Why States Should Outlaw Homosexual 'Marriage' and Homosexual 'Civil Unions'

The Battle Over Marriage

Baker v. Nelson, Supreme Court of Minnesota,
191 N.W.2d 185, 1971

In finding against homosexual plaintiffs the state Supreme Court judge said: "The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis."

Marriage is the foundation of any civil society. Before God established civil government, He established the family, starting with a man and a woman united in a lifelong commitment of fidelity. It is by His design that men and women become one in holy matrimony and express their intimacy by procreating and raising up children to be stewards of God's blessings when they are gone. Civil law does not arbitrarily create marriage as the Massachusetts Supreme Court suggested in November, it simply acknowledges this fundamental institution of humanity that predates all civil laws and governments. Society creates benefits for marriage because marriage has important benefits for society; stable marriages are the building block upon which nations and societies are built. If the brick crumbles, the building falls regardless of how grand its design. The state's interest in protecting this sacred, universal institution is self-evident.

Marriage is under assault today in America. The Massachusetts Supreme Court has joined Vermont in declaring that the Constitution allows homosexual couples to have the same marriage benefits in society as heterosexual couples. San Francisco has defied the law of the land and issued marriage licenses to homosexual couples. A Harris/CNN/Time poll in July 2003 found that 60% of Americans oppose "homosexual marriage," while only 33% support it. Most Americans would never extend marriage benefits to same-sex couples - only an unelected, unaccountable, unrestrained judicial tyranny can do that. State leaders must be proactive to defend traditional marriage from the liberal activist judges who conspire to cripple an institution they consider to be patriarchal and archaic.

There are two key reasons why the legal rights and benefits of marriage should not be extended to homosexuals. The first is that a homosexual relationship is not a marriage, and never can be. This truth is self-evident, but will be made clearer through the course of this article. The second is that homosexual relationships are harmful. Not only do they not provide the same benefits to society as traditional marriages, but their consequences are far more negative than positive.

What do I mean by "the laws of nature"? When we use an object in accordance with its design, we benefit from its use, and its potential is realized. When an object is abused contrary to its design, harm results; for example, if we were to eat soup with a shovel and dig a ditch with a spoon, injury would result. Those objects would not see their potential, and we would harm ourselves in the process. Homosexuals violate the laws of nature; they practice acts that are contrary to their design. As would be expected, harm is the result: psychological, physical, and social harm - not only to themselves, but to children and to society in general.

One doesn't have to read the Bible to know God's purposes for sex, or which environment is best suited for the raising of children. Nature teaches us these things. The ideal home for the raising up of children is under the care of a mother and a father, complementary parts of humanity, each with unique contributions to the development of children. Nature teaches us God's design for sex and marriage and sanctions violators with misery, disease, and untimely death - study after study confirms these unalterable truths.

Ohio recently joined thirty-seven states that have passed a Defense of Marriage Act. We must do what is right and necessary to protect marriage and "the laws of nature and nature's God" from this relentless ideological attack. Unfortunately, with an activist bench-legislating Federal judiciary that regularly overrules the will of the people and defies the Constitution, the DOMAs passed all over America are one gavel-slam away from the dumpster behind the state houses. Congress has the Constitutional authority to rein in this runaway judiciary by impeaching law-breaking judges, and we must not let them shirk from this duty.

I am a family practice physician with four years' experience caring for both homosexuals and heterosexuals. I have witnessed firsthand the physical, social, and psychological carnage of illicit sexual perversion, and I come armed with three testimonies of three patients.

Three Homosexual Patients

In order to demonstrate the harmful nature of the homosexual lifestyle, allow me to tell you about three patients whom I have given the pseudonyms, Joe, Shannon, and Bob. Each of these stories is true to the best of my recollection. I present their stories to you in an attempt to show you that the homosexual lifestyle is intrinsically unnatural, pathological, and harmful. The pathology I discovered in these four homosexuals is the norm in the homosexual community, as the studies I have documented reveal.

In the debate in the Ohio House of Representatives over the Defense of Marriage Act, there was concern that discussion of the negative affects of homosexuality was irrelevant to the Defense of Marriage Act that was being debated. To argue so reveals that many have missed the connection between the harmful, depreciating effects of homosexual relationships and the state's interest in the institution of marriage. It is in the interest of the state government to defend the unique legitimacy of traditional marriage because that which the activist judiciary is proposing - granting marriage benefits to same-sex couples - is harmful to individuals, to the institution of marriage, and to society as a whole. It is in the interest of the state to not allow homosexual perversion to be endorsed under the cloak of law, and statesmen should not neglect their duty to uphold the law of nature and nature's God in the face of the brazen judicial tyranny that threatens it.

Joe

Joe arrives in my office with his male lover. Joe is a 25-year-old man who is on disability for psychological illness. During the course of my examination, I discover Joe is being verbally abused and I suspect physical abuse. But this relationship, as all of his others have been, is brief. The second time Joe comes to my office, he's left his lover and moved on to another.

Statistically, Joe's promiscuity is not atypical for homosexuals, and this highlights the inordinate affections that characterize homosexuality. The median number of partners for homosexuals is four times higher than for heterosexuals.[1] Drs. Bell and Weinberg, in their classic study of homosexuality, found that 43% of white male homosexuals had sex with 500 or more partners, with 28% having 1,000 or more sex partners.[2],[3] In Paul Van de Ven's study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in Journal of Sex Research, he found that "the modal range for number of sexual partners [of homosexuals] was 101-500," with roughly 15% of subjects having had greater than 500 partners and roughly another 15% having had greater than 1000 partners.

