0.6% of gays and 5.7% of lesbians committed suicide (rates dozens of times
those of non-gays); and
- 0.6% of gays and 4.3% of lesbians died in motor vehicle accidents (over 17
times the rate of non-gays)
These events, coupled with various STDs (especially AIDS) gotten from other
gays, resulted in a median age of death of 40 among gays and a median age of
death of 45 among lesbians. In the same study, comparison samples of
married men had a median age of death of 75 and married women a median
age of death of 79. For divorced or single persons the median age of death was
57 for men and 71 for women.
Conclusion
The `hate crimes gays complain about are infrequent and seldom involve more
than name-calling or snide remarks. The FBI reported 431 hate crimes against
homosexuals for the U.S. in all of 1991. Only one was "confirmed for
Washington, D.C. - yet D.C. gay activists claimed 397 incidents! When
pressed, they admitted that at least 366 of these "crimes consisted of "verbal
harassment. (
23)

In line with traditional psychiatric opinion, violence goes hand-in-hand with the
`gay lifestyle. Almost all the exposure by homosexuals to violence and disease
is encountered in the gay subculture. Most of the murderers in the lifespan
study whose sexual orientation could be determined were also homosexual.
While violence toward homosexuals is deplorable, most violence involving gays
is self-induced (and the gay subculture may export more violence than it
absorbs from without).
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2009/02/violence-and-homosexuality/
5hil" Molestation an" Homosexuality
/y 0aul 5ameron< 0h. ..
.r. 5ameron is Chariman of the F amily ? esearch 3 nstitute of Colorado
Springs, Colorado USA. Click here for more information about this
organization. You may contact him at: Family Research Institute, PO Box
62640, Colorado Springs, CO 80962 USA. Phone number: (303) 681-
3113.
26
Ann Landers
(1)
says the statement "Homosexuals are more
inclined to molest children sexually than heterosexuals is
false. The American Psychological Association has sponsored
a work that asserts: "Recognized researchers in the field on
child abuse,. almost unanimously concur that homosexual
people are actually less likely to approach children sexually.

(2)
Why is it, then, that we read about sex between boys and
men in every newspaper? Does it merely reflect sensationalist
journalism? We know that heterosexual molestation also
occurs. But since there are so many more heterosexuals than
homosexuals, which kind of child molestation - homosexual
or heterosexual - is proportionately more common?
The Scientific '!i"ence
Three kinds of scientific evidence point to the proportion of homosexual
molestation: 1) survey reports of molestation in the general population, 2)
surveys of those caught and convicted of molestation, and 3) what
homosexuals themselves have reported. These three lines of evidence suggest
that the 1%-to-3% of adults who practice homosexuality
(3)
account for
between a fifth and a third of all child molestation.
?e(orts of Molestation by the General 0o(ulation
In 1983, a probability survey of the sexual experiences of 4,340 adults in 5
U.S. cities found that about 3% of men and 7% of women reported sexual
involvement with a man before the age of 13
4
(i.e., 30% was homosexual).
In 1983- (4), a random survey of 3,132 adults in Los Angeles found that 3.8%
of men and 6.8% of women said that they had been sexually assaulted in
childhood. Since 93% of the assailants were male, and only 1% of girls had
been assaulted by females, about 35% of the assaults were homosexual.
(5)
The Los Angeles Times
(6)
surveyed 2,628 adults across the U.S. in 1985. 27%
of the women and 16% of the men claimed to have been sexually molested.
Since 7% of the molestations of girls and 93% of the molestations of boys
were by adults of the same sex, about 4 of every 10 molestations in this
survey were homosexual.
In a random survey of British 15-to-19 yr olds, 35% of the boys and 9% of the
girls claimed to have been approached for sex by adult homosexuals and 2%
of the boys and 1% of the girls admitted to succumbing.
(7)
In science, a review of the professional literature published in a refereed
scientific journal is considered to be an accurate summary of the current state
of knowledge. The latest such review was published in 1985.
(8)
It concluded
that homosexual acts were involved in 25% to 40% of the cases of child
molestation recorded in the scientific and forensic literature.
27
Sur!eys of Those 5on!icte"
Drs Freund and Heasman
(9)
of the Clarke Institute of Psychiatry in Toronto
reviewed two sizeable studies and calculated that 34% and 32% of the
offenders against children were homosexual. In cases they had personally
handled, homosexuals accounted for 36% of their 457 pedophiles.
Dr. Adrian Copeland, a psychiatrist who works with sexual offenders at the
Peters Institute in Philadelphia, said (
10)
that, from his experience, pedophiles
tend to be homosexual and "40% to 45% of child molesters have had
"significant homosexual experiences.
Dr. C. H. McGaghy
(11)
estimated that "homosexual offenders probably
constitute about half of molesters who work with children. Other studies are
similar:
- Of the approximately 100 child molesters in 1991 at the Massachusetts
Treatment Center for Sexually Dangerous Persons, a third were heterosexual, a
third bisexual and a third homosexual in orientation.
(12)

- A state-wide survey of 161 Vermont adolescents who committed sex offenses
in 1984 found that 35 (22%) were homosexual. (
13)

- Of the 91 molesters of non-related children at Canadas Kingston Sexual
Behaviour Clinic from 1978-1984, 38 (42%) engaged in homosexuality.
(14)

- Of 52 child molesters in Ottawa from 1983 to 1985, 31 (60%) were
homosexual. (
15
)
- In England for 1973, 802 persons (8 females) were convicted of indecent
assault on a male, and 3,006 (6 of them female) were convicted of indecent
assault on a female (i.e., 21% were homosexual). 88% of male and about 70%
of female victims were under age sixteen.
(16)
Because of this pattern, Judge J. T. Rees concluded that "the male homosexual
naturally seeks the company of the male adolescent, or of the young male
adult, in preference to that of the fully-grown man. [In 1947] 986 persons
were convicted of homosexual and unnatural offences. Of those, 257 were
indictable offences involving 402 male victims.. The great majority of [whom]
. were under the age of 16. Only 11%. were over 21.
"[T]he problem of male homosexuality is in essence the problem of the
corruption of youth by itself [i.e., by other boys] and by its elders. [And
thereby]. the creation. of new addicts ready to corrupt a still further
generation of young men and boys in the future.
(17)
%hat Homosexuals A"mit
The 1948 Kinsey survey found that 37% of the gays and 2% of the lesbians
admitted to sexual relations with under-17-yr-olds, and 28% of the gays and
28
1% of the lesbians admitted to sexual relations with under-16-yr-olds while
they themselves were aged 18 or older.
(18)

In 1970 the Kinsey Institute interviewed 565 white gays in San Francisco: 25%
of them admitted to having had sex with boys aged 16 or younger while they
themselves were at least 21.
(19)

In The Gay Report, 23% of the gays and 6% of the lesbians admitted to sexual
interaction with youth less than 16 years of age.
(20)
In France, 129 convicted gays (
21)
(average age 34 years) said they had had
sexual contact with a total of 11,007 boys (an average of 85 different boys per
man). Abel et al reported similarly that men who molested girls outside their
family had averaged 20 victims each; those who molested boys averaged 150
victims each. (
22)

Summary
About a third of the reports of molestation by the populace have involved
homosexuality. Likewise, between a fifth and a third of those who have been
caught and/or convicted practiced homosexuality. Finally, a fifth to a third of
surveyed gays admitted to child molestation. All-in-all, a rather consistent
story.
Teacher-0u(il Sexual 3nteraction
Nowadays parents are labeled bigots for fearing that homosexual teachers
might molest their children. But if homosexuals are more apt to molest
children and are in a positon to take advantage of them, this fear makes
sense. Indeed, accounts of disproportionate homosexual teacher molestation
appear throughout the scientific literature.
The original U.S. Kinsey study reported
that 4% of the non-criminal white gays
and 7% of the non-criminal white
lesbians reported that they had their first
homosexual experience with a `teacher or
other caretaker. None of the
heterosexuals were recorded as having a
teacher as their first sex partner.
(18)

In England, Schofield reported that at
least 2 of his 150 homosexuals had their
first homosexual experience with a teacher and an additional 2 reported that
their first homosexual contact with an adult was with a teacher. One of the 50
men in his comparison group had also been seduced by a homosexual teacher,
while none of the men interviewed claimed involvement with a heterosexual
teacher.
(23)
29
In the 1978 McCalls magazine study
of 1,400 principals,
(24)
7% reported
complaints about homosexual
contact between teachers and pupils
and 13% reported complaints about
heterosexual contact between
teachers and pupils (i.e., 35% of
complaints were homosexual). 2%
"knew of instances in which teachers
discussed their homosexuality in
class.
Of 400 consecutive Australian
(25)
cases of molestation, 7 boys and 4
girls were assaulted by male teachers. Thus 64% of those assaults were
homosexual.
In 1987, Dr. Stephen Rubin, associate professor of psychology at Whitman
College, conducted a 10 state survey
(26)
and found 199 sexual abuse cases
involving teachers. 122 male teachers had abused female pupils and 14 female
teachers had abused male students. In 59 cases, however, male teachers had
abused male pupils and in 4 cases female teachers had abused female
students (overall 32% were homosexual).
A 1983 survey asked 4,340 adults
to report on any sexual advances
and any physical sexual contact by
elementary and secondary
teachers (4% of those who were
teachers in the survey claimed to
be bisexual or homosexual).
4
29%
of the advances by elementary and
16% of the advances by secondary
school teachers were homosexual.
In addition, 1 of 4 (25%) reports of
actual sexual contact with an elementary school teacher were homosexual. In
high school, 8 (22%) of 37 contacts between teacher and pupil were
homosexual. 18% reported having had a homosexual teacher (8% of those
over the age of 55 vs 25% of those under 26). Of those reporting a
homosexual teacher, 6% said that the teacher influenced them to try
homosexuality and 13% of the men and 4% of the women said that the
teacher made sexual advances toward them.
Summary
Whether examining surveys of the general populace or counts of those caught,
homosexual teachers are disproportionately apt to become sexually involved
with children.
30
0ro(ortionality: The Iey
Study after nationwide study (
3)
has yielded estimates of male homosexuality
that range between 1% and 3%. The proportion of lesbians in these studies is
almost always lower, usually about half that of gays. So, overall, perhaps 2%
of adults regularly indulge in homosexuality. Yet they account for between 20%
to 40% of all molestations of children.
Child molestation is not to be taken lightly. Officials at a facility which serves
about 1,500 runaway youngsters each year estimate that about half of the
boys have been homosexually abused and 90% of the girls heterosexually
assaulted.
(27)
Investigation of those suffering severe chronic mental illness
implicates child molestation as a primary cause (45% of Bigras et als
(28)

patients were homosexually abused).
3f )8 of the (o(ulation is res(onsible for )>8 to 1>8 of something
as socially an" (ersonally troubling as chil" molestation< something
must be "es(erately wrong with that )8. Not every homosexual is a child
molester. But enough gays do molest children so that the risk of a homosexual
molesting a child is 10 to 20 times greater than that of a heterosexual.
Goals of the Gay Mo!ement
The gay movement is forthright about seeking to legitimize child-adult
homosexual sex. In 1987, The Journal of Homosexuality - the scholarly organ
of the gay rights movement - published "Pedophilia and the Gay Movement.

