You are on page 1of 43

“NATURAL”1 vs.

Judith Gelernter Reisman, Ph.D.
Mary E. McAlister, Esq.
Donna Marie Gallagher1

Table of Contents
OF FRAUDULENT SEX “DATA” ........................................................................................................... 4
Defining Terms: ........................................................................................................................................ 4
A Brief Family Anthropological Backgrounder: Fear and Yale’s Stinging Ants ..................................... 4
Major Premise: .......................................................................................................................................... 6
Minor Premise:.......................................................................................................................................... 6
Judge Gasch Wrote: .................................................................................................................................. 7
Part I: Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study: ........................................................................... 8
Proximate Causation to Explain Homosexual, Transgender, Bisexual and Other Dis-orientation
Selections .................................................................................................................................................. 8
Part II: CDC Reports On Youthful Sexuality .......................................................................................... 9
“Sexual Identity, Sex of Sexual Contacts, and Health-Risk Behaviors Among Students in Grades 9–12
— Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance, Selected Sites, United States, 2001–2009” ................................. 9
Child Rape And Sexual Battery By Dis-orientation ............................................................................... 10
CDC Authors’ Language Methodology Excludes Rape Trauma, Abuse, Predator, Crime, Pornography,
Death, Chastity, Abstinence, Abortion, Virginity, Molestation, and the like… ..................................... 10
CDC Authors Ignore the Established Role of Early Sex Abuse in Crafting Bi/Homosexual Youth
Instead Seek “Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs) In Schools ...................................................................... 13


Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D., Research Professor, Liberty University School of Law, Director of Child Protection
Institute. Mary E. McAlister, Esq., Senior Counsel, Liberty Counsel. Donna Marie Gallagher, J.D. Liberty
University School of Law.


No “Tell a Responsible Adult” if You’ve Been Molested” Message. The CDC and APA Do Not
Advocate Reporting Offenders Who Raped, Transmitting STDs to Children ........................................ 13
About 1 In 5 Homosexuals versus 1 in 21 Heterosexuals Were Sexually Abused Prior To Their Teen
Years, yet No Call for Prosecution of Homosexual Molesters by CDC/Gay-Straight Groups............... 14
PART III: Sexual Novelty in The Innovative Marriage ........................................................................ 14
“America’s Greatest Weapon Against Child Poverty: Married Mom/Dad at Home .............................. 14
Marital Decline Increases “Illegitimacy” ................................................................................................ 15
Unmarried Women Have More Abortions Than Unmarried Teens and Married Women ..................... 15
The Heritage Data Spotlights a “Two-Caste Society” ............................................................................ 16
Normal, Man-Woman Marriage Reduces Poverty by 80% .................................................................... 17
Marital Novelty is Always Costly: Welfare Pay-Outs to Single-Parent Families .................................. 17
Rector reports that taxes fund over 70 programs and services for “poor and low-income persons.” ..... 17
From Most Married to Least Married: 73% Out of Wedlock Black Births ............................................ 18
2008 Data on Black, White, Hispanic “Illegitimacy” ............................................................................. 18
Part IV: “Novel” Marriages: The Fragile Families Survey .................................................................. 18
Novelty Wears Thin; “Father Involvement Declines.” ........................................................................... 19
Wrapping Up: The Lifelong Positive Effects of Fathers ........................................................................ 19
PS: Despite The Sexual Revolution, Girls Still Want (Need?) Babies ................................................... 20
School Sex Educators Long Told Children to Have Sex Before Marriage............................................. 20
And The Media Has Long Taught Everyone to Have Sex Before Marriage .......................................... 21
Part V: The Regnerus Study of New Novel Family Structures ............................................................ 21
Before: The APA Was Sure Children Were Not “Disadvantaged” by Novel Parenting ........................ 21
A Canadian Summary of the Study Outcomes ...................................................................................... 22
More Novelty and Instability ................................................................................................................. 24
Most Relevant Finding: Parental Biology is Sexually Protective ........................................................... 25
The Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect (NIS–4) (2009) .............................. 25

PART VI. The Inevitable Push for Pedophile Family Units, etc. ......................................................... 26
Schoolroom Sex Indoctrination: To Read, Meditate Upon, Perhaps To Venerate And Obey ............ 27
Part VII: Sexually Transmitted Insanity (Reprint SALVO, Winter 2013) ............................................ 28
How Our Public Schools Came to Promote a Social Disease ................................................................. 28
The Disease ............................................................................................................................................ 29
The Spread .............................................................................................................................................. 30
The Cure ................................................................................................................................................ 31
Endnotes to Sexually Transmitted Insanity ............................................................................................. 31
PART VIII Twenty-Three Law Journal Articles Cite Kinsey 2009 to 2012........................................ 31
A brief search of recent (2009 to 2012) law journal articles for reliance on Kinsey .............................. 31
Part IX: Can Courts Enjoin Factually False, Injurious Sex Ed Curricula? ....................................... 36
The Lindevaldsen Legal Theory .............................................................................................................. 36
Draft Endnotes .......................................................................................................................................... 38


“When good and bad do equal honours share….”it is indeed an established
custom with the inhabitants of most cities not to desire an equality, but either to
aspire to govern, or when they are conquered, to submit.” Aristotle, Politics. 2

Defining Our Terms
In On Interpretation, Aristotle notes, before we discuss an issue we must define our terms:
First we must define the terms 'noun' and 'verb', then the terms 'denial' and
'affirmation', then 'proposition' and 'sentence.' Spoken words are the symbols of
mental experience and written words are the symbols of spoken words. Just as all
men have not the same writing, so all men have not the same speech sounds, but the
mental experiences, which these directly symbolize, are the same for all, as also are
those things of which our experiences are the images.3
For convenience and clarity in this document the term identifying multiple forms of sexual
“marriage” (open, group, polygamous, child, tri-parent, trial, incestuous, multilateral, now
homosexual) will be labeled “novel” or “experimental.”
“Normal” and “Natural” will be defined in their traditional meaning as “that which functions
according to its design.”4
The mixture of “orientations,” (“gay,” “lesbian” transvestite, intersex, queer, questioning,
bisexual, etc.), are similarly defined in their essence as “dis-orientation” (“dis,” Latin prefix,
meaning apart, asunder, away). See “disorient” as to lose ones way due to confusion, a major
change in cultural mores, etc . 5
Absent sexually dystopian civil successes, this discussion of family begins with an excerpt on
Eros and sexual guidance from the ancient wisdom literature of Judeo Christian belief.
Drink water from your own cistern, And running water from your own well….
And rejoice with the wife of your youth, As a loving deer and a graceful dove….
(Proverbs 5: 15-19)
A Brief “Family” Anthropological Backgrounder: Fear and Yale’s Stinging Ants
For thousands of years, across cultures, the most prosperous civil societies emerged from a
working “family” structure of one faithful woman wed to one (faithful) man who, secure in his
bloodline, provided for and protected his family and tried to leave some legacy for his progeny.6

All three major world religions - Judaism, Christianity, Islam – do share a belief in a state of
future rewards and punishments. All profess a belief that families are protected by preserving
childhood sexual innocence versus children’s exposure to sexually explicit talk, images,
knowledge and activity. Despite common violation of these beliefs, (of which “child brides” are
the most obvious) most religious systems tend to hold to the moral premise that the solvency of
family and society is endangered when children engage in sex with, other children or adults.7
Indeed “fear” of children’s sexual exposure may be seen as an intuitive, biological imperative.8
Modern assaults on traditional religions and culture claim to stand on “scientific” data, on proofs
that traditional rules for sexual taboos are “fear” based and thus irrational.9 Absent hard evidence
of a prosperous culture that historically normalized novel sexual conduct, modern sexual/gender
revolutionary10 advocates have cut their dystopian human sexuality canon out of whole cloth.
Despite the overwhelming statistical proof of sexual freedom failures, sex/gender revolutionaries
implicitly suggest they possess a higher intelligence than that of our ancestors and our nation’s
founders. Sexologists cite "enlightened" cultures from history that have normalized disorientations, pointing to the failed hedonistic culture of ancient Greece but more often to
anthropologists like Margaret Mead and the Ford and Beach, Yale Human Relations Area Files.
These cross cultural studies point to the sex lives of obscure tribes in remote areas11 to support
their modern advocacy of “free” sex uninhibited by fear. A critical reading of these
Malinowski,12 Mead, Yale, etc., reports tell a different story. For example, Yale’s Ford and
Beach editors report the “tolerant” “sexually positive” Ponapean people as models for western
emulation without question or contradiction.
[Ponapeans’] are given careful instruction in sexual intercourse from the 4th or the
5th year….Before puberty, girls on Ponape undergo treatment designed to lengthen
the labia minora and to enlarge the clitoris. Old impotent men pull, beat, and suck
the labia to lengthen them. Black ants are put in the vulva; their stinging causes the
labia and clitoris to swell….repeated until the desired results are obtained.13
Desired by whom? Such modern ‘scholars’ ignore the fact that cultures practicing ‘sexual
freedom’ have not progressed (if one believes in Darwinian evolution) or who, as above,
commonly still engage in savage child sex abuse practices.14 Lloyd DeMause writes in The
Journal of Psychohistory that incest was “universal for most people in most places at most
times…[T]he earlier in history one searches, the more evidence there is of universal incest, just
as there is more evidence of other forms of child abuse."15
Just as we do not advocate cannibalism or eating our enemies’ brains because the South Fore
people of New Guinea did so,16 we don’t advocate early child sexual experiences because
Ponapean and other tribes do so. These studies cannot be endorsed to promote the overthrow of
our nation’s reasoned ancestral morals; they should be an example of what not to do.
The current “gender” family experiments follow a long history of failed dystopias built on
unconventional special interests and deviant adult desires.17 The following ‘good and bad’ forms

of family and marriage data briefly note some critical key events that erupted in thousands of
legal expositions and cases from 1948-to today18 in which local and federal courts have debated
what is “family,” “marriage,” “human sexuality,” “gender,”19 and “sexual orientation.”
Arguably, the law’s early reliance on fraudulent social science sexuality data have inevitably
produced legal cases, journal articles,20 agencies, institutions and hidden interests that tragically
overload the judicial system and that regularly yield bad legal and social decisions. Unless the
fraudulent historical events that shaped our current sexual anarchy are exposed and excised, our
legal system will next be facing claims for the right to sex with children, multiple people of any
age, animals, other species, flora and fauna. The following information is presented in the hopes
of stirring an interest in revisiting our fraudulent sex foundations with an aim to correct our
growing sexual anarchy. No extant scientific, anthropological, religious or evolutionary data
support normalizing any form of novel dis-orientation and/or novel early sex “education.” On
the contrary, the hard data presented below fully support a return to traditional treatment of
sexual morality in our schools, laws, media, religious institutions and culture.
Major Premise:
Much moral debate in the last several decades has centered on issues of normal versus abnormal
gender/sexuality. From a legitimate scientific standpoint, until a gene for alternate sexualities
(e.g., bisexual, homosexual, pedophile, pederast, sadomasochist, transgender, undecided, etc.,) is
proven, science and society must rely on proximate causation, i.e., that alternate, or abnormal,
sexual desires are shaped by environmental, cultural contagion. On the evidence, “equal
honours” for such alternate forms of man-woman relations confers honor on yet another novel
experiment on child sexual development. Science agrees with empirical observation and
common sense. Novel sexual experiments undermine children’s stability and the well-being of
society by holding children hostage to yet another assortment of adult sexual whims, fantasies
and special interests. Historically and cross-culturally, the man-woman marital contract (chastity
prior and fidelity within) has survived to advance stable, healthy, economically productive
progeny. It is of paramount legal and societal importance to strengthen and secure such normal
sexual relations.
Minor Premise:
The novel notion of homosexuality, bisexuality, transgenderism, same-sex “marriage” etc.,
builds on the reach for a non-heterosexual gene and a lack of environmental influences that
shape non-heterosexual orientations. Such a gene is not yet identified for homosexuality or for
the increasingly esoteric forms of non-normative animal, incest or human genetics. The claim
that childbirth outside of man-woman marriage is acceptable is wholly unstable and has been
dubbed by some an artifact of the “sexual revolution’s” pathological, fraudulent sex science.
These novel theories demand both an honest appraisal of the history of the sex advocacy
movement as well as the extant data on the coupling habits of alternate orientations. In his
Steffan v. Cheney opinion, Senior District Judge Oliver Gasch, United States District Court for
the District of Columbia, rejected plaintiff’s reliance on “data” from the “father” of the sexual

revolution, Professor Alfred Kinsey who has, by now, been “outed” as a pederast/pedophile, a
sadomasochistic bi/homosexual, pornography addict, who more than anyone else normalized the
current idea of a bisexual norm, and “homosexual orientation” as a genetic reality (e.g., labeling
1,200 to 1,400 sex offenders “normal” men).21 (False in one respect, false in all.22)
Judge Gasch Wrote:
It is not at all clear, as a scientific matter, whether one chooses one's sexual
orientation or not. See Review, Really, Dr. Kinsey?, 337 The Lancet (British
Medical Journal), 547, 547 (1991) (citing Judith A. Reisman & Edward W.
Eichel, Kinsey, Sex and Fraud: The Indoctrination of a People (John H. Court &
J. Gordon Muir eds., 1990) (Kinsey reports on male/female sexuality sharply
criticized due to improper knowingly unethical use of unrepresentative
populations); Review, Kinsey's Sexreport: Dubious, Misleading, Fraud?,
German Medical Tribune, July, 19, 1991, at 1, 6 (Jurgen Benning trans.) (same).
No choice in the matter would argue for a conclusion of immutability, while
some choice or a great deal of choice would tend to support a finding of
mutability. Without a definitive answer at hand, yet confident that some people
exercise some choice in their own sexual orientation, the Court does not regard
homosexuality as being an immutable characteristic (at 6).
Yet, since 1948 myriad law journals with global influence (from institutions such as Yale,
Harvard, Georgetown, American University, etc.)23 quote Kinsey’s fraudulent sexual orientation
“science” to support assertions for alternate genetic and gender sexualities, impairing and
imperiling the well-being of marriages, families, children and the civil society.