The same holds true for homosexual couples that profess to be in committed relationships. In The Male Couple, authors McWhirter and Mattison report that in a study of 156 males in homosexual relationships lasting from one to thirty-seven years, "Only seven couples have a totally exclusive sexual relationship, and these men all have been together for less than five years. Stated another way, all couples with a relationship lasting more than five years have incorporated some provision for outside sexual activity in their relationships." [4] By contrast, studies reveal that 75% of heterosexual men and 90% of heterosexual women remain faithful for the duration of their life.[5]

Among homosexual men in particular, casual sex, rather than committed relationships, is the rule and not the exception. The rare committed relationships in the homosexual community are of relatively short duration. For example, a study of homosexual men in the Netherlands, the first country in the world to legalize marriage for homosexuals, found that the average length of "steady partnerships" was less than two years.[6] Even homosexual men in "steady partnerships" had an average of eight "casual" sex partners per year. (Those without a "steady partner" had an average of 22 "casual" sex partners annually.)

Male homosexuals tend to be more promiscuous because of the general make-up of men and women. Generally speaking, all men need to have sex is a place, but women require commitment, intimacy, conversation, and romance. God made men that way to make sure sex happens in spite of the financial obligations that frequently fall heavier on the men in the raising of children, and he made women that way to ensure that the emotional bonds between husband and wife are strong to ensure longevity of the relationship. The tension is beautiful! But when two men are sexually active together, what do you imagine is the result? We should not be surprised that an inordinate amount of promiscuity is typical in the male homosexual community.

Domestic abuse is also extraordinarily common in the homosexual population. Statistics reveal gays to be the biggest "gay-bashers."[7] A study in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence examined conflict and violence in lesbian relationships: the researchers found that 31% reported one or more incidents of physical abuse.[8] In a survey of 1,099 lesbians, "slightly more than half of the [lesbians] reported that they had been abused by a female lover/partner."[9] A national survey of lesbians published in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology found that 37% had been physically abused and 32% had been raped or sexually attacked. Seventy-five percent of the nearly 2,000 respondents had pursued psychological counseling of some kind, many for treatment of long-term depression. Moreover, it has been calculated that "the incidence of domestic violence among gay men is nearly double that in the heterosexual population."[10]

Many of the "hate crimes" that concern anti-violence activists are in fact gay-on-gay crimes. Into this category fall many "pick-up murders," so called because they are committed by troubled men who pick up strangers in bars, go home with them for sex, and then rob and kill them.[11] "Intimate partner violence" between people of the same sex is approximately twenty times more common than anti-homosexual "hate crimes."

A Chicago police officer interviewed in a book on police officers said: "As far as passionate crimes... the homosexuals are the ones that come to mind for really throwing themselves into their work, so to speak. You generally find the most ferocious crimes are homosexual."[12]

As further evidence of the abusive and violent nature of homosexuality, consider the inordinate percentage of homosexuals that comprise the top mass murderers in our nation's history. The leading serial killers in the United States are all homosexuals! Imagine the outcry if it were shown that born-again evangelical "homophobes" were the top mass murderers in history! But, no, they were all homosexuals: Donald Harvey (37 murders), John Wayne Gacy (33 murders), Patrick Wayne Kearney (32 murders), Bruce Davis (28 murders), Dean Corli, Elmer Wayne Henley, David Owen Brooks (27 murders), Juan Corona (25 murders), Jeffrey Dahmer (17 murders), Stephen Kraft (16 murders), William Bonin (14 murders).[13] A study of 518 sex-related mass murders in the U.S. from 1966 to 1983 determined that 68% of the victims were killed by homosexuals and that 44% of the murderers were bisexuals or homosexuals.[14]

The modern world record for serial killing is held by a Russian homosexual, Andrei Chikatilo, who was convicted in 1992 of raping, murdering and eating parts of at least 21 boys, 17 women and 14 girls. The pathology of eating one's sexual victims also characterized Milwaukee's Jeffrey Dahmer in 1992. He not only killed 17 young men and boys, but cooked and ate their body parts.

The association between serial murder and homosexuality isn't recent. Two gays compete for the spot of "world's worst murderer." During the Nazi reign of terror, Auschwitz executioner Ludwig Tiene strangled, crushed, and gnawed boys and young men to death while he raped them. Though his grand total is uncertain, he often murdered as many as 100 daily. Gilles de Rais (Bluebeard) brutally destroyed the lives of 800 boys. Each lad was lured to his home, bathed, and fed. Then the boy was raped, then killed by being cut to pieces and either burned or eaten. What is it about homosexuality that makes them comprise most of the top of the list of the worst, sickest mass murders in history?

Joe's psychological illness is also not atypical in the homosexual community, and this also should not be a surprise to us if homosexuality is a self-depreciating abomination that the Bible reveals it to be. In contrast to the results of the vote of the American Psychological Association in 1973 that resulted in homosexuality being removed from the list of psychiatric diagnoses, the majority of the A.P.A.'s membership continued to view homosexuality as pathological. "...More than 3,700 psychiatrists ...in the U.S. believed that there were no legitimate scientific reasons for the American Psychiatric Association's change in fundamental psychiatric theory" when they took homosexuality off of the D.S.M. III's list of sexual-psychological abnormalities. "In a poll of 10,000 psychiatrists ...in 1977, of which 2,500 replies were received, approximately 68% believed that homosexuality was a pathological adaptation [as opposed to a normal variation]."[15]

Research evidence reported in the Archives of General Psychiatry concluded that gay, lesbian, and bisexual people were at a much higher risk for mental illness, specifically suicidality, major depression, conduct disorder, substance abuse, and anxiety disorder.[16] The rate of bulimia is about 15 times higher in homosexuals than it is in the population in general.

Joe's suicidal tendencies are also not atypical in the homosexual community. One carefully conducted study found suicide attempts among homosexuals were six times greater than the average.[17] Another study revealed that men with same-sex partners were 6.5 times as likely as their co-twins to have attempted suicide. [18] The higher rate was not explained, however, by the subjects' mental-health or substance-abuse disorders.