(29)
Author Theo Sandfort detailed homosexual efforts to end "oppression
towards pedophilia. In 1980 the largest Dutch gay organization (the COC)
"adopted the position that the liberation of pedophilia must be viewed as a gay
issue. [and that] ages of consent should therefore be abolished. by
acknowledging the affinity between homosexuality and pedophilia, the COC has
quite possibly made it easier for homosexual adults to become more sensitive
to erotic desires of younger members of their sex, thereby broadening gay
identity.
In 1990 COC achieved a significant victory: lowering of the age of consent for
homosexual sex in Holland to 12 (unless the parents object, in which case it
goes up to 15).
(30)
In the U.S. and Canada, the North American Man-Boy Love
Association marches proudly in many gay pride parades with the stated goal of
removing the barriers to man-boy sex. Note the phrases "oppression towards
pedophilia and "liberation of pedophilia. It is clear that those who advocate
the legalization of sex between adults and children intend to argue that such
conduct is a "civil right, deserving of the same legal protections afforded to
other minorities. A large proportion of Americans regard that argument as a
mere pretext to giving "sexual predators free reign to take advantage of
vulnerable children.
5onclusion
Not only is the gay rights movement upfront in its desire to legitimize sex with
31
children, but whether indexed by population reports of molestation, pedophile
convictions, or teacher-pupil assaults, there is a strong, disproportionate
association between child molestation and homosexuality. Ann Landers claim
that homosexuals molest children at no higher a rate than heterosexuals do is
untrue. The assertion by gay leaders and the American Psychological
Association that a homosexual is less likely than a heterosexual to molest
children is patently false.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2009/02/child-molestation-and-
homosexuality-2/
%hat 5auses Homosexual .esire an" 5an 3t /e 5hange"&
By Paul Cameron, Ph.D.
Most of us fail to understand why anyone would want to engage in homosexual
activity. To the average person, the very idea is either puzzling or repugnant.
Indeed, a recent survey [1] indicated that only 14% of men and 10% of
women imagined that such behavior could hold any "possibility of enjoyment.
The peculiar nature of homosexual desire has led some people to conclude that
this urge must be innate: that a certain number of people are "born that way,
that sexual preferences cannot be changed or even ended. What does the best
research really indicate? Are homosexual proclivities natural or irresistible?
At least three answers seem possible. The first, the answer of tradition, is as
follows: homosexual behavior is a bad habit that people fall into because they
are sexually permissive and experimental. This view holds that homosexuals
choose their lifestyle as the result of self-indulgence and an unwillingness to
play by society rules. The second position is held by a number of
psychoanalysts (e.g., Bieber, Socarides). According to them, homosexual
behavior is a mental illness, symptomatic of arrested development. They
believe that homosexuals have unnatural or perverse desires as a consequence
of poor familial relations in childhood or some other trauma. The third view is
"biological and holds that such desires are genetic or hormonal in origin, and
that there is no choice involved and no "childhood trauma necessary.
Which of these views is most consistent with the facts? Which tells us the most
about homosexual behavior and its origins? The answer seems to be that
homosexual behavior is learned. The following se!en lines of evidence support
such a conclusion.
H Co researcher has foun" (ro!able biological or genitic "ifferences
between heterosexuals an" homosexuals that weren+t cause" by
their beha!ior
Occasionally you may read about a scientific study that suggests that
homosexuality is an inherited tendency, but such studies have usually been
discounted after careful scrutiny or attempts at replication. No one has found a
single heretible genetic, hormonal or physical difference between
32
heterosexuals and homosexuals - at least none that is replicable. [9, 12]
While the absence of such a discovery doesnt prove that inherited sexual
tendencies arent possible, it suggests that none has been found because none
exists.
)H 0eo(le ten" to belie!e that their sexual "esires an" beha!iors are
learne"
Two large studies asked homosexual respondents to explain the origins of their
desires and behaviors - how they "got that way. The first of these studies
was conducted by Kinsey in the 1940s and involved 1700 homosexuals. The
second, in 1970 [4], involved 979 homosexuals. Both were conducted prior to
the period when the "gay rights movement started to politicize the issue of
homosexual origins. Both reported essentially the same findings: homosexuals
overwhelmingly believed their feelings and behavior were the result of social or
environmental influences.
In a 1983 study conducted by the Family Research Institute (FRI) [5] involving
a random sample of 147 homosexuals, 35% said their sexual desires were
hereditary. Interestingly, almost 80% of the 3,400 heterosexuals in the same
study said that their preferences and behavior were learned (see Table 1
below).
Table
?easons For 0referring:
homosexuality G=1>s an" =J>H
early homosexual experience(s) with adults and/or peers - 22%
homosexual friends/ around homosexuals a lot - 16%
poor relationship with mother - 15%
unusual development (was a sissy, artistic, couldnt get along with own
sex, tom-boy, et cetera) - 15%
poor relationship with father - 14%
heterosexual partners unavailable - 12%
social ineptitude - 9%
born that way - 9%
heterosexuality G=D-H
I was around heterosexuals a lot - 39%
society teaches heterosexuality and I responded - 34%
born that way - 22%
my parents, marriage was so good I wanted to have what they had -
21%
I tried it and liked it - 12%
childhood heterosexual experiences with peers; it was the in thing in
my crowd - 9%
33
I was seduced by a heterosexual adult - 5%
While these results arent conclusive, they tell something about the very recent
tendency to believe that homosexual behavior is inherited or biological. From
the 1930s (when Kinsey started collecting data) to the early 1970s, before a
"politically correct answer emerged, only about 10% of homosexuals claimed
they were "born that way. Heterosexuals apparently continue to believe that
their behavior is primarily a result of social conditioning.
-H $l"er homosexuals often a((roach the young
There is evidence that homosexuality, like drug use, is "handed down from
older individuals. The first homosexual encounter is usually initiated by an
older person. In separate studies, 60% [6], 64% [3], and 61% [10] of the
respondents claimed that their first partner was someone older who initiated
the sexual experience.
How this happens is suggested by a nationwide random study from Britain
[17]: 35% of boys and 9% of girls said they were approached for sex by adult
homosexuals. Whether for attention, curiosity, or by force, 2% of the boys and
1% of the girls succumbed. In the U.S. [1], 37% of males and 9% of females
reported having been approached for homosexual sex (65% of those doing the
inviting were older). Likewise, a study of over 400 London teenagers reported
that "for the boys, their first homosexual experience was very likely with
someone older: half the boys first partners were 20 or older; for girls it was 43
percent. [13]
A quarter of homosexuals have admitted to sex with children and underaged
teens [6, 5, 8], suggesting that homosexuality is introduced to youngsters the
same way other behaviors are learned - by experience.
1H 'arly homosexual ex(eriences influence a"ult (atterns of beha!ior
In the 1980s, scholars [12] examined the early Kinsey data to determine
whether or not childhood sexual experiences predicted adult behavior. The
results were significant: Homosexual experience in the early years -
particularly if it was ones first sexual experience - was a strong predictor of
adult homosexual behavior, both for males and females. A similar pattern
appeared in the 1970 Kinsey Institute [4] study: there was a strong
relationship between those whose first experience was homosexual and those
who practiced homosexuality in later life. In the FRI study [5] two-thirds of the
boys whose first experience was homosexual engaged in homosexual behavior
as adults; 95% of those whose first experience was heterosexual were likewise
heterosexual in their adult behavior. A similarly progressive pattern of sexual
behavior was reported for females.
It is remarkable that the three largest empirical studies of the question showed
essentially the same pattern. A childs first sexual experiences were strongly
associated with his or her adult sexual behavior.
34
:H Sexual con"uct is influence" by cultural factors B es(ecially
religious con!ictions
Kinsey reported "less homosexual activity among devout groups whether they
be Protestant, Catholic, or Jewish, and more homosexual activity among
religiously less active groups. [2] The 1983 FRI study found those raised in
irreligious homes to be over 4 times more likely to become homosexual than
those from devout homes. These studies suggest that when people believe
strongly that homosexual behavior is immoral, they are significantly less apt to
be involved in such activity.
Recently, because of the AIDS epidemic, it has been discovered that, relative
to white males, twice as many black males are homosexual [14] and 4 times
as many are bisexual. Perhaps it is related to the fact that 62% of black versus
17% of white children are being raised in fatherless homes. But even the worst
racist wouldnt suggest that it is due to genetic predisposition.
Were homosexual impulses truly inherited, we should be unable to find
differences in homosexual practice due to religious upbringing or racial sub-
culture.
9H Many change their sexual (references
In a large random sample [5], 88% of women currently claiming lesbian
attraction and 73% of men claiming to currently enjoy homosexual sex, said
that they had been sexually aroused by the opposite sex:
85% of these "lesbians and 54% of these "homosexuals reported
sexual relations with someone of the opposite sex in adulthood,
67% of lesbians and 54% of homosexuals reported current sexual
attraction to the opposite sex, and
82% of lesbians and 66% of homosexuals reported having been in love
with a member of the opposite sex.
Homosexuals experiment. They feel some normal impulses. Most have been
sexually aroused by, had sexual relations with, and even fallen in love with
someone of the opposite sex.
Nationwide random samples [11] of 904 men were asked about their sex lives
since age 21, and more specifically, in the last year. As the figure below
reveals, 1.3% reported sex with men in the past year and 5.2% at some time
in adulthood. Less than 1% of men had only had sex with men during their
lives. And 6 of every 7 who had had sex with men, also reported sex with
women.
Its a much different story with inherited characteristics. Race and gender are
not optional lifestyles. They remain immutable. The switching and
experimentation demonstrated in these two studies identifies homosexuality as
a preference, not an inevitability.
35
http://www.biblebelievers.com/CameronGraph3.jpg
JH There are many ex-homosexuals
Many engage in one or two homosexual experiences and never do it again - a
pattern reported for a third of the males with homosexual experience in one
study. [1] And then there are ex-homosexuals - those who have continued in
homosexual liaisons for a number of years and then choose to change not only
their habits, but also the object of their desire. Sometimes this alteration
occurs as the result of psychotherapy [10]; in others it is prompted by a
religious or spiritual conversion. [18]
Similar to the kinds of "cures achieved by drug addicts and alcoholics, these
treatments do not always remove homosexual desire or temptation. Whatever
the mechanism, in a 1984 study [5] almost 2% of heterosexuals reported that
at one time they considered themselves to be homosexual. It is clear that a
substantial number of people are reconsidering their sexual preferences at any
given time.
%hat causes homosexual "esire&
If homosexual impulses are not inherited, what kinds of influences "o cause
strong homosexual desires? No one answer is acceptable to all researchers in
the field. Important factors, however, seem to fall into four categories. As with
so many other odd sexual proclivities, males appear especially susceptible:
. Homosexual ex(erience:
any homosexual experience in childhood, especially if it is a first sexual
experience or with an adult
any homosexual contact with an adult, particularly with a relative or
authority figure (in a random survey, 5% of adult homosexuals vs 0.8%
of heterosexuals reported childhood sexual involvement with elementary
or secondary school teachers. [5]
). Family abnormality< inclu"ing the following:
a dominant, possessive, or rejecting mother
an absent, distant, or rejecting father
a parent with homosexual proclivities, particularly one who molests a
child of the same sex
a sibling with homosexual tendencies, particularly one who molests a
brother or sister
the lack of a religious home environment
divorce, which often leads to sexual problems for both the children and
the adults
parents who model unconventional sex roles
condoning homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle - welcoming
homosexuals (e.g., co-workers, friends) into the family circle
36
-. 6nusual sexual ex(erience< (articularly in early chil"hoo":
precocious or excessive masturbation
exposure to pornography in childhood
depersonalized sex (e.g., group sex, sex with animals)
for girls, sexual interaction with adult males
1. 5ultural influences:
a visible and socially approved homosexual sub-culture that invites
curiosity and encourages exploration
pro-homosexual sex education
openly homosexual authority figures, such as teachers (4% of Kinseys
and 4% of FRIs male homosexuals reported that their first homosexual
experience was with a teacher)
societal and legal toleration of homosexual acts
depictions of homosexuality as normal and/or desirable behavior
5an homosexuality be change"&
Certainly. As noted above, many people have turned away from homosexuality
- almost as many people as call themselves "gay.
Clearly the easier problem to eliminate is homosexual behavior. Just as many
heterosexuals control their desires to engage in premarital or extramarital sex,
so some with homosexual desires discipline themselves to abstain from
homosexual contact.
One thing seems to stand out: Associations are all-important. Anyone who
wants to abstain from homosexual behavior should avoid the company of
practicing homosexuals. There are organizations including "ex-gay ministries,
[18] designed to help those who wish to reform their conduct. Psychotherapy
claims about a 30% cure rate, and religious commitment seems to be the most
helpful factor in avoiding homosexual habits.
?eferences:
http://www.biblebelievers.com/CameronRefs3.jpg
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2009/02/what-causes-homosexual-desire-
and-can-it-be-changed/
.oes 3ncest 5ause Homosexuality&
Authors: Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron
Summary: A random sample of 5,182 adults from 6 U.S. metropolitan areas
were questioned about incestuous sexual relationships during childhood. Incest
was disproportionately reported by both male and female bisexuals and
homosexuals. 148 gays (7.7% of the sample) reported 14 (50%) of same-sex,
and 7 (22%) of opposite-sex incestuous experiences, and 20 (69%) of same-
37
sex and 2 (3%) of opposite-sex sexual experiences with other relatives. 88
lesbians (3% of the sample) reported 2 (33%) of same-sex incest and 7 (9%)
of opposite-sex incest and 1 (17%) of same-sex and 10 (13%) of opposite-sex
sexual experiences with other relatives. 12% of 98 male homosexuals vs 0.8%
of 1,224 male heterosexuals with a brother reported brother-brother incest.
These findings are consonant with those of other studies in which
disproportionately more incest by homosexuals was reported. As opposed to an
evolutionary genetic hypothesis, these data support the alternative that
homosexuality may be learned, since homosexuals do not produce children at
sustainable levels and the incidence of homosexuality varies as a function of
various social factors. Incest cannot be excluded as a significant basis for
homosexuality.
References: Psychological Reports, 1995, 76, 611-621.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/does-incest-cause-homosexuality/
Homosexual 0artnershi(s an" Homosexual 4onge!ity: A ?e(lication
Author: Paul Cameron
Summary: Replicating previous findings that homosexuals are
underrepresented after middle age, the 1996 National Household Survey of
Drug Abuse (N = 12,381) and 2000 Kaiser Family Foundation 15-city survey (N
= 405) reported that homosexual men and women are seldom aged 50+ yr.
and that older homosexuals are more apt to have a homosexual partner.
Deaths of 228 homosexuals as recorded in the Washington Blade 1999-2001
were examined. Although more apt to have a partner when older, the median
age of death of 88 homosexually partnered men was 45 yr., while for 118
unpartnered homosexual men it was 46 yr. This is consistent with the
suggestion that homosexual partnering may be an additional hazard to men.
References: Psychological Reports, 2002, 91, 671-678.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/homosexual-partnerships-and-
homosexual-longevity-a-replication/
5hil" Molestation an" Homosexuality
Authors: Paul Cameron, Kay Proctor, William Coburn, Jr., Nels Forde, Helen
Larson, and Kirk Cameron
Summary: How much child molestation occurs in our society and how much is
homosexual? Random-probability samples in Los Angeles, Denver, Omaha,
Louisville, and Washington, DC yielded 4,340 adults who answered an
extensive questionnaire regarding sexual attitudes, activities, and experiences.
Results indicate that perhaps 16% of both boys and girls claim sexual relations
with an adult before the age of 16; if only experiences with men are counted
about 5% of boys and 15% of girls claim sexual involvements. Sexual contacts
with adults before respondents were aged 13 were claimed by 9% of boys and
38
7% of girls; if only experiences with men are counted, only 3% of boys claimed
molestation. Considering only childrens claims of sex with men, about a third
were homosexual molestations. About 1% of females claimed some sexual
involvement with their fathers and a alike number with stepfathers. The latter
were considerably more apt to be considered "serious. About 1% of
elementary pupils and 3% of secondary pupils claimed sexual advances by
teachers and about a third of these advances resulted in physical sexual
contact. Bisexuals or homosexuals claimed much more frequent sexual contact
with caretakers, and homosexuality was disproportionately implicated in sexual
events under caretakers charge. No generational differences in rate of claims
of sexual molestation were found.
References: Psychological Reports, 1986, 58, 327-337.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/child-molestation-and-
homosexuality/
.omestic #iolence Among Homosexual 0artners
Author: Paul Cameron
Summary: Is domestic violence more frequent in homosexual partnerships?
The 1996 National Household Survey of Drug Abuse, based upon a random
sample of 12,381 adults aged 18 to 59 years, estimated that 828,900 men and
828,678 women engaged in homosexuality in the prior 12 months. Random
surveys indicated that at any given time, 29% of homosexual men and 32% of
homosexual women are in same-sex partnerships. The National Criminal
Victimization Survey for 1993 to 1999 reported that 0.24% of married women
and 0.035% of married men were victims of domestic violence annually versus
4.6% of the men and 5.8% of the women reporting same-sex partnerships.
Domestic violence appears to be more frequently reported in same-sex
partnerships than among the married.
References: Psychological Reports, 2003, 93, 410-416.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/domestic-violence-among-
homosexual-partners/
Molestations by Homosexual Foster 0arents: Cews(a(er Accounts !s
$fficial ?ecor"s
Author: Paul Cameron
Summary: To assess whether a systematic tally of newspaper accounts reflects
official foster-parent molestation a review o f6,444 news stories on Lexis-Nexis
Academic Universe from 1989 through 2002 about child molestation yielded 33
stories involving foster parents. Of the 25 foster-parent perpetrators, at least
15 (60%) engaged in homosexuality. In Illinois 1997-2002, 92 (34%) of 270
foster- or adoptive-parent perpetrators who engaged in "substantiated sexual
abuse homosexually abused their charges. These findings suggest that the
39
proportion of homosexual perpetrators in a systematic tally of newspaper
stories is similar to the proportion of homosexual perpetrators in datasets from
large entities and put in question the current policy of utilizing homosexuals as
foster and adoptive parents.
References: Psychological Reports, 2003, 93, 793-802.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/molestations-by-homosexual-
foster-parents-newspaper-accounts-vs-official-records/
5hil"ren of Homosexual 0arents ?e(ort 5hil"hoo" .ifficulties
Authors: Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron
Summary: Referenced as both supporting and weakening the case for
parenting by homosexuals, 57 life-story narratives of children with homosexual
parents published by Rafkin in 1990 and Saffron in 1996 were subjected to
content analysis. Children mentioned one or more problems or concerns in 48
(92%) of 52 families. Of the 213 scored problems, 201 (94%) were attributed
to the homosexual parent(s). Older daughters in at least 8 (27%) of 30
families and older sons in at least 2 (20%) of 10 families described themselves
as homosexual or bisexual. These findings are inconsistent with propositions
that children of homosexuals do not differ appreciably from those who live with
married parents or that children of homosexuals are not more apt to engage in
homosexuality.
References: Psychological Reports, 2002, 90, 71-82.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/children-of-homosexual-parents-
report-childhood-difficulties/
%hat 0ro(ortion of Heterosexuals is 'x-Homosexual&
Author: Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron
Summary: How many heterosexuals are `ex-homosexuals? In 1984, a random
sample of Dallas adults indicated that 8 (2.7%) of 294 currently heterosexual
men and 4 (1.0%) of 393 currently heterosexual women said that they were
ex-homosexual. Of an urban sample from 5 additional cities, 0.5% of current
heterosexuals reported that they had been homosexually `married. It thus
appears that perhaps 1-2% of heterosexuals are ex-homosexuals.
Proportionately more adults than teenagers and more men than women moved
from homosexuality to heterosexuality. Of the 18 who changed, 12 became
heterosexual and 6 bisexual, suggesting that perhaps two-thirds of those who
abandon "being homosexual `become heterosexual and a third `become
bisexual. Because labeling oneself `homosexual is so mutable and value-laden,
the term `omnisexual is suggested.
References: Psychological Reports, 2002, 91, 1087-1097.
40
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/what-proportion-of-heterosexuals-
is-ex-homosexual/
Sexual $rientation an" Sexually Transmitte" .isease
Author: Paul Cameron, Kay Proctor, William Coburn, Jr., and Nels Forde
Summary: 4,340 adults randomly drawn from five metropolitan areas were
questionnaired about their sexual orientation, involvement with unusual sexual
practices (e.g., sadomasochism, bondage & discipline), oral/anal sex, number
of homo- and heterosexual partners, and sexually transmitted disease (STD)
experience. Bi/homosexuals of both genders (4.4% of the sample) reported
higher lifetime rates for most of the STDs and admitted to higher rates of
deliberate infection of others than their heterosexual counterparts. Stepwise
regression analysis indicated that degree of participation in unusual sexual
practices, anal/oral contact, age and number of homosexual partners predicted
STD experience. Younger adults and homosexuals more frequently reported
engaging in both unusual sexual activities, oral/anal contact, and having had
STD experience. Homosexuals appear to contribute no less than 15% of the
nations STDs and probably act as a significant vector in generating additional
fractions to the STD pool.
References: Nebraska Medical Journal, 1985, 70(8), 292-299.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/sexual-orientation-and-sexually-
transmitted-disease/
Homosexual 0arents: Testing @5ommon SenseA B A 4iterature ?e!iew
'm(hasi,ing the Golombo2 an" Tas2er
Author: Paul Cameron
Summary: Counter to claims by the American Psychological Association and
the National Association of Social Workers as well as numerous reviewers that
children raised by homosexuals and married heterosexuals do not differ, the
elaborate social-personality theory called "common sense predicts that
because "like produces like and because psychopathy/sociopathy informs the
major expressions of social deviance including homosexuality, children of
homosexuals will (1) be more frequently subjected to parental instability (of
residence and sexual partners) and (2) have poorer peer and adult
relationships. Also, as is held to be true of their parents, homosexuals children
will be more apt to (3) become homosexual, (4) be unstable (have emotional
problems and difficulty forming lasting bonds) with reduced interest in natility,
and (5) be sexually precocious and promiscuous. Differences between
homosexual and heterosexual comparison groups that bore on "common
sense were considered suggestive "bits of empirical evidence. Differences
that emerged within studies conducted by sympathetic researchers utilizing
volunteer samples were considered bits of adverse evidence. Of 171 bits, 82
adverse and 55 nonadverse bits supported, while 34 bits fell against "common
sense. From this tentative method of counting, support was found for common
41
sense beliefs that children of homosexuals will be more apt to become
homosexual and have poorer peer relationships, while weaker support was
found for some of the other predictions. As assessed in this way, the empirical
evidence in the literature tended to lean against claims of "no differences
between children raised by homosexuals
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/homosexual-parents-testing-
%E2%80%9Ccommon-sense%E2%80%9D-%E2%80%94-a-literature-review-
emphasizing-the-golombok-and-tasker/
Homosexual 0arents: A 5om(arati!e Forensic Stu"y of 5haracter an"
Harms to 5hil"ren
Authors: Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron
Summary: 40 appeals cases of custody disputes drawn systematically from all
cases involving a homosexual parent in the United States were compared to 38
appeals cases involving heterosexual custody disputes drawn randomly from
listings under parental "character and 18 appeals cases drawn randomly from
"general cases in Dicennial Digest from 1966 to 1991. Each case involving
homosexual vs heterosexual claimants was examined for recorded information
about (1) the character of the homosexual parent, the associates of the
homosexual parent, the heterosexual parent, and the associates of the
heterosexual parent, (2) the effects, particularly harms, upon the child(ren),
and (3) psychiatric opinion. 82% of the homosexual vs 18% of the
heterosexual parents and 54% of the homosexuals associates vs 19% of the
heterosexuals associates were recorded as having poor character in cases
involving a homosexual claimant. Of the 66 recorded harms, e.g., molestation,
physical abuse, to the 73 children, homosexual persons accounted for 64
(97%). Of the 32 lesbians, 6 were recorded as having engaged in criminal
activity and 3 of bringing false charges of child sexual abuse against the father.
Psychiatric opinion, however, ran 25 to 12 in favor of custody for the
homosexual parent. In the 56 heterosexual vs heterosexual comparison cases,
38% of the heterosexual parents and 28% of their associates were recorded as
having poor character. Six harms to their 105 children and 3 instances of
criminality but no false charges of sexual abuse were recorded. In the appeals
court literature, homosexual parents were disproportionately of poor character
and disproportionately associated with various harms to their children.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/homosexual-parents-a-
comparative-forensic-study-of-character-and-harms-to-children/
.o Homosexual Teachers Account for About Half of Cews Stories of
Molestations of 0u(ils&
Author: Paul Cameron
Summary: Homosexual interaction was involved in 11 (48%) of 23 and 10
(45%) of 22, that is, about half of two nationwide databases of newspaper
stories about teachers sexual involvement with pupils reported by Cameron
42
and Cameron in 1998. Whether this relationship holds at a local level was
examined by searching all indexed `sex crimes in the Boston Globe from 1991
through 1998 for local stories about sex between pupil and teacher. Of the 21
teachers in 20 stories, 11 (52%) interacted homosexually with pupils. Thus it
appears that nationally and locally, as reported in newspapers, about half of
the molestations by teachers are homosexual.
References: Psychological Reports, 2002, 90, 173-174.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/do-homosexual-teachers-account-
for-about-half-of-news-stories-of-molestations-of-pupils/
Homosexual 0arents
Authors: Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron
Summary: Does the homosexuality of parents affect the sexual orientation or
experiences of their children? Seventeen of 5,182 randomly obtained adults
from six U.S. cities answered questionnaires indicating that they had a
homosexual parent. Parental homosexuality may be related to findings that:
(1) 5 of the 17 reported sexual relations with their parents; (2) a
disproportionate fraction reported sexual relations with other caretakers and
relatives; and (3) a disproportionate fraction: (a) claimed a less than
exclusively heterosexual orientation (47%); (b) indicated gender
dissatisfaction; and (c) reeported that their first sexual experience was
homosexual. Of 1,388 consecutive obituaries in a major homosexual
newspaper, 87 of the gays who died had children and registered a median age
of death of 47 (the 1,267 without children had a median age of death of 38);
10 lesbians did and 24 did not have children. We estimate that less than 1% of
parents are bisexual or homosexual and that < 7% of gays and about a third
of lesbians are parents.
References: Adolescence, 1996, 31(124), 757-776.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/homosexual-parents/
@ .efiniti!eA 6ni!ersity of 5hicago Sex Sur!ey $!erestimate"
0re!alence of Homosexual 3"entity K Thurs"ay< February >)<
)>>9
Authors: Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron
Summary: The 1994 University of Chicago "definitive survey of adults
estimated prevalence of homosexuality among males at 2.8% and among
females at 1.4%. Corrected for the exclusion of those over the age of 59 years,
the estimates should be 2.3% and 1.2%.
References: Psychological Reports, 1998, 82, 861-862.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/%E2%80%9Cdefinitive
43
%E2%80%9D-university-of-chicago-sex-survey-overestimated-prevalence-of-
homosexual-identity-thursday-february-02-2006/
.i" the A0A Misre(resent the Scientific 4iterature to 5ourts in Su((ort
of Homosexual 5usto"y&
Authors: Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron
Summary: In 1994, American Psychological Association amicus briefs informed
two state Supreme Courts that (a) homosexual parents are not more apt to
have homosexual children; (b) lesbians "score significantly higher than
heterosexual parents on a measure of parental effectiveness; and (c) no
differences between the children raised by homosexuals and nonhomosexuals
had been found "regardless of the geographic region within the United States
where the children were raised. In fact, the evidence from these briefs shows
to the contrary that (a) homosexual parents are more apt to have homosexual
children; (b) the findings on parental effectiveness consisted of 15 fathers
being less verbal than 45 mothers; and (c) the finding of no differences
between homosexually and heterosexually raised children consisted of
investigators visiting 11 states to test 89 offspring of 83 lesbian vs. 81 children
of 69 nonlesbian volunteers. The APAs support for gay rights in these briefs
may have violated its own ethical principles that "psychologists base their
statements on scientifically acceptable psychological findings and techniques
with full recognition of the limits and uncertainties of such evidence and that
psychologists must "provide thorough discussion of the limitations of their
data, especially where their work touches upon social policy (APA, 1981).
References: The Journal of Psychology, 1997, 131(3), 313-332.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/did-the-apa-misrepresent-the-
scientific-literature-to-courts-in-support-of-homosexual-custody/
The 4onge!ity of Homosexuals: /efore an" After the A3.S '(i"emic
Authors: Paul Cameron, William L. Playfair, and Stephen Wellum
Summary: Although the U.S. Surgeon General characterized homosexual sex
as "normal and "healthy, homosexuals and IV drug abusers have suffered
disproportionately from the AIDS epidemic. Longevity is often utilized as a
measure of health. How long did homosexuals live before the AIDS epidemic
and how long do they live today? We examined 6,737 obituaries/death notices
from eighteen U.S. homosexual journals over the past thirteen years and
compared them to obituaries from two conventional newspapers. The
obituaries from the non-homosexual newspapers were similar to U.S. averages
for longevity: the median age of death of married men was seventy-five, 80
percent died old (65 or older); for unmarried men it was fifty-seven, 32
percent died old; for married women it was seventy-nine, 85 percent died old;
for unmarried women it was seventy-one, 60 percent died old. For the 6,574
homosexual deaths, the median age of death if AIDS was the cause was thirty-
nine irrespective of whether or not the individual had a Long Time Sexual
44
Partner [LTSP], 1 percent died old. For those 829 who died of non-AIDS causes
the median age of death was forty-two (41 for those 315 with a LTSP and 43
for those 514 without) and < 9 percent died old. Homosexuals more frequently
met a violent end from accidental death, traffic death, suicide, and murder
than men in general. The 163 lesbians registered a median age of death of
forty-four (20% died old) and exhibited high rates of violent death and cancer
as compared to women in general. Old homosexuals appear to have been
proportionately less numerous than their non-homosexual counterparts in the
scientific literature from 1858 to 1993. The pattern of early death evident in
the homosexual obituaries is consistent with the pattern exhibited in the
published surveys of homosexuals and intravenous drug abusers. Homosexuals
may have experienced a short lifespan for the last 140 years; AIDS has
apparently reduced it about 10 percent. Such an abbreviated lifespan puts the
healthfulness of homosexuality in question.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/the-longevity-of-homosexuals-
before-and-after-the-aids-epidemic/
Gay $bituaries 5losely Trac2 $fficially ?e(orte" .eaths from A3.S
Authors: Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron
Summary: The age distribution of AIDS deaths of males who have sex with
males [MSM] was estimated from obituaries in the Washington Blade, a gay
newspaper. Statistics from the 2003 HIV/AIDS Surveillance Supplemental
Report are highly congruent with deaths of MSM due to AIDS from these
obituaries. Death due to AIDS in old age was most frequent for heterosexuals
and least frequent for MSM who were drug abusers. Obituaries in the
Washington Blade are thus consistent with and may be representative of
deaths due to AIDS among MSM. The latest CDC report tends to strengthen
the overall finding based upon obituaries: that the lifespan of MSM is shortened
two to three decades by AIDS and, possibly, other causes.
References: Psychological Reports, 2005, 96, 693-697.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/gay-obituaries-closely-track-
officially-reported-deaths-from-aids/
5hil" Molestations by Homosexual Foster 0arents: 3llinois< ==J-)>>)
Author: Paul Cameron
Summary: Do those who engage in homosexuality disproportionately sexually
abuse foster or adoptive children as reported by child protective services?
Illinois child services reported sexual abuse for 1997 through 2002. 270
parents committed "substantiated sexual offenses against foster or
subsidized adoptive children: 67 (69%) of 97 of these mother and 148 (86%)
of 173 of these father perpertrators sexually abused girls; 30 (31%) of the
mothers and 25 (14%) of the father perpetrators sexually abused boys, i.e., 92
(34%) of the perpetrators homosexually abused their charges. Of these
45
parents 15 both physically and sexually abused charges: daughters by 8 of the
mothers and 4 of the fathers, sons by 3 of the mothers, i.e., same-sex
perpetrators were involved in 53%. Thus, homosexual practitioners were
proportionately more apt to abuse foster or adoptive children sexually.
References: Psychological Reports, 2005, 96, 227-230.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/child-molestations-by-
homosexual-foster-parents-illinois-1997-2002/
Cumbers of Homosexual 0arents 4i!ing with Their 5hil"ren
Author: Paul Cameron
Summary: Those contending for the `normalcy of homosexuality claim there
are 800,000 to 7 million homosexual parents raising between 1 and 9 million
children. The 1996 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, a nationally
representative sample of 12,321 ages 18 through 59 yr., reported about
416,000 parents - most of whom were married - living with children under
the age of 17 yr. who reported same-sex "vaginal, oral, or anal sex in the past
12 months. Two random-sample surveys suggested that there are fewer than
half a million homosexual parents, and a total sample of 14,000 mothers in
Avon suggests in fewer. Thus, it is likely that fewer than 500,000 homosexual
parents live with fewer than 750,000 children under 18 yr.
References: Psychological Reports, 2004, 94, 179-188.
Did the American Psychological Association Misrepresent Scientific Material to
the U.S. Supreme Cour
Authors: Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron
Summary: On January 31, 1986, the American Psychological Association (APA)
file an amicus curiae brief with the U.S. Supreme Court favoring constitutional
protection for consensual sodomy. The APA claimed that: (1) the Bell,
Weinberg, and Hammersmith survey found that "62% of heterosexual men
reported that their first sexual experience was with another male; 39% of
homosexual men reported such experience, (2) "data do not support a
linkage between childhood homosexual activity and sexual orientation, and (3)
"there are no empirical data to support the popular myth that homosexual
orientation or behavior results from `contagion by other homosexuals. It is
judged that, in violation of standards for scientific reporting, the Bell, et al.
finding was pulled out of context so that if favored the APA position, and the
studies the APA cited in this section of the brief were either contrary to,
nonsupportive of, or did not bear upon the APAs contentions. Professional
scientific organizations have a special obligation to (a) be accurate in
representations to the U.S. Supreme Court and (b) adhere to accepted
standards of scholarship in their use of citations.
References: Psychological Reports, 1988, 63, 255-270.
46
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/numbers-of-homosexual-parents-
living-with-their-children/
.oes Homosexual Acti!ity Shorten 4ife&
Authors: Paul Cameron, Kirk Cameron, and William L. Playfair
Summary: Previous estimates from obituaries and pre-1994 sex surveys
suggested that the median age of death for homosexuals is less than 50 yr.
Four contemporary databases were used to test that estimate: (1) obituaries in
the homosexual press from 1993 through 1997 reflected treatment success for
those with AIDS but suggested a median age of death less than 50 years; (2)
two large random sexuality surveys in 1994 - one in the USA and the other in
Britain - yielded results consistent with a median age of death for
homosexuals of less then 50 years; (3) the median age of those ever married
