From the Bi Health Summit’s website’s report on its conference in Chicago Friday, Aug. 14 (emphasis added):

Research presented by Cheryl Dobinson, MA, and Stewart Landers, JD, MCP, from their two separate studies was remarkably similar.  Bisexuals reported suffering from depression and anxiety in higher rates than heterosexuals or lesbians and gay men.  In terms of attempting or thinking of attempting suicide, bisexual men were 7 times higher, while gay men were 4 times higher, than straight men; bisexual women were 6 times higher, while lesbian women were 4 times higher, than straight women.  An Australian study revealed that middle-aged bi women were 24 times more likely to engage in self harm, like cutting, than straight women, as a coping mechanism.

Dobinson’s research revealed that only 26% of bisexuals did not experience child sexual abuse.  I’ll be getting more information on violence, domestic violence, and physical or sexual abuse, since she whizzed through a lot of that information and I don’t wish to misquote her findings.

I would also like to speak more with Cheryl Dobinson regarding her findings in anal sex for bi women and men.  Her research shows that bi men have fewer male partners than gay men and engage in anal sex less with men, but are more likely to have unprotected anal sex with men; while bi women have higher rates of anal sex with men than straight women and are more likely to report being HIV+.  … I would really like to discuss the 2005 CDC study with her that showed 44% of straight men and 35% of straight women engaged in anal sex.

Stewart Landers’ information from the 2001-2006 Massachusetts’ Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey — which is just the kind of huge population study bi researchers are looking for — revealed similar levels of depression, anxiety, suicidality, self-harm, and suffering from violence.  Bisexual adults report poorer health and greater risks across a whole spectrum of health factors, including alcohol, substance abuse, and tobacco use.  Heart disease seems to be up 3 times higher than straight people, asthma rates reported higher than straight people but fairly equal to lesbians and gay men.

Landers’ study showed a surprising finding that people 18-24 were the largest group identifying as bisexual.

See also a related report from the Bi Health Summit: “Half of Homosexuals are Bisexual: Homosexual Newspaper.”

My good friend Brian Camenker of MassResistance provides more evidence of the health hazards associated with homosexual and bisexuality — the lavender elephant in the room that liberal, pro-”gay” advocates refuse to acknowledge and deal with.

Note to readers: Brian has just announced that MassResistance’s e-mail updates will now be available online at MassResistance’s website. He assures me that all past e-mails will be archived. This is great news for pro-family advocates as MassResistance does excellent work in exposing homosexual activism in all its perverseness — e.g., the shocking “Fistgate” scandal in 2000 in which Massachusetts teenagers were taught by homosexual activists and state employees how to perform a grotesque “gay” (hand-anal) act known as “fisting.” (I think I am correct in recalling that the leadership of Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network, or GLSEN, never apologized for Fistgate; if they did apologize, I’ll gladly post it here. Notably, homosexual activist lawyers sued Camenker and another pro-family advocate following Fistgate for allegedly violating the students’ privacy by publicizing an undercover audiotape of the shocking lesson for “queer” youth.)

I also recommend Amy Contrada’s useful posts on the MassResistance blog. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

——————————————————

“The health profile of gay/lesbian/homosexual residents was poorer than that of heterosexual/straight residents on: self-reported health; disability-related activity limitation; asthma; current and past tobacco smoking; anxious mood; 30-day binge drinking and substance use; and lifetime sexual assault victimization. In addition, lesbian/homosexual women were more likely to be obese than their heterosexual/straight female peers. Bisexual residents faired worse than heterosexual/straight residents in terms of: access to health insurance, as well as medical and dental providers; heart disease; anxious and depressed moods, 12-month suicidal ideation; current tobacco smoking, and lifetime and 12-month sexual assault victimization. In addition, bisexual women were more likely to report disability-related activity limitation, 30-day illicit drug use, and lifetime intimate partner violence victimization than heterosexual/straight women.” — “A Health Profile of Massachusetts Adults by Sexual Orientation Identity: Results from the 2001-2006 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Surveys,” Mass. Department of Public Health, p. 2.