Said Drs. Weinberg and Bell: "'Some notes on Suicide'... In more than 50% of the cases studied, homosexual tendencies were uncovered."[19]

Rebuttal: "Homophobic discrimination is to blame for the high suicide rates among gays. If the government recognized equal rights for gays, they would be happier and less inclined to self-destructive behaviors."
Response: If it were true that public disapproval of homosexuality was the cause of the increased rates of suicide and depression in the homosexual population, then we would expect that societies where homosexuals were publicly affirmed and allowed to marry would see less incidence of psychological pathology. However, a well-conducted Netherlands study confirmed the relationship between homosexuality and a host of psychological illnesses including suicide. The Netherlands is a very gay-affirming and gay-friendly society, one of the first modern societies to legalize homosexual marriage, and yet psychological illness and suicide were still significantly more frequent in the homosexual population. Researchers Saghir and Robins (1978) examined reasons for suicide attempts among homosexuals and found that if the reasons for the attempt were connected with homosexuality, about two-thirds were due to breakups of relationships - not outside pressures from society. Similarly, researchers Bell and Weinberg (1981) found the major reason for suicide attempts was the breakup of relationships. How can Bible-believing Christians, whom leftists call "homophobes", be blamed for that?

There is no evidence that Christianity's condemnation of homosexuality is to blame for the self-destructive behaviors prevalent among homosexuals. On the contrary, one of the reasons Bible-believing Christians condemn homosexuality is because homosexuality is intrinsically self-destructive, and since we love homosexuals, we want what's best for them, and that would be the will of God for them: abstinence until heterosexual marriage and fidelity within.

Joe's misery is annexed to his homosexual activities. The most unloving thing the government can do is affirm Joe in his self-depreciating and unhealthy lifestyle choices. The Federal bench-legislators have shown that they are more than willing to disregard the well-being of men like Joe, the will of the people, and invent rights from a "living constitution" for Joe and his male lover to "marry". It is the duty of the state legislatures to pass laws such as the Defense of Marriage Act that state in unequivocal terms what marriage is and to refuse to let judicial activists grant homosexual perversion equal footing to traditional marriage.

Shannon

When I first laid eyes on Shannon at the indigent clinic where I was moonlighting in residency, I thought he was a woman. His voice was feminine, his dress seductive, and his make-up thorough. But the five-o'clock shadow gave him away. Shannon was a transvestite. The teardrop tattoo under his right eye was symbolic of the life of misery this young man had lived since he was molested by a homosexual as a young boy. Shannon wanted controlled substances from me for his panic attacks, as well as estrogen to maximize his femininity. He was addicted to a controlled substance called alprazolam, or Xanax, and he became angry and belligerent when I was reluctant to prescribe the medication for him.

When I was growing up, a family close to ours experienced firsthand the devastation of child molestation by homosexual seduction. The family invited 6 foot 8 inch, 240-pound family friend named Sean to their home for the summer; at the end of the summer, Sean mysteriously disappeared. I ran into him six years later when I was in college. Before long, he opened his wallet and began to show me his collection of pictures of little boys. Upon further questioning, he confessed to me that he enjoyed sex with boys. Wracked with guilt, he confessed to me that he had anal sex with two of my friends and had sexually molested another during the summer he stayed with them in my neighborhood. He feigned repentance, but soon disappeared again. Now, it makes sense why one of those boys frequents homosexual bars and has been indicted for having sex with an underage girl; children who were molested by homosexuals are much more likely to become homosexuals and child-molesters themselves.

I am convinced that homosexuals sexually reproduce themselves by molesting children. Homosexuals commit a far greater percentage of child sex crimes than that for which demographics alone can account.[20] Dr. Judith Reisman in her book, Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences, notes the work done by Dr. Gene Abel, who compared the molestation rates of homosexual and heterosexual child molesters. He found that homosexuals accounted for 150 boy victims per sex abuser, compared with 19 female victims per heterosexual child molester. The study found that homosexuals are more than nine times as likely to sodomize children than heterosexual sex predators.

A 2001 study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior revealed that 46% of male homosexuals and 22% of lesbians reported homosexual molestation in childhood. Compare this to childhood homosexual molestation rates of only 7% for heterosexual men and 1% for heterosexual women. The sample was especially useful for research purposes because it did not focus on dissatisfied homosexuals in therapy; in fact, 97% of the men were participating in a gay pride celebration at the time they participated in the survey interview. Sixty-eight percent of the male study subjects and 38 % of the females did not identify as homosexual until after the molestation.[21]

Not one Boy Scout has ever been heterosexually molested by a scout leader! In spite of the criticism the homosexual community has heaped on the Boy Scouts, the Scouts have been sued for millions for not doing enough to protect children from homosexual child predators. A former scoutmaster in Oklahoma pleaded guilty recently to sixty-one charges of having had sex with five boys under the age of 14, as well as multiple counts of rape, forcible oral sodomy, lewd acts with children and bestiality. His wife turned him in after she caught him molesting a 12-year-old boy in their home. He had been a scout leader since 1992.[22]

Homosexuals make up a small percentage of the U.S. population, yet they have assaulted half of the sexually molested children. Child sexual molestation is more than three times more common among homosexuals than among heterosexuals.[23] Children of homosexual parents have a fifty-fold increased risk of suffering from incest by a parent.

There are many studies that show that homosexuals reproduce by molesting children. Sex researchers Masters and Johnson wrote in Human Sexual Inadequacy: "Recruitment usually was accomplished by an older male, frequently in his twenties, but occasionally men in their thirties were the initiators... The teenager was left with the concept that whether or not he continued as an active homosexual, he would always be homophile-oriented." In an article entitled "The Men From the Boys," in Out magazine in 1994, the director of a home for runaway youth admits that between 14 and 16 years of age, he "probably had sex with well over a thousand people, most of them much older than myself." This boy hardly met a homosexual adult who would not have sex with him.

Sexual abuse in foster care is a significant problem and is much more common in homosexual foster families than their heterosexual counterparts.[24] A front page story in Newark this summer concerned the indictment of a Big Brother volunteer for sexually molesting a number of troubled children for whom he cared. A study published in Psychological Reports analyzed the content of 57 life-story narratives by children with homosexual parents assembled by lesbian researchers Louise Rafkin from the United States and Lisa Saffron from England. In these narratives, children in 48 of the 52 families (92 percent) mentioned one or more of these "problems": hypersexuality, instability, molestation, domestic violence - children attributed 94 percent of these problems to their homosexual parent(s).