Summary of Findings
Part I: Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study
Part I: briefly establishes a framework for novel, hence non-normal bi/homosexual and other
similar sexual experiments as increasing early abuse and neglect and this as triggering bad selfand other-destructive conduct.
Part II: reports current CDC data on statistically significant harmful behavior (“at-risk”24)
among disoriented, (as in “confused as to time or place; out of touch: therapy for disoriented
patients) youth, prematurely mislabeled by the CDC authors’ as “minority youth,” compared to
normative heterosexual youth.
Part III: provides recent data reporting on how positive, healthy normal marriage aids
children—as it has throughout history.
Part IV: examines recent data on the health and well-being of children raised by homosexual
Part V: provides data largely from homosexual advocates documenting their coupling patterns.
Underpinning the analyses is the imperative need to revisit all laws that, post “sexual revolution”

have undermined the sanctity of the marital state and thereby violated children’s inherent rights
to stable upbringing.
Part VI: examines the slippery slope toward normalizing pedophilia and other ‘novel’ family
Part VII: looks at how the schools increase the criminal spread of sexually transmitted diseases
as though this was a just a troublesome fallout from the pleasures of sex.
Part VIII: briefly looks at 24 Law Journal articles between 2009 and 2012 that continue to cite
to Kinsey as a sexuality expert for today.
Part IX: notes the possibility of enforcing the requirement that only “factual and medically
accurate” sexuality data be imparted to schoolchildren.
The following should briefly set the record straight on the sexual “elephant in the room.” i.e., the
unscrupulous historical “sex science” frauds and crimes by Alfred Kinsey and company, that
built, fueled, and continue to fuel the socio-sexual bulldozer being run by sexuality “equality”
claimants who really “aspire to govern.” (Aristotle’s Politics)25

Part I: The Adverse Childhood
Experiences (ACE) Study:
Proximate Causation to Explain Homosexual,
Transgender, Bisexual and Other Disorientation Selections26
The ACE collaborative research between the
Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, GA,
and Kaiser Permanente in San Diego, CA.
confirm a preponderance of “Adverse
Childhood Experiences” (table left) in the lives
of those experiencing non-normative “gender” dis-orientation. It is worrisome that the CDC at
risk youth study described here chose to avoid reporting those ACE probable proximate causal
connections to those facing sexual dis-orientations. These Adverse Reactions are seen below in
the percentages of “gay and bisexual men” who were likely to have unprotected anal intercourse
reported in 2002 by Kathleen Kendall-Tackett in her study “The Health Effects of Childhood
Abuse: Four Pathways by which Abuse Can Influence Health.” In her research, Puerto Rican
“gay” men “sexually abused before age 13” were more likely to participate in “anal intercourse
without protection” compared to men who were not abused before age 13 while all ACE risk
measures, smoking, drugs, alcohol, etc., directly reflected early sex abuse.27
This risky conduct in the CDC study reported below was never connected to early abuse even
though the study authors cite another “study of gay and bisexual men in treatment for STDs”
(Bartholow et al., 1994) that found child sexual abuse was significantly associated with “suicidal
thoughts or actions,” use of “psychoactive drugs,” and STDs.28

Part II: CDC Reports On Youthful Sexuality
“Sexual Identity, Sex of Sexual Contacts, and Health-Risk Behaviors Among Students
in Grades 9–12 — Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance, Selected Sites, United States,
To date no historic, cross-cultural, literary and scientific data find scientific proofs for genetic,
“at birth” homosexuality. No genetic markers for child homosexuals have been found despite
‘gay’ academic efforts to find a gene in cadavers, left-handedness, tears and such.30 Still,
thousands of law journals--including a 2009 Harvard Law Review article—have regularly
marketed Alfred Kinsey’s sham sexuality data from 1948 to today31 claiming that 10% to “37%
of males had had at least one same-sex experience to orgasm.”32 However, the recent Center for
Disease Control (CDC) youth survey is likely accurate, society is experiencing a statistically
significant growth in youthful non-normative sexual experimentation. Kinsey’s dis-orientation
sex frauds are finally taking root.
As noted, the general term “dis-orientation” is used here as a convenience classification for a
myriad of non-normative, non-heterosexual sexuality “orientation” groupings (homosexual,
bisexual, transvestites, transgenders, pederasts, pedophiles, sadomasochists, zoophiles, etc.)
The CDC authors claim that about 7 percent of youth are sexually non-normative. “Across the
nine sites that assessed sexual identity,” 93.0% of youth were found to be heterosexual, with
1.3% gay or lesbian, 3.7% bisexual, and 2.5%33 “unsure” of what their orientation might be.
These youthful dis-orientation findings reflect well-documented early school and media
Kinseyan sexual advocacy.34 Consider that the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network
(“GLSEN”) claims to have registered over “3,000 student clubs, commonly known as gaystraight alliances.” GLSEN’s website welcomes all curious youth with offers of parties,
celebrations, celebrity events, speakers, even scholarships. GLSEN insists that about “5% of
America's high school students identify as lesbian or gay...”35 And, indeed, as children’s plastic,
vulnerable brains are meant to learn in school, and as sexual dis-orientation is taught as a viable
"choice" that "at least 1 in 10" is "born-this-way" in the school curriculum, it is logical that many
students would identify as homosexual. This presents a persuasive reason to immediately halt
such brain training until sex educators prove that their sex lessons have done no harm, and have
dramatically reduced youthful sexual activity and experimentation.
Since modern brain research confirms that environment shapes the human brain, especially
before age 21,36 it is not surprising that children’s sexual dis-orientations are increasing. As
noted, although historic, cross-cultural, literary and scientific data obstinately identify myriad
cultural markers that can trigger temporary and/or permanent same-sex arousal,37 the CDC
survey hides the data on early sex abuse as trauma and commonly causal in adult and juvenile
sexual dis-orientations.


Child Rape And Sexual Battery By Dis-orientation
For this reason, judicial attention should ponder the left-leaning CDC 2001-2009 “Survey on
Sexual Identity,” for its alarming findings of 15% admitted higher rates of “gay or lesbian” early
sexual trauma—before 13-years-old—as well as its child rape and “dating violence” data. It
turns out that early sex crimes are statistically higher among all sexually disoriented non-normal
youth; homosexual, bisexual and what the movement had called “questioning” but which the
CDC study defines as “not sure” (of their dis-orientation) than among heterosexual youth. The
following high school student data reproted 12 months before the CDC survey are briefly,
statistically rounded up:
“[F]irst sexual intercourse before age 13 years,” 5% Heterosexual, 20% Gay
or Lesbian, 15% Bisexual, and 13% Not Sure. 38 (Discussed further below)
“Dating violence”: 10% Heterosexual, 28% Gay or Lesbian, 23% Bisexual, and 19% Not Sure.
“Physically forced to have sexual intercourse” 7% Heterosexual, 24% Gay
or Lesbian, 40% Bisexual, and 24% Not Sure.
Note: reported child sexual trauma is roughly 15%, 18%, 33% higher for disoriented than for
oriented youth. Again, the authors hide early sex trauma as causal in high rates of all at-risk, selfdestructive, drug and alcohol using and suicidal behaviors by all disoriented youths (labeled by
CDC authors as “sexual minority” youth). These bad behaviors included multiple partners, use of
weapons in violence and the like. Across all harm measures, sexually disoriented youths rated
unhappiness much higher than did heterosexual youths.
CDC Authors’ Language Methodology Excludes Rape Trauma, Abuse, Predator,
Crime, Pornography, Death, Chastity, Abstinence, Abortion, Virginity, Molestation,
and similar critical, informative terminology.
The CDC authors offer rigorous data on youthful activity by “orientation,” race/ethnicity; fist
fights, exercise, seat belts, bicycle helmets, milk, fruit juice, soda pop, steroids, alcohol, various
drugs, inhalants, tobacco, television, computer games, sports teams, diets, laxatives, vomiting,
obesity and the like.
Moreover, as noted above, the authors reported “Dating Violence” and “Forced to Have Sexual
Intercourse.” Dating violence, defined as, “hit, slapped, or physically hurt on purpose by their
boyfriend or girlfriend” was as much as 18% higher for some disoriented students than for
heterosexual youths. Yet, this alarming violence by “gay, lesbian, bisexual and unsure”
disoriented persons on other disoriented minors was ignored in the authors’ analysis and
conclusions. Inexcusably, the authors never even revealed the ages of those disoriented persons
who had (illegal) sex with disoriented minors.
Rape or a sadomasochistic dis-orientation? The authors’ data on “Forced to Have Sexual
Intercourse” reinforces their data on “Dating Violence.” The authors write that, some children
were “physically forced to have sexual intercourse when they did not want to.”39 (Emphasis

added), implying that some children might have wanted to be sexually “forced” but some “did
not want to” be forced. As in dating violence data, “forced to have sexual intercourse” was up to
33% lower among heterosexual than disoriented youth.
While admitting children were “physically forced” to have sex, the authors trivialize the
reality of child rapes by excising important evaluative, moral and crime terminology, normal
words like trauma, rape, molestation or abuse. Most disturbing, the authors excised the age
or circumstances of the child’s “first sexual intercourse” whether forced or not.
Furthermore, the authors excised data on the “age” of initial and subsequent sex dates and
partners, (older or younger). And although non-normative, disoriented youth had roughly an
8% higher rate of weapons carried to school, this was ignored as a function of early “force”
or “dating violence” child trauma. While the authors detailed data on soda pop use they
ignored at-risk anal and oral sodomy, abortion or relevant data on pre-age 13 sex victims.
That is, did these pre-pubescent children suffer adult abuse, violence, threats, battery, etc.?
All Dysfunction Rates Are Lowest For Heterosexual Children
The study also showed that the rates of various dysfunctions were consistently the lowest
in heterosexual youth:
Use of Birth Control:
The percentage of “high school students who reportedly used a condom during last sexual
intercourse:” 66% for Heterosexual, 36% for Gay or Lesbian, 55% for Bisexual and 53%
for those who are “Not Sure.”
Percentage of those who reportedly use “birth control pills or Depo-Provera,” 22%
Heterosexual, 11% Gay or Lesbian, 21% Bisexual, 20% Not Sure. Yet the authors
provided zero data on abortions, pregnancies, or the side effects of birth control,
especially Depo-Provera.40
Use of Illicit Drugs Percentage of “high school students who ever:

Used marijuana,” 38% Heterosexual, 57% Gay or Lesbian, 61% Bisexual, and 37% Not

Used marijuana “before age 13,” 8% Heterosexual, 21% Gay or Lesbian, 22% Bisexual,
and 15% Not Sure.