in Denmark, Sweden, and Norway was about 50 years, while that of the ever
homosexually partnered was about 40 yr.; further, the married were about 5
times more apt to be old and 4 times less apt to be widowed young; and (4)
intravenous drug abusers and homosexuals taking HIV tests in Colorado had
almost identical age distributions. The four lines of evidence were consistent
with previous findings suggesting that homosexual activity may be associated
with a lifespan shortened by 20 to 30 years.
References: Psychological Reports, 1998, 83, 847-866.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/does-homosexual-activity-
shorten-life/
Homosexual Sex as Harmful as .rug Abuse< 0rostitution< or Smo2ing
Authors: Paul Cameron, Thomass Landess, and Kirk Cameron
Summary: In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court said same-sex sexual activity
could not be prohibited by law. Analyzing data from the 1996 National
Household Survey of Drug Abuse (N = 12,381) and comparing those who
engaged in four recreational activities - homosexual sex, illegal drug use,
participation in prostitution, and smoking - against those who abstained,
participants (1) were more frequently disruptive (e.g., more frequently
criminal, drove under the influence of drugs or alcohol, used illegal drugs, took
sexual risks), (2) were less frequently productive (e.g., less frequently had
children in marriage, more frequently missed work), and (3) generated
excessive costs (e.g., more promiscuous, higher consumers of medical
services). Major sexuality surveys have reported similar findings for
homosexuals. Societal discrimination inadequately accounts for these
differences since parallel comparisons of black and white subsamples produced
a pattern unlike the differences found between homosexuals and
nonhomosexuals.
Reference: Psychological Reports, 2005, 96, 915-961
47
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/published-article-1/
0ro-Gay /ias 3n Stu"y of 0e"o(hilia
Homosexuals are considerably more apt to involve themselves sexually with
the underage. Anyone actually in contact with the phenomenon has to
acknowledge this fact, perhaps most strongly explicated by the chairman of
FRI in 1985. While homosexual spokesmen have disputed his conclusion, in a
paper published in 2000 by Blanchard, Barbareee, Bogaert, Dicky, Klassen,
Kuban, and Zucker) the authors noted that the best epidemiological evidence
indicates that only 2-4% of men attracted to adults prefer men..; in contrast,
around 25-40% of men attracted to children prefer boys.. Thus the rate of
homosexual attraction is 6-20 times higher among pedophiles (p. 464). These
figures are quite similar to those we at FRI have used since the early 1980s -
figures that for which gay activists have roundly criticized us. So how do
Blanchard, et al., most of whom are from the Department of Psychiatry at the
University of Toronto, handle this fact that seems so damaging to the
homosexual cause? By telling people not to notice, or if they do, not to draw
the obvious conclusions.
Here+s how they en"e" their article:
@3m(lications for Societal Attitu"es
A few closing comments are necessary to preclude any misunderstanding or
misuse of this study. First, the statistical association of homosexuality and
pedophilia concerns development events in utero or in early childhood.
Ordinary (teleiophilic) homosexual men are no more likely to molest boys than
ordinary (teleiophilic) heterosexual men are to molest girls. Second, the causes
of homosexuality are irrelevant to whether it should be considered a
psychopathology. That question has already been decided in the negative, on
the grounds that homosexuality does not inherently cause distress to the
individual or any disability in functioning as a productive member of society
(Friedman, 1988; Spitzer, 1981). (p. 476)
Really? "developmental events in utero or early childhood - what is the
evidence for this apparent attempt to exculpate those who engage in this
behavior? Consider also "does not inherently cause distress to the individual.
Both citations are relatively `ancient in that the cited authors could not have
availed themselves of the research in the 1990s - when a number of large,
relatively unbiased studies on nonvolunteers were published. In 1994, the
University of Chicago sex survey) reported that homosexuals - both men
and women - less frequently claimed to be happy and more frequently
claimed to be unhappy than heterosexuals. More frequent mental disturbance
by homosexuals of both sexes has been reported in every large, random-
sample study on the issue published in the 1990s! (e.g., the Christchurch
study; the NHANES study; the large military twins-registry study; the 1996
NHSDA). And in 2001, in the Archives o& General Psychiatry, a large
representative sample of the Dutch population3 yielded the same finding, with
gays twice and lesbians two or three times more apt to have one or more
48
disorders in either the past 12 months or lifetime So even from the rather
narrow perspective of "distress to the individual the statement is, as near as
can now be determined, decidedly false.
Likewise "any disability in functioning as a productive member of society.
Where have these scholars been living? AIDS has devastated homosexual men,
and disproportionately affected homosexual women. A host of self-inflicted
problems (e.g., higher rates of suicide, substance abuse) as well has higher
rates of physical disease, mental disturbance, murder, and accidents contribute
to a sharply reduced lifespan.1 And if as a class you die young, and you are
disproportionately involved in substance abuse and corruption of youth, you
cannot contribute as much to society as those who live normal lifespans and do
not endanger their neighbors with their drug-use or their neighbors children
with their sexual predilections.
Another article dealing with the proportionality issue of child abuse was
published by Freund and Watson in 1992. These authors: noted the 1985
literature review by FRIs chairman, and agreed that the ratio of female to
male pedophilic victims was about 2:1, even as the proportion of heterosexual
to homosexual men is about 20:1. Freund and Watson did some `figuring to
arrive at an estimate that homosexual men are `only twice as apt to be
pedophiles. They concluded that their findings generated support for the notion
that "a homosexual development notably often does not result in androphilia
[sexual desire for men] but in homosexual pedophilia [desire for boys]. . This,
of course, should not be understood as saying that androphiles may have a
greater propensity to offend against children than do gynephiles [men
interested in sex with women],.. (p. 41). Notice that both sets of Canadian
investigators went to some lengths to `interpret or `gloss their results as not
harmful to the gay rights cause, but were honest enough to report `the facts
as they found them.
How is either research team to account for the fact that 23% of the 671 gays
in the Bell and Weinberg study in San Francisco9 said that half or less of their
partners "were 16 or younger when the respondent was 21 or older? Might
this mean that about a quarter of gays have engaged in pedophilia? Certainly,
in California in 1970, the activity they admitted to met the definition of `illegal
sexual contact with the underage [the age of consent was 18 yr.]. Then, some
might have only had sex with those aged 16. How many had sex with boys
aged 15 or less? Bell et al didnt ask. But in the original Kinsey studyJit was
27% of gays (Kinseys standard was having sex with the underage `when you
were aged 18 or older). And how many had sex with boys aged 13 or less -
an age that is defined as `protected by immaturity in almost all of the nations
in the worldD at this time? The original Kinsey data suggests that that figure
must be somewhere around 14% of gays under his `aged 18 or older standard
(7, p. 512). 14% is about a seventh of gays! Add-in the fact that a
disproportionate number of homosexuals have sex with animals (most studies,
including the two from the Kinsey Institute, have reported proportionately 4 to
6 times as frequently as among heterosexuals [in the Bell et al study in San
Francisco,= respondents were asked whether or not they had engaged in sex
with animals. Among men, 134 (19.5 percent) of 685 homosexual men
49
answered yes, as opposed to 18 (5.4 percent) of 334 heterosexual men.
Among women, 19 (6.5 percent) of 292 lesbians said they had engaged in sex
with animals, while none of the heterosexual women said they had done so
[1981, p. 161]), and homosexuals are more apt to engage in sadomasochism
[26% of the gays v 4.5% of the heterosexual men and 9.6% of the lesbians.
2.7% of the heterosexual women had engaged in sexual sadism (=, p. 161)]
and you get a picture of people who more frequently sexualize the players and
parts in life - people who are if you will, `omnisexual.
Gregory Herek, an openly homosexual/gay activist psychologist at the
University of California at Davis has criticized our published material on
homosexuals in general and on the link between homosexuality and child
molestation in particular. Herek criticizes the fact that no one, including us,
knows the sexual orientation of the man who molests boys in any study. We
hold that "a homosexual is "one who engages in homosexuality, and even if a
person caught molesting a boy called himself a heterosexual that would be
irrelevant (many men who have sex with men and get HIV call themselves
"heterosexual. Self-labeling is interesting, but it is hardly determinative as to
who is, #y their actions, considered a homosexual. The standard of `what the
individual does rather than what he says he is is the standard employed
throughout AIDS research, the 1996 NHSDA, the Dutch study cited above,
etc.). As a matter of fact, it appears that most people caught molesting boys
call themselves "homosexual or "bisexual - in one study (the only one of
which we are aware in which the question as to `identity was asked), 86% of
those incarcerated for molesting boys described themselves as homosexual or
"bisexual (>, p. 83) - what the other 14% called themselves is not
reported, but their behavior makes clear what they reasonably should be
considered. A "homosexual (or an omnisexual) is one who has sex with his
own sex, quite apart from what he claims he "is. While Masters and Johnson
suggested ambisexual to describe many homosexuals since they go `both
ways - that is, have sex with both their and the opposite sex, we feel it
makes the most sense to call them "omnisexual (like `omnivorous, denoting
willingness to eat both plants and animals) with a `major or emphasis in
homosexuality, which suggestively accounts for their more frequent sex with
animals, children, scatophilia, S & M, etc. Herek cites the 1994 Jenny et al
study of hospital charts at Denver Childrens Hospital of 269 children molested
as demonstrating that the molester was a gay or lesbian adult in only 2 of the
269 cases. As a matter of fact, 22% of the children in this study were
homosexually molested - but only 2 of the childrens hospital charts either
explicitly (in one case) or implicitly (in the other case) mentioned
homosexuality of the perpetrator and only one molestation by "someone who
could be classified as a pedophile or preferential child molester (, p. 43).
The rest of the `sexual preferences of the molesters were not listed on the
charts and were assumed to be heterosexual and nonpedophiles by Jenny et
al., - often merely because the perpetrator was living with the mother of the
boy molested. Because you have sex with a mother hardly means that you will
not have sex with a boy. For instance, in the large (over 20,000 respondents)
random French survey, of those who "reported having had sexual intercourse
with a same sex partner at least once also stated that they had had sexual
50
intercourse with persons of the opposite sex (4% of men and 2.5% of women
reported practices with partners of both sexes) (p. 111). For the sample as a
whole, "4.1% of men and 2.6% of women reported having had at least once
same sex partner (p. 108). Thus, only 2.4% of men who had ever engaged in
homosexuality and 3.8% of women who had ever engaged in homosexuality
failed to also engage in heterosexuality.1 This is how some married men
molest boys and some married women molest girls - engaging in
homosexuality is seldom the only kind of sex such an individual participates in.
People whose worlds are `colored sexual often find any number of sexual
things to do to and with others of many different ages, different species, and,
of course, the opposite and same sex.
Returning to the Jenny et al. study, are the overwhelming proportion (over
99%) of those who molested children not "pedophiles because they were not
listed as such on the hospital charts? Perhaps "pedophiles only commit about
1% of child molestations. But the 1% figure seems a tad improbable. Of course
it depends upon what you mean by "pedophile. if the standard that `any adult
who voluntarily engages in homosexual activity is a homosexual is applied to
the Jenny et al. study, then every one of the child molesters was a pedophile.
If we narrow the definition of pedophile to those who `major in sex with
children, then the Jenny et al. study does not tell us, and it still seems unlikely
that only one perpetrator was a "pedophile by this standard. The Jenny et al
study also does not tell us how many of the molesters "majored in
homosexual activity (some of the girls molested by men were probably
molested by `homosexuals under this definition). Why do we know so little?
The sexual orientation of the perpetrator was apparently not mentioned in any
of the other hospital charts! Neither the children nor the perpetrators were
interviewed for the Jenny study, only the hospital charts were examined.
Hospital charts seldom record `guesses as to the "sexual orientation of the
perpetrator. If 60 (22%) of the children were homosexually molested, by any
reasonable definition of `what a homosexual is, these children were molested
by a person who engages in homosexuality - i.e., a homosexual. Because a
person engages in homosexuality does not mean that he does not engage in
heterosexuality. Very few "homosexuals have failed to have sex with the
opposite sex. Thus both FRI and the Univ. of Chicago investigators) reported
that only 5% of women who have sex with women and 9% of men who have
sex with men said that they were heterosexual virgins, the corresponding
figures for the FRI study were 5% and 8%. In any given 5 year period, it
appears likely that most of those who have sex with their own sex also have
sex with the opposite sex. A goodly number of men who molest boys also
molest girls - all of these men are omnisexuals with an apparent `major or
`minor in homosexuality. Our research has been published and defended in
peer-reviewed, scientific journals. Hereks criticisms of us have not met this
standard, nor has he replied to our defense of the validity of our data. As time
marches on, just about all of the findings we have reported from our 1983-84
study have been replicated by other investigators - most of whom disagree
vehemently with our interpretations of those findings. But the findings are `the
facts, the interpretations of those facts are just that - interpretations or
reasoned opinions.
51
References
1. Cameron, P. Homosexual molestation of children: sexual interaction of
teacher and pupil. Psychological Reports 1985;57:1227-1236. 2. Blanchard R,
Barbaree HE, Bogaert AF, Dicky R, Klassen P, Kuban ME, Zucker KJ. Fraternal
birth order and sexual orientation in pedophiles. Archives o& 'e(ual ,ehavior
2000;29:463-478. 3. Sandfort TGM, Graaf R, Bijl RV, Schnabel P. Same-sex
sexual behavior and psychiatric disorders. Archives o& General Psychiatry
2001;58:85-91. 4. Cameron P, Cameron K, Playfair WL. Does homosexual
activity shorten life? Psychological Reports 1998;83:847-866. 5. Freund K,
Watson RJ. The proportions of heterosexual and homosexual pedophiles among
sex offenders against children: an exploratory study. %ournal o& 'e( ) *arital
Therapy 1992;18:34-43. 6. Bell AP, Weinberg MS. Homose(ualities6 a study o&
diversity among men and women. NY: Simon & Schuster, 1978. 7. Gebhard PH,
Johnson AB. The /insey data6 marginal ta#ulations o& the 3$4!+3$;4
interviews conducted #y the institute &or se( research. Philadelphia: Saunders,
1979. 8. Graupner H. Sexual consent: the criminal law in Europe and overseas.
Archives o& 'e(ual ,ehavior 2000;29:415-461. 9. Bell AP, Weinberg MS,
Hammersmith SK. 'e(ual pre&erence6 its development in men and women2
statisitical appendi(. 1981, Boomingrton, Inidana Univ. Press. 10. Erickson WD,
Walbek NH, Seely RK. Behavior patterns of child molesters. Archives o& 'e(ual
,ehavior 1988;17:77-86. 11. Jenny C, Roesler TA, JPoyer KL. Are children at
risk for sexual abuse by homosexuals? Pediatrics 1994;94:41-44. 12. Laumann
EO, Gagnon JH, Michael RT, Michaels S. (1994) The social organi5ation o&
se(uality6 se(ual practices in the <nited 'tates. Chicago: U. Chicago Press. 13.
Schumm WR. Psychology of the scientist: LXXXIII. An assessment of Hereks
critiue of the Cameron groups survey studies. Psychological Reports
2000;87:1123-1132. 14. Spira A, Bajos N, and the ACSF Group. 'e(ual
#ehaviour and A1.'. Aldershot: Avebury, 1994.
Copyright 2001, Dr. Paul Cameron, this is a working paper, do not cite or use
without written permission.
Sex With the Underage: The Kinsey investigators indexed sex with the
underage two ways, neither of which was completely satisfactorily for our
purposes. First, 171 (26.5%) of 646 male homosexuals and 4 (1.8%) of 222
female homosexuals reported having had homosexual sex with someone aged
15 or less and 91 (14.1%) of the 646 male homosexuals and none of the 222
female homosexuals reported having had homosexual sex with someone aged
13 or less since they were aged 18 or older (Gebhard & Johnson, 1979, p.
512). Heterosexual respondents were not asked the same question. For a
rough comparison, 79 (3.3%) of 2393 heterosexual men and 2 (0.1%) of 1840
heterosexual women reported coitus with someone aged 15 or less and 10
(0.4%) of the 2393 male heterosexuals and 1 (0.05%) of the 1840 female
heterosexuals reported coitus with someone aged 13 or under since they were
aged 18 or older (p. 289). The questions dont appear to be completely parallel
(i.e., if respondents took the question to mean penile/vagnial intromission this
would not parallel homosexual contact which could be oral/penile, anal/penile,
mutual fondling, etc.), but may suggest a greater incidence of sexual
52
involvement with the underage by homosexuals. Additionally, 313 (7.2%) of
4339 females reported some sort of physical heterosexual contact ranging
from genital touching to coitus (p. 193 compared with p. 197) before their
puberty with an older male. From p. 195 it would appear that around 85% of
these males were aged 18 or older, which would suggest that perhaps 6% of
the female respondents reported being sexually molested by a man while they
were aged 13 or less. This 6% report by females of having been sexually
involved with adult heterosexuals is substantially less than the 14.1% report
made by homosexual male adults as to their involvement with the underage.
In their partial follow-on with subjects in a hospital as controls v homosexual
offenders, many of whom had never been imprisoned for their offenses (1965,
p. 40), the investigators noted that [m]ore of the homosexual offenders were,
while preadolescent, the recipients of approaches by adult males than were the
members of any other sex-offender group: roughly a third had such
experience. Note that only 8 percent of the control group were similarly
approached. The approaches turned into overt physical contact for between 20
and 28 per cent of the three homosexual-offender groups - higher
percentages than exist for other groups..The record of the homosexual
offenders childhood contacts with adult males immediately suggests that their
experiences may have predisposed them to subsequent homosexual activity..
physical sexual contact with an adult male would be a graphic demonstration
to the child that some adult males can find sexual gratification with boys, and
this concept could be of importance when the child himself becomes adult,..
(1965, pp. 275-76). On their face, these findings suggest more sexual
involvement with the underage by homosexuals.
Saghir & Robins Sex With the Underaged: 15% of homosexual v 0% of
heterosexual men were arrested for `contributing to the delinquency of a
minor, however, the investigators said that at no time was a homosexual
arrested because he was with a minor who was under the age of 16" (pp. 165-
66). No homosexual or heterosexual women were arrested for `contributing to
the delinquency of a minor.
Bell & Weinberg Sex With Underage: Homosexuals were asked the
proportion of partners who were 16 or younger when the respondent was
aged 21 or older. 156 (23.2%) of 671 homosexual males and 11 (3.8%) of
homosexual women chose half or less. Heterosexual respondents were not
asked this or a comparable question. However, the point estimates for the
homosexuals are similar to those reported in the first Kinsey survey. One male
homosexual but no other adult reported committing homosexual rape on a
child, no one reported heterosexual rape of a child (1981, p. 163). 6 (3.1%) of
192 homosexual women, 1 (1.9%) of 54 heterosexual women reported having
been heterosexually raped in their first heterosexual encounter as a
prepubertal child and 4 (0.9%) of 443 homosexual men reported having been
homosexually raped in their first homosexual encounter as a prepubertal child.
6 (3.4%) of 174 homosexual women and 2 (4.2%) of 47 heterosexual women
reported having been raped heterosexually before their puberty. 4 (0.9%) of
420 homosexual men and 1 (1.2%) of 83 heterosexual men reported having
been raped homosexually before their puberty. 8 (3.4%) of 237 homosexual
53
women and 1 (0.9%) of 112 heterosexual women said that they had been
raped in their first heterosexual encounter after their puberty. 2 (0.4%) of 540
homosexual men said that they had been raped in the first homosexual
encounter after puberty (1981, pp. 163-164).
FRI Sex With Underage: From the perspective of the `victim, 19.5% of 298
homosexual males, 8.1% of 210 homosexual females reported that their first
physical homosexual contact with an adult homosexual occurred before they
were aged 14; while 32.3% of the males and 13.8% of the females that their
first homosexual sex with an adult homosexual occurred before they were aged
16. From the perspective of the `perpetrator, 9.4% of 203 homosexual men
and 8.8% of 137 homosexual women reported that the age of their youngest
homosexual partner was 13 or younger; 16.7% of the men and 8.8% of the
women that the age of their youngest homosexual partner was 15 or younger
while they themselves were 18 or older. From the perspective of the `victim,
3.3% of 1,758 heterosexual men and 5.5% of 2,768 heterosexual women
reported that their first physical heterosexual contact with an adult
heterosexual occurred before they were aged 14; 11.9% of heterosexual men
and 14.9% of heterosexual women that their first heterosexual contact before
they were aged 16. From the perspective of the `perpetrator, 2.3% of 1706
heterosexual men and 0.54% of 2,376 heterosexual women reported that the
age of their youngest heterosexual partner was 13 or under; 11.7% of the
heterosexual men and 1.3% of the women that their youngest heterosexual
partner was aged 15 or under while they themselves were 18 or older.
U Chicago Sex With Underage: Respondents were asked whether anyone had
"touched them sexually before they were aged 12 or 13. The reporting is
somewhat unclear, but it appears that 11 (32%) of 34 homosexual males and
8 (42%) of homosexual females reported having been sexually molested.
These percentages were higher than the proportion of all men (11%) and all
women (15%) who made the same report. Overall, considering only touchings
by those the respondent thought to be aged 18 or older, 56 (21.1%) of 266
touchings were homosexual. 46 (66.7%) of 69 sexual touchings of boys, and
10 (5.1%) of the 197 touchings of girls were homosexual. These findings are
consonant with more sexual involvement with the underage by homosexuals.
French study Sex With Underage: About 10% of homosexuals reported that
they had been raped at some point in life as opposed to about "one in 500" for
heterosexuals (p. 187). About a third of these rapes ocurred while the
respondent was aged 15 or younger, but explicit differences in having been
sexually molested in childhood between homosexuals and heterosexuals
divided by sex were not reported.
Summary of Scout Molestations (!" cases from !#$! to !##%&
Summary of 'eacher()u)il
Summary of ne*s)a)er stories about molestation
+dd to other ,character issues- ris. ta.ing/ shortened lifes)an
54
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2009/02/pro-gay-bias-in-study-of-
pedophilia/
Homosexual /rains&
Much like the media hype surrounding the alleged "gay gene, a great deal of
attention and speculation still surrounds the published study
(1)
of the brains of
19 homosexual males. Simon LeVay studied a neuron group (known as INAH-
3) in the anterior hypothalamus and noted a difference in size compared to
that of a group comprised of 16 presumably heterosexual males and 6
females. The author, the editors of 'cience, and the media rashly related this
size difference to "sexual orientation. The New York Times headlined it "Zone
of Brian Linked to Mens Sexual Orientation, the Washington Post ran "Node
Seen as Key to Gay Orientation, and Newsweek wrote "A Study Pinpoints a
Difference in the Brain.
Although LeVays report was first published five years ago, it is still frequently
cited by gay activists, the media, and others as a basis for the supposedly
biological cause of homosexuality. Simon LeVay himself has parlayed the
attention given to that one article into two additional books on the research
into biological explanations of homosexuality, including The 'e(ual ,rain,
published in 1993. Along with the "gay gene study and research on the sexual
orientation of identical versus fraternal twins, LeVays "homosexual brains
study has become one of the three "pillars in the argument supporting the
notion that homosexuals are "born that way. As such it is well worth
understanding and reviewing in detail.
While the technical aspects of LeVays small study approximate those of other
researchers in the field, the interpretations of the findings are fanciful and
unrelated to any evidence that this locus of neurons has any function
whatsoever. It is highly speculative to suggest that this neuron group is
associated in any way with human sexual function, let alone sexual behavior.
To suggest that "sexual orientation can be located in this group of nerve cells
strains credulity and calls into question the scientific sensibilities of those
claimsmakers.
TH' H3ST$?7 $F TH3S G?$60 $F C'6?$CS
In 1989, a group of investigators
(2)
seeking gender-related dimorphisms [sex
differences in anatomic structure] in the preoptic-anterior hypothalamic area of
the brain discovered that thionin (a histologic stain) "stained darkly (4)
relatively discrete cell groups in 11 male and 11 female brains. These cell
groups were named Interstitial Nuclei of the Anterior Hypothalamus (INAH). It
must be noted that this was a hunt for microscopic structural differences - no
attempt was made to tie any structural differences to any function, sexual or
otherwise. These investigators noted that they "were unable to identify any cell
group clearly homologous to a sexually dimorphic nucleus of another species,
55
but they decided to study these 4 nuclei anyway, of which INAH-2 and INAH-3
seemed to be dimorphic at least in their human subjects.
Further, they noted that "without knowledge of connectivity or neurochemical
characteristics of these nuclei, it is difficult to assign any as a homolog to a
sexually dimorphic nucleus of another mammalian species. In other words, it
is not known if animals have such a group of cells (so animal experiments
could not help in deciding the function of the group) - a major drawback to
future studies. Indeed, despite extensive "histological and histochemical
characterization of sex differences in the [medial preoptic nucleus] of the
rodent, little is known about its functions. Scientists have dissected and
studied the brains of countless rats in the pursuit of such knowledge, but for all
of their efforts we still know "little. Because "the human being cannot be
manipulated experimentally as can laboratory animals, it is difficult to
extrapolate from animals to humans regarding structural, behavioral, or
physiological sex differences.
In short, the findings of Allen et al relate to 4 areas of the hypothalamus that
stain darkly to thionin, but: 1) these nuclei may merely have a common locus
- it is possible that propinquity [i.e., physical closeness] is the only thing that
these particular neurons have in common; 2) these nuclei have no known
function and do not correspond to nuclei of animals whose function is known;
thus, 3) there is no evidence that INAH-2 and INAH-3 are related to sexual
function and certainly no evidence whatsoever that they are related to "sexual
orientation, if such a relationship could ever be established.
The first report of a difference between male and female brains came out of
Swaabs laboratory in the Netherlands (
3)
. He reported on what Allen et al
consider to be INAH-1. The typical course of "new findings regarding the brain
is illustrated by this study of INAH-1. In 1985, Swaab found that for his sample
of males and females, INAH-1 was 2.5 times larger in his sample of males than
it was in his females. In 1989 Allen et al found INAH-1 only 1.2 times larger in
males (not a statistically significant difference) and in 1991 LeVay found INAH-
1 slightly smaller in his sample of men than it was in his small sample of
women. In other words, LeVays findings contradict previous studies. Such
seems to be the fate of findings based upon small samples gathered hither and
yon.
The first report of a difference between homosexual and heterosexual brains
came out of Swaabs laboratory in 1990
4
. Swaab found that the
suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) of the hypothalamus was 1.7 times larger in a
sample of 10 homosexual men who died of AIDS than it was in 18 other men,
and in 6 heterosexuals (including women) who died of AIDS. He construed this
and his finding regarding another nucleus as evidence that does "not support
the global hypothesis that homosexual men have a `female brain. Of course,
the hypothesis that male homosexuals are different from heterosexuals
because they have brains structured like females is the basis for all recent
research seeking a link between the brain and sexual orientation.
Interestingly, LeVay, although aware of Swaabs finding, chose to dismiss it [he
56
said, because there "is little evidence, however, to suggest that SCN is involved
in the regulation of sexual behavior"] in favor of looking at differences in INAH-
2 and INAH-3. Note that the Swaab finding of a larger SCN in homosexuals, if
it were to hold up to further testing, would make the homosexual male brain
"super-male rather than "female-like as LeVays finding of smaller nuclei in
homosexual males would imply.
'CT'? S3M$C 4'#A7
Framing his research as a quest for the "biological substrate for sexual
orientation, Dr. LeVay explored the relative sizes of INAH-2 and INAH-3 in 19
homosexual males who had died of AIDS, 16 presumed heterosexuals (6 of
whom died of AIDS) and 6 women (1 of whom died of AIDS). INAH-3 "was
more than twice as large in the heterosexual men [0.12] as in the homosexual
men [0.051] and "the women [0.056]. Countless explanations might account
for the apparently smaller size of homosexual male INAH-3 nuclei, but to
interpret the size differential as bearing upon a "biological substrate for sexual
orientation is reminiscent of how graduate students find "the solution in
almost every one of their projects.
Since there is no homolog to a nucleus governing sexual orientation (or even a
sexual function) in animals [as the commentator in Science noted "there is no
animal model for studying homosexuality
(5)
"], future studies using animals
would not be helpful. Even if further work on many more human brains
replicated the finding of generally larger INAH-3 among those not known to be
homosexual, the emphasis would have to be placed on "generally. The size
differentials reported by LeVay denote the average or mean size of the INAH-3
nucleus. That is, the average size of the INAH-3 nucleus in the set of
homosexuals was smaller than the average size of the INAH-3 in heterosexual
males.
Despite some media misinterpretations that LeVay had shown all the
homosexual brains to be smaller than all the heterosexual brains, there was
actually a fair amount of variability in INAH-3 size from individual to individual
and definite overlap in the size distributions among the three sets of brains.
For instance, 3 out of the 19 homosexuals had a larger INAH-3 than the
average size for LeVays group of `heterosexual males. In addition, 3 of the 16
`heterosexual male brains had a smaller INAH-3 than the average homosexual
in LeVays study. If heterosexuals and homosexuals could truly be classified by
size of the INAH-3 nucleus, why didnt all the homosexuals have smaller INAH-
3 nuclei and all the heterosexual males have larger INAH-3 nuclei?
Even the supposed sexual dimorphism [i.e., size difference between male and
female] exhibited in INAH-3, as first reported by Allen et al, was less than
clearcut in LeVays study. In one of LeVays females, INAH-3 was larger than
the "heterosexual male mean, while in 3 of the "heterosexual males, INAH-3
was smaller than the female mean size. Of course, the small samples of
individuals used in LeVays study make it difficult to determine what if anything
these results really mean. In fact, it is not certain that LeVays `heterosexual
males were all necessarily even heterosexual. LeVay did not verify the sexual
57
orientation of his dead subjects before examining their brains. It appears
suspicious that 6 of his 16 `heterosexual males had died of AIDS. But LeVay
classified them as heterosexual anyway. If some of these individuals were
really homosexual, the average INAH-3 sizes for the two groups of males
would almost certainly change, increasing the degree of overlap between the
heterosexual and homosexual brains and muddling the results even further.
Dr. William Byne (
6)
has also noted that "The reliance on the brains of AIDS
victims poses a serious interpretive difficulty because decreased testosterone
levels are common in their cases.. In some mammalian species the size of
sexually dimorphic hypothalamic nuclei varies with the amount of testosterone
circulating in the blood stream.. Furthermore, some of the drugs used to treat
opportunistic infections associated with AIDS are also known to lower
testosterone levels.. it is conceivable that the size of the INAH3 in the men in
LeVays study reflected endocrine status at the time of death or some other
aspect of AIDS or its treatment rather than sexual orientation. Unfortunately,
the medical histories published in the LeVay study are inadequate to test this
hypothesis.
TH' I'7 3SS6'
The key issue in the LeVay study is not whether INAH-3 is, in fact, smaller in
homosexual men than in heterosexual men, but whether INAH-3 has anything
at all to do with sexual function, let alone sexual orientation. Until and unless
this is "nailed down, talk about cause/effect [e.g., does INAH-3 affect sexual
orientation or does sexual orientation cause changes in INAH-3?] is just so
much groundless speculation. LeVays data is consistent with the hypothesis
that sexually intimate contact with females causes growth in INAH-3 - after
all, the bisexual in LeVays sample had an INAH-3 size in line with the
"heterosexual male mean. But his limited data is consistent with any number
of alternative hypotheses. For instance, that promiscuity or exposure to bodily
waste bears a relationship to the size of INAH-3; or that participation in
competitive sports [which is reported infrequently by homosexuals] causes its
growth, or that nonparticipation causes shrinkage; or even that a bigger INAH-
3 enables one to better control his emotions. It could also be that exposure to
the AIDS virus itself has an impact on the INAH-3 nucleus, at least in some
cases, since so many of the individuals in LeVays study had died of the
disease.
To have a "hunch about something, then to argue that ones hunch is proven
by evidence that could just as plausibly be used by someone with a totally
different "hunch [e.g., a classical music instructor who "just knew" that
smaller INAH-3 caused an appreciation of fine music], is much more like
"wishful fishing than serious scientific hypothesis testing. Since 'cience noted
that there are no animal models for homosexuality, LeVays hunch could not
have come from studies of any similar animal nuclei. It is certainly not
"obvious that women are more like homosexual men than they are like
heterosexual men - there are numerous ways that heterosexual men are more
like females than homosexual males are.
58
As an openly gay researcher, LeVays credibility must also be questioned on
other grounds. LeVay promised publicly, both in debates with Dr. Paul Cameron
of FRI shortly after publication of his article in 'cience and to various media
reporters that he was going to replicate his findings on live subjects in the near
future (presumably through MRI techniques). However, LeVay left the Salk
Institute, the only plausible place he could have tried to carry out such
experiments, in favor of starting his own Institute of Gay and Lesbian
Education in West Hollywood, CA in 1992. In his 1993 book
(7)
, LeVay claimed
that MRI techniques were currently impractical for measuring such a small
nucleus as INAH-3. It is now 1996 - five years later - and LeVay has not
entered the refereed scientific literature again.
Perhaps this is because, as noted by Byne
(6)
, "LeVays study was initially
rejected by the in-house reviewers at Science.. the paper did not meet the
minimal standards to which even animal research in this area is held. This
paper had a single author who did all of the tissue processing as well as all of
the anatomical measurements and statistical tests. Even in animal work, the
standard has been that all measurements are made not only blindly but also by
more than one investigator. Certainly, the editors at Science should have been
more cautious and required that a co-investigator repeat and verify LeVays
measurements prior to publication of a study that was sure to be of great
interest to the general public as well as to the scientific community.
Furthermore, with respect to another brain structure, Dr. Byne has noted that
"Despite the lack of evidence for a sex difference in the corpus callosum, LeVay
("ew =or: Times, letter, October 7, 1991) suggests that male homosexuals
may be found to have female-typical callosa. He erroneously asserts that the
1982 study of de Lecoste-Utamsing and Holloway has been replicated in its
entirety and that the sex difference they reported is like that reported in
laboratory animals. As shown above, however, the 1982 study (de Lecoste-
Utamsing & Holloway) stands alone in finding women to have a larger splenium
and is contradicted by nearly two dozen studies. Furthermore, when a sex
difference in the corpus callosum has been reported in laboratory animals, it
has been larger in males..
LeVays explanation may be satisfying to some segments of society, but it
remains nothing more than a wishful explanation - a hunch. LeVays hunch not
only ignores some of Swaabs earlier finding, but also fails to take into
consideration the many other "hunches that might explain the phenomena he
was examining. To summarize, LeVay ignores previous studies, incongruities in
his own data, and numerous alternative explanations for the "differences he
cites. Yet the media was quick to hail this study as the final proof. In
Vancouver, Washington, The Colum#ian editorialized that INAH-3 "is always
smaller in the brains of homosexual males than it is in other brains.. Now
[gays] have evidence to back [their] faith [that they didnt choose to be gay].
Anti-gay zealots wont surrender their positions in the face of one scientific
report; zeal may be defined as the refusal to see reason no matter what the
evidence says. Anyone else should be able to see more clearly that hating a
sexual preference is no more valid than hating eye color, skin tone, hair twist
or any other characteristic based on biology.
59
A similar media circus was generated in 1984, when 'cience published an
analogous study (