From 1989 to 1990, 1,001 adult homosexual and bisexual men attending sexually transmitted disease clinics were interviewed regarding potentially abusive sexual contacts during childhood and adolescence. Thirty-seven percent of participants reported they had been encouraged or forced to have sexual contact before age nineteen with an older or more powerful partner; 94 % occurred with men. Median age of the participant at first contact was ten. Fifty-one percent involved use of force; 33 % involved anal sex.

The partnership between homosexual groups and groups that promote pedophilia is an historical fact. The national Gay Rights Platform of 1972 called for the repeal of all age-of-consent laws. Homosexual activist Andy Humm bragged of his influence over the New York City Council in the New York Native in August, 1983, with these words: "No one should be denied basic civil rights because of his or her orientation, whether the person be homosexual, heterosexual, transsexual, transvestite, pedophile, sadist, masochist, asexual-whatever one can imagine." "Basic civil rights" for a pedophile? A pedophile's basic civil right is to a fair and speedy trial.

More evidence of the association between pedophilia and homosexuality: the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) exists to promote homosexual sex with young boys, and leading gay-pride organizers in New York and San Francisco allowed NAMBLA to march undisguised in their parades repeatedly during the last two decades. The leading homosexual publication, The Advocate, in an article titled "Getting Over It" pondered on May 5, 1992, about how many boys "would have missed out on a valuable, liberating experience-one that initiated them into their sexuality-if it weren't for so-called molestation?" A prominent homosexual magazine quoted Damien Martin, the head of New York's homosexual Harvey Milk High School, as saying, "No kid has ever been hurt by [oral sex]."[25] (Is anybody surprised that homosexual child-molesters want to be public school teachers and Scout leaders?)

The nation's largest homosexual publicist, Alyson Publications of Boston, which distributes Daddy's Roommate and other homosexual books for kids, published Paedophilia: The Radical Case, hundreds of pages of why and how seven-year-old boys should be brought to climax. Another Alyson book, The Age Taboo, insists: "Boy-lovers... are not child molesters. The child abusers are... parents who force their staid morality onto the young people in their custody" (page 144). What absurdity that parents who encourage abstinence until marriage or who simply discourage child-sex are the real "child-molesters" while "boy-lovers" who have sex with underage kids are practicing "basic civil rights"! Their opinions are definitely extreme to the average American, but I want you to realize that the taxpayers' bank accounts are plundered and expended to stock public school libraries with homophilic books printed by this perverted publication company.

Rebuttal: "Pedophiles are not homosexuals. Pedophilia is a distinct and unique pathology and child-molesters should not be considered homosexuals if they prefer to molest boys."
Response: Every man molesting a boy is committing a homosexual act. Young boys do not excite straight men. If a male molests a little girl, do we cease to consider him a heterosexual because he chose a prepubescent girl to victimize? Furthermore, the homosexual child molesters speak for themselves: a study of convicted child molesters, published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, found that "86 percent of offenders against males described themselves as homosexual or bisexual."[26] To let a homosexual child predator make the point in his own words, the San Francisco Sentinel published a letter on March 26, 1992, headlined, "No Place for Homo-Homophobia", in which he said, "The love between men and boys is at the foundation of homosexuality. For the homosexual community to imply that boy-love is not homosexual love is ridiculous."

Statistically, Shannon's substance abuse is not atypical. Drug abuse in the homosexual community is epidemic, much higher than in the heterosexual population.[27],[28] Howard Grossman, a physician and member of Gay Men's Health Crisis' board of directors, says that about 75% of his homosexual male patients in Manhattan have experimented with illegal substances, including ecstasy, ketamine (special K), cocaine, crystal meth, trod GHB. A study published in Nursing Research found that lesbians are three times more likely to abuse alcohol: 91% of the participants had abused other drugs as well as alcohol, and 46% had been heavy drinkers with frequent drunkenness.[29]

These studies highlight the harmful and pathological nature of homosexuality. The most unloving thing the government can do is grant legitimacy to these unhealthy relationships. Our nation's leaders must take a stand for traditional marriage now, before the activist judiciary capitulates to the homosexuals' demands for marriage benefits.

Bob

Bob is a rare homosexual: he's in his 60's. Like friend and friend and lover after lover who have succumbed before him, he is dying of AIDS. Bob is on medications for a major depressive disorder, but no pill can dull his awareness of the fact that very soon the bell with toll for him. Bob is perhaps one of the loneliest, unhappy men I have ever met in my life.

If there's one thing that two decades of HIV and AIDS has taught us, it is that AIDS discriminates. Nature punishes those who violate its laws. Why do homosexuals comprise over half of all HIV/AIDS patients in the U.S. when they make up 2 - 3 % of the population? Because they are living a lifestyle that is in conflict with the laws of their design. Disease, misery, and death are the natural consequence of unnatural acts. You do not need to read the Bible to know sodomy is perverse, you just need to know what your genitals are for! The penis is designed for urination and copulation. The anus is an exit hole. Unlike the vagina, which has an acidic environment that hinders pathogen growth, is lined by a thick layer of stratified squamous epithelium that is resistant to tearing, and secretes a lubricant during intercourse, the rectum has an alkaline environment that promotes bacterial and viral growth, is lined by a thin layer of cuboidal epithelium that can tear easily with unnatural forces, and does not secrete a lubricant. God created man and woman and designed sex between them. God's laws are for mankind's benefit. These laws provide the boundaries where sex can be safely enjoyed and maximally productive. So it should be no surprise to us that sexual perversion is associated with a high rate of disease.