MassResistance writes:

Mass. Department of Public Health “groundbreaking” report says homosexuality linked with health problems, destructive behavior

On November 21 the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) released what it calls a “Groundbreaking Report on Health Disparities Based on Sexual Orientation”.

As the DPH press release describes:

“The report revealed significant disparities among people who identified as homosexual or bisexual in the areas of access to care, self-reported health status, anxiety, depression, suicide ideation, smoking, binge drinking, illicit drug use, sexual assault victimization, intimate partner violence, disability, obesity, asthma and heart disease . . . Lesbians were 2.2 times more likely than heterosexual women to be obese.”

Read entire DPH press release.

Read the Department of Public Health report HERE.

In other words, the DPH is forced to admit what everyone has known for a long time. Unfortunately, the extremely destructive nature of homosexual behavior – both medical and psychological – is usually not only suppressed, but is considered completely off-limits for discussion. But ultimately, some of the truth gets out, even in Massachusetts.

The “good” news, according to the report is that . . .

“Gay/lesbian/homosexuals and bisexuals were more likely than heterosexuals to have been ever tested for HIV than their straight/heterosexual counterparts. In addition, gay/homosexual men were less likely to be obese or overweight compared to straight/heterosexual men [probably due to weight loss from AIDS or other diseases?]. They were also more likely to obtain lifetime colorectal cancer screening and to report recent condom use.”

Yuck!

Interestingly, the Massachusetts DPH is probably the most pro-homosexual public health department in America. It’s run by DPH Commissioner John Auerbach, who is “married” to another man. In 2007, Auerbach appeared at a homosexual “youth” event telling the kids that he’d make sure there’s enough HIV testing available for everyone there. In 2005, the Massachusetts DPH helped create the notorious Little Black Book, Queer in the 21st Century, which depicted homosexual sex acts and listed places kids can hook up with homosexual adults.

How will the report’s findings be used?

What does the DPH say the report hopes to accomplish? Unfortunately, this really exposes how politicized the public health profession has become. The report recommends:

“Specific interventions should be developed to work with the bisexual population in these areas. Health officials also hope that the report will stimulate further study on ways to reduce and eliminate health disparities faced by gay, lesbian and bisexual people.”

But they are ignoring the root of the problem. The obvious way to “reduce and eliminate” these health disparities would be to discourage homosexual behavior, and help those currently involved in it to leave that horribly addictive and dangerous lifestyle.  (Instead, we’ll probably see more of “encourage condom use and HIV testing” types of pseudo-remedies.)

Unfortunately, common sense won’t be found even in medical circles these days. But the raw facts will continue to show up. In the meantime, people will suffer.

Excerpts from the letter follow (emphasis ours). Pray for Adam Flanders as he tries to pull his life together.

Jan 13, 2007

To Whom It May Concern:

My name is Adam Flanders. I am 20 years old and a current resident of Belfast, Maine. I am writing to you on behalf of my own concerns, as well as the concerns of other youth members and past members (who wish to remain anonymous) of the nonprofit organization, OUT! … As I Want to Be located in Rockland, Maine. We wish to inform you of the negligence and abuse of OUT advisors and adult members…

OUT has since been mismanaged in many ways, but I (we) wish to inform you of the apparent negligence of the adult advisors and board members resulting in the emotional distress, abuse, and harm brought to youth members as young as fourteen years old. We can only speak from personal experience, and since I am the only individual willing to reveal my identity, I will begin with my personal experience of OUT and I will then summarize the complaints of those individuals who wish to remain anonymous.

The majority of my time with OUT was spent at the (public) Lincoln Street Center (LSC) in Rockland, Maine once a week; every Friday night from 7 to 10 PM. However, the location has now moved to the private home of Ed and Virginia Slawson in Rockland, Maine and is now held 3 times a week. During my time at OUT meetings, my boyfriend [JL] and I would oftentimes sneak down to the restrooms in the lower part of the building to have sex, beginning when he was 14 and I was 18 — mostly because his father disapproved of our relationship and these meetings were our only opportunity to do this. We did this on many occasions, and several of the other youth were aware of this fact and I wouldn’t doubt that similar relations occurred between other members of OUT during our nightly meetings from 7 to 10 PM. I bet the advisors were aware of this, too.