on physiological differences between 17 heterosexual and
14 homosexual males. In spite of all the excitement, it led nowhere - again, a
study using an extremely small sample. The chances are good that LeVays
study will meet the same fate.
?'F'?'C5'S
1. LeVay, S. A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and
homosexual men. 'cience 253 (1991): 1034-1037.
2. Allen, L.S., Hines, M. Shryne, J.E., and Gorski, R.A. Two sexually dimorphic
cell groups in the human brain. % o& "euroscience 9 (1989): 497-506.
3. Swaab, D.F. and Fliers, E. A sexually dimorphic nucleus in the human brain.
'cience 228 (1985): 1112-1115.
4. Swaab, D.F. and Hofman, M.A. An enlarged suprachiasmatic nucleus in
homosexual men. ,rain Research 537 (1990): 141-148.
5. Barinaga, M. Is homosexuality biological? 'cience 253 (1991): 956-957.
6. Byne, W. Science and belief: psychobiological research on sexual
orientation. % o& Homose(uality 28 (1995): 303-344.
7. LeVay, S. The 'e(ual ,rain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1993.
8. Gladue, B.A., Green, R. and Hellman, R.E. Neuroendocrine response to
estrogen and sexual orientation. 'cience 225 (1984): 1496-1499.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2009/02/homosexual-brains/
The Cumbers Game: %hat 0ercentage of the 0o(ulation is Gay&
3. Mythic Status of the >8 Figure
A. Until very recently, 10% figure has been accepted lore within media and
academic circles
1. Newsweek, 2/15/93, p. 46: "For years, the gay-rights movement has sought
safety in numbers. Its leaders have long claimed that homosexuals constitute
10 percent of the American population. They cited Alfred Kinsey, who
interviewed thousands of men and women for landmark studies on human
sexuality in the 1940s and 1950s. Activists seized on the double digits to
strengthen their political message-that millions of citizens are excluded from
the mainstream by anti-gay discrimination. Policymakers and the press
(including NEWSWEEK) adopted the estimate-despite protests from skeptical
conservatives-citing it time and again.
60
2. Fortune, 1991, p. 42: "Kinseys classic 1948 studies suggest that about 10%
of American adults are homosexual, a figure that more recent surveys
support.
3. Washington Times, 11/19/91, p. A3: "10 percent of American men are
homosexual and 5 percent of women are lesbian.
4. Professional journals like the Family Therapy Networker, 1991: "from
Kinseys historic study in the 1940s to the present, surveys consistently show
that 10 percent of the population is either gay or lesbian-thats 25 million
people.
5. Even the head of the American Psychological Association, Bryant Welch,
testified on 2/6/89 that the APA had found "in fact all the research supported
the conclusion that homosexuality. is a sexual orientation found consistently in
about ten percent of the male population and approximately 5 percent of the
female population.. research showed that across different historical eras and
in totally different cultures the incidence of homosexuality remained the same
irrespective of public attitudes and prohibitions.
B. Figure is embodied in names of homosexual groups such as "1 in 10" and
the adolescent support project for homosexual adolescents called "Project 10,
which started in the L.A. public school system but has now spread to San
Francisco and Minnesota also.
C. Proof of the pudding: so many "shocked by much lower recent numbers
reported in Alan Guttmacher-sponsored study of men aged 20-39, which
estimated that only 1.1% of men had had only male homosexual partners
within the last 10 years.
1. Washington Times, 4/16: "`If everyone examines their own conscience, they
know that more than one in 100 people is gay.. Common sense tells you this
survey is nonsense, said Gregory King, spokesman for the Human Rights
Campaign Fund, the nations largest homosexual rights group. `I feel the 10
percent figure is probably about right because many homosexuals fear to
admit their sexual orientation, said Cathy Renna, co-chairwoman of the Gay
and Lesbian Alliance Againse Defamation.
NY Times, 4/16: "Yesterday, gay groups scoffed at the 1 percent figure, saying
that even though the researchers promised respondents anonymity, many
homosexuals were afraid to disclose their sexual orientation.
2. NY Times editorial from 4/17 called the new survey results a "surprise
3. Letter to the Washington Blade entitled "Out in America: "Up until now, we
have always based our estimates of the size of our community on the Kinsey
studies of the late 1940s. Researchers revisiting the question in the 1970s
reaffirmed that `one in ten view. Until now. A sociological study published by
the progressive Alan Guttmacher Institute, that interviewed over 3,300 men
throughout the country in 1991, found that only 2.3 percent of those
61
interviewed admit to a same sex experience in the last ten years; only 1.1
percent say they have been exclusively Gay. Although most of believe in our
heart of hearts that these are gross underestimates, the controversy will
continue to be fueled by experts and homophobes from everywhere.
4. NY Times election poll buried: A journalism seminar reviewing 1992
nominated the NY Times for one of the most significant "buried stories of the
year. The Times own presidential election exit polls asked about voters sexual
orientation and found less than 3% claimed to be gay. Times staffers couldnt
believe the results, being so much lower than the standard 10%, and so they
did not report the story.
D. More revealing: gay leaders now admit to abusing the 10% figure for their
own gain
1. NY Times 4/16: "Gay leaders have contended that the number of gay and
lesbian Americans was around 10 percent, a figure that many of them
suspected to be inflated. But they repeated the number often, they said, as a
way of encouraging the nations large population of closeted homosexuals to be
open about their sexual identity.
Newsweek, 2/15: "Some gay activists now concede that they exploited the
Kinsey estimate for its tactical value, not its accuracy. `We used that figure
when most gay people were entirely hidden to try to create an impression of
our numerousness, says Tom Stoddard, former head of the Lambda Legal
Defense Fund.
33. %hy Has >8 Figure /een So Sacre" to Gay Acti!ists&
A. If 10% is true, gays constitute a significant minority not easily ignored by:
1. Media and politicians
NY Times 4/16: "The size of the nations homosexual population has long been
at issue, all the more so in recent years as the gay civil rights movement has
gained momentum. The number has political implications, since it translates
into constituents, which translates into votes.
NY Times 4/17 editorial: "What does it matter? In the political realm, power
depends partly on numbers, so the new data may weaken the gay rights
movement just as it is struggling to lift the ban against homosexuals in the
military, head off laws in several states that would allow discrimination against
homosexuals and press President Clinton to back gay causes.
2. American public-1 in 10 means someone you know and love or work with is
gay
B. If true, why would homosexuality be so prevalent even under intense social
disapproval?
62
1. Genetic basis more plausible to many if 10% of population is consistently
gay
2. Can explain 1 or 2% gay as a fringe group making radical choices. Harder to
explain actions of 10% of the population as "fringe behavior
C. Until now, the esteemed reputation and work of Alfred Kinsey was at stake
1. For years, we at FRI have found rough sledding trying to have scholarly
criticisms of Kinseys work published in reputable journals. There has been a
tremendous bias against criticizing Kinsey.
333. Iinsey+s ?ole in History of >8 Figure
A. Before Kinsey, homosexuality considered fairly rare
1. Medical and psychiatric communities speculated that the figure was around
2% or so
2. Columbia Univ. psychiatrist David Abrahamsen wrote in 1944: "it is difficult
to say how frequent homosexuality really is. One is apt to say that male
homosexuality is found in only 2 percent of the total population, but there is a
general feeling that female homosexuality is more frequent.
3. Despite the speculation, no substantial data existed except for isolated,
small studies of volunteers or clinical patients
a. Ironically, given the problems we now know about Kinseys own
methodology, Kinsey strongly criticized previous studies of sexual behavior in a
review included in his first book, Sexual Behavior and the Human Male. He
wrote to a reviewer that it "is amazing how many people have been willing to
base generalizations about human sexual behavior on general gossip and a
handful of clinical cases, while they now object strenuously to an adequate and
carefully selected 5,300 cases.
B. No probability-based or randomly drawn surveys existed. Why?
1. The science and theory of statistics were still in their infancy in the 30s and
40s
2. Research design and survey methodology in social sciences were barely born
as fields of study
3. Sex was a taboo topic for general discourse
a. Even today, we have found that people who refuse to fill out sex
questionnaires tend to be more conservative and sexually staid
b. Random questionnaire survey on sexual behavior could easily have failed in
Kinseys time due to unwillingness on part of most Americans to fill it out
63
C. Enter Kinsey, changing the face of sex (and social science) research
1. Entymologist with fair academic reputation from studies of gull wasps
2. Began collecting sexual "histories in late 30s
3. Asked detailed series of intimate sexual questions of over 18,000 subjects
4. Made systematic and extensive efforts to organize and present data in 2
massive books
a. So massive that most people have never read through the Kinsey volumes
first-hand
D. Without competing data, Kinseys figures eventually became "fact
1. Sheer size of his database was intimidating to critics
2. Methods heavily criticized at first, but no counter data or studies put forward
to challenge Kinseys estimates
3. Critics were eventually forgotten, but Kinseys database remained and
gained acceptance in the scientific literature
E. As psychology and sociology grew in stature and popularity, Kinseys
research held up as "gold standard in sex research
1. Partly due to Kinseys detailed data collection methods and unique
interviewing style
2. Also due to acceptance on the part of social scientists of Kinseys basic
philosophical approach
3#. Iinsey+s 3m(act
A. Kinseys philosophical approach: erase distinction between sexually normal
and abnormal behavior
1. Argument based on sheer force of numbers: if a behavior is common or
practiced frequently, it cant be abnormal
a. Kinsey wrote that "In view of the data which we now have on the incidence
and frequency of the homosexual. it is difficult to maintain the view that
psychosexual reactions between individuals of the same sex are rare and
therefore abnormal or unnatural, or that they constitute within themselves
evidence of neuroses or even psychoses.
2. Kinsey ignored moral distinctions between right and wrong behavior; sexual
behavior just came in different varieties
64
a. Robinson, in his biography of Kinsey, wrote that "[h]e would never have
tolerated the proposition that sexual taboos were justified because they
guaranteed social stability. Kinsey also said he believed "most people would
exercise greater Christian tolerance of all types of sexual behavior, if they
understood. why people do what they do sexually.
3. Kinsey was actually indignant about the effects of religion on our sexual life
a. Pomeroy, Kinseys co-worker, wrote that Kinsey "was indignant about what it
[the Judeo-Christian tradition] had done to our culture. He often cited the
inaccuracies and paranoia in which he asserted it abounded. He was quite blunt
in talking about this tradition and its effect on the sexual lives of people in our
own time. Kinsey also wrote that "moral attempts to control particular forms
of sexual outlet are designed to perpetuate the mores and are often devoid of
any logic, not to say scientific justification.
4 Zealously tried to show taboo behaviors were pretty common (and therefore
OK)
a. Estimated high rates for masturbation, premarital sex, adultery, oral sex,
etc.
B. Kinsey on homosexuality
1. Issue of huge political and social significance
a. How many homosexuals?
b. How much homosexual behavior?
2. Kinseys claims
a. 10% predominantly homosexual for at least 3 years of adulthood
b. 18% bisexual or homosexual for at least 3 years of adulthood
c. 4% exclusively gay throughout adulthood
d. 37% of men with some post-pubertal homosexual experience
3. These estimates were a serious and often shocking challenge to prevailing
popular and professional thought
C. The unsettled question
1. Were Kinseys claims accurate? Question has hung around for last 40 years
2. Meanwhile, Kinseys estimates have greatly impacted cultural attitudes
toward sex and homosexuality. Weight of counter evidence hasnt been
amassed until now
65
#. The Truth as /est %e Inow 3t
A. FRI research: we examined over 35 of "best studies available
1. Methodology limited to studies with non-biasing methodology and design
involving some form of random selection
2. Probability-based studies are the best shot for getting believable, unbiased
population estimates
B. Looked at two fundamental questions
1. What fraction has ever had a post-pubertal homosexual experience?
2. What fraction is bi-/homosexual in orientation?
C. Findings on post-pubertal homosexual experience
1. Overall, certainly less than 10%, probably <5% for men and women
2. The best studies include:
a. USA:
Kinsey-NORC 1970 - 8.2% M, 4.3% F after age 15
FRI-Dallas 1984 - 10.7% M, 7.4% F after age 12
NCHS 1988-91 - 3.5% M since 1977 (over 50,000 respondents)
GSS 1989 - < 6.3% M after age 17
RTI-Dallas 1989 - 7.6% M, 2.7% F since 1978
GSS 1990 - 4.8% M after age 17
Billy/Guttmacher 1993 - 2.3% M in last 10 years
b. Australia:
Ross 1986 - 11.2 M, 4.6% F
c. Great Britain
Forman/Chilvers 1984-86 - 1.7% M in random controls, 2.7% M among
patients
Johnson 1992 - 6.1% M (almost 19,000 respondents)
d. France
66
Spira 1992 - 4.1% M, 2.6% F (over 20,000 respondents)
e. Norway
Sundet 1987 - 3.5% M, 3.0% F
f. Denmark
Schmidt 1989 - 3.8% M
Melbye 1989 - 2.7% M
3. Median of studies listed above: 4.1% M, 2.0% F
Upper quartile: 7.0% M, 4.6% F
D. Findings on homosexual orientation
1. Overall, certainly less than 4%, probably around 2-3% M, 2% F are
homosexual or bisexual
2. The best studies include
a. USA:
Bell/Weinberg 1970 - < 2% total M and F (ratings of siblings)
Cameron/Ross 1975-78 - 3.1% M, 3.9% F
FRI 1983 - 5.4% M, 3.6% F (4,340 respondents)
Trocki 1988-89 - 3% M, 2% F
NCHS 1988-91 - 3.5% M (over 50,000 respondents)
Catania/NABS 1992 - 2% M, 2% F (4% in urban areas; 10,600 respondents)
Billy/Battelle 1993 - 1.1% M
b. Denmark
Schmidt 1987 - 0.6% M
c. Canada
MacDonald 1988 - 2% total M and F (> 5,500 college student respondents)
3. Median of studies listed above: 2% M, 2% F
Upper Quartile: 3.3% M, 3.7% F
67
E. Other evidence consistent with these findings
1. Census Bureau count of gay/lesbian couples
a. Figure of 157,400 is less than 1% of all US households
b. Washington Blade reported that "The total includes 88,200 Gay male couples
and 69,200 Lesbian couples. The overall total of 157,400 represented less than
one percent of the 91 million U.S. households. Unmarried heterosexual couples
totaled approximately 3.1 million. representing about three percent of the
total households.
2. Admissions from the NY Times on 4/16
a. First a belated report on Presidential exit poll results the Times had
previously "buried, showing only 3% M and 2% F homosexuals: "In fact, one
survey analyzing the President vote found that 3 percent of men and 2% of
women said they were gay, lesbian, or bisexual.
b. The Times also quoted a marketer to the homosexual community: "Sean
Strub, who runs a marketing firm in Manhattan that keeps mailing lists of
homosexuals for sale to advertisers and politicians, estimated the size of the
countrys gay population at 2.5 percent to 3.5 percent.
3. Simple capitalism: gay bookstores in D.C.
a. There are 11,000 bookstores of all types nationwide for an average of
18,000 adults/store
b. DCs 2.9 million adults support 210 bookstores or 14,000/store (more
educated populace)
c. Deacon MacCubbin, owner of Lamba Rising, the largest gay bookstore in the
world, claimed there exist 534 gay or feminist/lesbian stores worldwide
d. Only 116 stores are strictly gay/lesbian; only 60 of these are located in US
e. Even tripling this number of stores to account for lesbians who frequent
feminist bookstores, gay and lesbian bookstores only slightly over 1% of the
total
f. Furthermore, Mr. MacCubbin claims gays buy 8 times the books of the
average person
g. Yet there are only two gay/lesbian bookstores in DC
h. Even if each supports 15,000 gays/lesbians (not likely if gays really buy so
many books relative to the average reader, for then more gay bookstores
would be supportable), get total of 30,000 homosexuals in D.C, approximately
1% of the total adult population
68
#3. %hy %as Iinsey So Far $ff&
A. Sample skewed tremendously by non-typical populations
1. Had interviewed over 1,500 convicted sex offenders in first 10,000 histories
2. Included histories of 600 male and 600 female prostitutes in database
3. Regularly visited not only prisons but known homosexual communities of his
time. In fact, in very few years did Kinsey fail to hit either a prison or gay
enclave in his sampling efforts
4. All Kinseys histories were thrown together for analysis with little regard for
proper statistical weighting or handling of the data
B. Kinseys sampling scheme was not systematic but rather haphazard
1. No random or probability-based design
2. Used underworld contacts to get into gay and sexually deviant groups
3. Kinsey became very interested in documenting the extremes of sexual
diversity, even going so far as to film participants in sexual activity. The Kinsey
Institute contains an archive of such films.
4. By being so interested in diversity, Kinsey was much less interested in the
relatively "dull sexual histories of most ordinary Americans, and these "dull
histories did not show up in his sample nearly as often as they should have
#33. 3s ?ecent ?esearch Any More ?eliable Than Iinsey&
A. Usual criticism: gays wont reveal themselves on surveys, wont tell truth
1. NY Times, 4/15, reporting on the recent Guttmacher Institute study: "`The
big question mark over every survey like this is, Are people telling the truth?
said Jacqueline Darroch Forrest, director of research for the Guttmacher
Institute, a research organization focusing on sexual behavior and
contraception.
2. Researchers usually assume gays are undercounted
3. But is this necessarily so?
B. In many sex surveys, half or more completely refuse to fill out the
questionnaire or respond at all
1. These non-respondents are the crucial swing vote in determining whether
gays have been undercounted
2. Several investigators, including we at FRI, have suggested that non-
69
respondents are more sexually conservative than respondents, based on
experience in working with sexuality questionnaires
3. This would tend to mean that survey estimates with high rejection rates
overstate rather than understate figures on homosexual activity and
orientation, but evidence is not completely unequivocal
C. Evidence from three studies
1. FRI reanalysis found partial non-responders to be most like conservative
heterosexuals and not sexually liberal
2. U. Maryland study had two types of data collection
a. Study of student volunteers and a separate anonymous postal questionnaire
sent to a random portion of the student body
b. Comparison of the results showed that the volunteer students were more
sexually liberal and active than the students who responded to the random
mail survey
c. Given the anonymity associated with the mail survey, and the lack of
anonymity associated with being a volunteer participant, these results suggest
that the sexually liberal are indeed willing to share their experiences in a sex
study
3. RTI study
a. Paid up to $175 to initial refusals to get them to cooperate
b. Increased overall response rate to 88%
c. Found higher rate of homosexual contact among initial refusals than among
those who responded the first time, suggesting that some with homosexual
experience did initially try to hide that fact, at least until the `price was right.
d. However, a public ad campaign by gay leaders against the study may have
caused more initial refusals than would have normally occurred
e. Also, and very importantly, the target study population was cut off at age 54
even though most refusals in other studies tend to be older (heterosexuals)
D. Overall, current set of studies seems adequate and sufficient to estimate
size of gay subpopulation
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2009/02/the-numbers-game-what-
percentage-of-the-population-is-gay/
Are $!er A Thir" of Foster 0arent Molestations Homosexual&
70
Summary: 50% of foster parent abuse in a general population survey and 34%
of abuse as determined by the Illinois DCFS was homosexual. In news stories
in the 50 largest newspapers and wire services 1980-2003, 175 foster parents
sexually abused 351+ charges. For the 169 whose sex of victim could be
determined: 149 (88%) were men; 76 (53%) victimized homosexually; and 85
(50%) were unmarried. Men assaulted 319 (91%) victims, homosexual
practitioners 222 (63%), and the unmarried 164 (47%). From 1980-1994,
57% of the victims were girls, after 1994 56% were boys. In 21 group homes,
the molestation was homosexual in 15 (71%) and 31 of the 32+ perpetrators
were male and at least 334 of 349+ victims were boys.
Common opinion holds that, as with those who enjoy drugs, those pursing
homosexual activity recruit the young (Levitt & Klassen, 1974). Traditional
child-placement policies were therefore based on assumptions that children
fostered by those who engaged in homosexuality would be more apt to be
sexually molested, socially isolated, and engage in homosexuality themselves
(Bigner & Bozett, 1989; Golombok & Tasker, 1996).
A new view, initially advanced by homosexual enthusiasts around the turn of
the 20 th century, holds that homosexual activity should be irrelevant to social
policy and since it is of the same personal and social worth as any other kind
of sexual entertainment, it is terribly wrong to discriminate against it in any
way. This view, requiring social sacrifice on behalf of homosexuals as a
downtrodden class, was appealed to by nationally syndicated "ew =or: Times
columnist, Maureen Dowd. Regarding the 11 states in the U.S. 2004
Presidential election voted to ban gay marriage she complained: [the religious
were] stirred up to object to social engineering on behalf of societys most
vulnerable: the poor, the sick, the sexually different (2004).
The major psychological, psychiatric, and social work associations came to
adopt the homosexuals are merely sexually different and therefore deserve
protection view after the American Psychiatric Associations 1973 decision to
consider homosexuality non-pathological. Thus, in 1975 the American
Psychological Association [APA] said it deplored all public and private
discrimination in such areas as employment, housing, public accommodation,
and licensing against those who engage in or who have engaged in
homosexual activities and urged discrimination in their favor, e.g. the
enactment of civil rights legislation at the local, state, and federal level that
would offer citizens who engage in acts of homosexuality the same protections
now guaranteed to others on the basis of race, creed, color, etc. On July 28,
2004 the APA ( www.apa.org ) declared opposition to discrimination against
lesbian or gay parents adoption, child custody and visitation, foster care and
reproductive health services. Since the APA cited no comparative empirical
studies on fostering by those who engage in or have engaged in acts of
homosexuality, its stance appears philosophical rather than empirically
based.
In 1995 the major professional associations told the U.S. Supreme Court (
Romer> that tradition was completely wrong about homosexuals being inclined
to child molestation. The APA, the American Psychiatric Association, and the
71
National Association of Social Workers (NASW) categorically declared there is
no evidence of any positive correlation between homosexual orientation and
child molestation. Likewise, the National Education Association, the American
Federation of Teachers and the American Association of University Professors
told the Court that the belief that gay teachers in the classroom would recruit
students to homosexuality because they are more likely than heterosexual
men to molest children is without foundation in fact. (quoted by Cameron,
Cameron, & Landess, 1996, p. 385).
Propelled in part by the interrelated professional associations contentions that
fostering or adopting is a right, children do just as well if reared by
homosexuals, and past concerns about homosexuals proclivity to molest
children are mistaken, social policy has been shifting away from banning
placements with homosexuals. Thus, a 2003 survey of 307 adoption agencies
cross the U.S. by Adam Pertman reported that 60% of those replying accepted
applications from and 40% said they had placed children with homosexuals.
Pertman commented: we [homosexuals] started out at near zero, and just
within the last decade were up to 60% ( .enver Post , 10/29/03).
History of homosexual foster (arenting in the 6.S.
The first case of adoption to an open homosexual in the U.S. appears to have
involved David Frater, 28, in 1981. While living with his mother and a male
companion of 6 years in Riverside, California, Frater asked to adopt his
temporary foster-boy Kevin, a 16-year-old who had lived in 14 different foster
homes. When the Department of Public Social Services received an anonymous
tip that Frater engaged in homosexuality it attempted to block his adoption.
Judith Cummings (1983) of the "ew =or: Times , reported that Fraters cause
was championed by civil rights groups, with the APA and the NASW supporting
his candidacy. The lack of cited empirical evidence about the outcomes for
children fostered or adopted by homosexuals does not appear to have entered
the dispute nor was it noted in any of the stories that made the press. In 1982,
the now 17-year-old, Kevin, lived with his adopted father, and Fraters mother
(the lover had departed). Frater was heralded in press reports (Associated
Press 5/29/83) as providing a temporary home to kids living on the street and
lauded for his desire to adopt 4 more children including Kevins 16-year-old
brother then living in a boys home (Associated Press 5/29/03; 5/30/83).
United Press International said the community sees him as a model parent
and quoted Frater: I date and go out as often as I have time to. Sometimes
my friends spend the night here. Kevin doesnt feel it is anything out of the
ordinary. (6/14/83).
In 1987, still without citing any published systematic empirical studies as to
how children do when fostered or adopted by homosexuals nor offering any
empirical evidence of its own, the NASW passed a resolution decrying
resistance to using single parents, .including lesbian and gay parents, as
potential foster care and adoption resources. Despite the NASW endorsement,
utilizing homosexuals met resistance. Laws (e.g., Florida [1977], New
Hampshire [1987], and Nebraska [1995]) and regulations (e.g., Massachusetts
[1985]) were passed against homosexual foster parents or adopters. Yet, civil
72
rights suits had also been won against the policy of excluding homosexuals
from adoption (e.g., David Frater in California in 1982), and more recently the
use of homosexual foster or adoptive parents has been encouraged (e.g.,
Toronto [1994], Massachusetts [1999], District of Columbia [2003]).
Are homosexual foster parents as apt or more apt to molest their charges?
About a quarter of surveyed homosexuals reported sex with the underage (Bell
& Weinberg, 1978; Jay & Young, 1979). So enabling them to foster with a
vulnerable child might result in molestation. Two ways to generate empirical
data on whether homosexuals are more apt to molest present themselves: get
foster parents or their victims to report such abuse, or examine the
circumstances surrounding those who were caught. About half a million
children (~0.7% of the nations minors) are placed in foster homes every year.
If every year ~1% of these are sexually abused (Branigin, 2003) we confront a
rare event requiring ~1.5 million respondent random sample of the general
population to interview 100 victims. More narrowly, a random sample of
~10,000 foster children would be required to catch the 100 or so that might
have been molested.
Interviewing foster children proved impossible. When contacted, entities
placing children with homosexuals declined to provide information about
molestation by foster parents (e.g., including Seattle, District of Columbia,
Colorado Springs, Vermont and a number of states contacted by a politician
interested in the issue [Illinois provided some information, below]). Each
stated that it had not done nor did it contemplate interview research with its
charges or foster parents and would not allow examination of its confidential
records as an alternative. Even were an interview study to be done, the
children would have strong motives to conceal molestation (e.g., reporting
would result in a different placement, might prove embarrassing, etc.) and
might not produce useful results. Attempting to ask foster parents to admit
molestation seemed worthless.
General population surveys : While it was not determined how many
respondents had been in a foster home, nor how many of the incidents had
been reported to authorities, 6 (0.02%) of a general population random
sample of 3,714 adults from five metropolitan areas reported serious sexual
advances against them by a foster parent [3 homosexual against girls; 3
heterosexual: 1 against a boy, 2 against girls] e.g., 6 (0.59%) of 1,021
serious sexual advances reported by various caretakers. One woman also
reported that the advance led to sexual contact with a male foster parent
e.g., 0.27% of 369 sexual contacts reported with various caretakers/relatives
(Cameron, Proctor, Coburn, Larson, Forde, & Cameron, 1986). Of these 6
sexual interactions, all of which would have been actionable, 3 were
homosexual.
3nformation About Those 5aught
The Illinois Department of Children & Family Services provided what it
considered substantiated records of foster-parent sexual abuse for 1997-
2002. 270 parents committed sexual offenses against foster- or subsidized-
73
adoptive children. 67 (69%) of 97 mothers and 148 (86%) of 173 fathers
sexually abused girls; 30 (31%) mothers and 25 (14%) of fathers sexually
abused boys (i.e., 92 [34%] of perpetrators homosexually abused their
charges). 15 parents both physically and sexually abused charges: daughters
by 8 mothers and 4 fathers, sons by 3 mothers (i.e., for both forms of
substantiated abuse, homosexual perpetrators were involved in 53%)
(reported elsewhere [Cameron, 2005]).
Perpetrator records : South Carolina provided access to records of convictions
for child molestation, but they proved too biased and incomplete to be usable.
Officials in charge of the database alerted that few perpetrators with
competent counsel were convicted of child molestation (and the Attorney
Generals staff opined that men accused of molesting boys were
disproportionately represented by counsel) and, of course, the records of those
not convicted (but often guilty) could not be inspected. Of additional concerns,
due to plea bargains the charges for which a perpetrator was sentenced and
classified bore modest relationship to what he had actually done, and the
database was not set up to determine the circumstances of the molestation
(e.g., whether the perpetrator was a foster parent who molested his charge).
As the research of Able, Becker, Mittleman, Cunningham-Rathner, Rouleau, &
Murphy (1987) with the non-incarcerated demonstrated, the kinds and
numbers of sexual crimes occurring in the real world may be quite different
than those working with prisoners or clients might assume.
"ews stories : A substantial correlation between a small set of newspaper
stories about foster parent molestation and substantiated foster parent sexual
abuse from the Illinois DCFS dataset (above) has been reported (Cameron,
2003). Unlike a compilation of convicted perpetrators, news stories usually
focus on the charges - often the initial phase of a charge or arrest. So those
found not guilty as well as guilty are represented at this level of social
control (making the news as a possible molester is a form of punishment). As
long as the stories that made the news were not biased toward or against
homosexuals, examining the past 24 years of the 50 largest-circulation
newspapers and wire-service stories regarding foster parent molestations as an
index of foster parent molestation seemed reasonable (what actually happened
is only known to the perpetrators and victims). News stories are only one index
of the possible indices of foster parent misbehavior - but if various indices
were to generate much the same outcomes some confidence could be placed in
the findings. The time span involved in the news reports also enables a sense
as to whether the shift in child-placement policy regarding homosexuals noted
in Pertmans 2003 ( .enver Post , 10/29/03) survey of U.S. adoption agencies
is reflected in news stories of abuse.
.efinition of LhomosexualM
The common meaning of homosexual is sexual attraction toward a person of
the same sex; sexual relations between persons of the same sex (1992 "ew
1llustrated We#ster-s .ictionary ). The public component is sex with the same
sex, which could have an effect upon society, rather than attraction which
might not result in actions. The APA resolutions above indicate that lesbian or
74
gay (terms which carry diagnostic and political meanings) are essentially
synonymous with those who engage in or who have engaged in homosexual
activities (which is descriptive and potentially objective).
When homosexual is used diagnostically rather than descriptively, many
assume that a homosexual neither could nor would have sex with the
opposite sex (e.g., Jenny, Roesler & Poyer, 1994). But almost all homosexuals
have had sex with the opposite sex and perhaps a third are or have been
married (Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, & Michaels, 1994; Black, Gates, Sanders,
& Taylor, 2000). Some research has adopted the desire and/or behavior
standard. Thus, Fergusson, Horwood, & Beautrais (1999), in studying the
development of homosexuality from birth reported that at age 21, 20 of their
sample of 1,008 said they were homosexual or bisexual (but 4 of those who
said they were homosexual had not engaged in homosexual activity) and an
additional 8 reported sex with their sex since the age of 16. The researchers
considered all 28 homosexual.
As with Fergusson, et al . (1999) many studies report a minority of self-
described homosexuals who hadnt acted on their desires, some call
themselves homosexuals to make a political statement, and others who
engage in same-sex sexual activity decline to use the term. So recent research
has tended to ignore desire in favor of having engaged in homosexual behavior
irrespective of age of partners or their sexual interactions with the opposite sex
(e.g., the1990 British national survey of 18,876 adults [Johnson, Wadsworth,
Wellings, & Field, 1994]; the 1996 Centers for Disease Control national
sexuality survey of 12,381 adults [Anderson, Wilson, Barker, Doll, Jones &
Holtgrave, 1999). This has not proved intellectually troubling for other than
those committed to a diagnostic' meaning of homosexual.' Indeed, to most
researchers, the understanding of a homosexual is one who engages in same-
sex sex' is evident enough that only one team has bothered to ask a sample of
men convicted of sexually abusing boys what they were' -- and 86%
described themselves as homosexual or bisexual (Erickson, Walbek & Seely,
1988, p. 80). No one, including supporters of gay rights (e.g., Cochrane &
Mays, 2001; Herek, 1991) has difficulty in knowing (and arguing) about the
implications of these various studies for homosexuals.
When homosexual' is used as other than a behavioral descriptor, empiricism
suffers. Thus, the frequently cited Are children at risk for sexual abuse by
homosexuals? by Jenny, Roesler & Poyer (1994), who declined to use sexual
behavior to classify. These researchers attempted a kind of indirect diagnostic'
use of homosexual.' Jenny, et al . examined hospital charts about molested
children from Denver Children's hospital for one year. The researchers did not
interview the victims, caretakers, or perpetrators; instead they assumed that
unless a perpetrator was designated homosexual' on the hospital chart, the
perpetrator was a heterosexual (!). Because many of the perpetrators were
husbands or boyfriends of the mother (and thus presumably had sex with her),
Jenny, et al? naively assumed they were not homosexual.' Identifying only 2
of 269 perpetrators as gay or lesbian from charts, and assuming that ~1% of
adults are' homosexual, they concluded, no evidence is available from this
data that children are at greater risk to be molested by identifiable
75
homosexuals than by other adults (p. 44). Yet, a perpetrator of the same sex
had molested 60 (22%) of the 269 children and descriptively each of these
perpetrators would qualify as homosexual.'
While unfulfilled desire is not included by defining homosexuals' as those who
have engaged in sex with their sex, it has the advantage of being objective in
the sense that it could be visible to observers an important component of
empiricism. Since the motivations of a perpetrator are much more difficult to
establish than actions, using homosexual' descriptively is widespread. Thus,
law enforcement and public health officials often use homosexual to describe
a person who engages in same-sex sexual activity. Thus, adult homosexuals
often persuade teen-aged boys to engage in homosexual conduct by offering
them money (State of Maryland Commission on Criminal Law, 1972) or a
congregation [a gay bathhouse] of consenting homosexuals does not give
immunity from the criminal statute which prohibits open, lewd, and lascivious
conduct (331 So.2d 289 ) - both of which employ homosexual in a
descriptive rather than in a diagnostic or political sense. Likewise, the 1975
APA resolution sought protection for all those who engage in or have engaged
in homosexual acts ignoring considerations of motive. In a similar vein,
because so many of the men infected with HIV from sex with their sex also had
sex with the opposite sex, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control abandoned
homosexual and heterosexual for terms that describe the behavior on which
the classification is based. Thus the CDCs participation in the 1996 National
Household Survey of Drug Abuse, as well as many large national sex surveys
(Spira, Bajos & the ACSF group, 1994; Wellings, Field, Johnson, & Wadsworth,
1994), divided respondents into those who had engaged in same-sex sex
[irrespective of the ages of partners or participation in opposite-sex sex] v . if
they only engaged in opposite-sex sexual activity.
To lessen ambiguity, homosexual is used as a descriptor rather than a
diagnosis in the following analysis of news stories. Perpetrators who raped
same-sex victim(s) were designated homosexual [some were married and a
few also violated opposite-sex victims, see Table 1]; those who raped only
opposite-sex victims were designated heterosexual.
Method
Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, an Internet search service, scans the whole
text in over 50 regional and national newspapers, largely in the US, but also
including major papers in Australia, England, Canada, and New Zealand (e.g.,
the ,altimore 'un , ,oston Glo#e , 1ndependent [England], Ottawa Citi5en
[Canada]). Lexis-Nexis also scans the whole text of all wire services (e.g.,
Associated Press, United Press International). From 1980 through 2003, every
news story in the newspapers or wire services that included foster parent and
sex or child or child molestation was examined. Only news stories or first-
person accounts were tallied, not editorials or opinion pieces, so stories of
primarily contemporaneous events were examined. Only a few of the stories
listed the stated sexual preferences or sexual orientation of the
perpetrators. So, as noted above, the kind of sex in which perpetrators were
involved classified their sexual proclivities (e.g., perpetrators who violated
76
same-sex victim(s) were designated homosexual; perpetrators who sexually
violated only opposite-sex victims designated heterosexual). Since marital
status is generally provided in stories about child molestation (the reaction of
the spouse is newsworthy), where it was not reported, the perpetrator was
scored as unmarried. Perpetrators were scored married if they were identified
as married, widowed, or divorced at the time of the offense(s) since their
married status often led to their foster status. Perpetrators were considered
foster parents if either the story or perpetrator said so (this is not as open and
shut as it would appear since reporters covering a molestation often quoted
representatives of placement agencies as saying that they could not be sure
that paper work had been completed or the placement fully endorsed). Victims
were counted as listed in the news stories, and accusations were scored as
true (no retrial exonerated a perpetrator, though a few increased or decreased
the number of victims). Some, many, and other terms indicating a number of
victims were scored as 2 victims.
Since the same standard was applied to all alleged perpetrators in the
database, as long as there was no bias in the kind of molestations (e.g., same-
sex, opposite-sex) that made the press, the legal outcome is irrelevant. If a
plea agreement removed a childs molestation from the conviction, that childs
molestation was not counted in the victim totals. Molested children who were
fostered or adopted were counted as victims. Instances where foster-children
sexually interacted with each other or the natural children in the home were
not included. Molestations in group settings (e.g., shelters, orphanages) were
recorded separately. When it was unclear whether the facility was a group
home (some homes foster a large number of children and reporting was often
unclear), it was counted as a group home.
Results
0ri!ate homes : Of the 175 perpetrators, 154 (88%) were men (the victims
sex for 5 men and 1 woman could not be determined) (Table 1). Of the 149
men whose sex of victim could be determined, 76 (51%) were homosexual,
and 72 (48%) were unmarried. Of the 20 women whose sex of victim(s) could
be determined, 14 (70%) were homosexual. Of the 14 female homosexuals, 7
molested children along with 4 husbands (3 of these husbands scored
homosexual, 1 heterosexual) and 3 cohabiting boyfriends (2 of whom scored
heterosexual, 1 homosexual); no female heterosexuals molested with a male
partner. Of the 76 homosexual men, 3 molested children along with wives, 1
with a girlfriend, and 1 with a homosexual partner; 1 heterosexual man
molested the same girl(s) as his wife, 2 heterosexual men molested the same
girl(s) as their cohabiting girlfriends.
Male homosexuals molested 198 (62%) of the 319 children victimized by men
and female homosexuals 24 (70%) of the 32 children victimized by women
(i.e., 2.6/ male homosexual and 1.7/ female homosexual perpetrator). The 73
nonhomosexual males molested 121 girls and the 6 nonhomosexual females
molested 8 boys (i.e., 1.7/nonhomosexual male and 1.3/nonhomosexual
female perpetrator). Of the 351 victims whose sex could be determined, men
assaulted 319 (91%), homosexuals 222 (63%), and the unmarried 164 (47%).
77
News stories about foster parent molestation increased over time. Numbers of
classifiable perpetrators increased from 13 for 1980-84, to 69 in the 2000s
(Table 1). This increase was particularly evident among unmarried
homosexuals which rose from 4 (31%) perpetrators in 1980-84 to 26 (38%)
in the 2000s; unmarried homosexuals accounted for 5 (20%) of 25 victims in
1980 to 1984 and 62 (44%) of 142 in the 2000s. Homosexuals accounted for
86 (58%) of 139 victims from 1980-1994 and 136 (70%) of 194 thereafter.
From 1980 through 1994 for victims whose sex was determinable, 74 (57%) of
the 130 were girls; after 1994 most were boys (115 [56%] of 204).
Grou( homes : The findings are summarized in Table 2. 15 (71%) of the 21
events involved homosexuality, and only 5 of the 31+ male perpetrators had
not molested homosexually. All but one of the perpetrators in the 21 group
home stories was male (it appears that the Portuguese woman was arrested
because she aided the 9 men in their homosexual victimization of the boys, not
because she had sex with any of them). While there is ambiguity regarding the
dozens of perpetrators in Wales, most perpetrators there appear to have been
homosexual [at the time, news commentators in both print and on TV in
England remarked on this aspect of the scandal frequently]. The
preponderance of boy victims (334 of 345 whose sex could be determined) is
also consistent with a preponderance of homosexual perpetrators. Homosexual
molestations in group settings increased over time with 1 event in 1980 to
1984, 1 for 1985 to 1989, then 2 for 1990 to 194, then 3 for 1995 to 1999,
and 7 for 2000 through 2003.
.iscussion
Attempting to determine the prevalence and characteristics of the sexual
interactions that occur in the real world is difficult, and no obvious gold
standard to index the real world presents itself. Questioning foster children
might prove useful, but such a survey cannot be carried out at this time. A
general population sample would be prohibitively expensive. Examining those
caught appears more feasible. The convicted are a biased sample, since the
sophisticated or affluent are much less apt to be convicted, and their records
verge on the unusable. The numbers of disapproved sexual situations with
children in the real world that occur undoubtedly exceed by far the few that
are caught (in my clinical experience, of the 5 teachers or clergy who were
caught molesting their charges, their employers did a good job of making sure
that the events were not known to the police or the newspapers - some
perpetrators even left with glowing recommendations), and may even exceed
the number reported by anonymous respondents (as Able, et al ., 1987).
Newspaper stories are only a tiny sample of the real world, and the
information in the stories has limits, but news stories address the kinds of
detail necessary and are often the only source of public information about rare
sexual events that is readily available.
As noted above, the key question about the use of news stories to index
molestation of foster children by homosexuals is whether these stories are
systematically biased. Absent a systematic bias against or in favor of reporting
that the molestation was homosexual, a sufficient number of such stories over
78
a long enough period would appear to have a good chance of being a
reasonable index of the underlying reality.
Stories 3n!ol!ing Homosexuality Seem Co 4ess 4i2ely To LMa2e CewsM
There is evidence from the news story database suggesting limited bias, and
thus the possibility of a decent correlation between the numbers of news
stories involving homosexual molestation and the underlying reality. No bias is
suggested by the fact that in private homes 88% of the molesters were men
who accounted for 91% of the victims. These parameters seem reasonable in
light of child molestation lore (Blanchard, Barbaree, Bogaert, Dicky, Klassen,
Kuban, & Zucker, 2000). That the first homosexual to adopt, David Frater,
would be charged with molesting a foster son in 1984, may have made his
story more newsworthy ( Associated Press 9/28/84). On the other hand, the
arrest of Ronald Hewitt for molesting a foster son in 2001, mere days after the
boys placement, would also appear newsworthy. After all, Hewitt had been
recruited as part of the Massachusetts Department of Social Service Safe
Homes project with homosexual mentors, which started in 1999 with
considerable fanfare and media attention as the first in the nation (
Associated Press 8/18/01). Yet the ,oston Glo#e , the major newspaper for
New England, did not report the event while the Associated Press did.
Wire services rather than large newspapers may be more apt to report on
homosexual molestation. From January through September, 2003 the 50
largest newspapers published 156 stories about child molestations. Of these,
77.5 (50%) concerned heterosexual molestation, 65.5 (42%) homosexual
molestation, and 13 (8%) molestations by perpetrators whose sexual
preferences could not be determined (if a man and a woman molested a girl, it
was counted as 0.5 homosexual and 0.5 heterosexual). During the same
period, newswires published 35 stories about child molestations, of which 10.5
(30%) concerned heterosexual molestation, 20.5 (59%) homosexual
molestation, and 4 (11%) molestations by perpetrators whose sexual
preferences could not be determined. The 50 newspapers did not publish a
story about 14 of the homosexual stories and 7 of the heterosexual stories in
the wire service accounts. Had the newspapers reported all the news service
stories the number of unique heterosexual stories would have increased to
84.5 and unique homosexual stories to 80.5. The only substantial discrepancy
involved one newspapers unknown preference of perpetrator stories, who
turned out to be a homosexual in the wire services account.
Some of the stories may have made the news because of a combination of
interesting incongruities. Thus, Mr. Lindsey, though unmarried, was permitted
to adopt 11 foster boys starting in 1971 (he was not caught abusing the boys
until 1988 [ Associated Press 12/5/1988]). Likewise, in spite of his conviction
for child molestation in 1967, starting in 1977, Mr. Schwarz, until he was
arrested for possessing child pornography in 1989, was given at least 24 boys
to foster parent by the state of Massachusetts ( ,oston Glo#e 5/18/1989). Mr.
Coleman got out of prison after serving 7 years for sodomy against minors in
1971. Yet he was permitted to be a foster parent for 5 boys between 1974-
1979 ( <nited Press 1nternational , 1/21/1981).
79
The proportion of homosexuals involved in newsworthy kinds of molestations
suggests that incongruities do not account for homosexuals disproportionate
presence among foster parent molesters. For instance, any molestation of a
foster child by a man of the cloth would appear newsworthy. Ten ministers
molested their foster-children: 7 engaged in homosexuality, and they raped 12
victims (the locations and dates of these stories are: LA 11/11/83; IL 5/12/89;
Canada 4/24/91; England 10/5/98; FL 3/5/99; MI 9/10/02; CO 8/18/02); 3
were heterosexual, and they raped 6 victims (OH 9/1/95; MA 12/29/98; FL
11/13/01). A man who falsely presented himself as a minister to gain foster-
parent status engaged in homosexuality with a number of foster sons (TN
1/9/97).
Similarly, 7 widely heralded foster fathers - that is, men who won foster
parent of the year awards or garnered publicity because of their exceptional
caring, included 4 who engaged in homosexuality (who raped 7 foster-children
[IN 2/27/83; IL 6/19/86; FL 12/5/88; CT 3/22/97]) and 3 heterosexuals (who
raped 8 foster daughters [MI 5/18/85; TX 1/25/95; VT 7/30/99]). Three of the
5 instances where the foster-child was raped and tortured involved men who
engaged in homosexuality (England 11/16/88; MN 12/14/92; RI 6/9/93; CA
5/3/99; CA 9/24/00). Likewise, homosexual perpetrators were involved in 2 of
the 4 instances where social workers or DPS officers molested foster children
(Wales 2/12/95; CA 5/3/99; WA 7/7/99; GA 3/22/02; OR 5/5/04), and in 2 of
the 3 stories where the foster child had been prostituted by the foster
parent(s) (Taipei 8/7/94; CA 9/24/00; CO 8/18/02). So the prevalence of
homosexuality was about the size in these incongruous or horrific incidents as
it was in the news story database as a whole.
While examining news stories is different from a controlled comparison study
(e.g., with matched pairs of foster children randomly drawn from the total set
of foster children, etc.), it has some compensatory advantages. As with the
study of hospital charts (Jenny, et al? , 1994) or those incarcerated for child
molestation (Blanchard, et a l., 2000), a part of the real world rather than
responses to questions generated the data. With news stories, the problems
associated with examining case reports (e.g., incompletion, ambiguity,
handwriting) or the sampling and measurement problems inherent in the usual
comparison study (e.g., refusals to participate, ambiguous responses) are
largely avoided. Further, the database is available for inspection on Lexis-
Nexis.
/asis For 5onsi"ering Homosexuals More A(t to Molest
Court cases and convictions
Common opinion about those who engaged in homosexuality or the
undesirability of homosexual parents did not come out of the blue. Rather the
belief had some basis in what were considered to be facts. In the past, the
stories people heard and told were among the most influential forces in
shaping common opinion about just about anything including homosexuality.
These stories were a kind of empirical reality test. Individuals experienced
events and told others. Beliefs about the criminal portion of society
80
(homosexual activity was illegal everywhere in the U.S. until 1962) were
informed by the experiences of police, jurists, the victimized and the accused.
Stories radiated from these individuals to their families, friends and beyond.
For the past ~200 years, those who lived in cities were exposed to
newspapers. Since newspapers often reported on criminality, their stories also
influenced common opinion.
From their contact with the British criminal justice system, jurists Rees & Ushill
(1956) concluded the male homosexual naturally seeks the company of the
male adolescent, or of the young male adult, in preference to that of the fully-
grown man. [In 1947] 986 persons were convicted of homosexual and
unnatural offences [in Great Britain]. Of those, 257 were indictable offences
involving 402 male victims.. The great majority of [whom]. were under the
age of 16. Only 11%. were over 21. This disproportionality (~20% of
offences in 1947 involved the underage) informed their etiologic theory: it is
vain to blind oneself to the fact that the problem of male homosexuality is in
essence the problem of the corruption of youth by itself and by its elders. It is
the problem of the creation by means of such corruption of new addicts ready
to corrupt a still further generation of young men and boys in the future (p.
29).
U.S. sodomy case law provides a similar flavor of the stories that influenced
common opinion regarding homosexuality. Perusing the legal dataset compiled
by George Painter, a gay-rights historian (e.g., fortunately for Washingtonians,
[initially] sodomy was legal in Washington) enables a sense of the content of
sodomy prosecutions he provides. Painter has traced the history of sodomy
laws in each U.S. state ( sodomylaws.org/sensibilities ). Examining Painters
accounts for 8 states from across the country (Washington, California, Illinois,
Texas, Maine, Rhode Island, Florida, Maryland), and considering only those
cases in which the adult or child status of the participants could be determined
from Painters accounts, further basis for the common opinion about
homosexuality and homosexual parenting can be detected.
In Washington, of prosecutions for sodomy in 12 cases, 4 involved man-man
sex, 7 man-boy sex (an 11 year old boy was the youngest victim; one case
involved a boy seduced by his employer; two stepsons were molested by their
stepfather) and in one case a man performed oral sex on a girl. Of 29 cases in
Texas: 14 (48%) concerned man-man sex; 12 (41%) concerned man-boy sex
(2 cases of fathers having sex with their sons one of whom was adopted; and
a school counselor having sex with 2 boys), and 3 boys having sex with other
boys. For Illinois, of 12 cases: 7 (58%) involved man-boy sex (one policeman,
one music teacher with students, one man with his employee, one 67 year old
man with a 9 year old boy [who ratted on him because he was dumped for
another boy]), and 5 (42%) involved man-man contact. For Californias 79
cases: 37 (47%) were man-man, 35 (44%) man-boy (including a public school
teacher with 2 boys, a Catholic Priest with 3 boys, a father with his son), 2
boy-boy cases, a woman-woman case, and 4 cases of man-woman sodomy.
For Rhode Island, the 4 cases involved men with other men at a YMCA, a man
with a 14 year old boy, a man with a 16 year old boy, and a man performing
oral sex on a woman. For Maine, the 2 cases involved a man with a woman and
81
a grandfather with his grandson. For Maryland, of 31 cases 21 (68%) were
man-boy (including a father on his 13 year old son; the youngest boy
assaulted was 4 yr.), one was man-woman, and 9 (29%) were man-man. For