There are currently an estimated 900,000 people in the United States that are infected with the HIV virus, or 1 in 300 Americans, and this disease has cost the American taxpayer billions of dollars. Although medical breakthroughs have decreased the rate of AIDS deaths annually, the rate of new infections per year has remained the same, at 40,000, despite the twenty-year "safe-sex" campaign.[30] New infections among homosexual men climbed 17% between 1999 and 2002 - the largest jump of any exposure category.[31] AIDS remains the fifth leading cause of death among those aged 25-44, and 59.7 % of new cases are contracted by homosexual men. According to the Centers for Disease Control, homosexual men are a thousand times more likely to contract AIDS than heterosexuals.[32] The list of other contagious diseases that homosexuals are at high-risk of acquiring is as long as your arm. The risk of anal cancer soars to an astounding 4000 % for those engaging in anal intercourse compared to those who don't, and it doubles again for those who are HIV positive.[33]

Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, M.D., a diplomate of both the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology and the C.G. Jung Institute of Zurich, Switzerland, in a recent interview, said: "A recent article in a psychiatric publication informed us that 30% of all 20-year-old homosexual men will be HIV positive or dead by the age of thirty."[34]

One study of morbidity and mortality in the homosexual population was performed by studying 6,737 obituaries from 18 U.S. homosexual journals over 13 years. These findings were compared to a large sample of obituaries from regular newspapers. The study found:

• The median age of death of married men was 75 and 80% died old (>65 yrs.)
• The median age of death for unmarried or divorced men was 57 and 32% of them died old.
• The median age of death for married women was 79, and 60% of them died old.
• However, the median age of death for homosexuals was the same nationwide, with only 2% surviving to old age!
• If AIDS was the cause of death, the median age was 39!
• For the 829 homosexuals who died of something other than AIDS, the median age of death was 42 and only 9% died old!
• The 163 lesbians had a median age of death of 44 and 20% died old!
• They were 116 times more likely to be murdered, 24 times more apt to commit suicide, and had a traffic-accident death-rate 18 times the rate of comparably-aged white males.
• Heart attacks, cancer, and liver failure were exceptionally common.
• 18% of lesbians died of murder, suicide, or accident - a rate 456 times higher than that of white females aged 25-44!
• The age distributions of samples of homosexuals in the scientific literature from 1858 to 1992 suggest a similarly shortened lifespan.[35]

The most shocking thing in this study is that even if a homosexual does not contract HIV/AIDS, he still lives on average only three more years than homosexuals who die of AIDS!

An article in the Journal of Epidemiology reported: "If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday. Under even the most liberal assumptions, gay and bisexual men in this [Canadian] urban centre are now experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by all men in Canada in the year 1871."[36]

Mr. Trey Kern, President of the Citizen's for Parent Rights in Maryland has collected an impressive amount data on studies documenting the diminished lifespan of active homosexuals.[37]

Rebuttal: "But doesn't scientific evidence reveal that homosexuals are 'born that way' and therefore are not responsible for their behavior?"
Response: There is no proof that homosexuality is genetic. Many have tried: Drs. Simon and Rice have attempted to link homosexual to the X chromosome inherited from their mothers. Dr. Simon LaVay referred to the differing average hypothalamus sizes of homosexuals and heterosexuals to try to prove that homosexuality was innate and involuntary. Drs. Bailey and Pillard looked for a concordance rate of homosexuality among twins. Each of these researchers freely admitted failure in their attempt to prove that homosexuality was genetic. The scholarly consensus is that echoed by the American Psychological Association: "[M]any scientists share the view that sexual orientation is shaped for most people at an early age through complex interactions of biological, psychological and social factors."[38]

More evidence that being a homosexual is voluntary is found in the many testimonies of those who have changed their sexual preference. Thousands of homosexuals have ceased to be homosexuals through repentance and ministry - you have heard their testimonies in this room - and their witness cannot be denied. I have known one homosexual who, after twenty years of bondage to homosexual addiction, is now free.

A Robert Spitzer study has been recently published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior wherein the evidence for the effectiveness of reorientation therapy was acknowledged.[39] The study has attracted much attention because its author, a prominent psychiatrist, is viewed as a historic champion of homosexual activism. Spitzer played a pivotal role in 1973 in removing homosexuality from the psychiatric manual of mental disorders. "I'm convinced from the people I have interviewed," Spitzer said, "that for many of them, they have made substantial changes toward becoming heterosexual... I think that's news... I came to this study skeptical. I now claim that these changes can be sustained."

There is a very interesting statistic in the more detailed version of the new Sex in America survey, performed by the Social Organization of Sexuality. They showed that 2.8% of the men in their sample were homosexual. But a much larger percentage of their sample - between 10 and 16 % - had been homosexual at some point in their lives previously and had abandoned the lifestyle. If this holds true, then for every active homosexual in America, there are four to five ex-homosexuals!

Sexual-reorientation treatment via psychotherapy was supported by a special section of articles in the January, 2003, issue of the Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. The American Psychological Association's prestigious journal Professional Psychology: Research and Practice has just published a comprehensive research paper on sexual-orientation change. Clients have the right to pursue change, the author says, because "sexual orientation, once thought to be an unchanging trait, is actually quite flexible for some people, changing as a result of therapy for some, ministry for others, and spontaneously for still others." Dr. Satinover reported a 52% success rate in the treatment of unwanted homosexual attraction. Masters and Johnson, the famed sex researchers, reported a 65% success rate after a five-year follow-up. Other professionals report success rates ranging from 30% to 70%. Statistically, if all homosexuals went through such therapy, tens of thousands of lives in this generation alone could be saved.

Rebuttal: "But don't some animals engage in homosexual activity? Doesn't this prove it is natural?"
Response: Some animals like sheep do engage in homosexual behavior. However, this only proves that homosexuals are acting like animals; this does not prove that homosexual sex is natural for humans, who are made in the image of God. Many animals do things that we don't consider natural for humans: the males of some ape species have sex with their prepubescent young, the female black widow spider eats her mate, mice and some species of birds may eat their young when they feel threatened, some sharks leave gaping bite marks on their mates during sex, other animals force themselves upon the opposite sex. Would this justify this behavior in humans? I think not.