“Currently used cocaine” 2% Heterosexual, 17% Gay or Lesbian, 11% Bisexual, and 11%
Not Sure.

Used “ecstasy” 5% Heterosexual, 23% Gay or Lesbian, 20% Bisexual, and 11% Not Sure.

Used “heroin” 2% Heterosexual, 18% Gay or Lesbian, 10% Bisexual, and 13% Not Sure.

Used “methamphetamines”4% Heterosexual, 22% Gay or Lesbian, 15% Bisexual, and
13% Not Sure.

Were “offered, sold, or given an illegal drug by someone on school property,” 25%
Heterosexual, 41% Gay or Lesbian, 37% Bisexual, and 28% Not Sure.

High school students who “seriously considered attempting suicide,” 12% Heterosexual,
30% Gay/Lesbian, 23% Bisexual, and 20% Not Sure.

High School students who “attempted” suicide: 6% Heterosexual, 26% Gay/Lesbian, 28%
Bisexual, and 19% Not Sure.

Heterosexual youth also had the lowest percentage of those who had their first sexual
intercourse before age 13: 5% Heterosexual, 20% Gay or Lesbian, 15% Bisexual, and
13% Not Sure. 41

Although their own data report the rape of children as “forced,” the authors write about
intercourse in pre-pubescent children, not even age 13, as though there is nothing untoward in
early sex. Again, the authors’ methodology excises data on what percentage were “forced,” the
ages of their first abuse, the ages of their offender(s), the abuse duration, offender(s)’ orientation
or dis-orientation, if the abuse is currently ongoing, etc. It could be argued that this shoddy
methodology reflects problems with the authorial skills and understanding of child sexual trauma
and its impact on subsequent self-harm and antisocial behaviors (as in multiple partners, drug and
alcohol use, suicidal ideation and yes, even sexual dis-orientation). Yet, much research, including
the NIBRS data below was long available to inform the CDC authors.
The US Department of Justice National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) Data on
Predators of Both Boys and Girls
In 2000, one
year before the
start of the CDC
survey, the US
Department of
Justice National
System (NIBRS)
identified (tables
above) children
under age 18 as

67% of sex abuse victims; with 34% of these sex victims under age 11; and 14% under 5 years
old. “In each sexual assault category except forcible rape, children below the age of 12 were
about half of all victims.” Boys under age 12 were 25% of all sex abuse victims but 64% of all
forcible sodomy victims.42
CDC Authors Ignore the Established Role of Early Sex Abuse in Crafting Bi/Homosexual
Youth43 Instead Seek “Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs) In Schools
The CDC authors44 mislead the public by euphemizing “first sexual intercourse before age 13” as
a variation of “coming of age” versus rape and statutory rape. The authors use the word
“harassed” only once, in reporting that disoriented youths were “verbally harassed.” (p. 47). Yet,
even the ever popular 1983 book, “One teenager in ten: writings by gay and lesbian youth,”
reporting 17 males and 11 females, “growing up gay in Canada and the United States” finds 38%
report child sex abuse as a kind of coming of age activity. A sampler reads as follows: "I was
twelve . . [when] my dance teacher . . . brought me out;" “I was in seventh grade when I moved
in with my 32-year-old-lover;” … “I was in fourth grade and had sex with my uncle;” "I’m
fifteen," and have sex with "this guy Reggie, who is 23."45
The CDC authors advocate for “Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs) in schools, claiming that GSAs
help children “participate meaningfully and feel more connected at school (p. 21).” The CDC
authors write that they train “school staff and others who work with sexual minority youths” to
help “shape behavioral health messages accordingly.” However, the authors dodge the high rate
of sex abuse suffered by disoriented, non-normative children before age 13. And they never
advocate that children report adult or other predators to the police, even those that infected the
children with sexually transmitted disease(s)—from crabs to AIDS.
No “Tell a Responsible Adult” if You’ve Been Molested Message. CDC and APA
Do Not Advocate Reporting Offenders Who Raped, Transmitting STDs to Children
The authors boast that CDC “funded the American Psychological Association (APA) Healthy
Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Students Project” with what they call “science-based workshops for
school counselors, nurses, psychologists, and social workers on how to effectively reach "sexual
minority youths" with HIV prevention messages and other health information.” (p. 48). Yet these
same authors excise the dozens of sexually transmitted diseases commonly caught prior to or
alongside HIV (crabs, herpes, syphilis, gonorrhea, genital warts, scabies, pelvic inflammatory
disease, HPV, hepatitis B, etc.).46 This methodological flaw excises the cost in money and
resources due to all fornication, that is, out of wedlock sexual intercourse. In 2006 D A. Pollard
argued in “Sex Torts”:
“America has a serious sexual problem. The sexual practices of a small percentage of Americans
have created an unprecedented disease rate that is costing the American public about $20 billion
per year.” While STD “damage” lawsuits increase, “current sex tort law is mired with antiheartbalm sentiment.” Our “sexual disease crisis” he says, reflects the “laws failure to do its part
to help educate the public and deter irresponsible sexual behavior.” Pollard wants “strict liability
for sexual disease transmission” (as in the pre-sexual revolution). This would “deter sexual

disease transmission, and educate the public about the sexual disease epidemic, more effectively
than negligence.”47 Since entitlement recipients cannot pay, the working ‘village’ must pony up
and pay the liability. Again the perpetrator doesn’t pay the price.
Instead of deterring STD transmission, CDC authors trivialize child sex abuse and protect the
probable high rate of disoriented child predators who caused disoriented “minority” youth to
engage “consensually” or forced in bad, dangerous, even fatal, behavior. So much for the “tell a
responsible adult” propaganda, when our key government health agency policy is “don’t ask
don’t tell,” lest the police be called in to locate the predators of child abuse and/or originators of
STD transmission.
About 1 in 5 Homosexuals versus 1 in 21
Heterosexuals Were Sexually Abused Prior To
Their Teen Years, yet No Call for Prosecution
of Homosexual Molesters by CDC/GayStraight Groups
The CDC statistics show that about 1 in every
5 “gay” children, 1 in 7 “bisexual” and 1 in 8
“sexually unsure” was sexually molested
before reaching his/her teen years as compared
to 1 in every 21 heterosexual children. These
shocking statistics compel one to ponder the
link between sexual orientation and childhood
molestation. The media appears to have chosen
to focus only on the CDC’s teen study findings
of poor self-esteem, drug abuse and suicidal
ideation in order to blame “society’s lack of
acceptance of homosexual conduct.” Yet, the
media has generally ignored the research
findings indicating a high number of
homosexual teens had been inducted into
sexuality before age 13 (i.e., as prepubescent
children). As the ACE Study above showed, the data really point to poor self-esteem, drug abuse
and suicidal ideation as logically originating from the molestation and the unwanted sexual
feelings thrust onto the prepubescent child.

PART III: Sexual Novelty in the Innovative Marriage48
“America’s Greatest Weapon Against Child Poverty: Married Mom/Dad at Home49
The 2012 Heritage Foundation report, Marriage: America’s Greatest Weapon Against Child
Poverty50 provides the law and society with needed extant data on the value of traditional,
normative mother-father marriage in the upbringing of children and thus the health of society,
what Cicero would define as the benefits of “right conduct.”51

The study’s principal author, Robert Rector, writes “child poverty is an ongoing national
concern, but few are aware that its principal cause is the absence of married fathers in the home.”
Since the advent of the sexual revolution and its fallout in the elimination of women-, familyand child-protective laws (“Restoring Legal Protections for Women and Children: a Historical
Analysis of The State’s Criminal Codes” April 2004),52 marriage has declined. Yet, says Rector,
“marriage remains America’s strongest anti-poverty weapon.” With only one parent--especially
absent a married father--poverty, welfare and children’s bad behavior increases. Rector argues
that the public deserves to know not just why youth should finish school, but why and how to
“form and maintain healthy marriages and delay childbearing until” a couple is economically
stable. Most important, government should reveal the harm from unmarried births for lowerincome persons.
The U.S. Census reported that single parents with children (2008) had a poverty rate (statistics
rounded up here) of 37% versus 6% for marrieds with children. A married Mom and Dad reduce
child poverty by about 80%. (See Chart 1, above) And, comparing married to single parents
with similar education levels, married poverty is 75% lower. Marriage reduces poverty.
Marital Decline Increases “Illegitimacy”
Throughout American history “illegitimacy” was shamed and marital childbirth was the norm.
Rector writes that even during “the War on Poverty in 1964” 93% of American children were
born to a married mom and dad at home. However, “over 60% of the states adopted no-fault
divorce grounds between 1970 and 1973—years of increasing divorce rates nationwide,”53
during which time schools began the shift from “sex hygiene” to “sex ed.”54 The collapse of
marriage was then dramatic. We lost 34% of our wedded births. By 2009 only 59% of children
were lucky enough to be born to a married
It should come as no surprise that women and
girls continued to have sex with men and boys
and thus to have babies—as well as abortions.
Although millions of women used birth control55
by 2008 41% of our children were born outside
of marriage.
Unmarried Women Have More Abortions Than
Unmarried Teens and Married Women


Rector also reported that in 2008, 8% of out-of-wedlock babies were born to unwed girls
under age 18, with 15% born to 18-19 year olds and nearly 40% to 20-24 year olds. Rector
argues correctly that the “out-of-wedlock birth is not a teenage issue” but rather reflects a
breakdown in male-female “relationships.” Yet, the National Abortion Federation calls
abortion “an integral part of reproductive health care.” The abortion group reports girls 15 to
19 have about 19% of all abortions; 33% are women age 20 to 24 and about 25% are women
30 or older.56
Indeed, the 1930s statistics of almost 100% wedlock and births attest not only to more children at
home with dad and mom, but to a wholly different responsible relationship between men and
women prior to the sexual revolution.
The Heritage Data
Spotlights a “TwoCaste Society”
Heritage data note
that of America’s
babies born in
2008, most had
mothers with a
high school degree
a college degree were living with their children’s fathers. The “high-income third of the
population” are college-educated parents. Single parents with a high school diploma or less and
their children occupy the bottom-rung of the income ladder.

While education is an issue, it should be noted that less than 5%57 of Americans attended college
in the 1930s. Still, nearly 100% of these “uneducated” nearly ‘poor’ citizens were responsible,
married couples. Most had a working husband and a home-making wife, and they and their
children experienced low rates of divorce, STDs, abortion, “illegitimacy” and sexual crime. The
public moral and legal view of marriage--chastity prior to and fidelity within--served as a health
and welfare protection for children, women and society.
Then, along came the sexual revolution with its “free sex” mantra and its ridicule of the JudeoChristian sexual morals of the ancestry that produced the “greatest” WWII generation.58 Since
the early 1960s single-parent families have roughly tripled; 71% of poor families with children
“are headed by single parents,” while 74% of non-poor families with children “are headed by
married couples.”
Normal, Man-Woman Marriage Reduces Poverty by 80%
The fact that fewer than 5% of the public attended college in the 1930s59 confirms that sexual
prudence (that used to be called “purity”) and a faithful marriage, not education, is the key factor
for social stability. Normal marriage, a historic prophylactic for social well-being, reduces
poverty by 80 percent.
32% poverty = single mother with only a high school degree
6% poverty = married-couple with only a high school degree
Marital Novelty is Always Costly: Welfare Pay-Outs to Single-Parent Families
The sexual revolution has failed families and making sex not war has been a societal disaster.
Being single largely disadvantages women for whom marriage has always been a means by
which-- feminist rhetoric aside—women could fulfill their nurturing, caring and procreative role
alongside a male protector. Historical records show that this allowed many women to play
significant service roles in the wider society. Current research confirms common knowledge;
“only 5 percent of children living with one parent are in a male-headed household.”60
Rector reports that taxes fund over 70 programs and services for “poor and low-income persons.”
In 2010:
 $400 billion went to “low-income families with children.” (largely female headed)
 $300 billion is paid to “single-parent families.” (~95% female headed)
 Medicaid largely pays for unmarried births (~100% female headed)
 Mom and babe are funded “for nearly two decades after the child is born.” (100% female
So, even in normal marriages the wife commonly works outside to help support the increased
costs of caring for experimental families. This leaves the children of in-tact families more
often unsupervised, which then leads to higher damaging statistics in this category than
would be otherwise.