Florida, of 7 cases, 4 were man-man, one man-boy, and 2 man-girl. Thus, for
these 8 states, 74 (42%) of the 176 cases concerned man-man and 86 (49)%
man-boy sex twice the fraction for Great Britain in the 1947 Rees & Ushill
compilation (1956).
The tilt toward sexual involvement with the underage by those who enjoy
homosexual activity is evident in these records. Since many of these criminal
trials undoubtedly made the newspapers and otherwise generated stories that
traveled considerable distances, and that 6 (7%) of the 87 man-boy cases
involved fathers, stepfathers or grandfathers and another 3 (3%) teachers,
could have contributed to the common opinion that those who enjoy
homosexual sex are more apt to molest their charges.
'e( 'urveys
A considerable fraction of homosexuals have admitted to sex with the
underage in major sex surveys. And almost all of these also report sex with
adults. Bell & Weinberg (1978) asked 671 homosexual men and 288
homosexual women about the proportions of their homosexual partners who
were 16 or younger when you were 21 or older (p. 311). Of the men, 77%
said none, 23% said half or less, and none said more than half; of the
women, 94% said none, 3.8% said half or less, and none said more than
half. While, 156 (23%) of the men and 11 (4%) of the women admitted to
having had some sex with children, none was a pedophile in the sense of only
having had sex with or could only have sex with children. Indeed, every one of
these admitted child molesters said that children accounted for no more than
half their sexual partners.
Jay and Young (1979) analyzed 4,329 questionnaires from homosexual men
and 962 women across the United States, aged 14 to 82. They asked: How
often do you have sex with men or boys [for the lesbians women or girls] of
the following ages? [always, very frequently, somewhat frequently, somewhat
infrequently, very infrequently, once]. 26 of their male respondents (0.6% of
their male respondents) and 10 of the female respondents (1% of their female
respondents) were 14-17 years old, so some of the answers might reflect sex
between teens and other teens or between teens and children. Jay & Young did
not provide raw numbers, only percentages: 4% of gays said they engaged in
sex with boys under the age of 9; 7% said they engaged in sex with boys aged
9-12; and 23% said they engaged in sex with boys aged 13-15. Even if we
subtract the 0.6% of respondents aged 14-17, we are still left with 22% of
gays 18 years or older who said they had sex with boys aged 15 or younger.
For lesbians: 1% said they had sex with girls under the age of 9; 2% said they
engaged in sex with girls aged 9-12; and 6% said they had engaged in sex
with girls aged 13-15. Even if we subtract the 1% of lesbians who were aged
14-17, we are still left with 5% of lesbians 18 years or older who reported
having sex with girls aged 15 or younger.
82
No gays and 0.5% of lesbians reported only having sex with children (only
percentages were reported). For gays, 1% said they engaged in sex with boys
aged 13-15 very frequently, but none said always. None said always to boys
aged 9-12 and boys under the age of 9, whereas 2% said they always had
sex with those 16-19, 5% said they always had sex with 20-24 year-olds, and
4% said that they always had sex with 25-29 year-olds. For lesbians, none
said they always engaged in sex with girls under 9 yr. (although 1% said they
did somewhat frequently), none said that they always had sex with girls
aged 9-12 (but 1% said somewhat frequently and another 1% said once).
However, 0.5% said they always had sex with girls aged 13-15, 1% very
frequently, 0.5% somewhat frequently, 2% said very infrequently, and 2%
said once. Even adjusting for the 1% of lesbian respondents under the age of
17, it is clear that a fraction of adult lesbians report engaging in sex with girls.
Respondents were asked Whether or not you have sex with any of the
following age groups, indicate how you feel about the idea of having sex with
each of them (p. 206) [very positive, somewhat positive, neutral, somewhat
negative, very negative, not sure]. For gays, 3% said they felt very positive
and 2% said they felt somewhat positive, 2% neutral, and 7% not sure
about having sex with boys under 9 yr. 4% said they felt very positive, 1%
somewhat positive, 3% neutral, and 7% not sure about having sex with
boys 9-12 yr. And 11% said they were very positive, 8% somewhat positive,
8% neutral, and 5% not sure about having sex with boys aged 13 to 15 yr.
For lesbians, 3% said they felt very positive about having sex with girls under
age 9, 0.5% were somewhat positive, and 2% were not sure. Regarding girls
9-12: 1% very positive, 1% somewhat positive, 0.5% neutral, and 4%
unsure. And regarding girls 13-15: 2% very positive, 4% somewhat
positive, 6% neutral, and 4% not sure.
The Bell & Weinberg and Jay & Young surveys generated similar point
estimates of the fraction of homosexuals who reported sexual relations with
children: 23% and 22% for gays; 4% and 5% for lesbians. This consistency
between the two surveys, one based on a semi-random sample and the other
on a volunteer sample, lends credence to the Jay & Young findings regarding
6% of lesbians and 19% of gays reporting positive feelings toward having
homosexual sex with children.
0ther 1areta.ers: 'eachers
After parents, teachers may be the most influential people in childrens lives.
Studies to date report a disproportionate homosexual footprint in pupil
molestations. In 1978, Hechinger & Hechinger reported that in a survey of
1,400 principals: 7% reported complaints about homosexual and 13%
complaints about heterosexual contact between teachers and pupils (i.e., 35%
of complaints were about homosexuals). In a ten state study of teachers who
had been formally disciplined for sexual interaction with their pupils (Rubin,
1988), 122 men had abused girls and 59 (33%) men had abused boys; 14
women had abused boys and 4 (29%) women had abused girls - 32% of the
molestations for which these teachers were convicted were homosexual. In a
random 6-city study of 5,182 adults (Cameron & Cameron, 1996b), of the 57
83
sexual contacts reported with elementary or secondary teachers 13 (23%)
were homosexual. Of those reporting serious sexual advances by elementary
teachers, 27% were homosexual; by secondary teachers, 20% were
homosexual. Wishnietsky (1991) contacted each of the 140 school systems in
North Carolina and inquired about disciplinary actions against high school
teachers or administratos for sexual physical contact with pupils in the past
three years. Of 21 events reported by superintendents, 6 (29%) involved
homosexual faculty (4 men with boys, 2 women with girls), 15 heterosexual
faculty (13 men with girls, 2 women with boys). A survey of 8 of the nations
newspaper stories of child molestation (Cameron & Cameron, 1998) found 23
teachers who were reported to have molested their pupils 11 (48%)
homosexually; a survey of @irst'earch and "ews#an: uncovered 22 teachers
who had molested their pupils 10 (45%) homosexually. Whether the
database dealt with the disciplined (Rubin, 1988; Wishnietsky, 1991),
superintendent reports (Hechinger & Hechinger, 1978), news stories (Cameron
& Cameron, 1998), or the presumably uncaught reported by respondents
(Cameron & Cameron, 1996b), the fraction of molestation events involving
homosexuals was disproportionate depending upon the index, ranging
between 20% (respondent-reported) to 48% (newspaper stories).
Pedophilie Not A Useful Category
Some (e.g., Herek, 1991) argue that those who have sex with children are
pedophiles rather than real homosexuals. This complex diagnostic
distinction is not very useful. The term pedophile is even more recent and
ambiguous than homosexual. Newspaper stories often treat pedophile as
synonymous with child molester as do some advocates of man-boy sex (e.g.,
OCarroll, 1980). But the .iagnostic and 'tatistical *anual o& *ental .isorders
1A (American Psychiatric Association, 1994) specifies that the disorder of
desiring/having sex with children must last at least 6 months (p. 528). Very
few of the homosexual respondents who reported sex with children in Bell &
Weinberg (1978) or Jay & Young (1979) [above] would warrant a diagnosis of
pedophile.
Orthodox Jews permit a girl to be married at age 3, but consummation awaits
her having two pubic hairs or attaining age 12. Roman and Byzantine law
permitted marriage to girls at 12 and boys at 14 (Lascaratos & Poulakou-
Rebelakou, 2000), old English law recognized consent to sex with the opposite
sex by a girl of 10 or a boy of 13, and the 1900 U.S. Census had a married
and working category for girls aged 10-15. Surely, all the men who lived under
these laws and had sex with girls that we consider underage, did not have a
disorder of pedophilia. Those who violate their societys age of consent laws
are engaging in criminality, but the proportion of these criminals who have a
disorder is questionable.
Linkage between men who enjoy same-sex sex and attempts to include boys in
their sexual activity has a long history. The 2 nd century .idache commanded
thou shalt not corrupt boys, and, by the 4 th century Roman, as well as
Byzantine and English law harshly condemned homosexual sex with boys. The
gay movements attempt to eliminate laws against boy/man sex has received
84
attention in both Europe and the U.S. for the past four decades (Rueda, 1982).
Thus Tom OCarrolls Paedophilia6 the radical case (1980) which argues for the
legalization of man/boy sex was reviewed favorably in the Advocate [the
largest circulation U.S. gay magazine] and published by Alyson [at the time the
largest gay themed publishing house]. Those in favor of intergenerational sex
have marched under descriptive banners in many gay rights parades from San
Francisco to New York to London to Berlin. The consistency between the history
of pederasty, reported sex with children (Bell & Weinberg, 1978), reported
positive feelings about sex with children (Jay & Young, 1979), empirical studies
of teacher-pupil sexual interaction, and the public face of the gay movement is
noteworthy.
There may be a growing willingness to (lace chil"ren with
homosexuals
The increases evident in Table l are consistent with a change in the employ of
more homosexual foster and adoptive parents and the growing number of
unmarried homosexual male foster parents in the private and group care of
foster children. Additionally consistent is the fact that girls constituted most
victims in the database during 1980-1994, while from 1995-2003, boys did. In
many clinical and forensic series, girls outnumber boy victims (Blanchard, et al
., 2000), although in a large non-clinical sample, boys outnumbered girls (Able,
et al2 1987).
Homosexuals often account for about a third of the perpetrators in clinical and
forensic series of adult child molesters (e.g., the best epidemiological evidence
indicates that only 2-4% of men attracted to adults prefer men; in contrast,
around 25-40% of men attracted to children prefer boys.. Thus the rate of
homosexual attraction is 6-20 times higher among pedophiles [Blanchard, et
al , 2000, p. 464]). Homosexuals constituted 76 (51%) of the 149 male and 14
(70%) of the 20 female foster perpetrators in the private foster home stories in
the news story database and almost certainly a substantial majority of
perpetrators in the group home stories.
In the Lexis-Nexis database 55% of the 169 perpetrators whose victims sex
could be determined engaged in homosexuality with their charges, while in
Illinois 34% of the 270 perpetrators did. In the population sample (Cameron,
et al ., 1986), 3 (50%) of the 6 respondents who reported criminal sexual acts
against them by their foster parents said it was homosexual. The agreement
between these three findings from quite different sources is noteworthy.
Likewise, there is good agreement between the Illinois foster care system and
the Lexis-Nexis databases regarding the proportion of homosexual female
perpetrators, e.g., 69% and 70% respectively (and all 3 homosexual events in
the general population survey concerned female perpetrators). But there is
poorer agreement between the 14% of male homosexual perpetrators from
Illinois and the 55% of male homosexual perpetrators from Lexis-Nexis (and
there were no gay molesters in the general population sample).
Addendum: After the above had been accepted for publication, 2004 was
examined. In 2004 there were 29 molestation stories about foster parents: 19
85
were homosexual (18 men, 1 woman) and these foster parents abused 28
boys and 1 girl; in 10 heterosexual events, 10 foster fathers molested 16 girls.
Thus 66% of foster parent perpetrators in 2004 were homosexual and they
accounted for 64% of the victims. In addition, a DPS officer charged with
having sex with at least one boy conspired with an openly homosexual male
foster parent to have access to boys (OR 5/5/04), and 2 boys were molested in
a group home, but sex of perpetrators was not provided (TX 8/16/04).
How .is(ro(ortionate 3s The Homosexual Foot(rint&
Those who engage in homosexuality are less apt to have children, to be
married or have been married (Black, et al ., 2000). They are also less apt to
say they want to have children and have fewer children if they do (Cameron &
Cameron, 1996; Black, et al ., 2000). So while the fraction of homosexual
foster-parents is unknown, it seems unlikely that it is as large as the
proportion of homosexuals in the adult population. While the precise proportion
of those who are engaging in homosexuality in the adult population is
unknown, it seems unlikely that it exceeds 3% (Black, et al , 2000), indeed,
the June 2004 Canadian Census survey of 121,300 adults aged 18+ put it at
1.4%. The little that is known about the proportion of homosexuals in the
population of foster parents suggests that it is less than 3%. Ottawa was
among the first jurisdictions to actively recruit homosexual foster parents. As
of October 24, 2002, homosexuals were present in 9 of 278 Ottawas approved
foster, and two had not yet been given a foster-child ( Ottawa Citi5en
10/24/2002), thus less than 3% of Ottawas placements were with
homosexuals.
Married homosexuals might not be known as homosexuals to agencies (or
their spouses). In the 1996 National Household Survey of Drug Abuse, a well-
done representative sample of noninstitutionalized adults in the US, about
0.1% of currently married men and 0.7% of currently married women reported
a same-sex sexual partner in the past 12 months. This suggests that 320,000
of the approximately 84 million currently married 18-59 year-olds are
homosexuals [www.icpsr.umich.edu/samhda]). After passage of its 1987 law
against homosexuals adopting or foster parenting, New Hampshire polled
foster and adoptive parents asking whether they engaged in homosexuality.
Ninety percent of respondents said that they did not, and 10% declined to
answer on the grounds that the question was an invasion of privacy ( "ew
=or: Times 3/27/88). It is unknown if any who refused to answer were
homosexual. Since the Ottawa survey was conducted in an environment highly
accepting of homosexuals, and for most of the 24 years covered by our survey
of foster parent molestations homosexuals were barred from fostering, even if
married homosexuals are counted-in, the Ottawa report that 3% of approved
foster placements are homosexual may be toward the high side for the
proportion of the Western worlds foster parents. If the 3% expectation were
applied to the 169 perpetrators uncovered in the Lexis-Nexis database, 5
homosexual perpetrators rather than the 82 actually counted would have been
involved in molestation ( B 2 > 100; P < .0001), indicating a greater risk of
sexual molestation if a child is placed with a homosexual.
86
Screening< Training< An" Home #isits Ha!e Significant Failure ?ates
Agencies pursuing the new philosophy of placements with homosexuals often
do the same background checks and make prospective foster parents attend
the same training. These procedures, they contend, will weed out those likely
to offend. The Lexis-Nexis database provides evidence that these techniques
frequently fail. Screening prospective foster-parents, even for previous
convictions for sexual child abuse, was inefficient. A number of cases besides
those of Schwarz and Coleman detailed above involved fostering by those
previously convicted of child molestation (e.g., NJ 1/21/81; WA 8/31/90; IL
8/31/90; MO 9/1/90; Scotland 7/11/94; England 5/23/97; NM 3/3/00; Fl,
2/5/03). A foster parent known to have molested was given children anyway
(GA 10/27/93). Home visits of social workers have frequently failed to uncover
substantial sexual abuse (e.g., CA 5/3/99; CA 2/24/03; MA 2/21/03; MD
7/8/03), and reports by foster-children of sexual abuse have been lost in the
shuffle (e.g., Canada 5/14/93; England 5/19/94; NY 3/16/94; WI 12/23/98;
CO 2/18/03; WA 2/21/03). The most glaring example of the inefficiency of
background checks may be the fact that it took years and many molestations
before a male couple in which the one who pretended to be a woman was
discovered to be a man (PA 2/12/02) - how could a good background check
miss the sex of the applicant?
In addition, in numerous situations the molested children were intimidated and
silenced for years. For instance, in their adulthood two foster-sons went public
about one of the four homosexual placements in Minneapolis. Even though
early in the placement one of the boys was tied up and burned with matches,
.foster-care workers violated state law by failing to report the abuse. [The
gay couple] fooled everybody who came to our door, said one of the foster-
sons. On the staircase wall was a family photograph that is ingrained in [my]
memory as the symbol of hypocrisy. Youd look at that picture and swear
nothing was wrong with this family, he said. The typical all-American family
with everyone smiling. But the boys had been continuously sexually molested
and tortured - one beginning at age 4 yr. Further, although the statute of
limitations had not expired when all of this came to light, the perpetrators were
never prosecuted. These facts led reporter Paul McEnroe to question the
motivations of the protective service bureaucracy in this case ( *inneapolis
'tar Tri#une , 12/24/92).
5onclusion
Including the addendum, an oversized homosexual footprint in the molestation
of foster children has appeared in 4 different empirical databases. An Illinois
bureaucracy put it at 34%, a general population survey at 50%, the news story
1980-2003 database at 63%, and the news story 2004 database at 66%. No
one of these studies is definitive, indeed, just what would constitute a
definitive study is obscure. But one of the studies is probably from the universe
of the uncaught and the other three from the universe of the caught.
Compared to the kinds of empirical evidence usually cited by those in social
service or the social sciences as evidence for or against a policy, this finding
appears pretty solid. Which one of the four studies generated a parameter
87
closest to the truth is uncertain, but even the lowest estimate should cause
pause about changing social policy regarding homosexual adoption and foster
parenting.
This disproportionate homosexual footprint is consistent with what one might
expect given the history of sodomy in general, the history of sodomy in the
legal systems of Great Britain and the U.S., and what we know about teacher-
pupil molestation. It is also consistent with the responses of homosexuals to
studies that inquired about their involvement with and desires toward children
- carried out and reported by pro-gay investigators (e.g., Bell & Weinberg,
1978; Jay & Young, 1979).
The APA and the NASW have put their considerable social standing behind
removing the traditional discrimination against homosexual foster or adoptive
parents (e.g., the 1987 NASW resolution decrying resistance to using single
parents, .including lesbian and gay parents, as potential foster care and
adoption resources and the 2004 APA resolution against discrimination
against lesbian or gay parents adoption, child custody and visitation, foster
care and reproductive health services). Yet the evidence published to date
indicates that at least a third of foster parent molestations of charges is
homosexual. These associations claim to adhere to empiricism to test their
beliefs and recommendations against empirical findings, and a willingness to
change their stances if the empirical evidence is otherwise. The results from
the newspaper story surveys, in concert with the previously published
evidence, makes it likely that homosexuals account for at least a third of
foster-parent molestations. Yet these associations have not only ignored the
empirical evidence that has been published but have cited no empirical
evidence to the contrary. Taking novel positions at variance with both custom
and what appears to be the empirical truth without empirical evidence that
supports these novel positions are not the actions of objective, empirically-
driven associations.
?eferences
Able GG, Becker JV, Mittleman M, Cunningham-Rathner J, Rouleau JL, &
Murphy WD. (1987) Self-reported sex crimes of nonincarcerated paraphiliacs.
%ournal o& 1nterpersonal Aiolence 2:3-25.
Anderson, J.E., Wilson, R. W., Barker, P., Doll, L., Jones, T.S., & Holtgrave, D.
(1999) Prevalence of sexual and drug-related HIV risk behaviors in the U.S.
adult population: results of the 1996 national household survey on drug abuse.
%ournal o& Ac7uired 1mmune .e&iciency 'yndromes , 21, 148-156.
Bell, A. P. & Weinberg, M. S. (1978) Homose(ualities6 a study o& diversity
among men and women . New York: Simon & Schuster.
Bigner, J. J. & Bozett, F. W. (1988). Parenting by gay fathers. *arriage and
@amily Review , 14, 155-175.
Black, D., Gates, G., Sanders, S., & Taylor L. (2000) Demographics of the gay
88
and lesbian population in the United States: evidence from available systematic
data sources. .emography 37:139-154.
Blanchard R, Barbaree HE, Bogaert AF, Dicky R, Klassen P, Kuban ME, Zucker
KJ. (2000) Fraternal birth order and sexual orientation in pedophiles. Arch
'e(ual ,ehav 29:463-478.
Branigin, W. (2003) Officials assess county child welfare system. Washington
Post , 7/10/03, p. TO3.
Cameron, P., Proctor, K., Coburn, W., Larson, H., Forde, N., & Cameron, K.
(1986) Child molestation and homosexuality. Psychological Reports , 38, 327-
337.
Cameron P, Cameron K. Homosexual parents. (1996) Adolescence 31:757-776.
Cameron, P. & Cameron, K. (1996) Do homosexual teachers pose a risk to
pupils? %ournal o& Psychology 130, 603-613. (b)
Cameron, P., Cameron, K., Landess, T. (1996) Errors by the American
Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, and the
National Educational Association in representing homosexuality in amicus briefs
about Amendment 2 to the U.S. Supreme Court. Psychological Reports 79,
383-404.
Cameron, P. & Cameron, K. (1998) What proportion of newspaper stories about
child molestation involves homosexuality? Psychological Reports 82, 863-871.
Cameron, P. (2003) Molestations by homosexual foster parents: newspaper
accounts vs official records. Psychological Reports 93:793-802.
Cameron, P. (2005) Homosexual foster parent molestations in Illinois, 1997-
2002. Submitted to Psychological Reports .
Cochrane SD & Mays VM. (2001) Lifetime prevalence of suicide symptoms and
affective disorder among men reporting same-sex sexual partners: results
from NHANES III. American %ournal o& Pu#lic Health , 90, 573-578.
Cummings, J. Homosexual views adoption approval as victory. "ew =or: Times
1/10/83, section A; p. 8.
Dowd, M. (2004) Bush team summons our nasty devils. Roc:y *ountain
"ews , 11/9/04, 31A.
Eriskson, w. D., Walbek, N. H., & Seely R. K. (1988) Behavior patterns of child
molesters. Archives o& 'e(ual ,ehavior 17, 77-86.
Fergusson, DM, Horwood, LJ, & Beautrais, AL. (1999) Is sexual orientation
related to mental health problems and suicidality in young people? Archives o&
General Psychiatry 56;876-880.
89
Golombok, S. & Tasker, F. (1996). Do parents influence the sexual orientation
of their children? Findings from a longitudinal study of lesbian families.
.evelopmental Psychology , 32, 3-11.
Hechinger, G., & Hechinger, F. M. (1978) Should homosexuals be allowed to
teach? *cCall-s , 105(6), pp. 100f.
Herek, G. M. (1991) Myths about sexual orientation: a lawyers guide to social
science research. 9aw and 'e(uality , 1, 133-172.
Jay K & Young A. (1979) The Gay report . N.Y.: Summit.
Jenny, C., Roesler, T. A., Poyer KL. (1994) Are children at risk for sexual abuse
by homosexuals? Pediatrics 94:41-44.
Johnson, A. M., Wadsworth, J., Wellings, K., & Field, J. (1994 > 'e(ual attitudes
and li&estyles . London: Blackwell Scientific Publications.
Lascaratos, J. & Poulakou-Rebelakou, E. (2000) Child sexual abuse: historical
cases in the Byzantine Empire (324-1453 A. D.) Child A#use ) "eglect 24,
1085-1090.
Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994) The social
organi5ation o& se(uality6 se(ual practices in the <nited 'tates? Chicago: Univ.
Chicago Press.
Levitt, E.E., & Klassen, A.D., Jr. (1974). Public Attitudes toward homosexuality:
part of the 1970 national survey by the Institute for Sex Research. %ournal o&
Homose(uality , 1, 29-43.
OCarroll, T. (1980) Paedophilia6 the radical case? Boston: Alyson.
Rees, J.T. & Ushill, H. V. (1956). They stand apart6 a critical survey o& the
pro#lems o& homose(uality . New York: Macmillan.
Rubin, S. (1988) Sex education: teachers who sexually abuse students. Paper
presented at 24 th International Congress of Psychology, Sydney, Australia.
Rueda, E. T. (1982) The homose(ual networ:6 private lives ) pu#lic policy? Old
Greenwich, CT: Devin Adair.
Spira A, Bajos N & the ACSF group. (1994) 'e(ual #ehaviour and A1.' .
Aldershot: Avebury.
Wellings K, Field J, Johnson AM, Wadsworth J. (1994) 'e(ual #ehaviour in
,ritain6 the national survey o& se(ual attitudes and li&estyles? London: Penguin.
State of Maryland Commission on Criminal Law, Proposed Criminal Code2
June 1, 1972.
90
Wishnietsky, D. H. (1991) Reported and unreported teacher-student sexual
harassment. %ournal o& Education Research 84, 164-169.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2009/02/are-over-a-third-of-foster-parent-
molestations-homosexual/
Homosexual 5hil" Molestations /y Foster 0arents: 3llinois< ==J-)>>)
Abstract
Do those who engage in homosexuality disproportionately sexually abuse
foster or adoptive children as reported by child protective services? Illinois
child services reported sexual abuse for 1997 through 2002. 270 parents
committed "substantiated sexual offenses against foster or subsidized
adoptive children: 67 (69%) of 97 mother and 148 (86%) of 173 father
perpetrators sexually abused girls; 30 (31%) mother and 25 (14%) of father
perpetrators sexually abused boys (i.e., 92 [34%] of the perpetrators
homosexually abused their charges). 15 of these parents both physically and
sexually abused charges: daughters by 8 mothers and 4 fathers, sons by 3
mothers (i.e., same-sex perpetrators were involved in 53%). Thus,
homosexual practitioners were proportionately more apt to sexually abuse
foster or adoptive children.
In a general population random sample of 3,714 adults from five metropolitan
areas, Cameron, Proctor, Coburn, Larson, Forde, & Cameron (1986) listed 6
(0.2%) reported "serious sexual advances (p., 329) against them by a foster
parent [3 homosexual against girls; 3 heterosexual: 1 against a boy, 2 against
girls] - that is, 6 (0.59%) of 1,021 "serious sexual advances reported by
various caretakers. One woman also reported that his advance led to "sexual
contact with a male foster parent - that is, 0.27% of 369 "sexual contacts
reported with various caretakers/relatives. Of these 6 sexual interactions, all of
which would presumably have been actionable, 3 were homosexual. On their
face, t hese results seem to validate traditional concerns about sexual
recruitment of children by homosexuals (Levitt & Klassen, 1974). In 1987, the
National Association of Social Workers [NASW] ignored this finding and without
proffering any evidence to the contrary, passed a resolution decrying
"resistance to using single parents, .including lesbian and gay parents, as
potential foster care and adoption resources.
In what appears to be the second empirical study bearing on the issue, 14
years of news stories about foster parent molestation of charges in the 50
largest circulation newspapers in the English-speaking world was reviewed
(Cameron, 2003). 12 (57%) of the 21 male and 3 of the 4 female perpetrators
(e.g., 15 [60%] of the 25 perpetrators) in these stories homosexually molested
their charges.
Two studies - one from a sample of victims, the other from a sample of stories
about victims and perpetrators - indicated that perhaps half of foster parent
molestations were upon members of the same sex. Would about the same
fraction of homosexual molestations obtain if the data was collected and
91
reported by child protective services?
Metho"
Responding to a Freedom of Information Act Request, the Illinois Department
of Children & Family Services provided a complete list of "substantiated
physical or sexual abuse by perpetrators sex as well as the sex of victim(s)
for 1997 through 2002. Marital status of parent perpetrators is not recorded in
Illinois and number of children abused per perpetrator or whether multiple
perpetrators violated the same child was not available. Behavior is potentially
observable, thus `objective unlike an individuals feelings or subject to dispute
as a psychiatrists diagnosis. As Ross, Essien, Williams, & Fenandez-Esquer
(2003) noted "sexual behavior is not always adequately represented by self-
labeling of sexual identity (p. 113), and because of this most recent
population surveys have indexed behavior rather than reported `identity (e.g.,
Spira, Bajos & the ACSF group, 1994; Wellings, Field, Johnson, Wadsworth,
1994; Anderson, Wilson, Barker, Doll, Jones, & Holtgrave, 1999). Since the
meaning of a homosexual is "sexual relations between persons of the same
sex (1992 New Illustrated Websters Dictionary ), and in the 1996 Centers for
Disease Control [CDC] national sexuality survey `homosexual was defined as
someone who had sex with their sex irrespective of age of partner (Anderson,
et al., 1999), it seemed sensible to use " homosexual behaviorally and
descriptively - referring to those who have sex with their sex - irrespective of
age of partner.
Considering those who sexually interact with the underage as `pedophiles is
not particularly useful. Bell & Weinberg (1978) asked 671 homosexual men and
288 homosexual women from a quasi-random sample in San Francisco about
the proportions of their homosexual partners who "were 16 or younger when
you were 21 or older (p. 311). Of the men, 77% said "none, 23% said "half
or less, and none said "more than half; of the women, 94% said "none,
3.8% said "half or less, and none said "more than half. While, 156 (23%) of
the men and 11 (4%) of the women admitted to having had some sex with
children, none was a "pedophile in the sense of only having had sex with or
could only have sex with children.
?esults
There were 963 offenders whose kind of abuse and sex of victim(s) were
known (2 mothers physically abused children of unspecified sex, an offender of
unknown sex abused child[ren] of unknown sex in an unspecified way).
Substantiated sexual abuse was reported for 270 parents: 67 (69%) of 97
mothers and 148 (86%) of 173 fathers sexually abused girls; 30 mothers and
25 fathers sexually abused boys (i.e., 92 [34%] homosexually abused their
charges). Substantiated physical abuse was found for 708 parents: 268 (49%)
of 544 mothers and 68 (41%) of 164 fathers physically abused daughters; 276
mothers and 96 fathers physically abused sons (i.e., 52%of perpetrators
abused boys). 15 parents both physically and sexually abused charges:
daughters by 8 mothers and 4 fathers, and sons by 3 mothers (i.e., when both
forms of abuse were substantiated, same-sex perpetrators were involved in
92
53%).
On average, yearly there were 60,093 children in 4,300 foster- or adoption-
subsidized homes in Illinois. For the 6-year period, 966 parents engaged in
"substantiated abuse after an investigation was conducted. Assuming one
perpetrator per home, per year, children were sexually abused in about 1%
(45/4,300) and physically abused in about 3% (118/4,300). Physical abuse
occurred in 6% of the homes where sexual abuse occurred, sexual abuse
occurred in 2% of homes where physical abuse occurred.
.iscussion
Illinois is the sixth largest state with about 12 million inhabitants and is slightly
more urban than the U.S. as a whole. The Illinois rates, which do not include
neglect, appear similar to the national average of 6.1% for "child abuse and
neglect reported by the U.S. Health and Human Services (Branigin, 2003).
Estimates of the proportion of adults who have engaged in homosexual sex in
the past 12 months vary. The 1996 National Household Survey of Drug
Abuse/CDC study (www.icpsr.umich.edu/samhda) estimated that 1.2% of
those aged 18 to 59 reported sex with a member of their sex [no age
specified] in the past 12 months, other estimates put the number at around 2-
3% (Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, & Michaels, 1994).
Ottawa, Canada was among the first jurisdictions to aggressively recruit
homosexual foster parents. As of October 24, 2002, 9 of 278 Ottawas
approved foster homes included known homosexuals, and two of these homes
had not yet been given a foster-child (Brooks, 2002), i.e., less than 3% of
Ottawas placements were homosexual. Thus, those who engage in sex with
their own sex appear to be employed as foster- and adoptive-parents in
proportions at or below their presence in the general population.
The proportion of molestations of foster children that were homosexual in the
general population survey by Cameron, et al . (1986) was 50%, while the
proportion of molestations of foster children that were homosexual in 14 years
of newspaper stories about foster parent molestations was 60% (Cameron,
2003). The Illinois material collected and reported by that states child
protective services - 34% homosexual - was lower than either of the two
published estimates. The prior 2 estimates were based upon small numbers of
data points - 6 in Cameron, et al ., 1986 and 25 in Cameron, 2003. It is
therefore tempting to believe that the 270 data points reported from Illinois
results in an estimate closer to the `real, underlying proportion - but further
studies will be required to be more certain as to which estimate is closest.
Nonetheless, the disproportionality of the homosexual footprint was evident in
each dataset. These three methods, though differing in their estimates of
homosexual molestation, tend to cross-validate each other. As such, support
for abandoning the tradition of excluding homosexuals as foster parents as
recommended by the NASW was not found.
?eferences
93
Anderson, J.E., Wilson, R. W., Barker, P., Doll, L., Jones, T.S., & Holtgrave, D.
(1999) Prevalence of sexual and drug-related HIV risk behaviors in the U.S.
adult population: results of the 1996 national household survey on drug abuse.
Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 21, 148-156.
Bell, A. P. & Weinberg, M. S. (1978) Homosexualities: a study of diversity
among men and women . New York: Simon & Schuster.
Branigin, W. (2003) Officials assess county child welfare system. Washington
Post , 7/10/03, p. TO3.
Brooks, M. (2002) CAS seeks gay foster parents: Move reflects changing face
of Canadian family. Ottawa Citizen , 10/24/02, p. Al.
Cameron, P., Proctor, K., Coburn, W., Larson, H., Forde, N., & Cameron, K.
(1986) Child molestation and homosexuality. Psychological Reports , 38, 327-
337.
Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., Michaels, S. (1994) The social
organization of sexuality: sexual practices in the United States . Chicago: Univ.
Chicago Press.
Levitt, E.E., & Klassen, A.D., Jr. (1974). Public Attitudes toward homosexuality:
part of the 1970 national survey by the Institute for Sex Research. Journal of
Homosexuality , 1, 29-43.
Ross, M. W., Essien, E. J., Williams, M. L., & Fernandez-Esquer, M. E. (2003)
Concordance between sexual behavior and sexual identity in street outreach
samples of four racial/ethnic groups. Sexually Transmitted Disease 30,110-
113.
Spira, A., Bajos, N. & the ACSF group. (1994) Sexual behaviour and AIDS .
Aldershot: Avebury.
Wellings, K., Field, .J, Johnson, A. M., Wadsworth, J. (1994) Sexual behaviour
in Britain: the national survey of sexual attitudes and lifestyles. London:
Penguin.
Note: IllinoisLeader.com filed the freedom of information act (FOIA) request.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/homosexual-child-molestations-
by-foster-parents-illinois-1997-2002/
5an Anything /e .one to Sto( Gay ?ights&
/ac2groun"
The West has produced the richest and most vital civilization ever to grace the
planet, but our civilization is dying by slow degrees. Western nations are
producing too few children to maintain their population. Most of our
94
demographic decline is due to a mix of a self-centered reluctance to have
children, birth control, wholesale abortion, and women in the workplace. The
rise of militant homosexuality has also been a significant factor. It is both a
symptom and a cause of our decline.
On one hand, the growing acceptance of homosexuality is symptomatic of a
larger trend in Western society - the growing view of sexuality as "mere
recreation, a casual activity divorced from procreation and family. Gay rights
is also a cause of civilizations decline. Homosexuality is a unique manifestation
of hedonism. Instead of producing children, it preys on them. Instead of
keeping to itself, it proselytizes. Instead of promoting health and stability (as
does marriage), it thrives on aggression, spreads disease, and destroys its
practitioners, emotionally and physically.
Along with the promotion of birth control and abortion, the present bland
acceptance of homosexuality signals the end of the religious and moral vision
that made Western civilization coherent and functional. We had a forewarning
of this social collapse in Germany following that nations defeat in World War I.
During the Weimar Republic, homosexuality was acceptable and consequently
rampant. The popular culture celebrated perversity. Kurt Weills songs
portrayed pleasure-seeking men moving from one homosexual encounter to
another. The first gay rights film, "Different From The Others, appeared in
Germany in 1919. This period of moral chaos spawned National Socialism and
the rise to power of its sexually twisted leader, Adolph Hitler.
The United States is not the Germany of the Weimar Republic, but we are now
telling our children in junior high school and even elementary school that
homosexuality is an acceptable alternative to traditional marriage. More and
more of them are encouraged to consider such behavior. High school
counselors in Virginia express concern that perversion has become so chic that
young heterosexuals are pretending to be bisexual and even homosexual. The
so-called gay rights movement is making certain that the next generation of
Americans will be more and more tolerant of this self-indulgent and dangerous
behavior, and even more likely to become addicted.
One thing seems clear: If the acceptance and practice of homosexuality
continues at its current rate, Western civilization will not survive.
So we ask again: Can anything be done to stop gay rights?
Goo" Cews< /a" Cews
At first glance, the answer would appear to be `yes. Eleven states in the
November 2004 election passed referenda banning gay `marriage in one form
or another. Another nine states since then have made similar changes to their
laws or constitutions. Pro-family conservatives have been credited with helping
to get out the vote on this and other moral issues, aiding President Bushs re-
election and keeping gay-sympathetic Democrats both 1) out of office and 2)
incapable of tilting the make-up of the Supreme Court further leftward. Liberals
were unable to stop the confirmations of new, conservative Supreme Court
95
Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito. Altogether, 45 states have passed
either Defense of Marriage legislation or marriage amendments to their
constitutions. And President Bush supports a Marriage Protection Amendment
to the U.S. Constitution, with the purpose of enshrining the definition of
marriage as between one man and one woman.
On the other hand, a penetrating look provides reason for pessimism. Within
the past ten years, the current Supreme Court has 1) overturned Amendment
2 in Colorado, a majority-passed referendum designed to limit the spread of
gay rights by administrative or judicial fiat; and 2) overturned all laws against
sodomy in Lawrence v. Texas, establishing a presumptive `right to sodomy
across America. The State of Vermont enacted the first gay civil unions,
followed by Connecticut and New Jersey, the State of Massachusetts legalized
gay marriage, California established homosexual domestic partnerships only a
year after its citizens, by referendum, reserved the name of `marriage for
unions of one man-one-woman, and citizens in Maine and Washington failed to
overturn new state-wide gay rights laws.
In an ominous parallel to its official decision to de-list homosexuality as a
mental disorder back in 1973, the American Psychiatric Association, in 2005,
officially endorsed gay marriage as a healthier alternative to gay
`bachelorhood.
On the political front, President Bush and many Republican leaders have clearly
stated their support for homosexual civil unions, if states so desire them. The
Bush administration also ignored the opportunity to defend anti-sodomy laws
in Lawrence v. Texas. And international pressure is growing. In addition to the
European countries that have now legalized either gay marriage or a close
equivalent, and the fact that the proposed constitution of the European Union
codifies sexual orientation as a protected status, the Canadian Supreme Court
has overturned laws against gay marriage (with the Canadian government
acquiescing to the decision and legalizing gay marriage in Parliament) and
ruled that almost any criticism of homosexuality is a form of `hate speech.
Strongly Catholic Ireland banned sodomy until 1993, but now has apparently
decided that some form of gay civil unions must be adopted in the near future.
And so it goes.
In the U.S., traditional Christian thought has been so pushed out of the public
square that Christian condemnation of homosexuality is either ignored or
explicitly pilloried. Meanwhile, support for gays continues to grow among the
elite. The editorial page commentary of the Wall Street Journal about former
New Jersey Governor James McGreeveys revelation of his homosexual
preference illustrates the depth of this support:
"the real scandal consuming New Jersey isnt governor James McGreeveys
sexual preference. Its how Mr. McGreevy and fellow state Democrats are
timing his resignation to cheat voters out of picking a replacement as soon as
possible.
"Obviously, being gay today isnt something that a politician need apologize for
96
or be ashamed of. Whats shameful is the way Mr. McGreevey is manipulating
the political calendar. (August 16, 2004, A12)
As the editors of the most influential newspaper in the world see it, that the
governor of New Jersey engaged in sodomy, cheated on his wife and child,
hired an unqualified lover, engaged in misappropriation of funds, lied to the
electorate, etc. - in short, acted in ways consonant with a Christian analysis of
what sodomites do - is irrelevant. McGreeveys sin is political, period. Today,
even conservative commentators (such as Bill ORiley or Michael Medved)
usually opine that condemnation of homosexuality is `backward or `bigoted.
How %e Got Here
Though this transformation to a gay-friendly world may seem to have
happened almost overnight, history shows otherwise. As former Harvard
sociologist and chairman Pitirim Sorokin documented in the 1950s, the sexual
revolution was brewing for at least the prior 100 years. Over that time, birth
rates and average family sizes steadily dropped, divorce rates and out-of-
wedlock births steadily rose, and taboos and strictures against cohabitation,
promiscuity, and homosexuality began to fall by the wayside. These trends
have continued and generally accelerated since Sorokins analysis.
An excellent - but by no means isolated - example of the long-term decline is
provided by the District of Columbia. When the District was established in
1790, sodomy was a capital crime. Today, homosexuals have more legal rights
in D.C. than non-homosexuals. Socially, gays wield significant power, so much
so that serious negotiations were needed to site a new baseball stadium at a
location occupied by a popular gay bar.
Despite some recent political setbacks on the issue of marriage, homosexual
activists have had much to celebrate of late. Homosexual activity is on the
verge of surpassing its place in the Greco-Roman world. Sodomy has been
accorded the status of a civil right, the courts and most lawyers are highly
sympathetic to the gay movement, and our educational institutions are doing
much to change the mindset of our young to a more accepting posture. In
addition, these activists know that political fancies can easily change. Large
majorities are today opposed to gay marriage. But it wasnt very many years
ago that similar majorities were opposed to gay teachers, homosexual
politicians, and anti-discrimination clauses based on sexual orientation. All
those majorities have shrunk if not disappeared over the past 20 to 30 years.
Who is to say that marriage will not follow suit?
A Strategic 0lan That %or2e"
In the late 1950s, though comprising only 2% of the adult population,
homosexual activists strategized to cancel the influence of Christianity. At that
time, the Christian Church in the U.S. claimed the allegiance of about two-
thirds of the population, and was strongly supported by at least 20% of adults.
The financial resources of gay activists were modest - they probably had no
more than $100,000 to expend. The Church had billions of dollars and dozens
97
of institutions of higher education. What strategy could they employ?
Those early homosexuals targeted `science. They correctly figured it would be
tough sledding if they tried to change Christianity from within. But by capturing
the professions and thereby science, the gay movement could trump
Christianity. They knew that religious professionals - intimidated by the
complexity of science and awed by its influence and accomplishments --
would eventually go along with them.
The same strategy had garnered considerable success in Germany, until Hitler
turned against the homosexuals. By doing `scientific work at the worlds first
`sexuality institute, homosexual activists had gotten a number of scientists to
sign on to their cause - even Albert Einstein. Gay leaders started publishing
their own scientific journal, the Journal of Homosexuality. They also won
influence by publishing in academic journals and getting seats on the boards of
major social service and social science professional associations.
Capturing `science was the key to this plan. Christianity, along with the Bible
and tradition, would be trumped - so they believed - if science favored the
homosexuals. However, there was also a risk. If the Church, with its
considerably larger resources, fought back to control and influence science, the
gay movement would be in trouble. Unfortunately, the Church did not wage
battle on the scientific turf; in fact, it generally dismissed science as inferior to
theology - `the queen of sciences.
That lost opportunity now `sticks in the Christian craw. The Church today finds
itself on the down side of having relinquished science about homosexuality to
the homosexuals. Many denominations have substituted the authority of that
science for their traditions and the Bible - witness the Episcopalians, the
Congregationalists, and the Church of Christ. Others are barely staving off
capitulation, including the Evangelical Lutheran Church, the Methodists, and
the Presbyterians.
Rightly concerned about these changes, many in the Evangelical wing of
Christianity have chosen to either 1) snipe at pro-homosexual scientific
findings, 2) support political action against the gay movement, and/or 3) adopt
the neo-Freudian notion that homosexuals can be `cured with certain kinds of
therapy, as evident in the `ex-gay movement.
Unfortunately, quibbling about various studies without advancing solid,
systematic counter-evidence does little to discredit them (very little in the gay
rights debate has changed despite the Evangelical uproar over Alfred Kinsey,
for instance). In the long run, trust and investment in the scientific enterprise
run so deep that few politicians are going to disregard `science to please
Christians. And even if the ex-gay movement can claim some success, its
converts are but a drop in the homosexual bucket.
In a word, if we keep doing what we have been doing, the Church will likely
lose its tax-exempt status, its freedom of speech regarding homosexuality will
be curbed, and Christians will be criticized from every quarter. Most
98
homosexuals are fixated, addicted to their sexual desires, and compulsive. Gay
activists are not content to let the Christians continue to preach against
homosexuality. They want to smash the Church and its influence to
smithereens, or else transform it into something that no longer resembles
historic Christianity.
So the question remains: can anything be done to reverse the tide of gay
rights? We believe there is, but it wont be easy. And it wont get done using
the strategies championed currently by most pro-family conservatives. In fact,
it will require a significant change in thinking and attack - what we would call
a paradigm shift.
0ara"igm Shifts
When Christianity came on the scene, homosexual activity was present and
quasi-accepted in the Greco-Roman world. Though the daily activities of those
who engaged in homosexuality are poorly known, it appears that there were
homosexual prostitutes at various temples, some teachers engaged in
homosexual relations with their pupils, and a certain amount of homosexual
activity occurred throughout society, often in the larger cities.
Christianity advanced a new paradigm against homosexual behavior: the word
of God. Homosexuality was not part of appropriate religious celebrations nor in
any way a good, because God despised it. Indeed, God had destroyed Sodom
and Gomorrah because of it, and might well destroy the Roman Empire if it did
not eliminate it. In light of this sacred truth, and as a chosen sin,
homosexuality deserved punishment.
It took 300 years for the Christian paradigm to triumph and express itself in
social policy. A law punishing homosexual activity with death appeared in A.D.
342. About 50 years later, the emperors Valentinian II, Theodosious, and
Arcadius decreed that "All persons who have the shameful custom of
condemning a mans body, acting the part of a womans. shall expiate this
sort of crime in avenging flames. Under Emperor Justinian (c. 527-565), the
Christian paradigm was explicitly stated: "We admonish men to abstain from
the aforesaid unlawful acts, that they may not lose their souls. so that the city
and the state may not come to harm by reason of such wicked deeds.
Following in the steps of Roman Law several centuries later, England punished
homosexual activity severely, as did the American colonies, as did the states.
But over time, the Christian truths about Gods hatred of homosexual activity,
Sodom and Gomorrah, etc., diminished in the law. As well, punishments for
same-sex activity declined in severity - from death to imprisonment to fines.
Yet the Christian belief that `homosexual activity is a sinful choice remained
firmly entrenched through the 1800s.
Toward the end of the 19th and beginnings of the 20th century, the nascent
field of psychiatry championed a new paradigm. According to its worldview,
those who engaged in homosexuality had a `condition that made them `ill, and
should be `treated rather than punished. The condition of `being a homosexual
99
was not their choice, but stemmed from childhood circumstances, biology, or
some combination of the two.
Psychiatry advertised itself as `enlightened and `scientific, and over time it
garnered a great deal of attention and respect. Some of this was due to self-
promotion, but it also resulted from science becoming accepted as more `real
or `substantial than claims of faith. Psychiatrists dealt with odd people and
produced testimonies from those whom they `treated. Psychiatrists also began
to search for biologic or specific environmental causes of homosexuality,
further anchoring such behavior in the realm of science rather than faith or
morality.
In addition, some found psychiatrys theory about the `condition of
homosexuality exceptionally satisfying. This theory, after all, had a very
important ramification: its not your fault. your parents or your hormones or
your genes, etc., drove you to do this. this is part of your `condition.
Psychiatric `science had proven that `homosexuals had to `sin - and no just
God (or society) could condemn activity that was `natural or so ingrained from
childhood.
By the 1930s, the psychiatric paradigm began competing with and replacing
the Christian paradigm - particularly in Europe. Many within the Church
aspired to be `enlightened when it came to homosexuality, and either melded
the Christian and the psychiatric viewpoints or simply adopted the psychiatric,
instead of the Christian, worldview. Later psychologists and researchers such
as Alfred Kinsey continued to cement discussion of homosexuality within a
scientific context, purportedly showing that many people engaged in
homosexual behavior with little if any ill effect, or that comparisons between
homosexuals and non-homosexuals showed few if any differences in
personality or social functioning. While those pushing the psychiatric
perspective espoused conflicting theories about the root causes of this
behavior, the general thrust was to describe homosexuals as `distinct or
`different because of their condition, but not in any sense inferior to `normal
people.
In 1962, following psychiatric thinking, Illinois legalized homosexual activity,
and other states followed. In the 1970s, psychiatry officially decided that
homosexuality was just another variant of `normal, and those portions of the
Church that had adopted the psychiatric viewpoint shifted in agreement.
Almost no one now questioned the psychiatric prognosis that homosexuals
were a `different kind of animal; even among Evangelical Christians,
homosexuals were just so `strange and `different that they must be `ill or in
need of `treatment. Surely, they would not simply `choose to do these odd
things. Even Kinseys explicit attempts to show that homosexuality was not
linked to ones biology and that everyone was capable of homosexual behavior
had fallen by the wayside.
The 4ast Stan"
The last major legal decision affirming the historic Christian paradigm that
100
homosexual behavior is a `choice occurred in 1984, when the 5th Circuit
overturned en banc Federal Judge Buchmeyers earlier decision that the Texas
sodomy law violated the U.S. Constitution (Baker v. Wade, 1984). Judge
Thomas Reavley, writing for the majority in the overturn of Buchmeyer, held
that the right to privacy did not include a right to engage in sodomy and that
homosexuals could not claim the need for `equal protection because
homosexuality had never been held to be a suspect classification. Reavley said
the court rejected the equal protection argument because the law was
"directed at certain conduct, not at a class of people. Though the conduct be
the desire of the bisexually or homosexually inclined, there is no necessity that
they engage in it. The statute affects only those who choose to act in the
manner prescribed.
Because there was "no necessity that they [homosexuals] engage in it, the
5th Circuit explicitly affirmed what Christians had traditionally claimed by faith:
homosexual activity, like other sexual activities, was voluntary. But nineteen
years later, in 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Texas sodomy law
in Lawrence v. Texas, namely because "homosexuals had to engage in
sodomy, it was part of their "nature. The psychiatric worldview had now thus
triumphed over the historic Christian worldview in every area, including
American jurisprudence - it apparently was necessary that homosexuals have
sex with each other.
Today, academia, the media, and much of the mainline Church have adopted
the psychiatric worldview. Much of the rest - including significant elements of
the Evangelical wing - is either verging on it, or is melding psychiatric and
Christian concepts together. Many evangelical leaders will assert, for instance,
that homosexuality is not a choice per se, but something ingrained or
developed at an early age. It may be `treatable, but is not entirely voluntary.
Similarly, Roman Catholicism explicitly recognizes the `condition of `being a
homosexual.