Mankind has a conscience (con means "with", science means "knowledge"), which is an intrinsic knowledge of right and wrong, justice and injustice. The Bible says the conscience is God's law written on our hearts. It is the source of that guilt that you feel in your bosom when you do wrong. Many homosexuals will freely acknowledge that when they began to indulge in unlawful lusts, they felt guilty for it. Man's conscience distinguishes him from the animal kingdom, and the law on that conscience will be the standard by which all will be judged on judgment day. (However, consciences can be seared by persistent sinning and rejection of truth.)

Rebuttal: "It is bigoted to deny homosexuals the same rights that their heterosexual counterparts have in society, and that includes the right to a life-long commitment with a spouse, and all of the economic and sociologic benefits that accompanies it."
Response: Homosexuals can marry! Homosexuals are not forbidden marriage. However, marriage by definition is a binding commitment between a man and a woman, and all that that relationship implies. If homosexuals want a life-long commitment with another homosexual, they can make one, but they don't have the right to a marriage license any more than they have a right to a pilots' license if they don't meet the qualifications.

To cite the reasoning of the Washington State Court of Appeals in 1971, Singer v. Hara, homosexuals are not denied a marriage license because of their sex; rather, they are denied a marriage license "because of the nature of marriage itself."

To borrow the reasoning of a Kentucky Federal Court in 1973, in Jones v. Hallahan, homosexuals are prevented from marrying, not by state statutes or the county's refusal to issue them a license, "but rather by their own incapability of entering into a marriage as that term is defined." The court refused to address the constitutional issues the homosexual appellants raised, holding that "the relationship proposed does not authorize the issuance of a marriage license because what they propose is not marriage."

In 1990, a New York Appellate Court in the Matter of Estate of Cooper ruled that "persons of the same sex have no Constitutional rights to enter into a marriage with each other."

In 1974, an Ohio court denied a marriage license to a lesbian couple in Thornton v. Timmers for "it is the express legislative intent that those persons who may be joined in marriage must be of different sexes."

Rebuttal: "How does it harm heterosexual marriage in society if two homosexuals who love each other and long for a lifelong companion marry?"
Response: It harms marriage because it redefines marriage. If marriage is a concept with no distinct meaning and can mean whatever you want it to be, then on what basis can you create any limitations to marriage whatsoever? If love and companionship were sufficient to define marriage, then there would be no reason to deny "marriage" to unions of a child and an adult, or an adult child and his or her aging parent, or to roommates who have no sexual relationship, or a man and his dog, or to groups rather than couples. If we allowed homosexuals to marry because to refuse it to them is unconstitutional discrimination, how could we arbitrarily protest an attempt of a polygamist or a bisexual to marry two or more people? Love and companionship are integral to marriage, but they are not sufficient to define it as an institution. Marriage, by Scriptural definition and cultural tradition, is a lifelong commitment between a man and a woman.

The benefits granted to married couples are not pulled out of thin air; they cost the public money. If benefits are given to any one who wants them for fear of "discriminating" against them, then benefit-inflation will occur. It will become like it presently is in the Netherlands, where there are no significant economic benefits, only costs, to marry. Then society will have lost a very important incentive to encouraging an institution that is critical to the raising up of children and the health, wealth, and stability of society in general.

Another way that homosexual relationships weaken traditional marriage is by way of infidelity. Gene Robinson, the first open homosexual to be appointed a bishop in the Episcopalian Church, left his wife and family to live with his homosexual lover. Another example: "nearly 40 percent" of the 5,700 homosexual couples who have entered into "civil unions" in Vermont "have had a previous heterosexual marriage."[40] The old stigmas against unfaithfulness in marriage and homosexual perversion might have given these heterosexual marriages a fighting chance, but with legal "homosexual unions" in Vermont, they were exposed and vulnerable.

Rebuttal: "If the potential to bear children through natural means is the sine qua non of marriage and one of the reasons homosexual couples shouldn't be allowed to marry, why does society allow infertile couples and couples past child-bearing age to marry? Why are single-parent families endorsed by the state and single-sex double-parent families are not?"
Response: These are the exceptions, not the rule. As a rule, mothers and fathers raise children. However, even childless marriages are a social anchor for children, who observe adults as role models. Besides, childless couples can be surprised by an unexpected pregnancy, or they can adopt children and give a child a mother-and-father-based family. Single parents can eventually marry, and give their children the benefit of a father and a mother. Even when a couple is past the age of reproduction, the marital commitment may keep an older man from fathering a child with a younger woman outside wedlock.

Rebuttal: "We already let homosexual couples adopt children. How can we deny them the right to marry and enjoy all of the economic and sociological benefits of that covenant and be fair to their children?"
Response: One kind of legal child-abuse doesn't justify another. Letting homosexuals adopt children is governmental child-abuse. As the statistics cited in the commentary on my patient Shannon above reveal, children whose parents are homosexuals are much more likely to endure sexual abuse than children of heterosexual parents.[41] A study in Adolescence found: "A disproportionate percentage - 29 % - of the adult children of homosexual parents had been specifically subjected to sexual molestation by that homosexual parent, compared to only 0.6 percent of adult children of heterosexual parents having reported sexual relations with their parent... Having a homosexual parent(s) appears to increase the risk of parental incest fifty-fold.

As would also be expected, children raised in homosexual households are also much more likely to be homosexuals themselves, with the resulting shortened lifespan and increase in the rates of suicide, drug abuse, psychological disorders, and infectious diseases.[42] This may be because, as studies have shown, homosexuals are much more likely to molest children than their heterosexual counterparts, and if a child is molested by a homosexual he is much more likely to become homosexual.

The studies that have been construed to prove that the children of heterosexual parents have similar well-being as the children of homosexual parents have problems that the authors of those studies freely admit: inadequate sample size, lack of random sampling, lack of anonymity among research participants, and self-presenting bias.