From Most Married to Least Married: 73% Out of Wedlock Black Births
The elitist-led sexual revolution has overwhelmed the black community. Stepping away from the
Heritage study momentarily, Diana Elliott, Research Manager for Pew’s Economic Mobility
Project reported on unwed childbearing by race since 1930.
“Race differences are particularly interesting, as black women were more often married than
white women prior to World War II, yet since the 1980s, have been increasingly less likely to be
married.”61 The high rate of black male imprisonment, 62loss of black marriage and the massive
increase in black abortion is clearly a result of changes in cultural mores since the sexual
revolution. More on this important issue at another time.63
2008 Data on Black, White, Hispanic “Illegitimacy”

29% white “illegitimacy”
53% Hispanic “illegitimacy”
72% Black “illegitimacy”
These illegitimacy rates are reflected in adult
trauma. A comprehensive 2012 Gallup Poll
reported “Only 3.4 Percent of US Adults
Identify as LGBT.” Yet, 4.6% of blacks, 4%
of Hispanics and 4.3% of Asians say they are
“lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.”
Moreover, black and Hispanic males are very
overrepresented in the prison population.64

Again, until the sexual revolution, black and
white births were marital and in 1940, with
abortion still criminal, only 2 percent of
white children and 14 percent of black
children were born out of wedlock. Heritage
reports this changed after the 1960s “War on
Poverty.” Black “illegitimacy” went from
14% in 1930 to 25% in 1964 to 50% in 1976 to 72% in 2008. White “illegitimacy” went from
2% in 1930 to 20% in 1960 to 29% in 2008.

Part IV: “Novel” Marriages: The Fragile Families Survey65
The Heritage study’s finding that normal marriage dramatically lowers poverty rates is
confirmed by “The Fragile Families and Child Well-being Survey,” a collaboration of Princeton
and Columbia universities. The Fragile study followed roughly 5,000 children born in large U.S.
cities between 1998 and 2000, including “children born to unmarried parents.” The Fragile study
confirms again the failure of even well-intended novel treatments of marriage.

Despite their high hopes, most [unmarried] parental relationships do not last, and
as a result many children experience high levels of instability. Only 35% of
unmarried couples are still living together five years after the birth of their child,
and less than half of the 35% are married….Just over 50% of cohabiting couples
are married or cohabiting five years after the birth.66
The Fragile study pointed to another critical failure in “novel” marital arrangements that reject
Judeo-Christian moral standards. That is, after unmarried dad leaves the nest, mother often
experiences “mental health problems,” so finds another male support, seriously endangering her
existing children physically, sexually, and emotionally. Once baby’s dad flees, unmarried moms
commonly find new men and have children with new partners. Nearly 40% of all unmarried
moms seek “at least one new partnership and about 14% have a child with a new partner, adding
to the instability and complexity of these families.” 67
Novelty Wears Thin; “Father Involvement Declines.”
By age five, only 50% of unmarried dads saw their child in the past month. “While formal child
support…increases over time, informal cash support and in-kind support (such as buying toys or
clothes) declines.” 68
Also, logically, the Fragile study found struggling single moms “engage in harsher parenting
practices and fewer literacy activities with their child than stably married mothers.”69 Children’s
cognitive test scores are reduced and children’s aggressive behavior increases “especially
pronounced among boys.” The study concludes that “children born to unmarried parents are
disadvantaged…in terms of parental capabilities and family stability.”70
Wrapping Up: The Lifelong Positive Effects of Fathers
Census data and the Fragile Families survey find “novel” marriages harm children. Extensive
cross cultural and historic data confirm that children in intact married homes are healthier than
those in any “novel” marital arrangements. Dad brings more to children than a salary. Compared
to intact married families, children from novel parent arrangements are:

More than twice as likely to be arrested for a juvenile crime;
Twice as likely to be treated for emotional and behavioral problems;
Roughly twice as likely to be suspended or expelled from school;
A third more likely to drop out before completing high school;
Thrice more likely to end up in jail by the time they reach age 30;
Girls are twice as likely to have a child without being married;
50 percent more likely to experience poverty as adults
Girls and boys are likely to be battered, molested by mom’s boyfriend(s)71


PS: Despite The Sexual Revolution, Girls Still Want (Need?) Babies
It does not bode well for children to rely on novel, untested, thus unstable adult care for their
survival. Heart and hearth must be satisfied so unmarried girls and women will often grasp their
right to feel they belong to something, to love someone. In Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor
Mothers Put Motherhood Before Marriage, Harvard public policy professor Kathryn Edin finds
unwed births “are almost never caused by a lack of access to birth control…”72 She found most
“women who have children out of wedlock strongly desire to have children.” Unmarried moms
view “children [as] the best of what life offers…a gift…a source of both joy and fulfillment.”
They “credit their children for virtually all that they see as positive….to bring validation,
purpose, companionship, and order to their often chaotic lives.”73
These young ladies want to be loved, cherished and to have the working hubby, a sweet house
and happy little children. However, since the sexual revolution, the courts legalized “seduction,”
“fornication” and all other “morality-based” crimes,74 exchanging “illegitimacy” for morally
neutral “out of wedlock birth.” The research is clear regarding this epoch.75
School Sex Educators Long Trained Children to Have Sex Before Marriage
Suffice it to say that, even before 1974 school pedagogy regularly taught children they had a
“right” to have sex outside of marriage, as did this popular Planned Parenthood classroom text!76
“Sex is best between friends. Not quickest, just best. Ask anyone who knows.” (p.
9). “There are only two basic kinds of sex: sex with victims and sex without. Sex
with victims is always wrong. Sex without is always right.” (p. 10) “If she’s
young, always ask… If this is a one nighter, and you don’t intend to be around, say
so….If this is a girl you've just met and she agrees, you're in the clear provided that
she's old enough to have some sense….” (p. 12) Don't lie to yourself. Decide
honestly what you want from your relationships with women. Do you want a
convenient warm body? Buy one. That's right. There are women who have freely
chosen that business, buy one. Do you want a virgin to marry? Buy one. There
are girls in that business too. Marriage is the price you'll pay, and you'll get the
virgin. Very temporarily. (p. 18). (You’ve Changed the Combination, Planned
Parenthood, Rocky Mountain, Colorado, 1974).77
Schoolroom sex marketing has long since invaded primary grades. Heritage says “[t]oday, the
historic norms and values concerning marriage and fatherhood have all but disappeared in lowincome neighborhoods.” True. But, the idea that “it is not important to be married before having
children” did not come from low-income neighborhoods. This view was not a norm in such
communities before the “sexual revolution” was launched by Dr. Kinsey in 1948 and mass
distributed by his famous radicalized “pamphleteer,” Hugh Hefner. Before anything can be done
to correct our current sexual insanity, law, legislation and society must reevaluate the roots of the
sexual frauds taught by our academic institutions that originated in the Kinsey Institute and were
normalized in colleges nationwide by Hefner.

The Media Has Long Marketed Non Marital Sex, Adultery, etc.
While elitist scholarship balks at using images such as
those below and rejects a “serious” treatment of “soft”
pornography, the data do not support either of these
contentions. The first issue of Playboy, December
1953, set a moral standard established by Kinsey’s
sexual revolution. The very first issue of Playboy’s
attack on marriage “Miss GOLD-DIGGER of 1953” symbolized the powerful anti-marriage
campaign early marketed to those in higher education. “When a modern-day marriage ends, it
doesn’t matter who’s to blame it’s always the guy who pays, and pays, and pays…” It is the
height of elitism to ignore how naïve college men and women were induced into reshaping our
national mores. This “upscale” moral conversation would be accepted by millions in “low
income neighborhoods.” The Kinsey-Hefner-Planned Parenthood coalition launched their sexual
revolution, and marriage would never be the same.78
Heritage seeks to solve the marriage problem by having government and society launch a public
education campaign in low-income areas to encourage school attendance--like the health
campaign on the risks of smoking. However, health educators never distributed free Lucky
Strikes with pamphlets on how to smoke responsibly. School sex educators however, show--even
give--children cheap condoms, with diagrams, sexy talks and videos to convince children to have
sex “responsibly.”79
Heritage concludes “Marriage remains America’s strongest anti-poverty weapon, yet it continues
to decline. As husbands disappear from the home, poverty and welfare dependence will increase,
and children and parents will suffer as a result.” And now, let us turn to recent research
examining how children fare in our newest marriage novelty--homosexual parenting.

Part V: The Regnerus Study of New ("Novel") Family Structures
The APA Was Sure Children Were Not “Disadvantaged” by Novel Parenting
In 2005, the American Psychological Association (APA) “Healthy Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual
Students Project,” CDC collaborator declared: “Not a single study has found children of lesbian
or homosexual parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of
heterosexual parents.” (Recall in 1999 the APA Bulletin reporting, “A Meta-Analytic
Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples,” also
concluded child sexual abuse could be harmless, beneficial and “positive.”80) However, Science
Daily, a mainstream internet agency, recently reported that upon examination, much of the
science supporting the APA “brief on same-sex parenting…does not stand up to scrutiny.”
Over 75% of the 59 APA studies were “small, non-representative, non-random samples” that
excluded minority people or families. About half had no “heterosexual comparison group” and
outcomes beyond childhood “such as intergenerational poverty, educational attainment, and
criminality” as influenced by divorce, remarriage, or cohabitation81 were excluded.

The Regnerus Study Debunks The APA’s Theory of No Disadvantage
The mainstream, popular Science Digest discussed the Mark Regnerus, Population Research
Center at the University of Texas study assked; How different are the adult children of parents
who have same-sex relationships? Findings from the New Family Structures Study. The
normally leftist The Digest said Regnerus “provides compelling new evidence that numerous
differences in social and emotional well-being do exist between young adults raised by women
who have had a lesbian relationship and those who have grown up in a nuclear family.” 82
The Institute of Marriage and Family Canada, reports in Canada that there “has been a virtual
blackout” on the Regnerus June 2012 study. Yet, it offers the first “nationally representative,
random sample to examine adult children raised by parents in same-sex relationships.”
Regnerus vetted over 15,000 Americans age 18-39, asking “if their biological mother or father
ever had a romantic relationship with a member of the same sex.” Although a same sex
relationship doesn’t prove homosexuality, it does offer data on such novel (dis-orientation) forms
of parenting.
The study asked how children who became adults in a same-sex romantic household would rate
on 40 social, emotional, and relational outcomes compared with other types of families.
Regnerus located 175 ‘lesbian raised’ and 73 homosexually raised children. Although he sought
children whose childhoods were spent with their same sex dads and mothers, only two of the 175
lesbian mothers parented throughout childhood. These children were compared to “intact
biological, adopted, divorced, step families, single parents and “other” families (which might
include deceased parents, for example).”83
A Canadian Summary of the Study Outcomes
As is seen in the CDC and the Fragile Family data, especially compared to traditional “intact
biological families,” children experiencing same-sex parentage would:

Experience poor educational attainment
Report overall lower levels of mental and physical health
Be in counseling or mental health therapy
Suffer from depression
Have recently thought of suicide (statistical significance for same-sex dad relations)
Be sexually molested (both inappropriate touching and forced sexual act)
Be unemployed or part-time employed as young adults
Have pled guilty to non-minor legal offenses

Homosexual v
Heterosexual Child Victims




Boy Abuse

Girl Abuse

Live in homes with lower
income levels (statistical
significance for same-sex
mom relations)
A full list of outcomes can be found
in the Regnerus study.84
Regnerus has defended his research
while admitting its limits. He doesn’t
address why the children of the novel
sex arrangement do poorly; that is,
he won’t attribute causality. He
tracked the respondents’ “age,
race/ethnicity, gender, the mother’s
education, perceived family-of-origin
income, and whether or not the
subject was bullied.”