So while many Christians today may claim that the Bible is their guide when it
comes to homosexuality, the reality is somewhat different. A religious
paradigm based on sacred faith and the revealed word of God dominated for
1500 years. While vestiges of it clearly remain, after an 100 year campaign,
the psychiatric paradigm is currently `in charge, especially after the `blitzkrieg
and capture by gay activists of the science of homosexuality over the last 50-
plus years. This is the dilemma conservatives and Christians alike now face.
%hat is Cee"e" Cow
What is needed is a new paradigm. The religious paradigm focused on mans
obedience to God and the danger to society if His will was disregarded. It was
based on a faith in an omnipotent and all-knowing God who actively moved in
human society. The psychiatric paradigm focused instead on the psychological
`needs or `conditions of the individual. It was grounded, supposedly, on
science and what scientists could observe about the nature of human behavior.
Certainly a general faith in science (of all types, not just behavioral science) is
clearly predominant today, especially with the obvious advances that science
101
and technology have wrought over the last century.
To displace it, the new paradigm must also be grounded in science. But instead
of the needs of the individual or their suffering as `victims of society (as gays
dying of AIDS have been characterized), it would emphasize the needs of
society and the recreational (choice-driven) nature of personal sexual desires.
Center stage under the new paradigm would be the wealth of scientific facts
that are currently neglected or suppressed: facts such as the high cost of AIDS
to society or the more frequent molestation of children by homosexual
practitioners, to mention only two.
The bottom line is that the Christian assault on homosexuality is waning. In the
face of purportedly `unassailable science, and with parishioners adopting more
and more elements of the psychiatric, individual-focused mindset, the Church
is being pressured to abandon its historic stance against homosexual activity
and to accept `homosexuals into its ranks. In America, the Church is on track
to lose its tax-exempt status if it fails to do so. Current efforts are not working
and cannot hope for anything but temporary future success.
Fortunately, as the history of homosexuality shows, no state of affairs is
immune to change. However, much like Christianitys success against Greco-
Roman acceptance of homosexuality, and the success of psychiatry against
Christianity, a new paradigm is indeed crucial - a paradigm backed by
empirical facts. The evidence supporting the new paradigm will have to be
used to batter down the now-dominant psychiatric paradigm. It will have to
incorporate the key elements of the old Christian worldview, but support those
elements with scientific buttressing. And, because the threat to the Church and
society is so great, time is of the essence.
This new paradigm demands a change in mindset, one of the most difficult of
human endeavors. Similar to the launch of conservative advocacy foundations
such as the John M. Olin Foundation, it will take significant organization and
the application of new monies. The example of the way many conservative
organizations were created is instructive. Irving Kristol and William Simon
argued in the 1970s that liberals were advancing economically because they
dominated the nations intellectual discourse.
As James Piereson, executive director of the John M. Olin Foundation, recalled
in the Wall Street Journal (July 21, 2004):
"Conservative philanthropists should underwrite their own `counter
intelligentsia that would support scholars who were oriented in favor of liberty
rather than against it.. [they] understood that a defense of capitalism
required also a defense of the deeper cultural assumptions that gave meaning
and order to a commercial civilization. Free markets could not be defended
without reference to the rule of law, religion, the family and the evolution of
our political institutions. This task required a full-blown engagement with the
world of ideas - a world traditionally dominated by the left. They understood
also that they were swimming against the intellectual tide in the 1970s, when
the future seemed to point in the direction of an ever-expanding welfare state.
102
"Liberal foundations (e.g., Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie) had dominated funding
of advocacy groups - all of which were liberal. Responding to the Kristol-
Simon call, new conservative foundations were created. Over time, they got
enough of a toehold to influence political events and began to sway the
intellectual discourse on capitalism.
This same kind of effort is needed today with gay rights. One or more new
foundations must be established to fund discourse and scientific research in
that area where most Christians and pro-family advocates have had little to
offer other than the convictions of their faith. The new paradigm must be
advanced and supported in an organized, systematic way. Science must be
used to buttress the Christian worldview and to counter the faulty, misguided
`science of psychiatry and gay-sympathetic academicians.
We can no longer rely - as almost all pro-family organizations do today - on
gleaning scientific `bits from those in liberal academia who already operate
under the psychiatric worldview umbrella, and who often secretly question
Christianity, if they are not overtly hostile. We must fund primary, basic
research by those scientists committed to the historic Christian mindset, then
publicize and showcase that research, and finally use it to influence and
change legislative and public policy. In short, we must subvert the academy by
doing original, honest research ourselves and use this to advance the historic
Christian faith in a brand new way.
Iey 0ro(ositions of the Cew 0ara"igm
Any new paradigm requires a new way of thinking. Our culture has become so
steeped in an individualistic, psychiatric view of sex that a change of viewpoint
will not be easy. Historic Christianity viewed sex as a gift from God to man, but
it was proscribed in ways that attempted to ensure that sex was used for the
good of society, first and foremost. Such a practice has well-served
Christendom through history. Even more important today, the traditional
Christian handling of sex is supported by an array of scientific and empirical
facts. We should therefore boldly proclaim and highlight the following
propositions, knowing that Gods truth is evident whenever honest science is
conducted.
H ?e(ro"ucti!e Sex 3s Cecessary< /ut 0ersonal Sexual 'x(erience 3s
Cot
Only a modest amount of sex between men and women is necessary for social
functioning. Some is needed to produce children and, beyond that, to 1) keep
married parents together for the rearing of their brood, and 2) build loyalties
assuring that society will not have to care for the parents while at least one
spouse is able to do so.
From societys perspective, non-marital sexual activities are either non-
productive or harmful. Except for `producers and `nurturers of children, other
sex is recreational. Indeed, since non-marital sex often results in problematic
pregnancies or contributes to the spreading of disease, it is best repressed.
103
Homosexual activity is an exceptionally costly and dangerous sexual
entertainment, even as private masturbation is non-productive.
Unlike our needs for food, clothing, and shelter, no one has to have sex. While
you may prefer it, no one dies without it. Not everybody enjoys sex, but for
the vast majority who do, sex with other(s) is not a necessity but an important
recreation.
Part of the reason the Christian paradigm fell before that of psychiatry is that
Christianitys contentions were based on faith - in God, the reality of Sodom
and Gomorrah, the Churchs interpretations of Scripture. To counter this,
psychiatrists could produce real people who told `tales of suffering alleviated
by the new-fangled `counseling they received. Psychiatry, particularly
Freudianism, also made sexuality central to personal and social development.
And it gained important cachet by describing its theories in scientific-sounding
language.
In part, the psychiatric trumped the religious paradigm because it could display
scientific `facts about how sexuality `worked in humans, while religion made
no such showing. Additionally, psychiatry elevated sexuality to that of a `need
and sexual experiences as central to a host of personal attributes and goals.
But it need not be so.
)H The 0sychiatric 0ara"igm About Homosexuality Has /een $!ersol"
an" the 5osts Ha!e 4argely /een 3gnore"
While some individuals undoubtedly `suffered because society actively
repressed non-marital sex - and homosexual sex in particular - our collective
life is not `better because those with homosexual desires have been permitted
to `do their thing. Indeed, about 1% of the U.S. gross domestic product [GDP]
is being spent to contain and treat HIV - a disease, as Cuba demonstrated,
that could have been largely `halted in its tracks if the `gay community had
not been coddled by U.S. public health officials.
The future for our children is increasingly uncertain. As first documented by
Professor Sorokin, Europe is well on the way toward a demographic decline,
and the U.S. is not far behind. Instead of making our collective life better,
`freeing up sexuality has resulted in fewer children overall and an ever-smaller
proportion of children born to married
parents.
-H The 0sychiatric 5laim That Homosexuality 3s *Eust As Cormal+ As
Heterosexuality ?ests $n Many 4ies< .istortions< an"
'xaggerations
Although psychiatrists and mental health experts claim that science informs
their positions, a great deal of that science can be proven faulty, overstated,
misrepresented, or sometimes fraudulent. Clearly, one key to grounding the
new paradigm in scientific fact is to demonstrate by honest science when the
`facts and `empirical claims of the psychiatric paradigm are either not true or
104
have been misrepresented.
In sharp contrast to what psychiatry has claimed - just to list a few examples
- children do not do as well when reared by homosexuals, unions of
homosexuals are not the same as the commitment of man-woman marriage,
homosexuals are more apt to molest children, homosexual sex is more
biologically dangerous than heterosexual sex, the proportion of those with
homosexual desires is not constant, HIV does not endanger everyone,
quarantine works, and people can and do change their sexual preferences.
While the psychiatric paradigm made strides by elevating science over religious
faith, the new paradigm should gain from telling the empirical truth about the
psychiatric paradigms lies, distortions, and exaggerations, but without
engaging in lies, distortions, or exaggerations of its own. Importantly, good
and careful scientific critique will require the services of true, highly-trained
scientists. Science should also be used to promote, on the tip of every spear,
an historic Christian view of `public health and `good social order. And it should
document the empirical danger and absurdity of building a civilization around
the sexual recreations of its members.
1H The 0sychiatric 0ara"igm 3s Too Carrow
Adapting society to the interests of individuals who want to have same-sex sex
will ultimately choke our social engine. Forcing the majority to accommodate
the desires of the few is fundamentally unjust and unworkable. Any number of
people want all kinds of sexual things, whether it be sex with the underage,
surgically changing their gender, wanting to marry their siblings, desiring
multiple spouses, etc. Ceding the right to `homosexuals to `do their thing but
not to other `sexual minorities is inherently `unfair, and bound to open
Pandoras box.
Furthermore, social functioning, rather than accommodating individual sexual
tastes, needs to be the centerpiece. A lot of sexual activity is capricious -
people, including `homosexuals, change their sexual (and other) tastes all the
time. What begins as recreation or entertainment can often `get the best of us
- consider addictions to drugs, gambling, and all sorts of sexual fixations. The
whimsical nature of sex leads people to acquire odd sexual tastes and
interests; the compulsive nature of sex often cements them to those tastes
and interests. The important concern is how those desires affect society.
Longitudinal studies suggest that children who participate in homosexuality
also wind up as more rebellious, more apt to abuse substances, and more apt
to engage in criminality. In studies of adults, those who engage in
homosexuality are more criminal, more rebellious, more likely to be drug-
users, more apt to molest children, and so on. In short, homosexual activity is
a risk both to participants and non-participants alike - it impacts greater
society in deleterious ways.
105
:H The 0sychiatric 0ara"igm .oes Cot *Fit+ %ith 5hristianity
The core concepts of psychiatry and Christianity clash. Psychiatry stresses `self
esteem and `self actualization or that people `act out of compulsion, while
Christianity counsels that we are to `deny self and that each is `led astray by
his own desires. Psychiatric professionals (clinicians, psychotherapists,
psychologists) compete with religious professionals (priests, preachers) as to
who will give advice about how we ought to live. The new paradigm would not
compete with Christianity since it aims to scientifically buttress the historic
Christian worldview. It would stress instead `what is good for all, `you can live
without sex, and that `sex should be reserved for marriage. Scientists
promoting the new paradigm would not compete with priests and preachers,
but would instead be a complement to them, providing the `new apologetics
for what the Church taught historically.
3m(lementing the Cew 0ara"igm
A natural `life-cycle is part and parcel of successfully implementing any new,
major paradigm shift. This life-cycle includes three basic components: 1)
research and basic science, 2) publicity and dissemination, and 3) public policy
and law.
All three of these components are crucial to effecting long-term cultural
change. Think, for instance, about cell phones. If cell phones caused brain
cancer when used regularly over a period of several years, what would be
needed to alter cell phone usage? First, there would have to be credible
research demonstrating the harmful effects of cell phone use, and further
research to delineate whether those effects extended to all cell phones, just
some, or only after a certain level of usage.
Second, those scientists discovering the cell phone side-effects would have to
publicize their findings at scientific meetings and in scientific journals.
Moreover, due to the seriousness of the potential threat to public health and
the large number of users who both enjoy and have come to depend on their
cell phones, other `watchdog organizations would have to make a serious
effort to communicate the findings to the public and to issue warnings to cell
phone users. They would also need to alert the general media and lobby for
widespread and repeated broadcast of health warnings.
Third, given the vast financial investment in the cell phone market and the
stakes involved, substantial political efforts might be needed to influence state
and federal governments to restrict, re-structure, or legislate against cell
phone usage. Various laws and/or administrative decisions might be necessary
to maximize the public health, including perhaps limits on the types of cell
phones that could be used, or for how long. Legislative bodies might need to
fund/seed research initiatives to find better cell phone technology that would
not cause cancer.
106
?esearch
As this quasi-hypothetical example illustrates, each `life-cycle component
entails significant effort, organization, and money. Unfortunately, very little
money or effort is being spent right now to promote the new paradigm. In
terms of basic research, only one organization is currently engaged in primary
research on homosexuality: Family Research Institute [FRI]. While its two
primary scientists are both listed among the top 15 published researchers
worldwide on this topic, and one of them is a reviewer for the British Medical
Journal, their scientific output is far exceeded by the combined efforts of pro-
homosexual academics across the globe.
No other pro-family organization or Christian college or university does primary
research in this area. Further, sexuality in general - and homosexuality in
particular - is an emotion-laden topic and generally the subject of social, not
`hard, science. As the conservative uproar over Alfred Kinsey and the 2004
biographical film about Kinsey demonstrate, many potential donors are skittish
about funding any `science related to sexuality; some go so far as to claim
that the study of sex is not science at all.
Compared to technology, of course, it is much harder to measure the effects of
particular sexual behaviors or the impacts of sexual social policy. And the
psychiatric paradigm is so entrenched in academia that even when such
scientific studies are done, it is often difficult to get permission to present
counter-evidence or contrary findings at scientific meetings, or to publish facts
counter to the current paradigm in scientific journals. This has had a chilling
effect on those conservatives in academia who might otherwise be willing to
support and defend the new paradigm.
In addition, there seems to be little understanding among pro-family
conservatives as to why such primary research is even needed. As opposed to
those conservative journalists and broadcasters who developed and exploited
alternative media outlets when they couldnt get a fair hearing on the major
networks, there has been almost no funding or support of alternative scientific
outlets by which the new paradigm might be buttressed and disseminated.
Yet the scientific enterprise is truly key to a winning strategy. Because science
is both elitist and highly competitive, it has garnered the admiration - and
even awe - of non-scientists, while at the same time often befuddling them in
its complexity. What many conservatives do not realize is how very difficult it is
to be a top-notch scientist. While there are hundreds of thousands of
professionals across the world engaged in science of one form or another, the
`cream of the scientific crop rises to the top through the process of publishing
in the scientific literature. Consider these facts: only 1% of Ph.D.s and M.D.s
ever publish in a scientific journal; only 2% of those who publish ever place
articles in one of the top handful of premier science journals; and only 10% of
this last group is ever chosen to serve as `peer reviewers for those top
journals, with the task of judging the quality of other scientists work.
Nevertheless, one of the scientists at the Family Research Institute has been
selected to do just that: be a peer-reviewer for the British Medical Journal, one
107
of most well-respected scientific journals in the world.
The point is that, while very difficult, it is possible to do and publish high-
quality science from a conservative perpective. But it has to be a primary focus
and goal of ones work. Further, in academia, universities spend large chunks
of resources supporting the research efforts of their scholars and providing a
conducive environment for those activities. That kind of support for science is
almost non-existent in conservative circles.
Indeed, consider Paul Weyrich, founder of the Heritage Foundation and one of
the fathers of the modern conservative movement. On July 25, 2005, he issued
a bittersweet, but incisive asssessment of our current state of affairs:
"At the heart of the challenge facing the conservative agenda lays one simple
fact: While we focused our efforts on politics, our opponents on the left focused
instead on culture.
"Each of us won. Compared to where the conservative movement was the year
I came to Washington, 1967, we are today immensely stronger politically.
Republicans, most of whom are at least nominally conservative, control both
Houses of Congress and the White House. That is success on a grand scale.
"Regrettably, our opponents have won an equally large victory over our
culture. What was called the `counter-culture in the 1960s now controls almost
every cultural venue: the entertainment industry (which is now the most
powerful force in our culture), the government schools, the media, and even
many churches. The ideology usually known as `Political Correctness, which is
really the cultural Marxism of the infamous Frankfurt School, is using every
type of cultural institution in our country to achieve its purpose, which is the
destruction of traditional Western culture and the Christian religion. All we
have to do is look around us and compare what we see with the America of the
1950s to understand how vast their victory is. The old sins have become
virtues and the old virtues have become sins.
"The nub of the problem is this: Culture is stronger than politics. Despite
everything conservatives have achieved in politics, the lefts cultural victory
trumps ours. That is why even when we win election after election, our country
continues to deteriorate.
Three-0ronge" 'ffort
We would submit that an important part of the lefts cultural victory has been
their domination of science, particularly that surrounding sex. That is why we
propose the following three-pronged effort to bolster basic research on issues
of sexuality, including homosexuality:
1. Establishment of a private foundation or endowment designed to fund
primary scientific research in these areas, conducted under the framework of
the historic Christian worldview.
108
2. Establishment of a conservative sexuality `think-tank and scientific
consortium, having as its primary aim the honest generation and gathering of
new empirical facts about sexuality and homosexuality, careful scientific
critique of existing research, publication and dissemination of new facts in the
scientific literature, and enabling the networking and partnership of like-
minded scientists from around the globe.
3. Expansion and systematic funding of the Family Research Institute. As
previously mentioned, we are currently the only conservative organization
conducting primary research on these topics. Additional funding of FRI makes
sense for the following reasons: a) we have already established a presence in
the scientific literature over the last 30 years, but would like to expand our
efforts and reach, b) we are currently supported by a small number of donors
with a minimal budget (<$200,000/yr), c) more than one scientific
organization is needed to effectively wage the gay rights battle.
To understand where things stand, FRI has the equivalent of two full-time
researchers on staff. We believe this would need to be increased to at least 6
or 7 professionals. Assuming $80,000 to $100,000/year for professional
salaries and $30,000 to $40,000/year per professional for ancillary staff, a
commitment of between $650,000/yr and $900,000/yr would be needed to
generate the volume of professional papers that would be required at scientific
meetings and in scientific journals to get the scientific community to take
serious notice.
0ublicity
As to publicity, several organizations exist within the religious conservative
movement that could potentially `sell the scholarly and scientific facts
supporting the new paradigm. Some of these, including Family Research
Council, Focus on the Family, the American Family Association, and others,
already have large followings.
However, to be effective in the secular as well religious arenas, it is likely that
these groups would have to significantly lighten their current moralistic thrust,
a change that may not sit well with their current leadership or support base.
Furthermore, they would have to end their support of the psychiatric paradigm,
a difficult change given its current ubiquity and the ways in which psychiatric
and Christian concepts have been melded. In particular, they would need to
sharply reduce (or preferably end) their support for the `ex-gay movement, an
approach which is psychiatrically anchored and highly Freudian in viewpoint.
To those who would point to recent actions on marriage by these groups, keep
in mind the narrow scope of these efforts. Many pro-family conservatives have
lent public support to the same Federal Marriage Amendment favored by
President Bush, one which would explicitly allow states to institute and legalize
near-marriage or marriage equivalents for homosexuals. None of the major
pro-family groups has any solution or alternative to Lawrence v. Texas - which
legalized sodomy across the nation - other than to criticize the Supreme Court
and bemoan its lurch to the left.
109
In addition, some of these same groups have lobbied for enactment of
`reciprocal beneficiary laws, in states such as Hawaii and Colorado, whereby
homosexuals are granted a state endorsement to sign up for many of the
benefits of marriage without being labeled as `married or having to form an
explicit civil union or domestic partnership. These reciprocal beneficiary
agreements are billed by pro-family conservatives as only providing more
affordable access to rights that homosexuals currently enjoy anyway, and have
been proposed as a compromise to avoid the need for gay marriage. In reality,
however, they are another form of `marriage lite, creating an explicit
government sanctioning of homosexual couplings where none existed, and
often creating new rights for homosexuals while further lessening the legal
distinction of marriage.
Lobbying for reciprocal beneficiary agreements is another defensive move,
designed to find something, anything, that might keep the narrow definition of
marriage intact. But none of the pro-family organizations has made any
concerted, systematic effort to keep homosexual teachers out of schools, bar
homosexuals from adopting or fostering children, or to counter the wave of
corporate and government entities that have adopted pro-gay preferences or
anti-discrimination clauses in their by-laws or charters. None has proposed
concrete steps for reversing Lawrences legalization of sodomy. Nor have there
been calls to overturn Lawrence, even though a Federal Marriage amendment
would do nothing to change the current legal status of sodomy, and even
though many of those same conservatives regularly call for the overturn of Roe
v. Wade. Instead, the current strategy has been almost exclusively about
protecting man-woman marriage, period.
Our goal is to change public policy and law for the better by making
homosexuality socially unacceptable and forcing gay rights back `into the
closet. To do this in our current cultural climate will require a serious
commitment to empiricism and honest science - this is our ace in the hole,
and it must lead and reinforce. Moralism and appeals to Biblical morality are
not likely to be effective in the long run except when `preaching to the choir.
Over the past 25 to 30 years during which gay rights has been thrust into the
American public consciousness, polls show that public acceptance of gays in
the military has risen from 51% to 80%, approval of homosexuals as
elementary school teachers has increased from 27% to 61%, and willingness
to vote for a well-qualified homosexual presidential candidate has jumped from
26% to 59%. Current tactics - which have primarily appealed to history,
tradition, and morality - have not worked and are not working.
Unfortunately, the recent political successes on marriage have likely wedded
existing pro-family organizations to their current strategies. Even if this were
not the case, it would still be very difficult to get already established
organizations to `change their tune. Consequently, we believe that a new
organization should be established that would focus exclusively on matters of
sexuality and sexual morality, as seen through the lens of science and
empiricism. This organization would be created to:
1. Serve as a publicity and public relations clearinghouse for the new science
110
on sexuality and homosexuality,
2. Promote new scientific information in laymens terms and attempt to build a
presence within the major media,
3. Host conventions, and provide training, seminars, and popularly-written
materials to Christian activists and concerned individuals of all walks of life,
4. Lobby state and federal governments for specific legislation and
administrative directives that will - using evidence from public health and
science as the basis - promote the traditional Christian viewpoint on
homosexuality.
The organization closest to what we have in mind is the Howard Center for
Family, Religion, and Society. It reviews the professional literature regarding
family life, sponsors conventions, and publishes books with a budget of
$650,000/year. While it touches upon homosexuality from time to time, its
main emphasis is upon demonstrating the superiority of the married two-
parent family and the importance of religion to successful family life. It does
not publish original scientific papers, nor does it critique articles that appear in
scientific outlets. Primarily it acts as a clearinghouse and organizer of
conventions to bring like-minded individuals and organizations together.
Another possible model would be the more recently formed Council on Family
Law, jointly sponsored by the Institute for American Values, the Institute for
Marriage and Public Policy, and the Institute for the Study of Marriage, Law,
and Culture. Each of these organizations is independent, non-partisan, and
seeks to foster interdisciplinary research on marriage and family law and social
policy by bringing together scholars from around the world, united by a
common mission. As the Institute for American Values puts it:
"In all of its work, the Institute seeks to bring fresh analyses and new research
to the attention of policy makers in government, opinion makers in the media,
and decision makers in the private sector.
0ublic 0olicy
The final piece of this puzzle - public policy and law - must also emphasize
and rest upon empiricism. The arguments upholding Georgias sodomy law in
the 1986 Supreme Court decision in Bowers v. Hardwick were based on history,
tradition and precedent. The high court affirmed those arguments then, but
rejected similar appeals to precedent in the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas case.
Public morality and majority sentiment - as they have evolved over time in
the Christian West - are not enough to stop gay rights. This was clear from
the Supreme Courts Romer v. Evans decision in 1994 rejecting Colorados
majority vote on Amendment 2.
What is needed are legislative and public policy strategies that can be argued
on the basis of public health, risk assessment, and scientific fact. Laws and
directives should be proposed and solicited which have as their motivating
111
basis the greater personal and social dangers/risks associated with homosexual
practice. Only by incorporating such bases into legislative or administrative
proposals will our courts be forced to determine the merits of such laws on the
basis of the public good, rationality, and scientific support.
To this end, we would propose the following as first examples of initiatives that
ought to be launched.
So"omy
Legislation making penile-anal sex illegal. Engaging in penile-anal sex
would be considered a felony, punishable by 1-5 years in prison, or a fine
of $2,000 per occurrence.
Penile-anal sex and intravenous [IV] drug use have been responsible for the
overwhelming majority of HIV infections and AIDS, an exceptionally costly
disease. Currently, possessing the equipment and/or substances to engage in
shooting IV drugs is illegal because such behavior spreads blood-borne disease
through needle and works sharing. Sodomy constitutes a public health threat,
a drain on the public treasury, and fosters a subculture that attempts to
expand the number of users. This bill would specifically correct the oversight
that penile-anal sex, though probably responsible for the majority of HIV
infections in the U.S., is currently legal.
Those who get infected from shooting drugs endanger their lives, the lives of
children they may carry, the health care workers who treat them, those who
receive bodily tissue from them (e.g., blood products, organ transplants), and
those with whom they come in contact to get and share IV drug-shooting
equipment. The state has a compelling interest in suppressing this activity,
since 1) the health care costs for diseases contracted by these means (e.g.,
HIV, hepatitis) are so substantial, and must be borne by society, and 2) those
who shoot IV drugs encourage others to participate with them.
The practice of penile-anal sex is similar, in that those who engage in it
endanger their lives, the lives of children they may carry, the health care
workers who treat them, those who receive bodily tissue from them, and those
with whom they engage in penile-anal sex. Diseases caught from penile-anal
sex entail substantial health care costs, which must be borne by the state. For
this reason, and the fact that those who engage in penile-anal sex encourage
others to participate with them, the state has a compelling interest in
suppressing this behavior.
Marriage 0rotection
Extend the Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA] by adding to it the provision
that "any political entity giving the same set or approximately the same
set of benefits to any institution other than marriage (e.g., domestic
partnerships, civil unions, or the equivalent) is denied Federal funding,
starting with a 1% reduction in Federal funding to that entity for the first
week that the entity is in violation, a 2% reduction for a violation during
the second week, and so on until either full compliance with the intent of
112
Congress to protect the institution of marriage is met, or all Federal
funding is withdrawn from that political entity.
Introduce federal and state bills declaring that "because of the risks to
individual and public health, and the high social costs associated with
HIV infection, which currently accounts for approximately 1% of Gross
Domestic Product and is still growing, as well as the many other
infections (e.g., syphilis, hepatitis C) that are spreading sexually through
the populace by sexual contact and commerce, any political entity that
receives Federal [or state] funding and passes some form of domestic
partnership or any public or private entity that does business with the
Federal [or state] government and provides benefits for unmarried
couples, must require blood tests of the same sort required to donate to
the blood bank. These tests must be required as of the date that a
partnership begins in the case of political entities granting domestic
partnerships, or as of the date such benefits are conferred in the case of
private entities providing benefits. Further, if a prospective member of
the couple fails to pass any of the tests associated with blood donation,
that partnership cannot commence until both partners are medically
certified as uninfected with any of the pathogens that would disqualify
blood for donation; neither can benefits be granted by the entity that
confers benefits.
Entities that did not comply with this second initiative would be denied Federal
or state funding, including a progressive reduction in total Federal or state
contract awards, until either compliance was met or all funding was removed.
Enactment of the first bill would mean conservatives would not have to wait
years for a (difficult and unlikely) Constitutional amendment on marriage. The
second bill would protect individual and public health and the taxpayer purse
should some form of domestic partnership be granted to those having sex
outside the bonds of matrimony.
Further, Congress is given sole discretion over the public purse under Sections
8 and 9 of Article I of the Constitution. There is ample precedent for Congress
to demand actions by the states or cities in order to retain Federal funding
(and similarly for state legislatures to act within their domains). Federal
highway funds are withheld, for instance, if a 0.08% standard for `drunk
driving is not enacted by each state. Minnesota was the very last hold-out on
this provision, but finally complied as of July 2005.
0rotection of 5hil"ren
Enact a Federal requirement of full disclosure of all sexual molestations
of foster and adoptive children, classified by sex and marital status of
each perpetrator and further cross-sorted by sex of child, for every entity
receiving Federal funding.
Every state would be required to list substantiated (or reported) instances of
sexual abuse, physical abuse, and neglect in such a way that the empirical
risks of same-sex and opposite-sex sexual abuse in foster and adoptive parent
113
homes could be determined and investigated. Currently, this kind of
information is not mandated nor regularly reported by any state or agency.
And yet there is selective evidence that the risk of same-sex sexual abuse is
substantially higher than the risk of opposite-sex abuse, evidence that must be
confirmed before implementing new, health-based, public policy on foster and
adoptive parenting.
If, after full disclosure, a years data from the states shows the same
pattern of disproportionate sexual abuse by those who engage in
homosexuality, then legislation would be proposed to ban Federal [or
state] funding of any entitys programs for children if that entity permits
fostering or adoption by homosexuals - that is, those who identify
themselves as bisexual, homosexual, transgendered, lesbian, gay, etc. or
who, as adults (aged 18 or older) have engaged in same-sex sexual
relationships.
'"ucation
Enact a Federal requirement that school districts treat homosexual sex as
a public health hazard. Any district that treats homosexual sex as
equivalent to heterosexual sex would have its Federal funding reduced by
1% per week of non-compliance.
Enact a Federal requirement that at least by 7th grade, each pupil in
every school must be informed of: 1) the health hazards of homosexual
sex, including STDs and the shortening of the lifespan, and 2) the health
benefits of marriage, including lesser risks of STDs and the lengthening
of the lifespan. Any school district that fails to inform its pupils in this
regard is to have its Federal funding reduced by 1% per week of non-
compliance.
Enact a Federal requirement that school districts must not have a non-
discrimination policy in regard to homosexual teachers. Any district that
has a non-discrimination policy regarding homosexuals would have its
Federal funding reduced by 1% per week of non-compliance.
Enact a federal requirement that schools and day care facilities must fully
disclose attempted or actual sexual molestations of pupils to the U.S.
Department of Education in a timely manner. All those convicted (or who
plead no contest) to a sexual charge involving a child must be reported,
by name, Social Security number, fingerprints, etc. to a register
maintained by the U.S. Department of Education. Further, mandate that
no teacher or worker at a school or day care facility - whether public or
private - can be employed if they have been convicted of, or are
currently being prosecuted for, sexual abuse of a child.
Enact a Federal requirement that any administrator or school board who
knowingly hires a homosexual or a convicted child molester as a teacher
or worker at a school or day care facility is to be fined $50,000.
114
5onclusion
It took Christianity 300 years to accomplish its transformation of society
regarding homosexuality. It has taken psychiatry about 100 years to partially
transform the Wests treatment. Today, it is likely that an investment of at least
20 years will be required to dent the hold that the psychiatric paradigm has on
elite and popular thinking. At the current pace - unless a new paradigm is
adopted and accepted - near total acquiescence to the gay rights movement
is almost assured over the next 20 to 40 years. That is why this effort and fight
- using a new line of attack and the very weapon psychiatry launched against
Christianity - is so critical.
%hat 7ou 5an .o
We can no longer sit on the sidelines and hope that our culture will somehow
rebound on its own. Apathy is nothing but a recipe for disaster. We can no
longer afford to be ignorant of the aims, nature, and stratagems of the
homosexual movement, no matter how distasteful or repugnant the subject
may seem. And a defeatist attitude that it is `already too late will only
guarantee certain failure.
FRI believes we can make a difference. The tide can be turned, difficult though
that may sound. But we need your involvement and the help of other
committed individuals. Specifically, what we are asking for is the following:
1. Financial resources. We need financial backing both to expand the mission of
Family Research Institute and to seed and fund the new foundation, research
consortium, and clearinghouse organizations described earlier. This will require
significant investment on the part of several individuals and/or entities.
2. Administrative and legal resources. We need individuals with excellent
business, management, and legal expertise to oversee the creation and
development of the new sexuality organizations.
3. Name recognition. We need well-known and well-respected individuals from
all walks of professional life to publicly lend their names and support to this
effort and to serve as board members and advisors.
4. Scientific expertise and collaboration. We need additional researchers and
academicians willing to collaborate with FRI, even at the risk of public ridicule
and/or professional censure, for the sake of pursuing and researching the
empirical truth about homosexuality.
5. Public relations and lobbying expertise. We need media-savvy individuals
and political veterans who will help bring this fight to both Congress, state
legislatures, and to our national media at all levels.
Please join with us in this undertaking. We can only make progress by uniting
together under a strategic plan that makes sense. Consider carefully whether
any other initiative is better worth your time, money, and involvement. Many
115
problems in our culture exist, to be sure. But what will have the most far-
reaching impacts on your children, their families, and the generations to come?
Put in another way, what is it about our way of life that is most worth
preserving?
May we all have the courage of our convictions to engage this battle.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/can-anything-be-done-to-stop-
gay-rights/
F?? Co! )>> B A Tale of Two Stu"ies
The /insey 1nstitute is at it again! Of course theyve changed their name
(Center &or 'e(ual Health Promotion) and allied with other organizations and
sexual policy `big-wigs, including the Centers &or .isease Control (CDC) and
former Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders. But to hear them tell it, they have just
released the biggest, most important sex survey ever. Well, not 7uite.
The new study - called the National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior
(NSSHB) - captured headlines all across the world on October 4 with one of
its big findings that 8% of U.S. men and 7% of U.S. women said they were
homosexual or bisexual! True? Probably not.
Though the survey methodology was touted as highly representative and
authoritative, it still left a number of questions. Survey respondents were
drawn by /nowledge "etwor:s, an outfit that draws random samples from a
larger probability-based panel of potential households. Individuals in the larger
panel are queried a few times a month via email to see if they will take part in
various surveys, one of which in 2009 was the new sex study. All data
collection is done online.
Whats not very clear is how agreeing to participate in such a panel (and
possibly getting paid to do it) might or might not be related to ones sexual
proclivities. Pilot tests described on the /nowledge "etwor:s website seem to
indicate that their recruitment process over-samples more educated individuals
and under-samples the less educated (as might be expected given the need to
use a computer and internet connection in order to respond to their survey
requests).
Both /nowledge "etwor:s and authors of the NSSHB results claimed that the
sample weights for the study were adjusted to match demographic profile of
the U.S. Census ,ureau-s Current Population Survey (CPS). Yet it is somewhat
confusing as to what precisely was done.
One author noted that "Some participant characteristics were previously
collected by Knowledge Networks for purposes of sample stratification and
sample adjustments using post-stratification data weights. These measures
included gender, age, race . and sexual orientation (heterosexual/straight,
homosexual/gay/lesbian, bisexual, asexual, other) (P. 257). However, a few
paragraphs later is the statement: "During analyses, post-stratification data
116
weights were applied to reduce variance and minimize bias caused by non-
sampling error. Distributions for age, race, gender, Hispanic ethnicity,
education, and U.S. Census region were used in post-stratification
adjustments.
So was the sexual orientation measure used to post-stratify the sample or not?
Since post-stratification involves adjusting ones sample - after the fact - so
that the weighted proportion of respondents matches a pre-established target,
knowing whether or not sexual orientation was used for these adjustments
matters a great deal. If so, on what basis was the pre-established target
calculated? And how could it have been when there are no regular national
statistics or registries on sexual orientation - unlike characteristics such as
race or gender - to provide a benchmark, and in fact, when estimating sexual
preference was one of the goals of the study to begin with?
Based on the professional write-up, our best guess is that data on sexual
orientation was collected separately from the main survey, but not necessarily
used to post-stratify the survey sample. But if that is so, exactly how were the
estimates of sexual preference compiled and computed? And was the same
sample used both to estimate sexual orientation as well as to answer the
`main survey?
Despite all the fanfare, the sample that was reported had a fairly high non-
response/noncompletion-rate (as was true of our 1983-84 FRI survey).
Consider that "[a] total of 2,172 parents (or legal guardians) reviewed the
study, including the survey, and 62% (N= 1,347) consented for their child to
be invited to participate. Of 1,347 adolescents [e.g., aged 14-17] contacted
electronically, 831 responded, with 99% (820) consenting to participate. An
electronic recruitment message was sent to 9,600 potential adult respondents,
of whom 6,182 (64%) responded, with 82% (N= 5,045) consenting to
participate (P. 256-7).
Do the math and you find a 50% (5,865/11,772) overall response rate from
the target sample. About 70% is common for large national surveys, but of
course, sex surveys are inherently harder and fewer people tend to be willing
to participate, especially those individuals of a conservative bent.
Estimates of sexual orientation reported by the NSSHB were as follows:
Table . Sexual $rientation by Subgrou(< CSSH/ G)>>H
Subgroup Heterosexual Gay/Lesbian Bisexual Other
Boys (14-17) 96.1% 1.8% 1.5% 0.1%
Girls (14-17) 90.5% 0.2% 8.4% 0.9%
Men 92.2% 4.2% 2.6% 1%
Women 93.1% 0.9% 3.6% 2.3%
The estimates in Table are weighted and post-stratified, as discussed above,
in order to match the U.S. national demographic profile. However, when only
117
half the target sample participates in the survey, it is quite possible that the
respondents were different enough from the non+respondents to create a
significant bias in the results.
What we found in our earlier survey (which had a similar number of
respondents) was that liberals and the libertine were more likely to respond to
a sex survey than the more conservative or sexually conventional.
Homosexuals are `showy about their sexuality (e.g., `gay pride parades), so
just as we concluded in the FRI study that our relatively high level of non-
response probably led to overestimating homosexual prevalence, so too the
same may be true of the NSSHB.
In addition, many of the media headlines got it wrong to begin with (what a
surprise!). While only 92% of adult men and 93% of women identified
themselves as "heterosexual/straight, a significant minority of the rest (1% of
men; 2.3% of women) called themselves "other (which presumably, from the
professional report, grouped together the responses "asexual and "other).
The FRI study similarly found that 2.1% of men and 3.9% of women said they
were "not sexual, so the "other subset of the NSSHB should not be assumed
to be homosexual. In fact, the reported tallies for combined adult
gays/lesbians/bisexuals were 6.8% men and 4.5% women, somewhat less -
especially for women - than the media headline of 8% gays and 7% lesbians.
Table is also odd in other respects. Not the high prevalence of
homosexuality, per se, but the difference between the sexual orientations of
adolescents vs? adults. If we take these figures at face value, then about 3.3%
of boys were homosexual, compared to 7.8% of men. For the girls, its just the
opposite - 8.6% are homosexual in youth, but that shrinks to only 4.5% in
adulthood. If these estimates are the `best ever, what mechanism explains this
pattern? For instance, if individuals are `born homosexual, how could the
percentages grow in boys and shrink in girls over time?
FRI suspects that the numbers themselves arent all that accurate. Not only do
the estimated rates of homosexuality/bisexuality run considerably higher than
other studies (such as the CDCs 2005 report), but other results also dont
seem to jibe with previous research. An example of this is the reported
prevalence of anal sex. The Guardian reported "More surprisingly, perhaps, the
reported rate of anal sex has also increased dramatically, effectively doubling
since the National Health and Social Life Survey was carried out by researchers
from the University of Chicago in 1988 (www.guardian.co.uk, 10/5/10). So did
the prevalence of anal sex really double in the past 20 years, or are the NSSHB
results simply overstating the reality of things?
Part of the answer comes from `across the pond in Great Britain. Its O&&ice o&
"ational 'tatistics recently reported a much, much larger (~238,000 person)
and more traditionally-executed study covering all of Britain. The Integrated
Household Survey (IHS) was not primarily a study about sex, but for the first
time included a question on sexual identity. Surveying those aged 16 or over
(adulthood in Great Britain is reached at age 16), it found the results in Table
).
118
Table ). Self-0ercei!e" Sexual 3"entity by Gen"er< 3HS G)>>H
Gender
(age 16+)
Heterosexual Gay/Lesbian Bisexual Other
Dont Know/Refusal/Non-
response
Men 94.6% 1.3% 0.3% 0.5% 3.3%
Women 94.9% 0.6% 0.7% 0.5% 3.2%
While it is certainly possible that rates of homosexuality differ between the
U.S. and Great Britain, if anything, there is even more societal and legal
support for homosexual expression in England than in America. Marriage-like
civil partnerships, for instance, are legal throughout Britain. So you might
guess that rates of homosexuality, were they to differ, would favor the English.
And yet the IHS only found 1.6% of men and 1.3% of women claiming a
homosexual or bisexual identity, about a third of the rates estimated in the
American NSSHB. Why the difference?
At least two factors come to mind. One, the overall response/completion rate
for the IHS was upwards of 96%, compared to only about 50% for the NSSHB.
Very few individuals, therefore, failed to answer the question on sexual identity
in Britain, meaning that the self-selection bias was likely fairly minimal.
Indeed, the O&&ice o& "ational 'tatistics (ONS) did several tests of the survey
either with or without the sexual identity question and found very similar
response rates each time.
Second, and related to the first factor, because the rest of survey was not
about sex, but only had this one question on sexual identity, it seems likely
that it was not perceived as a significant invasion of ones privacy. This in turn
should have kept non-responses to a minimum and improved the overall
accuracy of the results. The ONS also compared the IHS results to several
other recent studies of sexual identity/orientation and found similar estimates
of prevalence.
It is also interesting that - like nearly every other study on this topic over the
past 50+ years - the IHS found a significant drop-off in the prevalence of
homosexuality at older ages. Table - documents the reported results.
Although the age groupings are fairly wide, note how the proportion claiming a
homosexual or bisexual identity drops from 1.8-2.0% up to age 44, to 1.2% in
middle-age, and down to 0.6% for those in old age.
These results provide further confirmation of the notion FRI has studied and
documented for many years: either homosexuals tend to die at younger ages
than heterosexuals, or they drop out of the lifestyle as they get older. The first
possibility underscores the risks and unhealthiness that seem to be inherent in
homosexual practice. The second puts the lie to the `born that way, always that
way claim of homosexual activists. Either way, being homosexual may be `fun
for awhile, but in the end its no picnic.
Table -. Sexual 3"entity by Age Grou(< 3HS G)>>H
Age Heterosexual Gay/Lesbian Bisexual Other Dont Know/Refusal/Non-
119
Group response
16-24 92.8% 1.1% 0.7% 0.4% 5.0%
25-44 94.7% 1.4% 0.6% 0.5% 2.9%
45-64 95.6% 0.8% 0.4% 0.5% 2.7%
65+ 95.1% 0.3% 0.3% 0.6% 3.6%
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2010/12/frr-nov-2010-%E2%80%94-a-
tale-of-two-studies/
F?? Eun )>> K %estern *Gay ?ights+< 3slamic 0e"erasty
Might the march toward gay rights in the West at some point meld with
widespread pederasty in the Middle East? This is not a rhetorical question.
What `our allies do to boys in Afganistan and Pakistan echoes past Islamic
practice and is cause for concern - especially since `our homosexuals have
been successful in lowering the age of consent and are busily teaching Western
children the wonders of homosexual sex.
We know that pederasty followed Muslim conquests from Spain to northern
India and did not decline until the middle of the 18
th
century. Mohammed said
"Beware of beardless youth for they are a greater source of mischief than
young maidens. Was he referring to men with sexual desires for boys?
The creation of the Taliban in Afghanistan offers a clue about the
`dangerousness of boys: "Such is the Pashtun obsession with sodomy - locals
tell you that birds fly over Kandahar using only one wing, the other covering
their posterior - that the rape of young boys by warlords was one of the key
factors in Mullah Omar mobilising the Taleban. In the summer of 1994. two
[Afghan] commanders confronted each other over a young boy whom they
both wanted to sodomise. In the ensuing fight civilians were killed. Omars
group freed the boy and appeals began flooding in for Omar to help in other
disputes. By November, Omar and his Taleban were Kandahars new
rulers. []
Perhaps these commanders wanted the boy for ,acha ,a5i (`boy play). As
documented on @rontline (P,', April 20, 2010), attractive boys, aged 10
through 17, are sold by or extorted from their Afghan families to dress in
womens clothes, perform the whirling dance for crowds of men (often wearing
artificial breasts!), and then (often) get privately sodomized by one or more of
the audience.
In neighboring Pakistan, in "villages throughout the country, young boys are
often forcibly `taken by older men, starting a cycle of abuse and revenge that
social activists and observers say is the common pattern of homosexual sex.
These quasi-abductions often `create homosexuals: "The first time Aziz, a
lean, dark-haired 20-year-old in this bustling cultural capital, had sex with a
man, he was a pretty, illiterate boy of 16. A family friend took him to his
house, put on a Pakistani-made soft-porn video, and raped him. Now, says
120
Aziz., he is `addicted to sex with men, so he hangs around Lahores red-light
districts, getting paid a few rupees for sex. At night, he goes home to his
parents and prays to Allah to forgive him.. Among the Pashtun majority [in
the region], having a young, attractive boyfriend is a symbol of prestige and
wealth for affluent middle-aged men. Indeed, Pashtun men often keep a young
boy in. the male room of the house that the wife rarely enters.. The boy is
always the passive partner in sex and has often been coerced into the
relationship; he is given food and clothes by his partner, and is in many cases
forbidden to leave the relationship or marry. (In theory, the boys could marry
when theyre grown, but they are generally considered damaged, and end up
wandering the streets as homosexual outcasts). []
As might be expected when the stronger foist themselves upon the weaker,
violence and homosexual activity are highly correlated. Consider the fate of
boy volunteers for the Taliban captured by the Northern Alliance. Jeffrey
Gettleman