Concern about children placed in homosexual households who are orphaned because of the destructive nature of the homosexual lifestyle is well founded. In 1990, Wayne Tardiff and his partner, Allan Yoder, were the first homosexuals permitted to become adoptive parents in the state of New Jersey. Tardiff died in 1992 at age forty-four; Yoder died a few months later, leaving an orphaned five-year-old.[43]

Foolishly placing children under the care of homosexual couples ignores the accumulated wisdom of the cultures and societies that testify that the best way for children to be raised is by a mother and father who are married to each other. The importance of the traditional family has been increasingly verified by research showing that children from married two-parent households do better academically, financially, emotionally, and behaviorally. They are less likely to practice dangerous promiscuous behaviors, they have better health, and they receive more parental support.[44]

In conclusion

Right and wrong are not subjective or relative to the vote of judges or legislatures, nor to personal preference or even a democratic consensus. If so, how could any one tell anybody else that any behavior was wrong? For instance, how can a homosexual say homosexual hate crimes are wrong if all morality's relative and personal and he has no right to force his views on anybody else? If right and wrong were determined by the vote of a group of judges or the democratic consensus of the time, how could we condemn race-based slavery that was prevalent in the early days of our nation's existence? How could we condemn racist Naziism, which government came to power in Germany due to a democratic vote?

"Government's should not legislate morality," say the proponents of relative morality. But all legislation either legislates morality or immorality. The question is, Whose morality? The ultimate Judge of morality is our Creator, and no one can improve on His love and law. When you want to know how a purchase is going to function and how to make it maximally productive and not injure yourself using it, you read the "Owner's Manual." In the same way, if you want to determine how you should respond to the dilemma of homosexual marriage, you should turn to the "Owner's Manual," the revelation of the Creator found in the Holy Bible. The standard of right and wrong is the law of God as revealed in the Bible, because of the impossibility of the contrary: reject the God of the Bible and we lose the basis for any moral indignation and moral judgment against any behavior at all, and any and every form of evil can rise to the level of a celebrated constitutional right given sufficient descent into depravity.

The final question to be asked is this: What is God's opinion of homosexual marriage? We need not speculate, because He has made His will plain in His self-attesting revelation, the Holy Bible:

Leviticus 18
22. You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.[45]

Leviticus 20
13. If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.

Not only did the loving God of the Bible condemn homosexuality, He outlawed it as well, and prescribed the ultimate civil penalty for violation of this commandment to maximize the disincentive for this harmful behavior.

Romans 1
Regarding those who "suppress the truth in unrighteousness," those who "did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened," God
24. gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves,
25. who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26. For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.
27. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due...
32. who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

Timothy 1
8. But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully,
9. knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10. for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine,

Corinthians 6
9. Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,
10. nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.
11. And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

Notice in this Scripture that it says, "such were some of you." Thousands of people have ceased to be homosexuals and are leading normal married lives by the grace of God. This proves that homosexuality is not innate, but is a choice. The proclivity or disposition to practice homosexuality may be involuntary and is amenable to psychological therapy and therapy, but the choice to act upon those desires is sin.

Rebuttal: "Doesn't the Old Testament 'holiness code' also condemn eating shellfish and pork, and it says you must wear a certain type of clothing, etc.? If you are going to condemn homosexuality, you should also condemn these things. If these things are acceptable, then so is homosexuality."
Response: There are three types of laws in the "holiness code": the moral law, the civil law, and the ceremonial law. Only the Jews were obligated to keep the ceremonial (dietary laws, feast celebrations, animal sacrifices, etc.). However, all people are obligated to keep the moral law, which is written upon their consciences. The moral law was emphasized by Jesus and His Apostles in the New Testament. They condemned all extra-marital lust, and offered forgiveness for sin through the atonement of Jesus Christ.

Homosexual acts are intrinsically unnatural, pathological, and sinful. I have given you examples, shown you the reasons, documented a plethora of supporting evidence from scientific journals, and responded to common rebuttals. The most unloving thing the state could do to homosexuals is legitimize their injurious perversions and grant them domestic partner benefits or marriage licenses. The judiciary is out of control right now, and it's just a matter of time before they force homosexual marriage or marriage benefits for homosexual "civil unions" upon us. State leaders must be pro-active and enact to defend marriage from this assault. Marriage is a holy institution universal to humanity - it has been ordained by the Creator and is not subject to redefinition or amendment.

July 2004

Thank you for taking the time to read this article. For a video copy of a debate with a homosexual law professor over the question, "Should Gay Marriage Be Legal?", please Email me: docjohnston@rightremedy.org.

---

[1] Whitehead and Whitehead 1999, calculated from Laumann et al 1994

[2] A. P. Bell and M. S. Weinberg, Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978), pp. 308, 309

[3] A. P. Bell, M. S. Weinberg, and S. K. Hammersmith, Sexual Preference, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981

[4] David P. McWhirter and Andrew M. Mattison, The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1984), pp. 252, 253

[5] Robert T. Michael et al., Sex in America: A Definitive Survey (Boston:Little, Brown and Company, 1994

[6] Maria Xiridou et al., in AIDS, 2003, 17:1029-1038

[7] "Gay Domestic Violence Finally Measured," Paul Cameron, Journal of the Family Research Institute, Vol. 16 No. 8, Dec 2001

[8] Lettie L. Lockhart et al., "Letting out the Secret: Violence in Lesbian Relationships," Journal of Interpersonal Violence 9 (1994): 469-492

[9] Gwat Yong Lie and Sabrina Gentlewarrier, "Intimate Violence in Lesbian Relationships: Discussion of Survey Findings and Practice Implications," Journal of Social Service Research 15 (1991): 41-59

[10] D. Island and P. Letellier, Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them:Battered Gay Men and Domestic Violence (New York: Haworth Press, 1991), p. 14

[11] "Across U.S., Gay Anti-Violence Groups Respond to a Familiar Alarm", Washington Post, July 17, 1997

[12] Chicago police officer, interviewed in "What Cops Know", by Connie Fletcher; NY:Villard Books, 1991, p.67

[13] New York Times / Associated Press article, 8-15-92

[14] Cameron, P. "Is homosexuality disproportionately associated with murder?" Paper presented at Midwestern Psychological Assn, Chicago, 1983