Moreover, my Regent University
Law Review’s article, “Crafting
Bi/Homosexual Youth”85 includes
extensive data on the length of most
homosexual relationships, the violence within those relationships and, as sampled here, hard data
on child sex abuse within those relationships. Psychologist Eugene Abel reported homosexual
males “sexually molest young boys with an incidence that is occurring from five times greater
than the molestation of girls.”86 However, the widespread use of pornography in the last decade
has allowed heterosexuals to access, abuse, traffic, perhaps even more girl victims.
Gene Abel Study, Regent University Law Review [Vol.
14:283, p.300] 2002

“[N]onincarcerated child molesters admitted from 23.4 to 281.7 acts per offender . . . whose
targets were males.” 87 The rate of homosexual versus heterosexual child sexual abuse is
staggering. Abel’s data (table left) of 150.2 boys abused per male homosexual offender finds no
equal (yet) in heterosexual violations of 19.8 girls.”88 See the Reisman report on “Homosexual
Marriage” for details from the homosexual research itself on the nature of “marriage” within that
Meanwhile the issue of Social Science Research in which Regnerus’ study appears also carries a
report by Loren Marks, a PhD in family studies at Louisiana State University. Marks confirmed
the scholarship of the Regnerus study, especially the simple but profound finding that same-sex
parents are not all white upper-middle-class.
The Witherspoon Institute, which helped fund the study, noted that publicity stereotypes
commonly display homosexual parents as “white, upper-middle-class,” while Regnerus found
48% of the respondents with a [homosexual father] and 43% of the respondents with a [lesbian
mother] said that they were either black or Hispanic” 90 a stunning rate since blacks are 13% and
Hispanics 17% of Americans.91

More Novelty and Instability
Witherspoon reports that only “2 out of the 15,000 screened spent a span of 18 years with the
same two mothers” while “23%, said they had spent at least three years living in the same
household with both their mother and her [female] romantic partner. Among those who said their
father had had a same-sex relationship, 1.1% of children reported spending at least three years
together with both men.” Homosexual instability is consistent with global findings.
For example, a recent 2012 study of same-sex couples in Great Britain finds that gay and lesbian
cohabiting couples are more likely to separate than heterosexual couples.[3] A 2006 study of same
sex marriages in Norway and Sweden found that “divorce risk levels are considerably higher in
same-sex marriages.”[4] Swedish lesbian couples divorce over three times more than heterosexual
couples. “Swedish gay couples are 1.35 times more likely to divorce…” Two strong same-sex
marriage academic advocates, Timothy Biblarz and Judith Stacey admit that there is more
instability among lesbian parents than among heterosexuals.[5]
Regnerus answered his critics in Slate:92
“One notable theme among the adult children of same-sex parents, however, is household
instability, and plenty of it. … While we know that good things tend to happen—both in
the short-term and over the long run—when people provide households that last, parents
in the [study] who had same-sex relationships were the least likely to exhibit such
And he answered his critics in Patheos:94
[O]nly two respondents total said they lived with their mother and her [lesbian] partner
nonstop from birth to age 18. Two more said they did so for 15 years, and two more for 13
years. To be sure, these 10 fared better on more outcomes than did their less-stable peers.
They’re just uncommon, and too small a group to detect statistically-significant
differences, for sure.


Although the data reflected nearly 3000 adults, 95 Regnerus’ study isn’t longitudinal since this
novel parental experiment cannot be traced back to 1930, as can data on unmarried childbirth
above. However, contrary to the APA assertions, Regnerus found adult children of same sex
couples statistically “disadvantaged” compared to children raised by biological, married parents.
Even here we cannot escape Kinsey. Regnerus says, “the Kinsey scale of sexual behavior was
employed, but modified to allow respondents to select the best description of their sexual
orientation (rather than behavior).”96 Regnerus reports a nationally-representative research
sample finding that “1.7% of all Americans between the ages of 18 and 39 report that their father
or mother has had a same-sex relationship, a figure comparable to other estimates of children in
gay and lesbian households (e.g., Stacey and Biblarz (2001a,b) report a plausible range from 1%
to 12%).”97
Briefly, the idea of no difference in parenting recently has shifted to “same-sex parents appear to
be more competent than heterosexual parents.”98 Some claim their romantic relationships may be
better. Other researchers claim two women parenthood may be best, for “Lesbian co-parents
seem to outperform comparable married heterosexual, biological parents on several measures
….”99 Regnerus observes that even here, however lesbian parents face a somewhat greater risk of
splitting up due, they suggest, to their ‘‘asymmetrical biological and legal statuses and their high
standards of equality.”100
Most Relevant Finding: Parental Biology is Sexually Protective
Witherspoon notes that “contrary to recent and widely circulated reports that there is no sexual
victimization in lesbian households,”101 23% of the children of lesbian mothers said they were
touched sexually by a parent or other adult. The study finds 6% of children in a “gay father”
household, 2% in an intact biological home, 3% in an adopted home, 10% in a divorced home,
12% with a stepfamily and 10% in single parent home were molested. Also, 31% of lesbianmothered children said they had been raped [forced to have sex] as did 25% of homosexually
fathered children and 8% of children in biologically parented homes. Normal biological
marriage stability protects children.102 See additional data in “Table 2: Mean scores on select
outcomes dichotomous variables” of the Regnerus Study above.
The Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect (NIS–4) (2009)
The NIS-4 data similarly demonstrate that the safest place for a child is “living with two married
biological parents.” Since no homosexual parenting arrangement is wholly biological, children
are uniformly at risk in that structure. The study found children living with “a single parent who
had a cohabiting partner in the household had the highest rate in all maltreatment categories.
Compared to children living with married biological parents, those whose single parent had a
live-in partner had more than 8 times the rate of maltreatment overall, over 10 times the rate of
abuse, and nearly 8 times the rate of neglect.” 103
Certainly, the introduction of pornography in the home has sexually endangered children overall,
but while sex abuse of children will have increased radically within the home environs, the
protective nature of parental biology should still restrain sexual abuse of the child more than

non-kinship, novel, relations. Early in 1979 David Finkelhor wrote in his influential work,
Sexually Victimized Children of what happens to children living in “novel” sexual arrangements:
Girls who are merely without fathers were about 50 percent more vulnerable than
the average girl, but girls with stepfathers were almost 150 percent more
vulnerable….Clinicians have noted that in many cases of father daughter incest
the offender was really a stepfather…. Indeed our data give support to this picture.
The rate of father-daughter incest is much higher in the families with stepfathers
than in any other subgroup in the whole survey--almost five times higher….[G]irls
in these families are more vulnerable to stepbrothers, stepsisters, step cousins…
[and possibly] a coterie of friends and acquaintances who are not so protective
toward a stepdaughter. (Emphasis added).”104
It is reasonable to hypothesize the increase in incestuous infant exploitation, even resulting in
childhood venereal disease,105 when vulnerable adults and teens believe “sexual development”
begins at birth for “most children aged zero to three will…[e]xperience an erection or vaginal
lubrication.”106 This mantra by “Advocates for Youth,” eroticizes newborns. Yet, “erectile
tissue” is found in the nose, ears and penis107 often due to urine108 buildup, fear, or just
movement. And all bodily exit/entry sites--ear, nose, genitalia, mouth, anus--are lubricated as a
basic biological and bacteriologically protective design. Thousands of web citations are available
quoting Planned Parenthood’s Mary Calderone’s “Fetal Erections” claim below:
Fears of a pedophile agenda are further aroused by Mary Calderone's use of a new
"scientific" prop--an ultrasound picture of penile erection in a 29-week-old
fetus…..touted as further evidence of child sexuality….In Mary S. Calderone,
"Fetal Erection and Its Message to Us," “SIECUS Report, May-July 1983, pp. 9-10.
This is becoming a common, naive misinterpretation by sexologists of a normal
reflexive and vascular reaction.109
Witherspoon reports that “young-adult children” of a lesbian mother were three times more
likely to have gotten a STD than those who had married parents. Children of lesbian mothers
were two and a half times more likely to have been given an STD than those living in
stepfamilies. And the step children had double the chance of being given an STD than those
living in a normal marital home. On marijuana use, young-adult children “of divorced parents
were the worst off,” saying they used marijuana roughly one and a half times more than children
living in intact parental homes and the latter reported the “least frequent marijuana use as young

PART VI. The Inevitable Push for Pedophile Family Units, etc.
Noting the trendy acceptance of pedophilia among the intelligentsia, author Mary Eberstadt
stated, “Hands down, the real Big Daddy of Pedophilia Chic could only be the long-dead
researcher Alfred C. Kinsey!” Ms. Eberstadt’s discussion of this growing problem was entered
into the Congressional Record in 1996. 110


Kinsey’s role in normalizing pedophilia, and actually pederasty as well, was officially supported
by NAMBLA (The North American Man-Boy Love Association). NAMBLA offers a unique
historical account of the role of Kinsey and sexology in the acceptance of children as viable
sexual targets for adult society. One of NAMBLA leaders wrote, “Gay liberationists in general
and boy-lovers in particular, should know Kinsey’s work and hold it dear; implicit in Kinsey is
the struggle we fight today.”111 Moreover, for years, the text alongside a photo of Kinsey
“interviewing” a posed woman claimed our sex laws were old fashioned, just designed “to
protect custom.” The second paragraph read as follows:
"When children are constantly warned by parents and teachers against contacts
with adults, and when they receive no explanation of the exact nature of the
contacts, they are ready to become hysterical as soon as any older person
approaches, or stops and speaks to them in the street, or fondles them, or proposes
to do something for them, even though the adult may have had no sexual
objective in mind. Some of the more experienced students of juvenile problems
have come to believe that the emotional reactions of the parents, police officers,
and other adults who discover that the child has had such a contact, may disturb
the child more seriously than the sexual contacts themselves. The current hysteria
over sex offenders may very well have serious effects on the ability of many of
these children to work out sexual adjustments some years later..."
~ Alfred Kinsey, W. Pomeroy, C. Martin, and P. Gebhard, Sexual Behavior in the
Human Female (Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders, 1953).112
Schoolroom Sex Indoctrination: To Read, Meditate Upon, Perhaps Venerate and Obey
The bi/tri/homosexual “Advocates For Youth” (AY) Website113 offers “Lesson Plans; For
Educators Working with Elementary School-Aged Children; For Educators working with Middle
and High School-Aged Youth.” AY trains children in novel sexuality experiences and
advocacies in schoolrooms, with books, films and teachers largely funded by American
taxpayers. As seen in the CDC study above and discussed below, school sex education has long
urged sexual experimentation, bi/homosexuality, masturbation, sodomy, multiple partners and so
on, while rarely if ever mentioning any legal, much less moral, issues surrounding child sexual
The genesis of sexuality education can be seen in the Supreme Court’s decision upholding the
prohibition against posting the Ten Commandments in Kentucky classrooms in which the Court
expressed concern about the children possibly meditating upon, venerating and obeying the
Commandments. Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39, 42 (1980). Thus the preeminent purpose for
school sex ed posters, books, videos and the like is “plainly” sexual in nature; as in a return to
cultic/religious sexuality.
“The preeminent purpose for posting the Ten Commandments on schoolroom
walls is plainly religious in nature. The Commandments do not confine themselves
to arguably secular matters, such as honoring one’s parents, killing or murder,
adultery, stealing, false witness, and covetousness. …. Rather, the first part of the

Commandments concerns the religious duties of believers: worshipping the Lord
God alone, avoiding idolatry, not using the Lord’s name in vain, and observing the
Sabbath Day.” Id.
“If the posted copies of the Ten Commandments are to have any effect at all, it will
be to induce the schoolchildren to read, meditate upon, perhaps to venerate and
obey, the Commandments. However desirable this might be as a matter of private
devotion, it is not a permissible state objective under the Establishment Clause.
It does not matter that the posted copies of the Ten Commandments are financed
by voluntary private contributions, for the mere posting of the copies under the
auspices of the legislature provides the “official support of the State ...
Government” that the Establishment Clause prohibits.” Id114
Only 17 years earlier, the Court had prohibited the daily reading of Bible verses and the Lord’s
Prayer in the public schools, despite the school district’s assertion of such secular purposes as
“the promotion of moral values, the contradiction to the materialistic trends of our times, the
perpetuation of our institutions and the teaching of literature.”115
So, with Bible reading and prayer banned and now the walls stripped of the Ten
Commandments, the schoolroom walls and minds were available for other materials upon which
the students could “meditate, venerate and obey. Soon vivid, graphic AIDS/HIV posters, sporting
images of condoms and sexy, lusting boys and girls appeared. Some posters graphically showed
children how to clean their drug-using needles, engage in anal and oral sodomy, how to apply a
dental dam on a young girl’s genital area and put a condom on a young boy’s phallus. Now this
was moral progress.116 The article reprinted below illustrates how the “sexual commandments”
have replaced the Ten Commandments in the nation’s classrooms.