reported [)] that:
"at least 1,500 prisoners, mostly boys, were being held in private jails. `Were
they being sexually abused? Gettleman asked. `It is a custom, the informer
declared, `With boys that age, before they have hair on the faces, these things
happen. Things? What things? "Jimshade [a boy ]. follower of the mullah Sufi
Mohammed. said he was captured. He spent six weeks as a slave. before his
family bought his freedom. `The soldiers do things to you, he said, `that make
you want to kill yourself. They have this game: They start with the youngest
prisoners and ask them their age, he continued. `If a boy says 13, they send
13 soldiers to him. If he says 16, the boy gets 16. The soldiers take turns
raping the boys, Jimshade said. `They take them to an underground room and
hold the boys down, and the whole house fills with screaming, and the soldiers
yell louder than the screaming, like they are mad or crazy or have turned into
wild animals. Sometimes, he said, his voice shrinking, `I still hear them.
One could wish this were an isolated event. Yet, last year in Pakistan, at least
61 boys were raped and murdered - 28 of them by groups of men, and at
least another 431 boys were raped without being killed. [-] As these are the
`reported incidents, we can be sure there were many more since families are
not only `paid off for use of their boys, but also to shut up. As such, the
`sexual tastes of a significant minority of Pakistanis are decidedly anti-social.
Investigators have reported that a large minority of Pakistanis is very
supportive of pederasty.
By comparison, we know that about a third of interviewed U.S. adult
homosexual males approved of, and had sex with, boys. This is close to the
figure the National Coalition for Child Rights reported - specifically, that 23%
of Pakistani adults said they were "proud of man-boy sex and "11% did not
consider it wrong (Rajabali, Khan, Warraich, et al, 2008). [1] Since Pakistanis
are migrating all across the Western world, you have to wonder how much
pederasty is now taking place in London or New York.
As horrible as pederasty is, adult homosexuality is also rampant in
Afghanistan. A military study (reported by @o( "ews) found that Pashtun men
121
commonly have sex with other men, admire other men physically, have sex
with boys, and shun women socially and sexually - but dont call themselves
"homosexuals. In one instance, a group of local male interpreters had
contracted gonorrhea anally from each other but refused to believe they could
have contracted it sexually "because they were not homosexuals.
Apparently, according to the report, Pashtun men interpret the Islamic
prohibition on homosexuality to mean they cannot "love another man - but
that doesnt mean they cant use men for "sexual gratification. A U.S. army
medic had to tell a local man how to get his wife pregnant. "When it was
explained to him what was necessary, he disgustedly asked, `How could one
feel desire to be with a woman, who God has made unclean, when one could
be with a man, who is clean? Surely this must be wrong.
The contradictions abound. These Pashtun men apparently enjoy and are
having anal sex, that is, se( with the #ody-s sewer system! Yet women are
`unclean! And to top it off, the U.S. is allied with these Afghanis in order to
defeat the Taliban - even though it is the Taliban that opposes pederasty.
Since the gay movement was partially inspired by prominent pederasts (e.g.,
Oscar Wilde, Paul Goodman, Andr Gide, Allen Ginsberg), if Islamic
fundamentalists come to believe pederasty is part and parcel of `the Islamic
truth (and millions of Muslims may apparently believe this), might they form
an alliance with the gay movement? Consider Larry Kramer, co-founder of ACT-
UP, who has contracted both Hepatitis B and HIV (from adults) in his
homosexual travels. While he doesnt mention pederasty.
Gay Liberation (or Gay Lib) is the name used to describe the radical lesbian,
gay, bisexual and transgendered movement of the late 1960s and early to mid
1970s in North America, Western Europe, and Australia and New Zealand.
."Oscar Fingal OFlahertie Wills Wilde (October 16, 1854 C" November 30,
1900) was an Irish playwright, novelist, poet, and short story writer. .In those
instances where children do have sex with their homosexual elders, be they
teachers or anyone else, I submit that often, very often, the child desires the
activity, and perhaps even solicits it, either because of a natural curiosity that
will or will not develop along these lines, or because he or she is homosexual
and innately knows it. This is far from `recruitment. Obviously, there are
instances in which the child is unwilling, and is a victim of sexual abuse, homo-
or heterosexual. But, as with straight children anxious for the experience with
someone of the opposite sex, these are kids who seek solicit, and consent
willingly to sex with someone of the same sex. And unlike girls or women
forced into rape and traumatized, most gay men have warm memories of their
earliest and early sexual encounters; when we share these stories with each
other, they are invariably positive ones. [:]
What Aziz and Jimshade said doesnt quite fit Kramers optimistic scenario. Nor
does it fit the thousands of boys being kept in sexual slavery in Afghanistan,
Pakistan, and beyond. Clearly, some Muslim men have developed and written
about sexual tastes that include boys. For instance, Sufyan at-Thawri (d. 783)
wrote about sexual temptation "if every woman has one devil accompanying
122
her, then a handsome lad has seventeen. Or Hanbalite jurist Ibn al-Jawzi (d.
1200): "He who claims that he experiences no desire when looking at beautiful
boys or youths is a liar, and if we could believe him he would be an animal, and
not a human being." Much of this is undoubtedly driven by cultural norms, but
FRI has also noted the apparent inclination of those who enjoy homosexuality
to include youth in their activities, regardless of culture.
Beyond ,acha ,a5i, a 2009 study of 170 Pakistani truck drivers and their 169
helper boys [9] reported that "almost all of the boys ended up having sex
with the mostly-married drivers. Further, older helper boys often raped
younger boy-helpers. Principal investigator, Dr Muhammad Tufail, said athough
having sex with female prostitutes is fairly common, "drivers prefer young
boys.
All of this evidence - both anecdotal and otherwise - should give significant
pause to the notion of a great one-world `melting pot of cultures, traditions,
and practices championed by our liberal elite. That Muslims and Christians;
Americans, Pakistanis, and Afghans; homosexuals and heterosexuals, etcetera,
etcetera, can all live in `perfect harmony. Indeed, one of the obvious successes
of Christianity was driving institutionalized pederasty out of society. As the
West rejects Christianity, it becomes more and more accepting of
homosexuality. Are we headed back to a highly violent and ugly past?
?eferences:
1. Kennedy M (2004) Open secrets: In Pakistan, sex between men is strictly
forbidden by law and religion. But even in the most conservative regions, its
also embedded in the society. ,oston Glo#e, July 11.
2. Gettleman J (2002) The untold war: prisoner of Jihad. 9A Times, July 21
3. Sahil (2009) Cruel "um#ers 2$
(http://www.sahil.org/abt_publications_cruelnumbers.html).
4. Rajabali A, Khan S, Warraich HJ, Warrich MR, Khanani MR, Ali SH (2008)
HIV and homosexuality in Pakistan. 9ancet 1n&ectious .iseases 8:511-515.
5. Kramer L (1981) Reports &rom the Holocaust? NY: St. Martins, p234.
6. Imran M (2010) The "ews 1nternational, February 19
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2010/07/frr-jun-2010-western-gay-rights-
islamic-pederasty/
F?? Ean )>> B 0e"o(hilia an" Male Homosexuality
*0e"o(hilia+ an" Male Homosexuality
Homosexuals have claimed for some time that they are no more apt than
heterosexuals to molest children. Over the past three decades, professional
123
associations have chimed in to support their claim. For instance, in Romer v.
Evans, a 1994 brief by the American Psychological Association, the "ational
Association o& 'ocial Wor:ers, and the American Psychiatric Association told
the U.S. Supreme Court "there is no evidence of any positive correlation
between homosexual orientation and child molestation (pp. 23, 24). The same
claims are made in most college textbooks. In fact, this position is so ingrained
that two expert witnesses for State Attorney Generals offices told me they
were #anned from addressing disproportionate molestation when defending
Arkansas regulations against foster parenting by homosexuals (decided June
29, 2006) and Floridas defense of its law against homosexual adoption
(decided November 25, 2008).
The state of knowledge was historically very different. In pre-Christian Greece,
Aristophanes observed that men taken with homosexual relations "when they
grow to be men, they become lovers of boys, and it requires the compulsion of
convention to overcome their natural disinclination to marriage and
procreation. More recently, a 1970s survey conducted by the Kinsey Institute
reported that while aged 21 or older, 23% of 671 gays said they had sex with
boys aged 16 or younger. And of 4,329 gays sampled by Jay and Young - both
open homosexuals - about 22% reported sex with boys and over 30%
openness to, or approval of, sex with boys.
Despite this evidence, Scotlan" has decided to protect homosexual
practitioners in a very significant way. Recent events in Edinburgh, Glasgow,
and Dundee ought to jolt Scots into rethinking those protections.
May of 2009 saw the prosecution of 8 Scottish male homosexuals, the arrest of
another 35+ homosexuals across the UK, and still more arrests of others in the
Netherlands and the U.S. for mixtures of child abuse and pornography. The 8
"gang members, all seemingly respectable professionals, led sordid double
lives, newspapers complained. [Why should the media expect education or
professionalism to somehow shield one from becoming a child molester?]
The ringleaders were Neil Strachan, 41 (infected with HIV) and James Rennie,
38. Although "seemingly respectable professionals, Strachan had already been
convicted of raping a 5 year-old boy in 1997. Well, one might say, `he deserves
a second-chance. Yet he was convicted of raping another 18 month-old boy in
2003. How many chances does a rapist get in Scotland? Plenty, since his latest
victim was another 18 month-old boy.
Strachan charmed-up the parents, and then volunteered to babysit the little
guy. Of course he was charming, attentive, and said all the right things -
monsters such as he have the game down pat.
Do his three assaults on boys mean that Strachan is a `pedophile with no
desire for adult partners? No. Strachan was infected with HIV and had a `gay
partner (also indicted). He almost certainly got infected with HIV by having
anal sex with another man, so his `pedophilia was far from an exclusive
appetite. Like most homosexuals, these 8 individuals were sexually `flexible or
`omnisexual.
124
Rennie was a `gay star. A Scottish newspaper called him "the outwardly
respectable boss of 9es#ian2 Gay2 ,ise(ual and Transgender =outh 'cotland
(notice how far the Scots have fallen). As a secondary school teacher who had
been invited to the Scottish Parliament for a debate on "helping young gay
people, his gay-rights activism was well known. His crime? Abusing a three-
month old boy and permitting other members of the `gay clan to listen over
the phone while he molested the tyke. Pictures, of course, were taken, and
distributed far and wide. He too had a gay "partner, trolled the Internet for
gay sex dates, picked up "rent boys [young male prostitutes], and "advertised
a porn collection on toilet walls. Yet another sexually obsessed `flexible fellow.
Forgetting he had images of boys being molested on his hard-drive, the
investigation started when Strachan took his laptop to get fixed. The repair
shop noticed the 7,000+ pictures of naked and abused boys, etc. and notified
police. The hard-drive turned up email lists of over 70 co-conspirators across
the world. Police called it "the biggest and most challenging. paedophile
network dismantled in Scotland. A Netherlands comrade even bragged of
having molested and `snuffed [killed] a little boy in France.
Rennie had exotic tastes. One of his emails indicated his longing to "see
children with Downs Syndrome sexually abused. Sophisticated chap, eh?
All these perpetrators were "gay, most were professionals. And the "church
goer who "helped with a kids after-school club was married (but he also
secretly had a gay partner, and used his wifes email address to lure boys for
sex).
Scotland has laws giving gays `super rights - they cant even be criticized in
letters to the editor. Clearly, giving super rights to the depraved results in
super depravity.
How "oes a sexual taste for little boys come about&
A partial answer comes from South Africas 'unday Times (12/27/09). Seems
"14 boys who live in a street in a working-class suburb of Cape Town were
caught having sex. "The children, aged between six and 13, have been.
sodomising each other for months - allegedly after they watched a
pornographic film together. A shocked parent told the Sunday Times that the
case had come to light two weeks ago, when an eight-year-old was caught
naked in bed with his three-year-old niece.
"He told (his father) that two of his friends, a nine-year-old and a 12-year-old,
had sodomised him, the parent said. The father took the boy to a doctor, who
confirmed this. He then confronted the two alleged perpetrators, who said
"they had been sodomised by another boy. The boys told us they had watched
blue movies at the house of one of the older boys while his parents were at
work, another parent said. "The older boy then told `a group of about eight
boys to `do what those people in the movie did. This started in September
2008, when the youngest was only five and the eldest 11 [by the way, this is
fairly standard operating procedure - older boys induce younger boys to
125
perform].
Notice what we have here: the boys `just happened to run across porn in one
of their parents homes. Whether the pornography featured anal sex is hard to
tell, but probably so. Kids, especially boys are curious. They know that adults
do all kinds of `interesting and `fun things kids arent supposed to know about
or do. This `sex ring ran for about a year before one of the parents stumbled
upon it. Unfortunately, many of these boys are by now probably `into
homosexual anal sex. No matter what their parents do or do not do to them,
some of these boys will continue to sneak around and have homosexual sex.
They `had fun and got away with it for a year - and getting away with
something is yet another `coup on the parents.
Are they too young to `get hooked? No. Because of some parents purchases
(or carelessness), all these boys are well-primed for an adult homosexuals
attentions while they are young. And homosexuals like the child-molesting
Scots above make sure they are around kids whenever possible. When they
reach their teens, who knows what these boys will do? Now that they have
been `broken in, the trail of tears is just beginning - for them and their
parents.
Which brings us to the </ Gay "ews (Warsaw, January 1, 2010). It scolded UK
Tory leader Camerons new European Parliamentary allies, the Polish 9aw and
%ustice Party. What terrible thing is this Polish party doing? Why, "targeting
gays as they demand a government clampdown on paedophiles and the
Internet.
This, the homosexuals assert, is "homophobia.
Turns out that 27 Law and Justice Members of Parliament (MP) have signed a
parliamentary question demanding the setting-up of a special department at
the Ministry of the Interior and Administration, the Polish newspaper
R5ec5pospolita reported. "The team would monitor homosexual websites
because we are dealing with the promotion of `paedophilia by some
homosexual circles, said MP Stanislaw Pieta, author of the parliamentary
question. In addition, the MPs are demanding that the Ministry disclose
statistics on the number of cases of paedophilia uncovered over the past ten
years - and detailing cases that were homosexual. Mr. Pieta: "I am not saying
that every gay is a paedophile, but let us consider Great Britain where from 20
to 43 percent of uncovered cases of paedophilia are homosexual instances,
while gays make only 1% of society, he said.
The MPs who signed the parliamentary question also want to know if police are
given training in finding paedophiles among gays - and if police undertake
`reconnaissance operations to monitor clubs frequented by gays. The MPs cite
a Rzeczpospolita article in which gay activist Karski explained how a
homose(ual can evade the law and adopt a child. He "has pointed out a legal
loophole which enables a crime to be committed, MP Kozak told the
newspaper.
126
When I toured Poland in early 2009, I shared some of the extensive research
that shows that gays are much more apt to molest children. I challenged Polish
authorities to assemble their own data on child molestation. I also noted
research documenting that homosexuals are more apt to engage in criminal
pursuits. Homosexuals often feel that they are justified in breaking the law
because they are `discriminated against and further justified in assaulting
children because they were often assaulted (often they want to share the
`fun).
As you can see, criminality and homose(ual tastes Cust seem to Dgo together-
- even in Poland. The Scottish experience shows that vile molestations, child
pornography, and homosexuality go together. Let us hope the Poles can keep
similar situations from occurring in their country. Gathering hard2 empirical
data is the &irst step.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2010/01/family-research-report-
%E2%80%94-january-2010/
Eust
How 'ffecti!e are the 'x-Gay Ministries&
?eturn to
to(
FRI is often asked about ex-gay ministries.
We generally give mildly-endorsing referrals to these efforts. After all, their
intentions are good. However, these organizations are not an unmixed
blessing.
Consider some of the following facts:
There
is no "oubt that some who engage in homosexuality are converted or
weaned
away from the lifestyle by these groups. This fact riles gay activists
since
the bulk of them claim that they were born that way and cant change. The
existence
of those who have changed is a real `bug in the gay bonnet since it puts the
lie to one of their tactics. And it forces gay apologists to argue that those
who have changed werent really gay, or else they couldnt have changed a
rather
silly tautology that ignores the plain evidence.
.es(ite the li!ing testimonials
of many ex-gays, there is little doubt that the cure rates among the ex-gay
organizations are nothing to brag about. All addictions, particularly sexual
addictions, are hard to break and many more people attempt to break away
than
finally succeed. A great deal of time, effort, and money has to be expended
for each cure. Per dollar, the cure rate for sexual addictions is among the
worst of all the habitual sins.
127
Alcoholics Anonymous appears to have
popularized the `it takes one to save one slogan. Although this theme has
influenced
many social workers over the past several decades, the evidence that it truly
works is not so clear. FRI has attempted to nail down proof that ex-druggies
do the best work converting druggies away from drugs, ex-drunks do the best
weaning alcoholics from alcohol, and ex-gays do the best converting
homosexuals
away from homosexuality. So far, we have not found convincing evidence that
any of the Ex- programs run by Exs are more successful than programs
manned
by non-professional non-Exs or those run by psychologists, social workers,
or psychiatrists. Either way, the success rate with addicts is not very high.
Because they tap into the `it takes
one to save one principle, the leaders of the ex-gay ministries dont have
to have college degrees, and generally they dont. The enthusiasm of the
converted
is counted as good as or better than degrees. But perhaps formal learning
doesnt
make any difference when it comes to helping people. After all, many studies
that have compared the cure rates of students in psychology or psychiatry
often
report as good or better cure rates for the students than Ph.D.s or M.D.s in
the field. Such heavy reliance upon enthusiasm, however, is troubling to those
that want reliable hard facts. After all, those who are not technically trained
will have difficulty evaluating the scientific literature on homosexuality (or
any other) topic. Enthusiasm is no substitute for the training that enables
critical evaluation of technical reports and scientific claims.
'!erything %or2s Some of the Time
An important fact to remember when
evaluating the claims of any cure or program is that just about any treatment
or cure works for some people. In fact, FRI is unaware of any touted program,
from nude therapy to shock therapy and everything in between, that cant
claim
some successes and trot out some testimonials to prove it. There are always
some who testify that a given program did them some good or cured them.
The real issue then is not whether
some are helped, since some always are, but rather whether some reasonably
predictable
proportion of those contacted by the Ex-program are cured. Further, how does
the proportion who are cured compare to the proportions cured by other
programs
or simply by waiting until the person gets older (which works for most
addictions
if the person doesnt die first).
128
Usually, curative-minded groups or
treatments claim about a 1/3 success rate for those who stay the course of the
entire treatment. Of course, many addicts drop into Ex-groups for a look see.
Some will even try the program or treatment out for a while. But many,
probably
even most, dont stay the course. How do you count these people? If you
consider
them failures, then the program looks worse. But it they are not counted at
all, thats not quite fair either. Clearly, figuring cure rates for any given
Ex-program is exceptionally difficult.
Figuring cure rates is even more difficult when the program or organization
deliberately avoids collecting data.
Exodus, the largest Ex-gay consortium, does not collect any form of data on
cures or conversions. Instead, it collects data on number of books sold,
number
of inquiries, number of attendees at conferences, etc. As with many social
service
organizations, Exodus has no hard evidence that its approach works, other
than
the usual set of testimonials.
In May we talked with a member of the Exodus board of directors. He offered
the usual social service line that we dont know how many were reached, but
we know some are. And whether its
one or many, at least. We talked with leaders of another ex-gay group in
June,
and they gave the same answer. This is somewhat frustrating, since there are
always people who would like funding under the guise of helping others.
Prudence
dictates that programs demonstrate how much bang for the buck they deliver.
Unfortunately, like so many social service or helping programs, the ex-gay
ministries
cannot provide that crucial information.
When government programs have been
carefully evaluated, they usually fail to accomplish much. So proof of efficacy
is both a legitimate and prudent request. When Bob Davies, North American
director
of Exodus, was pinned by gay activists in mid-July, 1998 that two of the initial
leaders of Exodus had left their wives for homosexuality, he said "We dont
claim to have 100 percent success. We know that there are many people that
come
to Exodus who after a period of time realize that because of the difficulty
in the change process they lose heart and give up.that does not negate the
fact that there are many people who stick with it and experience significant
change." (Christian News 7/27/98)
As the exam(le of 'xo"us suggests,
some of the leaders of the ex-gay movement appear to be still semi-entangled
129
with the lifestyle. As a consequence, a significant number of those in
leadership
fall back into homosexuality, when, had they just quit, got away, stayed away,
and moved on, they might have escaped entirely.
It is a sad truth that those who
were once seriously involved with an addiction are more susceptible to the
temptations
of that addiction than those who were never addicted to begin with. Public
record
documents several cases of leaders of ex-alcoholic and ex-drug abuser
programs
who `fell off the wagon. When those who are struggling with an addiction or
sin are around others who are so tempted, bad things can happen, and
frequently
do.
For instance, imagine that you have
a large church. Adultery is a common problem. In a large congregation, it is
predictable that many are struggling with having committed adultery or being
sorely tempted to. Let us further imagine that you organize a program to help
such individuals. You announce that at such a time in such a room all those
who have committed adultery or desire to do so will meet together to comfort
each other, pray, read the Bible, listen to speeches from those who have
overcome,
etc.
What will happen? Predictably, chaos.
Why?
Every man in the room will know that
every woman in the room either has or wants to commit adultery. Every
woman
in the room will know that every man in the room either has or wants to
commit
adultery. While some may be helped by this ministry, it is certain that the
program will also be a stimulus to pairing up adulterous individuals, serving
as a kind of introduction agency. By focusing a ministry on a particular sin
or problem, and bringing together those with that particular difficulty,
significant
problems are almost guaranteed.
Consider this testimony from lesbian
Sandi Wiggins: "A little over ten years ago I was involved with two different
Ex-Gay ministries. I was involved to the point where I was a small group leader
and a hotline phone counselor. My thinking was completely change imperative.
I engaged Ex-Gay ministries because of my own deep cognitive and spiritual
distress
about being a Christian and a lesbian. I met my partner at an Exodus
130
conference.
About five years ago, I turned to yet a third Ex-gay ministry.
"Within the past two years,
I have been praying and brooding more intensely for resolution in my soul. I
had deeply internalized homophobia because of the way I understood that the
Bible and hence God thought about me. I totally believed that I could not live
a fulfilling life or be a Christian or be self-actualized unless my same gender
attractions disappeared.
"Now I have seen that all these
things are possible in my life and that I can truly continue to follow Jesus."
Notice the progression.
Sandi had "internalized homophobia."
That is, she felt bad about her involvement with homosexuality. But she DID
NOT WANT TO GIVE IT UP, so she hung around those with homosexual desires,
ostensibly
to help them (and, FRI suspects, she genuinely wanted to help them quit).
Still,
homosexuals were all around her. If she changed her mind again, the `right
people were there to help her bail out and go back. Sandi hung around
homosexuality
and homosexuals and eventually met her true [homosexual] love.
Jesus said that "If you love
me you will follow my commandments," including those commandments
against
sexual immorality. Unfortunately, when asked to choose between sexual and/or
personal fulfillment and following Christ, people often choose the former and
reinterpret the latter.
If Ms. Wiggins had got free and moved
on, her life today might be very different. But now she is a cancer in both
the ex-gay movement and the church, arguing and proving by her very life
that
one can claim to follow Jesus without actually doing so.
GTo /e 5ontinue" in Cext 3ssueH
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/1998/09/frr-aug-sept-1998/
F?? Se( ==D B Success in 0re!enting A3.S&
The headlines screamed, and even
National Public Radio crowed: even in the inner-city, AIDS can be prevented!
Imagine,
for less than $300 apiece, inner-city Blacks and Hispanics can be
131
"taught
to use condoms" and, as a consequence, not get AIDS. If true, a BIG DEAL.
But the reality does not match the rhetoric.
Here was the plan. Separate those
coming to STD clinics by sex into small groups of 5 to 15 persons. Ask each
person to attend 7 twice-weekly 90-to-120 minute sessions on AIDS
prevention/risk
reduction. At these sessions, have the leaders and other group members
pressure
participants to be safe, use condoms, use clean needles, etc. Let a control
group just go to a 1 hour session featuring an AIDS prevention videotape.
Then,
over the next year, assess the participants in the study at the 3rd month, 6th
month, and 12th month for: 1) self-reported claims of condom-use in the 90
days
before the interview, 2) for men only, STDs as indicated on their chart at the
STD clinic, and 3) at the 12th month follow-up, tested prevalence of chlamydia
and gonorrhea via a urine sample.
About 1850 were involved in each
of the experimental and control groups. Whether participants were paid is not
clear, but the average number of "booster" sessions (called "dosex")
that the experimental group attended was 5.2, and 63% attended 6 or 7
sessions.
The results?
The experimental group claimed that
they were using condoms more often than the control group at each of the 3
assessments.
While statistically significant, the differences were not enormous. The average
number of "unprotected intercourse acts" claimed at the 12th month
assessment was 16.7 for the controls, 13.2 for the experimentals who
attended
5 or fewer sessions, and 11.2 for those experimentals who attended 6 or 7
sessions.
The experimental group also claimed fewer symptoms that were suggestive of
STDs.
If you can take people at their word
on these matters, a mild success. The objective measures, however, were not
good news for the investigators.
When it came to STDs as indexed by
the STD clinic charts, there was no difference between the experimental and
control groups about 9% in each case contracted an STD over the year. The
investigators
did find that gonorrhea was a bit less common in the men in the experimental
group (1%) than in the control men (2%) on the STD charts. But the urine test
132
at the 12th month found no statistically significant differences between the
groups in gonorrhea or chlamydia.
So what we have is a fairly strong
study that generated weak or no findings. Just like the French study in 1991
that found no effect of public AIDS education upon STD rates (Family Research
Report, June-Sept, 1991), this study found at most a "hint" that a
fairly intensive small-group effort might actually reduce STDs.
While the authors argued that people
could be relied upon to "tell the truth" about their condom use, FRI
is skeptical. But if the authors were correct, then consider what they didnt
find. In contrast to the small correlation reported between attending more
booster
sessions and self-reported condom use, there was no report of any
correlation
between self-re(orte" con"om-use an" ST.s.
Why not? Apparently there was no
such correlation. This non-finding punches a hole in the condom-theory of STD
prevention. You have to wonder whether the belief in the efficacy of condoms
is one of science or one of faith.
?eference: NIMH
Multisite HIV prevention trial group. The NIMH multisite HIV prevention trail:
reducing HIV sexual risk behavior. Science, 1998,280, 1889-94.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/1998/09/frr-aug-sept-1998/
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2008/12/aids-%E2%80%94-intervention-
works-%E2%80%9Ceducation%E2%80%9D-is-questionable/
A3.S B 3nter!ention %or2sN @'"ucationA is Ouestionable
Authors: Paul Cameron and William L. Playfair
Summary: A decrease in or leveling off of new cases of transfusion-related
AIDS coupled with continued increases in homosexual and IV drug cases
suggests that intervention by barring contaminated blood has worked and
"education has worked less well, if at all. Current evidence suggests that the
blood-bar resulted in change in new AIDS cases among children within 3 years
and among adults within 3 1/2 years.
References: Psychological Reports, 1991, 68, 467-470.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2014/01/muddled-thinking/
Ean )>1 P Mu""le" Thin2ing
Marvin Olasky, Editor in Chief of World *aga5ine, posted an analysis here of
133
Ugandas anti-homosexuality bill on January 24. Although Dr. Olasky claims a
conservative Christian background and worldview, his reactions to Ugandas
efforts to suppress homosexuality seem ignorant of both historic Christian
treatment in this area as well as the power of law to influence behavior. Below
we extensively excerpt Olaskys analysis and rebut with our commentary.
0roblem or Solution& by Marvin Olasky
Going ballistic: When the Ugandan parliament shortly before Christmas passed
a bill legislating long prison sentences for homosexuals, The Hu&&ington Post
quoted one activist calling Dec. 20 `the worst day in history, and the U.S. State
Department (which looks the other way as Muslims murder Christians) was
quick to `condemn the bill. On Jan. 17 Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni
chose not to sign the bill, citing a technicality, and columnists blamed American
Christians for manipulating the purportedly ignorant and easily led Africans.
A deeper analysis came from Chris Howles, a missionary in Uganda who in his
blog, "amugongo 9i&e, called the national opposition to homosexuality
historical rather than religious. Howles wrote online ("Homophobia in Uganda:
Is Christianity the problem or the solution?), `The vast majority of Christians
in this country have never met or spoken with a Western missionary. Nor have
their leaders. Many of these attitudes about homosexuality come direct from
traditional Ugandan culture.
F?3+s 5omment B Homophobia? This propaganda word does not belong in
Christian discourse. Dislike of homosexuality, general avoidance of those who
practice it, and trying to keep our kids safe from gay predators are hardly
`problems for Christians - it is `who we are supposed to be. To be sure, we
will find ourselves out of tune with Archbishop Desmond Tutus "If I go up to
heaven and find a homophobic God, I will tell him I prefer the other place.
Similarly, we will find ourselves on the wrong side of President Obama,
Hollywood, David Cameron, Bill and Hillary Clinton, the EU, the media, etc. If
God calls something wrong but our elite say its precious, our marching orders
are clear - as the brave Ugandan Christian boys and young men of 1886 (and
mentioned by Olasky below) demonstrated.
Some things do not change. In surveys conducted by homosexual researchers
of U.S. male homosexuals, over a fifth admitted to having sex with boys, and
media reports suggest they commit up to half of all child molestation in the
U.S.
Who ya gonna believe? I side with Howles, in part because in November I
visited his central Ugandan township of Namugongo and saw a memorial to 26
pages, young royal servants who professed Christ and were martyred in 1886.
. King Mwanga II had the 26 pages burned to death, and a national holiday
now honors them.
Why the king killed them is important in understanding the recent Ugandan
legislation. Students learn that Mwanga II expected the royal pages to submit
to his homosexual advances. After all, the traditional saying "amunswa alya
134
:unswa5e (the queen ant feeds on her subjects) indicated that the monarch is
licensed to kill those who reject him.
The pages, though, fed on Christ and chose to die rather than to sin so
blatantly. Given that fact, many Ugandans see tolerance of homosexuality in
Uganda, let alone praise for it, as historical treason. Does that mean I
applauded the parliamentary legislation .? . No: It was harsh and unlikely to
be effective.
F?3+s 5omment B Laws against murder are harsh and unlikely to be effective
(in completely stopping murder). But such laws educate as to what is `correct
and serve as a disincentive to commit murder. Just because we cannot specify
how many lives were saved by a particular law hardly means the law was
ineffective. Surely the fact that people still commit murder, rape, or theft would
not cause Dr. Olasky to label them as "ineffective and not worth having.
I write that because ancient Israels experience shows how sinners like all of us
tend to act when faced with a long list of laws: We break them. The ancient
Israelites had the best laws, since God gave them. They had every reason to
be confident in their lawgiver, since God had delivered their ancestors
from slavery. They had every reason to fear breaking them, since the penalty
often was death. But, under these best of possible conditions for obedience,
they disobeyed.
F?3+s 5omment B The Jews only had 613 hard and fast laws, in addition to a
number of bureaucratic interpretations made by their priestly class. Whatever
that number, it pales beside the hundreds of thousands of laws under which we
live. Does the multiplicity of laws make us want to break them? Doubtful. Laws
both educate and regulate. If sinners are to live with sinners, laws are
absolutely necessary and Christians are to obey them except when, as with the
brave 26 boys and young men, they contradict a basic tenant of faith.
Howles has a better idea: Promote Christianity, not tradition. He argues that if
Ugandans temper their desire to put homosexuals in prison, `it will most likely
be because of Christianity, as churches preach a message of godly love and
kindness towards active homosexuals.
F?3+s 5omment B Really? How do we show "godly love and kindness toward
active child molesters? Or active thieves, active adulterers, active slanderers,
etc.? Until the last few decades, every time the Christian Church had the
opportunity, it made homosexual activity illegal - often carrying the ultimate
penalty. So it was in Rome, England, and early in these United States.
Everyone else - especially children - should not be endangered so those
expressing homosexual interests can be comfortable.
Christianity is an historic religion. Only if you believe it is `whatever we say it is
today can you contend that `the Gospel requires acceptance and/or embrace
of those who practice homosexuality! If pusillanimous preachers want to
`ignore Christian history in favor of a new Gospel, they earn their heretic label.
135
Homosexuality is wrong and laws can be useful educators, but our hope is in
`the gospel that shows us that all people are created in Gods image . the
gospel that welcomes all people to confess that Jesus is Lord and unite
together in a broken but re-built community of Christ, as Ephesians 2:17-22
explains.
F?3+s 5omment B Some acquire a preference for child-sex, others would like
to have affairs with their neighbors spouses. If such individuals protest, whine,
and threaten about how they are being oppressed and denied their desires, will
Christians also be expected to include them as we "welcome all people in a
"broken but re-built community of Christ? Peter said in Acts to "repent and be
baptized, not `unite together in a broken but re-built community and be
baptized.
Christians with a traditionally-minded, Bible-believing tilt should reject any
attempt to bring "active homosexuals into our "re-built community; they, not
we, must first repent. If Christianity is to abandon standards and repentance
for failing these standards, and instead become re-warmed psychobabble,
forget the Church, see your local shrink or a bookstores self-help section.
Fear-based laws may work for a while, and laws to protect life are certainly
important, but rules imposing morality usually sweep problems under the rug
instead of solving them.
F?3+s 5omment B When abortion was illegal in the U.S., the abortion rate
was no more than half, if not a third, of what it is today. Did such laws `solve
abortion? No, no more than laws against murder `solve murder. Abortions
occurred, murders occurred - laws did not `solve either. Humans are, by
nature, sinful. Law, sometimes harsh law, is necessary when strong motives
are involved. Law does not and cannot `solve sin, it only contains it. When
homosexual activity was illegal, it still occurred, but it did not grace every
newscast, get taught in our schools, get extolled in our drama, or cause
Christian editors to go wobbly in fear of them, etc.
Thousands of years of Church decisions ought not to be abandoned all because
liberals criticize us or homosexuals feel uncomfortable. Neither the Sadducees
(the liberals of his time) nor the Pharisees (the conservatives) hailed Christ.
Those who follow Christ are `stuck with His decrees. If you want to claim
Christ and ignore His commands, since Tutu is an Archbishop, perhaps you can.
But the Apostle Paul seems to warn otherwise: "The wicked will have no share
in Gods kingdom. Dont be mistaken about this: no one who lives in sexual
sin. adulterers, or males who have sex with other males, . or slanderers. will
have a share in Gods Kingdom" (1 Cor. 6).
If law doesnt work for long, what does? Only the gospel. Christ loved us
enough to die for us. Once we stop thinking of ourselves as the center of the
world and recognize that God owns it and us, we realize that our greatest
pleasure comes not from indulgence but from feeling Gods pleasure.
F?3+s 5omment B To which many who sin sexually might retort "agreed, my
136
greatest pleasure is `feeling Gods pleasure. Yet I get lesser, but substantial
pleasure, from feelings gotten from a good roll in the hay, visit to a bathhouse,
or tryst in a public restroom, etc." Jesus never said `if you love me, live so as
to feel Gods pleasure; but rather " if you love me, you will keep my
commandments. Feelings are not only `cheap, but totally unreliable
(`everything a man does is right in his own eyes). This is akin to Buddhism (or
Universalism) and rather removed from historic Christianity.
Regular church-goers usually do somewhat better on almost every index of
social usefulness and personal health. They score this way by trying to follow
Gods commandments, thereby separating themselves from the practices of
`the world; certainly from the sexual preachments of our current elite.
Homosexual practitioners may get pleasure from indulging their sexual desires,
but that is far outweighed by diseases leading to a shortened lifespan
combined with interpersonal violence, instability, and a life of destructive
meaninglessness. Additionally, they are a burden to us all in that they 1)
consume more than they contribute, 2) disproportionately disturb social order,
and 3) produce few children themselves while molesting the kids of others.
Homosexuality violates Gods first commandment to `be fruitful, and is at the
very heart of Biblical denunciation of rebellion against God (see Deut 32 and
Romans 1). Homosexual lust led to the painful incineration of 26 brave
Ugandan Christian boys and young men. It cannot be ignored without
substantial intellectual and moral peril. Arguably Christianitys greatest
preacher, John Chrysostom, called it the worst sin, worse even than murder.
While every sin in Scripture is not to be carried into public law, if this sin is not,
what would Olasky nominate and how would he justify it?
M'.35A4 5$CS'O6'C5'S $F %HAT H$M$S'Q6A4S .$
/y 0aul 5ameron< 0h...
.r. 5ameron is Chariman of the Family Research Institute of Colorado
Springs, Colorado USA. Click here for more information about this
organization. You may contact him at: Family Research Institute, PO Box
62640, Colorado Springs, CO 80962 USA. Phone number: (303) 681-3113. (No
e-mail address.)
Throughout history, all civilizations had all major religions have condemned
homosexuality.
1
In the American colonies, homosexual acts were a capital
offense. Thomas Jefferson said that homosexuality "should be punished, if a
man, by castration, if a woman, by cutting through the cartilage of her nose a
hole of one-half inch in diameter as least.
2
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
137
physical dysfunction."
4
%hat Homosexuals .o
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."
Homosexual Acti!ities Gin 8H
US
16
US
13
US US
18
Denmark
20
US
19
London
27