[15] American Journal of Psychotherapy, July 1978, pp.421-425

[16] Fergusson et al. 1999, Herrell et al. 1999, Sandfort et al. 2001, Carlat et al. 1997, and e.g. Bailey 1999

[17] G. Ramfedi, "Sexual Orientation and Youth Suicide", MSJAMA - Review, Vol. 282, pp. 1291-1292, October 6, 1999

[18] Archives of General Psychiatry, Oct. 1999

[19] Weinberg & Bell, Homosexuality: An Annotated Autobibliography; NY: Harper & Row, 1972; p.220

[20] Psychological Reports, 1986, Vol.58, p.327

[21] Tomeo, M., Templer, D., Anderson, S., Kotler, D., "Comparative Data of Childhood and Adolescence Molestation in Heterosexual and Homosexual Persons," Archives of Sexual Behavior Vol. 30(3), pp. 535-541, 2001

[22] "Boy Scouts Must Defend Against Sexual Predators," World Net Daily, Aug. 20, 2000

[23] "The Proportions of Heterosexual and Homosexual Pedophiles among Sex Offenders against Children", The Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, No. 1, 1992.

[24] P. Cameron, "Gay Foster Parents More Apt to Molest," Journal of the Family Research Institute, Vol. 17 No. 7, Nov 2002

[25] Out, Sept. 1994, page 73

[26] W. D. Erickson, M.D., et al., in Archives of Sexual Behavior 17:1, 1988

[27] Center for Substance Abuse Treatment of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Jan. 2001

[28] The American Journal of Psychology, March 2003

[29] Joanne Hall, "Lesbians Recovering from Alcoholic Problems: An Ethnographic Study of Health Care Expectations," Nursing Research 43 (1994): 238-244

[30] APA's Practical Guidelines for the Treatment of Patients with HIV/AIDS," Epidemiology, Clinical Features Influencing Treatment

[31] "Increases in HIV Diagnoses --- 29 States, 1999-2002," Centers for Disease Control, Nov. 28, 2003, http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5247a2.htm

[32] The HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control, National Center for Infectious Diseases, Division of HIV/AIDS, January, 1992, p. 9.

[33] Fenger, C. "Anal Neoplasia and Its Precursors: Facts and Controversies," Seminars in Diagnostic Pathology 8, no. 3, August 1991, pp.190-201; Daling, J.R. et al., "Sexual Practices, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, and the Incidence of Anal Cancer," New England Journal of Medicine 317, no.16, 15 October 1987, pp. 973-77

[34] Interview with National Assn. For Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, Sept.30, 2002, http://www.narth.com/docs/satinovr.html

[35] Dr. Paul Cameron, "Medical Consequences of What Homosexuals Do", Family Research Institute, PO Box 2091, Washington, DC 20013-2091

[36] "Modeling the impact of HIV disease on mortality in gay and bisexual men," by RS Hogg, SA Strathdee, KJ Craib, MV O'Shaughnessy, JS Montaner and MT Schechter, International Journal of Epidemiology, Vol 26, No. 3, 1997, pp. 657-61.

[37] "Homosexual Myths: Homosexuals Live Long Lives, Fact Sheet. Studies include: G. Tardieu, 1858; M. Hirschfield, 1914, Kinsey, 1930's, 1940's; Mattachine Society, 1950's: Berger, 1960's, Kinsey Institute, 1969; Spada Report 1978; M. Mendola, 1979; Cameron, Playfair, Wellum, 1994; Hogg, R.S., et. al, International Journal of Epidemiology, 1997; Cameron, P, Cameron, K, Playfair, WL., Psychological Reports, 1998.

[38] ("Gay Genes, Revisited: Doubts arise over research on the biology of homosexuality," November 1995, p.26.; P. Copeland and D. Hamer (1994) New York: Simon and Schuster.;J. Satinover, M.D., (1996). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books; W. Byne and B. Parsons, "Human Sexual Orientation: The Biologic Theories Reappraised." 50, no.3; S. Goldberg (1994) Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books; A.P.A.'s booklet, "Answers to Your Questions About Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality"

[39] Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol.32, No.5, Oct.2003, pp.403-417

[40] Boston Globe, June 29, 2003

[41] "Gay Foster Parents More Apt to Molest," Paul Cameron, Journal of the Family Research Institute, Vol. 17 No. 7, Nov. 2002

[42] F. Tasker and S. Golombok, "Adults Raised as Children in Lesbian Families," p. 213; J. M. Bailey et al., "Sexual Orientation of Adult Sons of Gay Fathers," pp. 127, 128; Tasker and Golombok, "Do Parents Influence the Sexual Orientation?" p. 7; Judith Stacey and Timothy J. Biblarz, "(How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter," American Sociological Review 66 (2001)

[43] Obituaries, The Washington Blade, July 16, 1992

[44] See the following: Sara McLanahan and Gary Sandfeur, Growing Up with a Single Parent: What Hurts, What Helps (Cambridge:Harvard University Press, 1994), p. 45; Pat Fagan, "How Broken Families Rob Children of Their Chances for Prosperity," Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 1283, June 11, 1999, p. 13; Dawn Upchurch et al., "Gender and Ethnic Differences in the Timing of First Sexual Intercourse," Family Planning Perspectives 30 (1998): 121-127; Jeanne M. Hilton and Esther L. Devall, "Comparison of Parenting and Children's Behavior in Single-Mother, Single-Father, and Intact Families," Journal of Divorce and Remarriage 29 (1998): 23-54; Jane Mauldon, "The Effect of Marital Disruption on Children's Health," Demography 27 (1990): 431-446; Frank Furstenberg, Jr., and Julien Teitler, "Reconsidering the Effects of Marital Disruption: What Happens to Children of Divorce in Early Adulthood?" Journal of Family Issues 15 (June 1994); Elizabeth Thomson et al., "Family Structure and Child Well-Being: Economic Resources vs. Parental Behaviors," Social Forces 73 (1994): 221-42.