Part VII: Sexually Transmitted Insanity (Reprint SALVO, Winter 2013)
How Our Public Schools Came to Promote a Social Disease
Not so long ago, American high-school students were educated in “sex hygiene.” They were
told, “Save the conjugal act for marriage or you’ll get horrid diseases; if you’re a girl, you might
become pregnant; and, boys, don’t marry an easy girl.” The lessons yielded low rates of STDs,
illegitimacy, abortions, fatherless households, welfare dependency and high rates of virginity
(even Hugh Hefner was a virgin in college) and social stability.117
But after World War II, a new “science” arose that transformed sex hygiene into an ally for the
sexual revolution. Leading the radicals was the closeted sexual psychopath, Professor Alfred C.
Kinsey, “the father of the sexual revolution.” Backed by Indiana University and the Rockefeller
Foundation, Kinsey’s pseudo-scientific claims in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948)
and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953) would displace the Judeo-Christian worldview
in sexual criminal law, public policy, medicine, art, and entertainment, and would lead to the
creation of a new “sex education” field.

The Infection
Kinsey’s books went viral and were translated into a dozen languages. According to Lena
Lennerhed, a professor of gender studies at Södertörn University near Stockholm, the Swedes
even spurned Freud for Kinsey during legislative debates in the 1960s:
"Alfred Kinsey . . . was the scientific authority. Kinsey’s rejection of Freud’s
sublimation theory was interpreted as an argument for the right among the young,
even teenagers, to have an unrestricted sex life . . . and evidence that traditional
moral standards were outdated and contrary to human nature."1 (emphasis added)
This opinion was parroted by professors everywhere. Newly minted college “sexperts”
began teaching wide-eyed students that sexual self-expression was healthy and that self-control
was repression and psychologically bad for you. By 1955, Kinsey’s sexual worldview had
shaped the American Law Institute’s Model Penal Code, which urged all 50 states to view our
sex laws as “outdated and contrary to human nature.” Conversely, the institute report spurred
lawyerly claims that “sex education” would reduce sex crimes and diseases.
Sexual libertinism became the leading scholarly opinion. In 1964, as New York
University began awarding degrees in “sexual health,” “brave pioneers”2 met at the Kinsey
Institute to allot “sex education” to the newly formed Sex Information and Education Council of
the U.S. (SIECUS). This organization joined with Planned Parenthood in attacking sexual
morality on a global scale. Both groups were funded by the Playboy Foundation to train children
about sexual “health.”
In 1968, a book by Kinsey’s co-author and sometime lover Wardell Pomeroy, Boys and
Sex, appeared as a school sex-ed text nationwide, normalizing sodomy, prostitution,
sadomasochism, and homosexuality. It even described bestiality as “a loving sexual relationship
with an animal.” Pomeroy advised children that “premarital intercourse does have its definite
values as a training ground.”3
The Disease
By the 1970s, public schools in the U.S. were flooded with radical sex “education.”
Thomas Sowell and others have noted that teen “pregnancies soared as ‘sex education’ spread
pervasively throughout the public schools.”4
This all helped to erode the barriers to legalized abortion, until Roe v. Wade wiped them
out in 1973. That same year, Planned Parenthood’s president, Alan Guttmacher, noted, “The only
avenue the International Planned Parenthood Federation and its allies could travel to win the
battle for abortion on demand is through sex education.”5
At that time, “sex positive” education rarely mentioned condoms, an omission that likely
helped lead to an increase in teen pregnancies that ended in abortion—which in turn increased
the “need” for more school sex education.

By 1974, Planned Parenthood was mass-distributing a booklet called “You’ve Changed
the Combination.” It was a full-blown, frontal assault on traditional American sexual morality,
including marriage. The authors told our children, “Sex is best between friends. . . . Have sexual
relationships only with friends. . . . If she’s young, always ask.” The booklet also normalized
homosexuality and ridiculed marriage: “Do you want a virgin to marry? Buy one. There are girls
in that business, too. Marriage is the price you’ll pay, and you’ll get the virgin. Very
Today, Planned Parenthood dominates public-school sex education. It battles every
attempt at abstinence education, for a resurgence in teen chastity would reduce teen pregnancies
and threaten Planned Parenthood’s lucrative abortion business and its pharmaceutical profits.
The Spread
Today, the United Kingdom seems to have run ahead of the U.S. in sex education, as
evidenced by a new program forced on British schoolchildren. It starts with seven-year-olds,
despite parents’ protests. One reporter tried to put a light spin on his description of an -animated
film shown to children at a village primary school: Among the saucy scenes that seared the
schoolchildren’s innocent eyes was one of a couple chasing each other around a bed before
knuckling down to some nookie. During the erotic action, a voice-over describes it as
In the film, a naked young boy and girl stand alongside a naked adult man and woman.
The woman slides over to the man as a voiceover says they think they like each other. Already
naked, they don’t sip tea and chat, but hop onto a bed where they have missionary-style sexual
intercourse (with red hearts floating above). The new friends then copulate woman atop. The
educators know that this film will shape children’s brains, minds, memories, imaginations, and
conduct. Some, tragically, will try out the “exciting” red-heart event on other children.
Sadly, they won’t be the first. In April 1997, the Washington Post reported that local
police had “ended their investigation into a sexual incident at a Southeast Washington
elementary school, concluding that a group of fourth-graders left unsupervised for up to an hour
on Monday had engaged in consensual sex.”
Moreover, since lowering children’s sexual inhibitions and introducing and
demonstrating sex to children are identified by the FBI as methods used by sexual predators to
“groom” prospective victims, some percentage of “sex educated” children will be more easily
seduced by predators.7
Groomed at younger and younger ages to be sexually active, the students of modern sex
education are being set up for exploitation by predators even as they are taught to exploit each
other. And they will continue to suffer the consequences. As long ago as 1994, even the
Guttmacher Institute acknowledged that approximately one in four sexually active teens were
contracting a sexually transmitted disease each year.8

The Cure
Today, the liberal AIDS Healthcare Foundation admits:
“The relatively conservative lifestyles that America practiced prior to the ’60s kept the number
of STDs at a much lower level than they are today. For the most part, 15-year-old kids were not
having as much sex as they are having today. And most adults did not have as many sexual
partners as they do now. . . . Nineteen million STD infections in the United States every year is a
staggering number.”9
You would think the solution, then, would be obvious. Yet the same author goes on to proclaim:
“The next sexual revolution has begun—it is the battle for sexual health. We have a right to a
sexual life that is as free from disease as it can possibly be. We know that the more sexual
partners we have, the more risk we are taking—that is a fact.”
We know that STDs will never disappear. However, society should take the business of
making sex safe as seriously as it does fighting the flu.
So what is the new plan? Well, more “condom promotion and distribution . . . and routine
screening” and, especially, “quality sex education.” In other words, more grooming for sexual
But isn’t doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results the
very definition of insanity?
Endnotes to Sexually Transmitted Insanity

Lena Lennerhed, “The Pursuit of Pleasure: Sexliberalism [sic] in Sweden in the 1960s”: Also see Lennerhed’s “Taking the Middle Way: Sex Education Debates in
Sweden in the Early Twentieth Century,” in Shaping Sexual Knowledge: A Cultural History of Sex Education
in Twentieth Century Europe, Lutz Sauerteig and Roger Davidson, eds. (Routledge, 2009).
3. Wardell Pomeroy, Boys and Sex (Delacorte Press, 1981), pp. 117, 171.
4. Thomas Sowell, “The Big Lie,” Forbes (Dec. 23, 1991), p. 5.
5. Alan Guttmacher quote of May 3, 1973, cited in Humanity (Aug./Sept. 1979), p. 11.
6. Metro News:
7. FBI testimony:
8. Sex and America’s Teenagers (Alan Guttmacher Institute, 1994).
9. AIDS Healthcare Foundation:

PART VIII Twenty-Three Law Journal Articles Cite Kinsey 2009 to 2012
A quick search of 2009 to 2012 law journal articles for reliance on Kinsey
These essays reveal a total of 23 articles citing to Kinsey’s work, with 22 of the 23 citing Kinsey
positively. There were five citations in 2012, showing that he continues to be a prominent source

for researchers. The search did not include secondary cites to Kinsey, such as Kinseyans and the
Kinsey-based 1955 Model Penal Code.
2012 Five Citations To Kinsey:
1. SEXUAL REORIENTATION Georgetown Law Journal April, 2012 100 Geo. L.J. 997
“…Alfred Kinsey founded the modern field of human sexuality studies.58 His chief
innovation was the “Kinsey scale,” which assessed sexual orientation along a continuum
from 0 to 6, where 0 denoted an orientation with exclusively heterosexual contacts and 6
denoted an orientation with exclusively homosexual contacts, and 1 through 5 denoted
shades of gray between exclusive heterosexuality to exclusive homosexuality….”
DEFAULT RULES, AND OVERRIDE RULES Georgetown Law Journal August,
2012 100 Geo. L.J. 1881 “Thus, the Kinsey reports of 1948 and 1953 documented that
Americans were no longer conforming their private behavior to the natural law ideal
reflected in the criminal law…”
3. ILLEGITIMACY AND SEX, OLD AND NEW American University Journal of
Gender, Social Policy and the Law 2012 20 Am. U. J. Gender Soc. Pol'y & L. 347
“Hence, for example, the casebook chapter on “The Problem of Illegitimacy” also
included excerpts from the Kinsey Reports surveying contemporary sexual behavior…”
BISEXUALITY San Diego Law Review Spring 2012 49 San Diego L. Rev. 415 “Social
conservatives seek to stifle these messages because--like Sigmund Freud, [FN400]
Margaret Mead, [FN401] Alfred Kinsey [FN402]--they perceive a causal relationship
between homophobic cultural ideals…”
5. REVIVING A CULTURE OF LIFE IN AMERICA Liberty University Law Review
Winter, 2012 6 Liberty U. L. Rev. 283 “Although the Model Penal Code was based on
flawed research from the Kinsey Institute, the liberalization trend still continued. [FN15]
“The Model Penal Code, which was based on faulty premises from Alfred Kinsey's
research, influenced the minority of states that liberalized abortion laws prior to Roe v.
Wade. Because liberalization in these few states influenced the Supreme Court, the
impact was felt in every state.” This is the only article of the 24 published between
2009 and 2012 which cites Kinsey’s findings as frauds.
6. THE SEARCH FOR RAPISTS' “REAL” MOTIVES Journal of Criminal Law and
Criminology Winter 2011 101 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 171 “After interviewing 5,300

American men, Kinsey et al. decided that adultery is due to the man's desire for a variety
of partners, “without respect to the satisfactory or unsatisfactory nature of the sexual
relations at home….”
Washington University Journal of Law & Policy 2011 35 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol'y 363 “In
the first project, sex research, Masters set out to break new ground beyond Alfred
Kinsey's collection of survey data about sex by conducting direct clinical observation…”
UCLA L. Rev. 1333. William N. Eskridge, Jr. “A dramatic breakthrough came in the
work of an Indiana University biologist, Professor Alfred Kinsey. His massive empirical
analysis of the sexual practices of white males (1948) and females (1953) revealed that
Americans engaged in a much greater variety of sexual practices (especially
Alaska Law Review June, 2010 27 Alaska L. Rev. 71 “Dr. Alfred Kinsey described
children's view of sexuality this way: [C]hildren have only a dim sense of adult sexuality.
What may seem like a horrible violation of social taboos from an adult perspective need
not be so to a child. A sexual experience with an adult may be something unusual,
vaguely unpleasant, even traumatic at the Moment, but not a horror story. Most children's
sexual experiences involve encounters with fondlers and exhibitionists, . . . and it is
difficult to understand why a child, except for its cultural conditioning, should be
disturbed *89 at having its genitals touched, or disturbed at seeing the genitals of other
persons. [FN125]”
ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM University of Baltimore Law Forum Fall 2010 41 U.
Balt. L.F. 43 “Sex-trafficking is a global problem….Kinsey's studies on sexual behavior
heightened awareness of the basic sexual tendencies of humans. Kinsey's findings
included that…”
AFFECTIONS Howard Law Journal Winter 2010 53 How. L.J. 377 “A Shift in