Sydney/London
26
Canada
25

1940s1977 83/84 1983 1984 1983 1985 1991
ever ever ever in yr in yr in mo in mo last 6mo
oral/penile 83 99 100/99 99 86 67
anal/penile 68 91 93/98 95 92 95 100
oral/anal 59 83 92/92 63 69 89 55/65
urine sex 10 23 29/
fisting/toys 22 41/47 34
fecal sex-eating 4 8
enemas 11 11
torture sex 22 37 37
public/orgy sex 61 76 88
sex with minors 37 23 24/
$?A4 S'Q 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 partners
17,27
),
and gays average somewhere between 106 and 1105 different partners/year,
the potential for infection is considerable.
?'5TA4 S'Q 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
138
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 gerbils
8
). 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 for life.
F'5A4 S'Q 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,
5
70% 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

6?3C' S'Q 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
139
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.
$TH'? GA7 S'Q 0?A5T35'S
SA.$MAS$5H3SM as the Table indicates, a large minority of
gays engage in torture for sexual fun. Sex with minors 25% of
white gays
17
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 homosexuality
31
).
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. Morin
15
reported that 824 gays had
lowered their sex-rate from 70 different partners/yr. in 1982 to 50/yr. by 1984.
McKusick
14
reported declines from 76/yr. to 47/yr. in 1985. In Spain
32
the
average was 42/yr. in 1989.
Me"ical 5onseRuences 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 study
3
? 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.
'ffects on the 4ifes(an
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
140
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 the
cause of death, 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 life-span.
The Gay 4egacy
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 /iological Swa(meet
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.
141
The 0attern of 3nfection
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 in homosexual behavior.
23
The rare form of airborne
scarlet fever that stalked San Francisco in 1976 also started among
homosexuals.
10
Genuine 5om(assion
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 encourage non-smokers 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.
?eferences
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, 1167-79.
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
142
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,"
1982115599-607.
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 Association,"
19922672632-35.
25. Schechter, M.T. et al. Changes in sexual behavior and fear of AIDS.
"Lancet," 198411293.
26. Elford, J. et al. Kaposi's sarcoma and insertive rimming. "Lancet,"
1992339938.
143
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.
This educational pamphlet has been produced by Family Research Institute,
Inc., Dr. Paul Cameron, Chairman. A complete report is available for a donation
of $25 in the U.S., $40 foreign, postage included. Other pamphlets in the
series include:
What Causes Homosexual Desire?
Child Molestation and Homosexuality
Medical Consequences of What Homosexuals Do
Violence and Homosexuality
Born WHAT Way?
The Psychology of Homosexualy
Suggested donation for pamphlets: 11 for $5, 25 for $10, 50 for $19, 100 for
$35, 350 for $100, 1,000 for $250, postpaid. Remit to:
@amily Research 1nstitute
PO ,o( ;2;0
Colorado 'prings2 CO !$;2
Phone6 E44> ;!3+4334
The Family ?esearch ?e(ort newsletter is $25/year ($40 foreign)
Copyright, 1997, Family Research Institute, Inc.
http://www.biblebelievers.com/Cameron2.html
144
0sychiatric 0rofessions Falsely 5laim Gays Co More A(t to Molest
Paul Cameron, Ph.D. and Kay Proctor, M. Ed.
Family Research Institute
POB 62640, Colorado Springs, CO 80962
Abstract: Although tradition holds and most believe otherwise, the
psychiatric and educational professions assert there is no evidence that male
homosexuals are more apt to molest children. Painters records of U.S.
convictions for sodomy 1776-2001 and the John Jay College reports of U.S.
Catholic Priest molestations 1950-2010 are examined. About half (49%) of the
sodomy convictions involving homosexuality were of men molesting boys and a
disproportionate share (81%) of priest molestations involved boys. If about
22% of priests engage in homosexuality, about 14% were caught molesting
boys v 1% of heterosexual priests caught molesting girls. Both datasets are
discordant with the professions claim that there is no evidence indicating gays
are more apt to molest.
Since Roman times, participants in homosexuality have often been
considered contumacious and mendacious. But homosexuals effect on society
- particularly their recruitment of youth - has been a major reason for
suppression of homosexuality. Beliefs that 1) those who enjoy homosexuality
seek sex with youth is longstanding (e.g., Aristophanes "lovers of boys) and
that 2) they convert the young to their taste is pervasive (Levitt & Klassen,
1974). Not only was gays inclination toward boys part of recent professional
lore (e.g., McGagy [1971] "homosexual offenders probably constitute about
half of molesters who work with children), but it underpinned formal and
informal bars against homosexuals adopting, serving as Scout masters, or
teaching school.
Gay researchers (e.g., Kinsey, Pomeroy & Martin, 1948; Jay & Young, 1977)
and sympathizers (e.g., Bell & Weinberg, 1978) documented fairly extensive
man/boy sex, and Gay Pride parades often include man-boy love groups. Even
Evelyn Hooker, the `gay rights liberator, opined "theoretical interest in [gays
145
mental state] is mild compared with concern about the social consequences of
homosexuality (1958, p. 33). In response, gay activists claim they `are not
disproportionately apt to molest boys and, that even if sex between men and
boys occurs, it is not particularly harmful.
Wright & Cummings (2005), long-time members and officers in the
American Psychological Association [APA] charge the APA "has chosen ideology
over science in which "advocacy for scientific and professional concerns has
been usurped by agenda-driven ideologues.. (xiv), with acceptance of
homosexuality being one of its ideologies (e.g., Chapter 4). Wright &
Cummings note "the House of Representatives and the Senate of the United
States censured the APA for publishing in one of its journals a meta-analysis
and interview study of college students who had been molested as children.
The publication challenged the notion that these experiences had been
deleterious,. setting off a firestorm.., which culminated in the APA being the
only professional society in the history of America to be censured by the
Congress. . .the condemnation was unanimous in both the House and the
Senate. [The APAs 1999 testimony before Congress] "came down heavily on
the side of academic freedom and uncensored scientific research and only
secondarily against pedophilia.. In private, several members of Congress
confided that the APA testimony was so ambiguous that voting against
condemning the APA would have given the appearance of endorsing
pedophilia. (xvii)
Given the then general acceptance of a strong linkage between a mans
homosexual interests and sex with boys, it was noteworthy when the APA in
1975 deplored "all public and private discrimination in such areas as
employment, housing, public accommodation, and licensing against those who
engage in or who have engaged in homosexual activities. Even more striking
was the claim of the APA, the American Psychiatric Association, and the
National Association of Social Workers in their amicus brief to the U.S.
Supreme Court in Romer (1995) that "there is no evidence of any positive
correlation between homosexual orientation and child molestation. In Romer
the National Education Association, American Federation of Teachers and
American Association of University Professors also told the Court that the belief
146
gays "are more likely than heterosexual men to molest children "is without
foundation in fact. (quoted by Cameron, Cameron, & Landess, 1996, p. 385).
These assertions countered long-standing belief and professional lore and
ignored the disproportionate homosexual footprint that has turned up almost
wherever child molestation has been explored. Thus disproportionate
homosexual molestation has appeared in generalized studies of child sexual
abuse (Able, Becker, Mittleman, Cunningham-Rathner, Roulan, & Murphy,
1987); teacher-pupil sex (Rubin, 1988; Wishnietsky, 1991; Shakeshaft &
Cohan, 1995; Cameron & Cameron, 1996; 1998) and sexual abuse by foster
and adoptive parents (Cameron, 2005).
The APA may have seemed "ambiguous in 1999 about condemning man-
boy sex, but it has been unambiguous in claiming that homosexuality and child
molestation are uncorrelated. When the APA and its allies in the psychiatric-
social work professions told the U.S. Supreme Court in 1994 there was no
evidence of a linkage of homosexuality and child molestation, it grossly
misrepresented the empirical literature. Both its 1994 amicus and 1999
testimony before Congress could be seen as "ideology over science.
The influence of the changed professional associations position on the
correlation between homosexuality and sex with the underage is widespread.
Thus, in 2011 activists cited the APAs position to legalize homosexuality and
homosexual sex with the currently underage in a number of African countries
(e.g., Uganda, Ghana, and Cameroon). Likewise, Presidential candidate Rick
Santorum was criticized by the APA in August, 2011 for dismissing the APAs
research on homosexuality as mere opinion rather than science (e.g., "all these
associations prove is that they have a point of view and the people who join
them, they agree with that point of view. The American Psychological
Association is not proof of anything Dias, E. September 2, Time magazine on
line). To examine whether the APAs stance is opinion- rather than empirically-
driven, two large U.S. on-line datasets are examined: Painters catalogue of
U.S. convictions for sodomy 1776-2001 and U.S. Catholic priest molestations
from 1950 to 2010.
Method
So"omy 5on!ictions: George Painter, an openly pro-homosexual legal
147
historian, documented states sodomy convictions from 1776 through 2001.
Giving at least the first few cases of conviction for sodomy in each state, and
then highlighting cases as they broke new ground, he referenced, summarized,
and commented on many hundreds of convictions
(sodomylaws?orgFsensi#ilitiesFintroduction?htm>. Painter included enough detail
to determine whether the participants were underage in 445 cases (no cases
from NH, SD, VT, WV and WY were included because Painters descriptions for
these states were too short or ambiguous to score).
We independently scored the remaining 445 cases as being man-man, man-
boy (boy= <age 18), man-woman, boy-boy (both underage), man-girl (girl=
< age 18), woman-woman, or woman-girl (under the law, `sodomy was taken
to mean oral sex involving the penis if performed by a male, or involving the
vagina whether by a female or male). We had 97% agreement in scoring;
disputes were settled by consensus.
We examined Catholic priest molestations in John Jay College of Criminal
Justice reports 2004 (http://www.usccb.org/nrb/johnjaystudy/) & Terry, Smith,
et al (2011). As all priests are male, vow to abstain from sex, receive about
the same education, and have about the same socioeconomic status, they
provide a natural quasi-experimental test of those with homosexual v
heterosexual inclinations regarding child sexual abuse.
Results
5on!ictions for so"omy that included enough detail to determine whether
participants were adults or underage from 1776-2001 are summarized by
dates in Table 1. With the exception of 37 man-woman and 5 man-girl
convictions, the remaining 403 (90.6%) involved homosexual relations. Of
convictions for adult homosexuality, 194 (43.6%) involved adult-child events,
and 202 (45.4%) adult-adult events - so about 49% of the 396 homosexual
convictions involved the underage. Generally, state convictions suggest the
same pattern. Thus, of states with at least 10 convictions: CA, FL, IL, IN, MD,
MI, MO, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, TX, and WA, there were 130 adult-adult and 125
adult-underage, or 49% of homosexual convictions involved the underage.
Proportion of the convictions involving the underage did not appear to
systematically vary across the 226 years of Painters narrative.
148
0riest Molestations: There are slight discrepancies between the 2004 and
2011 reports numbers of victims and perpetrators. There were 10,297 (2004)
or 10,667 (2011) victims molested by 4,311 (2004) or 4,392 (2011) priests (of
109,694 priests who served during the period, thus conservatively
4,311/109,694 [3.93%] of priests were caught).
The 2004 report listed offenders against girls, boys and girls, and boys in
Table 3.5.3: 991 priests offended only against girls, 2,805 only against boys,
and 157 against both boys and girls (victims sex was unknown in 429).
Dealing with the 3,801 perpetrators whose sex of victim(s) was known, 2,805
+ 157 = 2, 962 or 77.9% of the priest offenders engaged in homosexuality (or
`were homosexual/bisexual). Though some girls might have been molested by
an offender who also molested boys but wasnt caught, for estimates we
consider 22.1% heterosexual offenders (see Table 2). Boys were 81% of
victims; those aged 9 or under = 1269/8956 = 14% and aged 10-12 =
2970/8956= 33%. Thus, 47% of priests victims were <13 yr. or pre pubescent
-- the usual age for a diagnosis of pedophilia (Hall & Hall, 2007). The median
age of girl victims was reported to be somewhat younger than that of boy
victims.
The 2011 document also reported priest molestations by the Center for
Applied Research in the Apostolate [CARA], from 2004 through 2009 [reports
were missing for 2005 & 2007]. So at least an additional 2,658 reports of
abuse were assembled - again a "majority of victims (81 percent) were male
(2011, p. 9).
Discussion
The strength of both data sets is that they are based upon perpetrators who
were caught, not self-report. In Painters set, caught and convicted under the
highest standards of evidence, and in the priest set as reported by the oldest
institution in the West.
5riminal 5on!ictions: About half of all U.S. sodomy convictions for
homosexuality in the Painter set involved adults with the underage. In Great
Britain, similarly high levels of underage involvement were noted in the papers
on homosexuality assembled by Ress & Usill (1956). Home Office statistics of
convictions for sex crimes (p. 188), which included various homosexual and
149
heterosexual offenses indicated that: In 1953, there were 5,680 homosexual
and 10,135 heterosexual offenses; in 1950 4,416 homosexual and 8220
heterosexual offenses; in 1947, there were 2,814 homosexual and 6,408
heterosexual offenses. Thus, 36% of the sexual offenses in 1953, 35% in
1950, and 31% in 1947 were homosexual. In a separate tally from 14 police
areas in 1947, of 257 convictions of homosexuals involving 402 male
accomplices, the "great majority of .accomplices were under the age of 16.
Only 11 per cent of the whole were over 21, and there was only one conviction
involving the case of an adult with an adult in private. In a carefully studied
court, of 448 cases in 1952-54, 46 (10%) involved homosexual offenses. Of
the 20 men aged over 21 yr. old sentenced, 12 (60%) were convicted of crimes
involving the underage (p. 195). These convictions buttress Moores (1945)
"homosexuality is to a very large extent an acquired abnormality and
propagates itself as a morally contagious disease, and Halishams (1956) the
"problem of male homosexuality is in essence the problem of the corruption of
youth by itself and by its elders (p. 29).
U.S. `sodomy cases only covered oral-vaginal sexual abuse of girls. So the
proportion of all U.S. sex crimes accounted for by homosexuals is uncertain. In
Great Britain, it appears that around a third of sex crime convictions involved
homosexual activity. About half of the convictions for homosexuality involved
man/boy sex in both countries.
0riest molestations: Knowing the proportion of homosexual priests would
enable calculation of the proportion caught. John Jay researchers provided only
one estimate based on 119 priests who were caught and returned
questionnaires (2011, p. 51) -- "about one-quarter understood their identity as
homosexual or bisexual (2011, p. 65). Plante (2010) reported "the Catholic
Church has a large number of priests who are homosexual in orientation (22%
to 45% according to a variety of studies and reports). While these are
estimates, how one would go about determining `the actual proportion is
unclear.
If we assume 22% of priests have homosexual desires [the lowest estimate
we could find and in essential agreement with Plante or the John Jay `about
one-quarter], given the 77.9% v 22.1% distribution, for the 3.93% of priests
150
who molested, then 77.9 x 3.93= 3.06% of the molesters were homosexual
and 22.1 x 3.93 = 0.87% were heterosexual. Thus, if 22% of priests `were
gay, at least 13.9% (3.06/22) of them were caught (v 0.87/78 or 1.1% of
heterosexual priests). If 30% of the priests were gay, at least 10.2% were
caught molesting children (v 0.87/70 or 1.2% of heterosexual priests). If 45%
had homosexual desires, then 6.8% were caught (v 0.87/55 or 1.6% of
heterosexual priests) (see Table 2). These estimates would seem to apply to
the CARA data since the proportion of victims who were boys was also 81%,
though numbers of priests involved were not provided.
Table 2: Estimates of Homosexual Priests Molestations
If % had
homosexual
desires
% of priests
who
molested
boys
% of priests
who
molested
girls
% of
homosexual
priests caught
molesting
% of
heterosexual
priests
caught
molesting
22 3.06 0.87 13.9 1.1
30 3.06 0.87 10.2 1.2
45 3.06 0.87 6.8 1.6
Professional lore has most molestations not coming to light, with boys more
frequently than girls not reporting their victimization (Hall & Hall, 2007). Thus,
comparisons involving the ratio of boy to girl victims probably underestimate
the true proportion of boy victims.
Ignoring this probable underestimate and considering only priests who were
caught, if homosexuals comprise 22% of the priesthood it would appear that a
homosexual priest was about 13 times more apt (e.g., 13.9/1.1= 12.6); over 8
times more if homosexuals comprise 30% of the priesthood (e.g., 10.2/1.2=
8.5), and 4 times more if homosexuals comprise 45% of the priesthood (e.g.,
6.8/1.6= 4.25) to molest than a heterosexual priest.
Support for the contentions of the professional societies that an association
between child molestation and homosexuality is absent did not appear in the
priest data set. Indeed, although the precise proportion of homosexually-
inclined priests is uncertain, by almost any plausible scenario homosexuals
were more apt to molest by a substantial margin - a margin that, as noted, is
151
probably greater due to underreporting by boys.
Man-boy sex
Bell & Weinberg (1978) asked 671 randomly-selected gay men face-to-face
about the proportions of their homosexual partners who "were 16 or younger
when you were 21 or older (e.g., at least 5 years below the age of consent in
California at the time of interview): 77% said "none, 23% said "half or less,
and none said "more than half (p. 311, 1978). The 21% would also be similar
to Jay & Youngs anonymous questionnaire survey (1979) of 4,329 volunteer
gays where about 22% of gays reported sex with boys and >30% openness to
it (surveys of man-boy sex appear not to have been conducted and published
since 1984). If 22% of priests are gay and 13.9% were caught, it would only
take 1.5+ more priests to have had sex with boys than were caught to equal
21% (i.e., 20.85%). 21% of caught priests would be roughly in line with the
Bell & Weinberg (1978) estimate based on gay self-report.
That 22-23% of gays reported sex with boys - that is, to be a child molester
- is to admit to one of the most disapproved activities in our culture. As such,
the actual fraction of gays who have sex with boys is likely higher. From the
same perspective, it seems highly improbable that only 4% of priests molested
children. Priests almost always got caught because the children - usually men
currently in their 30s and 40s - came forward. We know that many, perhaps
even most, of the homosexually molested never come forward to avoid the
stigma of possibly having `encouraged it or `corrupted (see Hall & Hall, 2007).
Additionally, given the long period from molestation to being caught in the
John Jay study (almost never the same year as the molestation, seldom within
5 years and often 20 to 30 years after the molestation) - it seems likely that
many priests didnt get caught. Indeed, the accuracy of `what actually
happened? in the John Jay study is clouded by exceptionally slow reporting:
80.5% of the 10, 667 abuses had occurred by 1985, but only 810 (7.4%) had
been reported to the `registering agency by 1985! The media (and legal
system) apparently drove reporting -- a third of molestations the dioceses
reportedly knew by the end of 2002 were reported-on in 2002 - a year the
media focused attention on the phenomenon.
All of the Bell & Weinberg (1978) gays who admitted to sex with boys
152
reported "half or less of their partners were boys. Likewise, none of the gays
in Jay & Young who reported sex with boys under the age of 16 yr. ticked
"always regarding sex with boys and only 1% ticked "very frequently on the
questionnaire. Regarding sex with boys aged 16-19, 2% ticked "always,6%
ticked "very frequently, and 11% "somewhat frequently. These reports scotch
the notion that the priest molestations of boys were by `pedophiles rather than
gays - a point made repeatedly by the John Jay researchers since almost all of
the priest victimizers also admitted sex with adults (whose sex was not
reported).
That heterosexual priests were so much less apt to be caught strongly
suggests they were much less apt to molest the underage (especially as girls
are more apt to `squeal). As such, the APA claim "there is no evidence of any
positive correlation between homosexual orientation and child molestation as
well as the similar claims of the other professional societies in their amici
briefs fail to find support from the John Jay priest data set.
Thus, the contentions of the professional societies about there being no
association between child molestation and homosexuality contradict Painters
and the British data sets. Au contraire, both support the `older professional
lore regarding disproportionate homosexual molestation of children.
Weaknesses in these data sets include their unknown degree of
representativeness of all sex crime convictions involving the underage, or
whether convictions trace a different pattern of victim ages than arrests.
If an association that possibly harbors or permits the publication of an
unpopular opinion about the harm of man-boy sex is worthy of Congressional
censure, surely falsely testifying to the highest court in the land (and thereby
to the world at large) there is `no evidence that men with homosexual tastes
are more likely to molest boys is worthy of even greater reproach.
References
Able GG, Becker JV, Mittleman M, Cunningham-Rathner J, Roulan JL, & Murphy
WD. (1987) Self-reported sex crimes of nonincarcerated paraphiliacs. %
1nterpersonal Aiolence 2, 3-25.
153
Bell, A. P. & Weinberg, M. S. (1978) Homose(ualities6 a study o& diversity
among men and women. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Cameron, P. & Cameron, K (1996) Do homosexual teachers pose a risk to
pupils? %ournal o& Psychology 130, 603-613.
Cameron, P. & Cameron, K. (1998) What proportion of newspaper stories about
child molestation involves homosexuality? Psychological Reports 82, 863-
871.
Cameron, P. (2005) Homosexual Child Molestations By Foster Parents: Illinois,
1997-2002 Psychological Reports 96:227-230
Halisham, Q. C. (1956) Homosexuality and society. In Rees, T. and Usill, H.V.
They stand apart6 a critical survey o& the pro#lems o& homose(uality. NY:
MacMillan, pp. 21-35.
Hall RC & Hall RCW (2007) A profile of pedophilia: definition, characteristics of
offenders, recidivism, treatment outcomes, and forensic issues. *ayo Clinic
Proceedings, 82(4), 457-471.
Hooker, E. (1958) Male homosexuality in the Rorschach. %ournal o& ProCective
Techni7ues 22, 33-54, p. 33.
Jay K & Young A. (1979) The Gay report. N.Y.: Summit.
John Jay College, The "ature and 'cope o& 'e(ual A#use o& *inors #y Catholic
Priests and .eacons in the <nited 'tates2 3$8+22 (Washington, DC:
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2004).
Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1948). Sexual behavior in the
human male. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders.
Levitt, E.E., & Klassen, A.D., Jr. (1974). Public Attitudes toward
homosexuality: part of the 1970 national survey by the Institute for Sex
Research. %ournal o& Homose(uality, 1, 29-43.
McGagy, C. H. (1971). Child molesting. 'e(ual ,ehavior 1, 16-24.
Moore, T. V. (1945). The pathogenesis and treatment of homosexual disorders:
A digest of some pertinent evidence. %ournal o& Personality2 302 47-83.
Plante T. (2010) Six important points you don't hear about regarding clergy
sexual abuse in the Catholic Church: More myths than facts in Catholic
clergy sexual abuse discussions Psychology Today March 24.
Rubin, S. (1988) Sex education: teachers who sexually abuse students. Paper
154
presented at 24
th
International Congress of Psychology, Sydney, Australia.
Shakeshaft, C. & Cohan, A. (1995) Sexual abuse of students by school
personnel. Phi .elta /appan 76, 513-520.
Terry, K. J., Smith, M.L., Katarina Schuth, K., Kelly, J.R.Vollman, B., Massey, C.
(2011) The Causes and Context of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic
Priests in the United States, 1950-2010.
Wishnietsky, D. H. (1991) Reported and unreported teacher-student sexual
harassment. %ournal o& Education Research 84, 164-169.
Wright RH, Cummings NA (2005) Destructive trends in mental health: the well-
intentioned path to harm. NY: Taylor & Francis.
Table 1: 445 Convictions for Sodomy 1776-2001
Man-man Man-boy Man-
woman
Man-girl Woman-
woman
Boy-boy Woman-
girl
1776 -
1872
3 0 0 0 0 0 0
1873 -
1947
46 64 13 4 1 5 0
1948 -
1985
124 117 22 1 1 2 0
1986 -
2001
24 12 2 0 3 0 1
T$TA4 =J =- -J : : J
http://www.biblebelievers.com/Cameron1.html
SAM' S'Q MA??3AG':
Til .eath .o 6s 0art&
/y .r. 0aul 5ameron
Dr. Cameron is Chariman of the Family Research Institute of Colorado Springs,
Colorado USA. Click here for more information about this organization. You
may contact him at: Family Research Institute, PO Box 62640, Colorado
Springs, CO 80962 USA. Phone number: (303) 681-3113. (They don't have an
e-mail address.)
Society has a vested interest in prohibiting behavior that endangers the health
or safety of the community. Because of this, homosexual liaisons have
historically been forbidden by law.
155
Homosexuals contend that their relationships are the equivalent of marriage
between a man and woman. They demand that society dignify and approve of
their partnerships by giving them legal status as 'marriages.' They further
argue that homosexuals should be allowed to become foster parents or adopt
children.
The best scientific evidence suggests that putting society's stamp of approval
on homosexual partnerships would harm society in general and homosexuals in
particular, the very individuals some contend would be helped.
A large body of scientific evidence suggests that homosexual marriage is a
defective counterfeit of traditional marriage and that it poses a clear and
present danger to the health of the community:
Traditional marriage improves the health of its participants, has the lowest rate
of domestic violence, prolongs life, and is the best context in which to raise
children.
Homosexual coupling undermines its participants' health, has the highest rate
of domestic violence, shortens life, and is a poor environment in which to raise
children.
The Facts About Homosexual Marriage
Fact #: Homosexual marriages are short li!e".
When one examines homosexual behavior patterns, it becomes clear that the
plea for legal homosexual marriage is less about marriage than the push for
legitimacy. Most gays and lesbians are not in monogamous relationships, and
in fact often live alone by preference.
In a study(1) of 2,000 U.S. and European gays in the 1960s, researchers
found that "living by oneself is probably the chief residential pattern for
male homosexuals. It provides the freedom to pursue whatever style of
homosexual life one chooses, whether it be furtive encounters in parks or
immersion in the homosexual subculture. In addition, homosexual
relationships are fragile enough to make this residential pattern common
whether deliberate or not."
A 1970 study in San Francisco(2) found that approximately 61% of gays
and 37% of lesbians were living alone.
In 1977, the Spada Report(3) noted that only 8% of the gays in its
sample claimed to have a monogamous relationship with a live-in lover.
The same year(4) over 5,000 gays and lesbians were asked: "Do you
consider or have you considered yourself 'married' to another
[homosexual]?" Only 40% of lesbians and 25% of gays said "yes." The
authors noted that with "gay male couples, it is hard to even suggest
that there are norms of behavior. [One] might expect to find a clear
pattern of 'categories' emerging from the answers to the questions about
lovers, boy friends, and relationships. In fact, no such pattern emerged."
156
In the early 1980s, a large non-random sample(5) of almost 8,000
heterosexual and homosexual couples responded to advertisements in
alternative newspapers. The average number of years together was 9.8
for the married, 1.7, for cohabiting heterosexuals, 3.5 for the gay
couples, and 2.2 for the lesbian couples.
#ariety $!er Monogamy
Although gay activists often argue that legalizing homosexual marriage.would
help make such relationships more permanent, the reality is that most gays
desire variety in their sex partners, not the monogamy of traditional marriage.
In 1987, only 23% of gays in London(6) reported sexual exclusivity "in
the month before interview."
In 1990, only 12% of gays in Toronto, Canada(7) said that they were in
monogamous relationships.
In 1991, in the midst of the AIDS crisis, Australian gays(8) were
monitored to see whether they had changed their sexual habits. There
was essentially no change in 5 years: 23% reported a monogamous
relationship, 35% a non-monogamous relationship, and 29% only
"casual sex." The authors reported that "there were almost as many men
moving into monogamy as out of it, and out of casual-only partnerships
as into them."
In 1993, a study(9) of 428 gays in San Francisco found that only 14%
reported just a single sexual partner in the previous year. The vast
majority had multiple sex partners.
In 1994, the largest national gay magazine' reported that only 17% of
its sample of 2,500 gays claimed to live together in a monogamous
relationship.
Even gays who do have long-term partners do not play by the typical 'rules.'
Only 69% of Dutch gays" with a marriage-type 'partner' actually lived together.
The average number of "outside partners" per year of 'marriage' was 7.1 and
increased from 2.5 in the first year of the relationship to 11 in the 6th year.
%hy are homosexual marriages shorter an" less committe" than
tra"itional marriages&
At any given time, less than a third of gays and approximately half of lesbians
are living with a lover. Because the relationships are so short, the average
homosexual can anticipate many, many 'divorces.'
At any instant, about 10% of gays live together in monogamous relationships.
Their monogamy seldom lasts beyond a year. Perhaps half of lesbians live
together in monogamous relationships. These typically dissolve in one to three
years.
These same patterns appear in the scientific literature over the last 50
yearsboth long before and during the AIDS epidemic. This consistency
suggests a reality associated with the practice of homosexuality, one unlikely
157
to be affected by changes in marriage laws.
The .anish 'x(erience
In Denmark, a form of homosexual marriage has been legal since 1989.
Through 1995, less than 5% of Danish homosexuals had gotten married, and
28% of these marriages had already ended in divorce or death.(12)
The Danish experience provides no evidence that gay 'marriage' is baneficial.
Men who married men were three times more apt to be widowers before the
age of 55 than men who married women! Similarly, a woman who married a
woman was three times more apt to be a widow than a woman who married a
man.
Fact #): Stu"ies show homosexual marriage is ha,ar"ous to oneSs
health.
Across the world, numerous researchers have reported that 'committed' or
'coupled' homosexuals are more apt to engage in highly risky and biologically
unsanitary sexual practices than are 'single' gays. As a consequence of this
activity, they increase their chances of getting AIDS and other sexually
transmitted or blood-borne diseases.
In 1983, near the beginning of the.AIDS epidemic, gays in San
Francisco(13) who claimed to be in "monogamous relationships" were
compared to those who were not. Without exception, those in
monogamous relationships more frequently reported that they had
engaged in biologically unhealthful activity during the past year. As
examples, 4.5% of the monogamous v. 2.2% of the unpartnered had
engaged in drinking urine, and 33.3% v. 19.6% claimed to practice oral-
anal sex.
In a sample of London gays(6) in 1987, those infected with HIV were
more apt to have regular partners than those not so infected.In 1989,
Italian researchers(14) investigated 127 gays attending an AIDS clinic.
Twelve percent of those without steady partners v. 28% of those with
steady partners were HIV+. The investigators remarked that "to our
surprise, male prostitutes did not seem to be at increased risk, whereas
homosexuals who reported a steady partner (i.e., the same man for the
previous six months) carried the highest relative risk."
During 1991-92, 677 gays in England(15) were asked about
"unprotected anal sex." Those who had 'regular' partners reported sex
lives which were "about three times as likely to involve unprotected anal
sex than partnerships described as 'casual/one-night stands."' Sex with a
regular partner "was far more important than awarelless of HIV status in
facilitating high-risk behaviour."
A 1993 British sexual diary study(16) of 385 gays reported that men in
"monogamous" relationships practiced more anal intercourse and more
anal-oral sex than those without a steady partner. It concluded that "gay
men in a Closed relationship... exhibit... the highest risk of HIV
transmission."
158
In 1992, a sample(17) of 2,593 gays from Tucson, AZ and Portland, OR
reinforced the consistent finding that "gay men in primary relationships
are significantly more likely than single men to have engaged in
unprotected anal intercourse."
Similarly, a 1993 sample(18) of gays from Barcelona, Spain practiced
riskier sex with their regular partners than with casual pick ups.
Even a 1994 study(19) of over 600 lesbians demonstrated that "the
connection between monogamy and unprotected sex,... was very
consistent across interviews. Protected sex was generally equated with
casual encounters; unprotected sex was generally equated with trusting
relationships. Not using latex baariers was seen as a step in the process
of relational commitment. Choosing to have unprotected sex indicated
deepening trust and intimacy as the relationship grew."
%hy is homosexual marriage a health ha,ar"&
While married people pledge and generally live up to their vows of sexual
faithfulness, participants in both gay and lesbian "marriages" offer each other
something quite different. They see shared biological intimacy and sexual risk-
taking as the hallmark of trust and commitment. Being exposed in this way to
the bodily discharges of their partner increases the risk of disease, especially
so if that partner was 'married' to someone else before or engaged in sex with
others outside the relationship.
The evidence is strong that both gays and lesbians are more apt to take
biological risks when having sex with a partner than when having casual sex.
The evidence is also strong that gays disproportionately contract more disease,
especially AIDS and the various fonms of hepatitis, from sex with "partners"
than they do from sex with strangers. There is also some evidence(20) that
gays with partners are more apt to die of both AIDS and non-AIDS conditions
than those without partners.
Like gays, 'married' lesbians are more apt to engage in biological intimacy and
risk-taking. However, there is insufficient evidence to conclude whether disease
or death rates are higher for partnered or unpartnered lesbians.
Fact #-: Homosexual marriage has the highest rate of "omestic
!iolence.
Domestic violence is a public health concern. Among heterosexuals, not only is
it an obvious marker of a troubled marriage, but media attention and tax
dollars to aid 'battered women' have both grown tremendously in recent years.
What is not reported is the empirical evidence suggesting that homosexual
couples have higher rates of domestic violence than do heterosexual couples,
especially among lesbians.
In 1996,(21) Susan Holt, coordinator of the domestic violence unit of the Los
Angeles Gay Lesbian Center, said that "domestic violence is the third largest
health problem facing the gay and lesbian community today and trails only
behind AIDS and substance abuse... in terms of sheer numbers and lethality."
159
The average rate of domestic violence in traditional maariage, established by a
nationwide federal government survey(22) of 6,779 married couples in 1988,
is apparently less than 5% per year. During their most recent year of marriage,
2.0% of husbands and 3.2% of wives said that they were hit, shoved or had
things thrown at them. Unmarried, cohabiting heterosexuals report(23) higher
rates of violencea rate of about 20% to 25% per year.
%hen the same stan"ar" is a((lie" to gay an" lesbian relationshi(s<
the following e!i"ence emerges:
In 1987,(24) 48% of 43 lesbian, and 39% of 39 gay Georgia couples
reported domestic violence.
In 1988,(25) 70 lesbian and gay students participated in a study of
conflict resolution in gay and lesbian relationships. Adjusted upward for
reporting by only one partner in the couple (i.e., "only one side of the
story"), an estimated 29% of gay and 56% of lesbian couples
experienced violence in the past year.
In 1989,(26) 284 lesbians were interviewed who were involved "in a
committed, cohabitating lesbian relationship" during the last 6 months.
Adjusted for reporting by just one partner, an estimated 43% of the
relationships were violent in the past year.
In 1990,(27) nearly half of 90 lesbian couples in Los Angeles reported
domestic violence yearly. 21% of these wonien said that they were
mothers. Interestingly, of those mothers who had children living with
them, 11 lived in "violent" and 11 in "nonviolent" relationships. Thus,
unlike traditional marriage where parents will often forego fighting to
shield the children from hostility, there was no evidence from this
investigation that the presence of youngsters reduced the rate of
domestic violence.
Overall, the evidence is fairly compelling that homosexual domestic violence
exceeds heterosexual domestic violence. The limited scientific literature
suggests that physical domestic violence occurs every year among less than
5% of traditionally married couples, 20% to 25% of cohabiting heterosexuals,
and approximately half of lesbian couples. The evidence is less certain for
gays, but their rate appears to fall somewhere between that for unmarried,
cohabiting heterosexuals and lesbians.
Fact #1: Homosexual "omestic !iolence is a logger (roblem than gay
bashing.
Gay activists and the media are quick to assert that discriminatory attitudes by
'straight' society lead directly to violence against homosexuals (i.e., 'gay
bashing'). In fact, evidence suggests that homosexual domestic violence
substantially exceeds, in frequency and lethality, any and all forms of 'gay
bashing.' That is, the violence that homosexuals do to one another is much
more significant than the violence that others do to homosexuals.
In 1995, a homosexual domestic violence consortium conducted a study(28) in
six cities Chicago, Columbus, Minneapolis, New York, San Diego, and San
160
Francisco where reports of anti-homosexual harassment or samesex domestic
violence were tabulated.
The harassment incidents ranged from name calling (e.g., 'faggot,' 'queer') to
actual physical harm or property damage. Homosexual domestic violence, on
the other hand, referred only to incidents in which actual physical harm
occurred or was seriously threatened (i.e., met the legal standard for domestic
violence).
The results? Nationwide,(29) as well as in these cities, around half of anti-
homosexual harassment reports in 1995 involved only slurs or insults, thus not
rising to the level of actual or threatened physical violence.
In San Francisco, there were 347 calls about same-sex domestic violence and
324 calls about anti-homosexual harassment. In three of the five other cities
there were also more calls reporting same-sex domestic violence than
antihomosexual harassment. The same ratio was reported for the study as a
whole.
Given that half of the harassment reports did not rise to the level of violence,
while domestic violence meant exactly that, if the data gathered by this
consortium of homosexuals corresponds to the underlying reality, the physical
threat to homosexuals from same-sex domestic violence is more than twice as
great as the physical threat they experience from 'the outside.'
Rather than being a 'shelter against the stonms of life,' as traditional marriage
is sometimes characterized, being homosexually partnered actually increases
the physical dangers associated with homosexuality.
Fact #:: Homosexuals ma2e (oor (arents.
Fewer than 20 empirical studies have been done on homosexual parents.
These studies have been small, biased, and generally fail to address many of
the traditional concerns regarding homosexual parenting. However, the limited
evidence they have generated supports what common sense would expect.
The largest study,(30) and the only one based on a random sample, estimated
that less than half of a percent of Americans have had a homosexual parent.
Those who did were more likely to:
1. report having had sex with a parent,
2. experience homosexuality as their first sexual encounter,
3. be sexually molested,
4. become homosexual or bisexual, and
5. report dissatisfaction with their childhood.
The various studies,(31) added together, suggest that the children of
homosexuals are at least 3 times more apt to become homosexual than
children raised by the traditionally mamed.
161
Further, there is reasonable evidence, both in the empirical literature and in
dozens of court cases dealing with the issue,(32) that children of homosexuals
are more apt to be sexually exposed to the homosexual lifestyle and/or
molested.
Finally, substantial evidence(31) suggests that children of homosexuals are
more apt to doubt their own sexuality, be embarrassed by their homosexual
parent(s), and be teased and taunted by their peers.
%hat 5an %e 5onclu"e&
H'omosexual marriage is a bad idea, While traditional marriage delivers
benefits to its participants as well as to society, gay marriage harms everyone
it touches especially homosexuals themselves. Not only does it place
homosexuals at increased risk for HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases,
but it also subjects them to an increased threat of domestic violence and early
death.
Homosexual marriage is nothing like traditional marriage. Homosexual unions
are not built around lifetime commitments, nor are they good environments to
raise children.
Those who support legalizing homosexual marriage include the same
compassionate people who championed the right of singles to become parents.
We know the results of that campaign: a third of the nation's children do not
have a father. We also know that children without fathers much more often do
poorly in school, get in trouble with the law, and become dysfunctional parents
themselves.
It would be foolish to tamper with something as vital to personal and social
health as traditional marriage in order the placate the same troubled souls that
pushed for our current cultural mess.
?eferences
1. Weinberg, M.S. Williams, C.J. Male homoseruals: their problems
adaptations. NY: Penguin, 1975.
2. Bell, A. P. Weinberg, M.S. Homosexualaies NY:Simon Schusver, 1978.
3. Spada, J. The Spada repon. NY:Sigmet, 1979
4. Jay, K. Young, A. The gay report. NY:Summit, 1979.
5. Blumstein, P. Schwartz, P. American couples NY:Morrow, 1983.
6. Hunt, A. J., et al. Genitourinary Medicine, 1990, 66, 423427.
7. Orr, K., Morrison, K. Doing it in the 90s. Univ. Toronto Laval Universities,
162
1993.
8. Kippax, S., et al. AIDS, 1993, 7, 257-263.
9. Osmond, D. H., et al. Amer I Public Health, 1994, 84, 1933-1937.
10. Lever, J. Advocate, Issue 661/662, August, 23, 1994, 15-24.
11. Deenen, A. A., et al. Archives Serual Behavior,1994, 23, 421431.
12. Wockner, R. Advocate, Issue 726, February 4, 1997, 26.
13. McKusick, L., et al. Amer I Public Health, 1985, 75, 493-496.
14. Franceschi, S., et al. Lancet, 1989, 1, 42.
15. Dawson, J. M., et al. AIDS, 1994, 8, 837-841.
16. Coxon A.P.M., et al. AIDS, 1993, 7, 877-882.
17. Hoff, C.C., et al. I Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 1997, 14, 72-
78.
18. Wang, J. et al. Soc Sci Med, 1997, 44, 469-77.
19. Stevens, P. E. Soc Sci Med, 1994, 39,1565-78.
20. Cameron, P., Playfair, W. L., Wellum, S. The longevity of homosexuals.
Omega, 1994, 29, 249 272.
21. Holt S. Ending the cycle of domestic violence. Gay Lesbian Times,
9126196, p. 39.
22. Sorenson, J, et al.. Amer I Public Health. 1996, 86, 3540.
23. Ellis, D. Violence Victims, 1989, 4, 235-255.
24. Gardner, R. Method of conflict resolution correlates af physical aggression
victimization in heterosezual, lesbian, gay male couples. Unpub Doc Dis, U
Georgia, 1988.
25. Waterman, C.K, et al. J Sel Research 1989, 26, 118 124.
26. Lockhart, L.L., et al. I Interpersanal Vialence, 1994, 9, 469492.
27. Coleman, V. Violence in leshian couples: a berween groups comparison.
Unpub Doc Dis, CA Sch Prof Psych:LA, 1990.
28. Merrill, G. Press release from National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs,
October 22, 1996 from San Francisco various inteniews in November, 1996
163
with senior author Memll, Jem Lynn Fields in Chicago, Bea Hanson in New York.
29. Anti-Lesbian/Gay Violence in 1995. Horizons Community Senices. Self
published.
30. Cameron, P. Cameron, K. Homosexual parents, Adolescence, 1996, 31,
757-776.
31. Cameron, P. Cameron, K. Did the APA misrepresent the scientific literature
to couns in suppon of homosexual custody? I Psychology, 1997, 131, 1-20.
32. Cameron, P. Cameron, K. Homosexual parents: a natural comparison.
Psychol Repts, 1997, in press.
This educational pamphlet has been produced by Family Research Institute,
Inc., Dr. Paul Cameron, Chairman.
Copyright, 1997, Family Research Institute, Inc.
http://www.biblebelievers.com/CameronPic.gif
164