American Sentiment Toward Adultery… One of the first studies to reveal the extent of
extramarital affairs in America was a report by Dr. Alfred Kinsey, a zoologist at Indiana
University, along with a group of researchers.”
DON'T TELL” Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Minority Issues Spring 2010 12
SCHOLAR 551 “Alfred C. Kinsey et al., Sexual Behavior in the Human Male 623
(1948). The distinction between persons who have engaged in homosexual activity and
persons who are “homosexual” was noted.
IN THE MILITARY San Diego Law Review November-December 2010 47 San Diego
L. Rev. 1161 “In the early 1950s, Alfred Kinsey's study of sexual activity reported that
one-half of married men and one-fourth of married women committed adultery sometime
in their married lives….”
14. ADVERTISING AND SOCIAL IDENTITY Buffalo Law Review July, 2010 58 Buff.
L. Rev. 931 “There is a great deal of evidence that individuals typically feel both
heterosexual and homosexual impulses, just at different levels, which can fluctuate with
time and experience.138 See ALFRED C. KINSEY ET AL...”
2009 43 Suffolk U. L. Rev. 89 “…This was in a way, my way, as an Australian, of
paying back a debt that I had for the research that Alfred Kinsey performed in the 1940s
and ‘50s. Amazing to think of it, that this expert in the taxonomy of bees (gall wasps)
should turn his attention, midlife, to the taxonomy of human beings. Kinsey's work rang
around the world, and when I was a young boy reaching puberty, a word of Kinsey's
research, his report on sexuality in the human male, sexuality in the human female,
brought me a message in far away Australia that I was not alone. And it brought that
message, in part, because of Kinsey, but, in part, because of the great constitutional
traditions of this country. Kinsey was defended by the president of Indiana University, a
wonderful scholar named Herman Wells….” [Kirby, retired chief justice of Australia’s
Supreme Court] (Emphasis added)
SEXUAL PRIVACY Fordham Law Review May, 2009 77 Fordham L. Rev. 2997
“Many contemporary reports of American sexuality still cite data collected by Dr. Alfred
Kinsey in the late 1930s through the early 1950s; his methodology has since been

questioned, and regardless, the America he surveyed is vastly different than that of
today….”(Emphasis added)
AND LOVE Harvard Law Review March, 2009 122 Harv. L. Rev. 1307 “These
numbers may well understate the prevalence of same-sex desire and experience, as other
studies find higher rates,108 See, e.g., The Kinsey Institute, Data from Alfred Kinsey's
Studies, (last visited Feb. 8, 2009)
(summarizing data from Alfred C. Kinsey et al., Sexual Behavior in the Human Male
(1998) (1948); Alfred C. Kinsey et al., Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1998)
(1953) (reporting that 37% of males had had at least one same-sex experience to orgasm
and that 13% of women had had such an experience)).” (Emphasis added)
SEXUAL PSYCHOPATH LAWS Louisiana Law Review Spring, 2009 69 La. L. Rev.
549 “…Perhaps the most notable report on the issue was prepared by the New Jersey
Commission on Sex Crimes. On March 10, 1949, the New Jersey Senate created a
commission to study sex crimes….[inviting] internationally known experts like Morris
Ploscowe, Dr. Alfred Kinsey, and Edwin H. Sutherland to participate. The New Jersey
Commission concluded that there were not tens of thousands of homicidal sex fiends.”
“”It has been carefully estimated by Dr. Kinsey that not more than 5 percent of our
convicted sex offenders are of a dangerous variety, exercising force or injury upon a
victim. Crime reports support this finding.””51 “In 1955, Dr. Albert Kinsey spoke at the
Congress of Correction-a four day meeting sponsored by the American Correctional
Association in Des Moines, Iowa. Kinsey said that there was no evidence of either an
increase or a decrease in sex crimes over the last fifty years.52 In his influential 1951
book, Sex and the Law, Morris Ploscowe…wrote: ““Most sex offenders are charged with
relatively minor crimes. They are not for the most part degenerate sex fiends who are
potential killers. Nor are they individuals with persistent patterns of illicit sexual activity
who graduate from minor crimes to atrocious major offenses.””54 “….Ploscowe noted
that of 2,366 indictments for rape, just 418 of them (18%) were for forcible rape whereas
the remaining 1,948 (82%) were for statutory rape (sex with a minor under the age of
18).55 Ploscowe stressed the importance of this distinction” saying “If most rapes simply
involve consensual acts of sexual intercourse with under-age girls they are not the
product of degenerates…” [Ploscowe offered no proofs of child consent and no data on
ages of victims]. (Emphasis added)
Review December, 2009 97 Cal. L. Rev. 1785 “No systematic evidence existed to
support any of these beliefs, which were actually inconsistent with empirical studies such

as the famous Kinsey Reports on the sex lives of American men (1948) and women
(1953)….”63 (Emphasis added)
20. HETEROSEXUALITY AND TITLE VII Northwestern University Law Review
Winter 2009 103 Nw. U. L. Rev. 205 “Rather than attempt to do so here, it suffices to
note that since Kinsey's work on sexuality, the academic study of homosexuality has
flourished. See Alfred C. Kinsey et al., Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953)…”
(Emphasis added)
HISTORY OF THE CRIMINAL LAW COURSE Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law
Fall, 2009 7 Ohio St. J. Crim. L. 217, “See, e.g., Alfred C. Kinsey et al., Sexual Behavior
in the Human Male (1948); Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy, Sex the Measure of All Things: A
Life of Alfred C. Kinsey (Indiana University Press 2000) (1998).” (Emphasis added)
GAY LITIGATION IN THE 1950S-1970S Yale Law Journal November, 2009 119
Yale L.J. 316 “…arguing that “[t]here is, in truth, no definitely definable and distinct
group of human beings classifiable as ‘homosexuals' set apart from the rest of the
population.”68 Rather, citing Alfred Kinsey's work, the petitioner claimed that
“‘homosexual’ is not a characteristic of a small, isolated, group of people, but is a type
of sexual activity or propensity which directly affects and [o]ccurs in the lives of vast
proportions of our population.”69 (Emphasis added)
MODERN ERA Northern Kentucky Law Review 2009 36 N. Ky. L. Rev. 1 “…A
Definitive Survey 176 (Warner Books, 1994) (incidence of female homosexuality is
1.4%); Alfred Kinsey, Sexual Behavior and the Human Male 623 (W.B. Saunders Co.
1948) (data indicates that at least 37% of the male population has engaged in homosexual
behavior between adolescence and old age)….” (Emphasis added)

Part IX: Can Courts Enjoin Factually False, Injurious Sex Ed Curricula?
The Lindevaldsen Legal Theory
In conclusion, cultural and legal activities that support heterosexuality and chastity before
marriage and faithfulness during are deemed, on the data, to support the healthiest and thus
happiest children. So, actions that support normative sexuality and that investigate the causes of
dis-orientations are encouraged. In what can be called “the Lindevaldsen Legal Theory,” some
conversation would wisely center on reversing the criminally fraudulent Kinsey-based sexuality

training found as a variety of labels (“Bullying,” “Hate Crimes” “Diversity” “Title IX,” “Sex
Ed,” “AIDS Prevention” etc.).
Schools repeatedly testify that they are providing “factual and medically accurate” information to
our children. Therefore, if it is proven that school districts are conveying fraudulent and
medically inaccurate information, even grounded in crimes against children--that jeopardizes the
health and safety of its students, would this satisfy the four-factor test,” outlined below?
Since the studies establish that millions of children are acting out sexually harmful materials to
their detriment, should not these, using the Supreme Court’s reasoning in Stone be removed as it
is clear schoolchildren “read, meditate upon, perhaps to venerate and obey,” the sexual
commandments on why and how to masturbate, alone or with others, how to commit oral and
anal sodomy, how to fornicate, (in some educational materials even with animals)? For, the mere
posting of the copies showing of the sex videos, reading of the sex books, under the auspices of
the legislature provides the official support of the State to these sexually harmful activities.
Professor Lindevaldsen asks, cannot the courts “Enjoin Factually Inaccurate [Fraudulent,
Criminally Derived] Curricula”? One wonders, could this rise to the level of a juvenile class
action lawsuit?
According to well-established principles of equity, a plaintiff seeking a permanent
injunction must satisfy a four-factor test before a court may grant the requested
relief. 195 A plaintiff must demonstrate: (1) that it has suffered an irreparable
injury; (2) that remedies available at law, such as monetary damages, are
inadequate to compensate for that injury; (3) that, considering the balance of
hardships between the plaintiff and defendant, a remedy in equity is warranted;
and (4) that the public interest would not be disserved by a permanent injunction.
196 A situation where school districts are conveying factually and medically
inaccurate information that jeopardizes the health and safety of its students should
satisfy the four-factor test.
In those states that affirmatively require schools to provide medically and
factually accurate sexual information concerning same-sex attractions, plaintiffs
should be entitled to permanent injunctive relief in connection with an action that
seeks a declaratory judgment that the curriculum violates the statutory
requirements. Given the staggering health risks associated with same-sex sexual
activity, particularly among vulnerable, undeveloped youths, plaintiffs can
demonstrate that a statistically demonstrable percentage of youths will suffer
irreparable injury if the curriculum is not enjoined. As to the second factor, the
harm that ensues as a result of children engaging in perilous sexual activity due to
repeated exposure to false school sexual “education” could not adequately be
compensated monetarily. For these same reasons, equity and child welfare weighs
in favor of granting the injunction and enjoining the sexually toxic curriculum-schools simply have no legitimate right to provide harmful sex instruction to

naive students. Finally, the public interest is served through a judicial order that
protects youth from being trained to embrace hazardous sexual behavior.118
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.119

Draft Endnotes
THE DATA: In this report “NATURAL” defines a male-female (“traditional”) marriage not necessarily a
“sacramental” Catholic marriage that requires prior baptism of both the bride and groom.
Politics: A treatise on Government, Chapter VII, p, 36 and see XI p. 89.
Aristotle, On Interpretation, translated by E. M. Edghill,,
see also Aristotle's Logic, “Definitions and Essences,” 2000; Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Ed., Edward
“Normalcy,” Dr. Charles King “that which functions according to its design,” 1945, "The Meaning of Normal." Yale
J. of Biology and Medicine, 18, 493-501. See also Samuel Nigro, MD. The Soul of the Earth, Xlibiris Corp, KY,
2012, p. 84.
dis-(n.d.). dis·o·ri·ent ; to cause to lose one's way…to confuse
by removing or obscuring something that has guided a person, group, or culture, as customs, moral standards,
etc....Psychiatry. to cause to lose perception of time, place, or one's personal identity.

If support data are needed read historical documents; a good review is William and Ariel Durant, The
Story of Civilization, Simon and Schuster. Publication date, 1935–1975, 1980, 1993, etc.


Cultures where girls are given as child brides also hold to virginity as critical but no such society has evolved to
provide a life of prosperity for ordinary people.
[T]the biological basis of fear,” US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health retrieved 10831
records; Fear Conditioning: How the Brain Learns about Danger, The Neurobiological Basis of Anxiety and
Fear: Circuits, Mechanisms, and Neurochemical Interactions, I,
etc. There is a huge scientific body of work, from Darwin to today, establishing the life-saving properties of
fear, as a key protection for animals and humans; eradicating fear in sex is scientifically unjustified and
“Sex Offender Laws Are Based On Rage and Fear,”, 2012; “HIV
Law is Based on Fear and Sexual Taboos,”, Unitarian Universalism, May
17, 2008,“Public Safety,”, retrieved 12/19/2012; etc…
Alfred Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior in the Human Male in 1948 is recognized in books, popular and scholarly
articles and legal arguments as the launch of the “sexual revolution,” and a Google search for Kinsey as the
“father of the sexual revolution” yielded 90,000 immediate hits, January 7, 2912.
Clellan Ford and Frank Beach, Forward to Patterns of Sexual Behavior New York: Harper, Hoeber Medical
Division, 1951. In 1949 The Yale Cross-Cultural Survey was christened the Human Relations Area Files, a
classier label than a “survey.”
Bronislaw Malinowski, The Sexual Life of Savages, republished, Beacon Press, Boston, Mass, 1987, see
discussions of “Katuyauski” parties.
13 Ford and Beach, Ibid, p. 183.
Lloyd DeMause, “The Universality of Incest,” The Journal of Psychohistory, Fall 1991, Vol. 19, No. 2 .
DeMause, Ibid.



Thomas Maugh, (2008-12-18). "D. Carleton Gajdusek dies at 85; Nobel Prize winner identified exotic
disease, was unrepentant pedophile". Los Angeles Times.,0,7539125,full.story. Retrieved 2012-05-12.
Scores of credible books document failed utopias: See
See Chapter 8, “Kinsey and the Law” in Judith Reisman, Kinsey, Crimes and Consequences, Institute for Media
Education (2011).
See “Nordic Institute Closed” This multi-governmental agreement determined the gender research invalid.
Reisman, Kinsey, Crimes and Consequences, Ibid, pp. 187 to 261.
Kinsey, Pomeroy, Martin and Gebhard, Sexual Behavior in the Human Female, W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia,
1953. “Satisfactory increases of figures on the homosexual cannot be obtained by any technique short of a
carefully planned population survey... every segment of the total population,” p. 618. Kinsey states that they
have data in the Male volume on “1200 persons who have been convicted of sex offenses,” p. 392. Elsewhere
the figure is 1,400, etc.
Antonin Scalia and Bryan Garner, Making Your Case, Thomas/West, St. Paul, MN., 2008, p. 124.
See PART VIII in this document of 24 Law Journal Articles Cite Kinsey 2009 to 2012; 650 law journal citations
from 1982-2000, and over 100 between 2000 and 2009; a full search is underway.


26 Collected between 1995 and 1997, the prevalence (%) is estimated from the entire ACE Study
sample (n=17,337). The ACE report asked, "How often did anyone at least 5 years older than you or an adult,
ever touch you sexually?" etc. The subtext, molestation by someone less than 5 years older, etc, is viewed by
the sexually liberated as 'normal', harmless “peer” sex experimentation?
27 “The Health Effects of Childhood Abuse: Four Pathways by
which Abuse Can Influence Health,” Kathleen Kendall-Tackett, Family Research Laboratory, University of
New Hampshire Child Abuse and Neglect 2002, Vol. 6/7, 715-730
Kendall-Tackett, ibid, “Gay and bisexual men with a history of child sexual abuse were more likely to have
unprotected anal intercourse, and had a two- fold increase in the prevalence of HIV infection compared with gay
and bisexual men who had not been sexually abused (Bartholow et al., 1994; Zierler, Feingold, Laufer, Velentgas,
Krantrowitz-Gordon, & Mayer, 1991). Carballo-Dieguez and Dolezal (1995) reported similar findings in their
study of Puerto Rican homosexuals. Men who had been sexually abused before age 13 participated in anal
sodomy absent condoms more than men “who had not been sexually abused before age 13.”
CDC Reports on Youthful Sexuality,
Indeed, this blame is now being extended to pedophile and pederasts. Handedness in pedophilia and hebephilia
December 9, 1991, Judge Oliver Gasch ruled in favor of the Department of Defense in Steffan v. Cheney.
Reisman, Ibid, Chapter 8, “Kinsey’s Impact on American Law” for 650 law journal citations from 1982-2000,
more forthcoming post publication; 1948-1982 cites were not from the database but from earlier library
CDC Ibid, p. 5.
See Part VII: Sexually Transmitted Insanity (Reprint SALVO, Winter 2013).
See APPENDIX, Reisman, Restructuring the Immature Brain, The Institute for Media Education &
California Protective Parents, Assoc., DRAFT 2008
See Judith Reisman, “Crafting Bi/Homosexual Youth” for more detail, but as is discussed in this report one major
marker is early sexual abuse, commonly “same sex” but heterosexual abuse is also implicated, 14 Regent U. L.
ge. See also
CDC, Ibid, p. 29.
CDC, Ibid, p.10.
Depo-Provera side effects: multiple sources, e.g.;, etc.
CDC, p. 29.


July 2000, the NIBRS “Sexual Assault of Young Children as Reported to Law Enforcement Victim, Incident, and
Offender Characteristics, A NIBRS Statistical Report,” estimated child sex abuse to the general population from
a base of 12 states. “[O]ver two-thirds (67%) of all victims of sexual assault reported to law enforcement
agencies, were juveniles under the age of 18 at the time of the crime. More than half of all juvenile victims were
under age 12.That is, 33%, of all victims of sexual assault reported to law enforcement were ages 12 through 17
and 34% were under age 12.” And, “14% of all victims…were under age 6.” Id., p. 2. Id., NIBRS, p. 4.
(Emphasis added).
Reisman, Ibid, “Crafting Bi/Homosexual Youth.”
44 See tobacco
funding for CDC lead researcher.
One Teenager In 10 (Ann Heron ed., 1983). This is a classic sexually explicit text, commonly given to children
confused and or curious about sex, Citations are to pages 60, 33-34, 48-49 and 67.
Planned Parenthood;
D A. Pollard, "Sex Torts" (March 16, 2006). bepress Legal Series. bepress Legal Series.Working Paper 1148.
Dr. Fred Berlin, co-founder of the Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic also called the Sexual Behavior
Consultation Unit, now dubbed the Gender Identity Clinic, argues for a constitutional “right” for men to
sodomize each other. Matt Barber writes, “In his characteristically brilliant dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia
forecast exactly what’s happened in the decade since [Lawrence v. Texas]: “State laws against bigamy, samesex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality and obscenity are likewise
sustainable only in light of Bowers’ validation of laws based on moral choices,” he wrote. “Every single one of
these laws is called into question by today’s decision.” See
Heritage Foundation report, Marriage: America’s Greatest Weapon Against Child Poverty Robert Rector
September 16, 2010 states, to “strengthen marriage, it is vital that at-risk populations clearly understand the
benefits of marriage and the costs and consequences of non-marital childbearing.”
Heritage, Ibid.
See for example, Carolyn Adler, “God’s Law the Foundation of Free Government”
The Walter-von-Baeyer-Society for Ethics in Psychiatry (GEP), the former “German Association on the Political
Abuse of Psychiatry,“ member of the former International Association on the Political Use of Psychiatry
Study by Douglas W. Allen and Maggie Gallagher, “Does Divorce Law Affect The Divorce Rate? A Review Of
Empirical Research, 1995-2006,” Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, 2007, p. 18.
Newsweek, “The Sin of Yielding to Impure Desire.” “In 1964, Mary Calderone, a physician who had been the
medical director at Planned Parenthood, founded the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the
United States (SIECUS). SIECUS was created in part to challenge the hegemony of the American Social
Hygiene Association, which then dominated sex-education curriculum development. In 1968, The U.S. Office
of Education gave New York University a grant to develop graduate programs for training sex-education
teachers.” (October 27, 2009).
American Experience, “The Pill,”
Wardell Pomeroy, Dr. Kinsey and The Kinsey Institute for Sex Research, Yale University Press, 1982, p. 72.
Writing to Breland in the autumn of 1940, Kinsey describes his prison work and says: “More important...these
histories are giving me a look-in on a lower social level, and the patterns of sexual behavior are totally different
from those of college students. After all, our college students constitute less than 1% of the population and it is
the great mass of the population which is reported in the group that I am now working.” In the Yale University
reprint the % is corrected to read “[actually it was about 5%].”
See and .com for a list of her books, articles and documentaries:



Wardell Pomeroy, Dr. Kinsey and The Kinsey Institute for Sex Research, Yale University Press, 1982, p. 72.
Writing to Breland in the autumn of 1940, Kinsey describes his prison work and says: “More important...these
histories are giving me a look-in on a lower social level, and the patterns of sexual behavior are totally different
from those of college students. After all, our college students constitute less than 1% of the population and it is
the great mass of the population which is reported in the group that I am now working.” In the Yale University
reprint the % is corrected to read “[actually it was about 5%].”
Jon M. Shepard, Cengage Advantage Books: Sociology, date etc, see also, Child Trends DataBank 2002; U.S.
Bureau of the Census 2007c, etc.
61 Historical Marriage Trends from 1890-2010: A Focus on Race Differences, SEHSD Working Paper Number
Re: family breakdown: “The prison population grew by 700 percent from 1970 to 2005,” outpacing crime and
population growth 1 in every 15 African American men and 1 in every 36 Hispanic men are incarcerated in
comparison to 1 in every 106 white men… one in three black men can expect to go to prison in their lifetime.”
John Parker, Sex, Lies, & Pornography in Black America,
65 Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study Fact Sheet, accessed at:
66 Fragile Families, Ibid.
67 Fragile Families, Ibid.
68 Fragile Families, Ibid.
69 Fragile Families, Ibid.
70 Fragile Families, Ibid.
Judith Reisman, How the FBI and DoJ Minimize Child Sex Abuse Reporting, 2002, David Finkelhor, Sexually Victimized Children, Free Press, 1979, p. 122.
Heritage, Ibid.
73 Fragile Families, Ibid.
Attachment The State Factor: Restoring Legal Protections for Women and Children, last two pages flow charts.
See full collection of Reisman’s book with extensive citations to the large body of research on this issue.
See “You’ve Changed the Combination” Planned Parenthood, Rocky Mountain, Colorado, 1974,
See “You’ve Changed the Combination” Planned Parenthood, Rocky Mountain, Colorado, 1974,
Judith Reisman, “Soft” porn plays hardball Its Tragic Effects on Women, Children and the Family, Huntington
House, LA, 1991.
See Part VII, SALVO.
Judith Reisman, APA: Pedophilia On The March, Http://Www.Wnd.Com/1999/06/2777 and, 1999.
New Studies Challenge Established Views About Development of Children Raised by Gay or Lesbian Parents
June 7, 2012
New Studies, Ibid.
The Institute of Marriage and Family Canada, June 20, 2012,
Mark Regnerus, Social Science Research, Volume 41, Issue 4, July 2012, The Study, pp. 752–770.

Crafting Bi/Homosexual Youth,
Crafting Bi/Homosexual Youth,
Crafting Bi/Homosexual Youth,
Regent University Law Review [Vol. 14:283, p. 300,
Crafting Gay/Bi Youth,



Ibid, http://www.slate.
Regnerus study by Jason Richwine, Ph.D. and Jennifer A. Marshall, October 2, 2012.
The Regnerus study
Mark Regnerus. "How different are the adult children of parents who have same-sex relationships? Findings from
the New Families Structure Study." Social Science Research 41, no 4 (July 2012): 752-770.
Douglas Abbott,
M. Regnerus / Social Science Research 41 (2012) 752–770, see also, Michael Shepherd,
M. Regnerus / Social Science Research 41 (2012) 752-770 see also,
The Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect, Ibid, See also citation in

David Finkelhor, Sexually Victimized Children, The Free Press, 1979, p. 122.
Nadine Hartley, Yahoo! Contributor Network, “Disturbing Reports of Infant Rape Continue as the Public and
Government Ignore Our Babies.” January 29, 2010. See full report citations.
Barbara Huberman, RN, MEd, Director of Education and Outreach October 2002, Advocates for Youth, Huberman is on the Advisory Committee for the
National Sexuality Education Standards: Core Content and Skills, K-12.
Erectile tissue is also found in the nose (turbinates), ear, urethral sponge and perineal sponge.[2]
A full bladder as triggering erection is defined as a 'reflex erection' -- located in the sacral nerves (S2-S4) of the
spinal cord. Phil Klebine; Linda Lindsey (May 2007). "Sexual Function for Men with Spinal Cord Injury". Spinal
Birmingham. Retrieved 2011-12-17.
Judith A. Reisman, et al., Kinsey, Sex and Fraud: The Indoctrination of a People, 1990, Lafayette LA:
Huntington House, p. 129 check see footnote 18 on Dr. Mary Calderone’s “fetal erection.”
Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 103 [(Friday, July 12, 1996)] “’As Judith A. Reisman and Edward
W. Eichel point out in their 1990 expose Kinsey, Sex and Fraud, “It is Kinsey's work which established the
notion of `normal' childhood sexual desire''--a notion that, as their book documents, was field-tested on the
bodies of hundreds of children, most of them boys, in ways that might today be considered imprisonable
offenses,’” and Mary Eberstadt, The Weekly Standard, June 17, 1996.
Daniel Tsang, editor, The Age Taboo: Gay Male Sexuality, Power and Consent, AIyson Publication, Gay Men’s
Press, Boston, 1981, p. 96, 98. (Emphasis added)

Stone v. Graham; .

Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 223 (1963).


One of many such California and other state School Posters, “Los Angeles, Gay and Lesbian
Community Services Center (GLCSC) Youth Services Drew University Community Education
Project, etc., LA Free Clinic (213) 462-4158.”


Phyllis and Eberhard Kronhausen, Sex Histories of American College Men, Ballantine Books, New York, 1960,
pp. 219, 255, 262.
Rena M. Lindevaldsen “Holding Schools Accountable For Their Sex-Ed Curricula,” Liberty University Law
Review, Summer, 2011, 5 Liberty U. L. Rev. 463.
Lindevaldsen, Ibid.