There was virtually little to no level of chaperoning, as adult advisors such as Phil Hansen and Lis Clark stressed the importance of a youth-led organization. I recall that we never really knew where maybe half the youth members were at any given time…

Several members, particularly two friends, Chris and Courtney (also youth members of the board) almost always showed up to our meetings high on marijuana and/or drunk on alcohol. Even worse, I witnessed several advisors drinking too much at such special events as OUT barbecues or other social events, with an especial focus on the night of the Question 1 victory: many of the adults were completely drunk, and our advisors, wanting to join the celebration, made the choice to simply bring along OUT youth members. The celebration was held at the home of Michael Mayo in Thomaston and I remember being touched and even groped by one of the older men there (who was clearly intoxicated), and I’ve heard that other youth had similar experiences. OUT advisors were also getting drunk and flirting with youth members. It made the entire situation very uncomfortable, especially at the “Rainbow Potluck,” a weekly event inclusive of OUT members (still going on), attended primarily by gay and lesbian adults past the age of 40. I, myself and other youth were hit on by some of the adults at the Rainbow Potluck, and I cannot possibly imagine that our advisors were oblivious to this fact. In fact, it was occurring within our own organization.

I once spent the night at one of the advisor’s homes (Jeff), with another youth member who was also his nephew (Tyler) up from Florida. Tyler and I engaged in minor sexual contact beneath Jeff’s loft that night, though I awoke to find the two of them showering together outside, completely in the nude. In my personal opinion, it is highly inappropriate for an adult advisor in his thirties to be showering nude with a youth member, age 14 at the time. The abuse did not stop there.

Late in the Summer of 2006, the president of OUT, Phil Hansen was forcefully required to step down from his position. …I recall Phil’s stories he told to OUT members, affectionate stories from Greek literature about young boys having sexual relations with older men and open jokes about pedophilia at meetings in his own positive spin on things. This type of sexual abuse and verbal harassment has become a common part of OUT and its advisors and youth members — almost like a mutual joke shared by everyone, but making many if not most of the youth very uncomfortable and distressed…

To summarize some of the experiences of other youth members at OUT meetings and events, I will list the following for the purpose of simplicity, and then finish with a final, more personal note.

• [AC], a youth member, continually and repeatedly sexually harassing other youth members with advances and lies about his sexual relations, which according to him, were with every member of OUT. Even our coordinator (advisor) Lis Clark joked about how pathetic his constant lies were, and yet when myself and other youth members complained of the sexual harassment, Lis simply scoffed it off as immaturity.
• Another youth member, [JC] threatened suicide online and blamed it on myself, because he looked up to me and was jealous of my relationship with [JL]. The youth member Chris discovered [JC]’s online post while browsing a gay porn hookup site (www.gaywatch.com) during an OUT meeting. It caused a lot of distress to all of us, knowing he was out on the streets attempting suicide while we are at our meeting.
• Suicide threats and attempts have been a common part of our organization. We once invited a counselor to speak at one of our meetings, and 3 of the members just ran out of the building crying because they couldn’t handle the situation. What most concerned me (and others) was the fact that none of the advisors made any attempt to catch up to them or follow up with them afterward.
• Several of our OUT meetings were spent writing letters to seemingly every democrat in Knox County. The youth members were made to write sympathetic letters at the heavy pressure from OUT’s new president, J.P. Fecteau. I guess it worked because only a few months ago OUT received a $4,000 donation.

As you can see, there has been a lot of abuse and negligence that has caused more harm to innocent youth than I could possibly begin to describe, and it continues today, and tomorrow, and the next.

My own personal association with OUT came to a sudden and violent end when my boyfriend [JL] of 14 months broke up with me. I knew I could find him at the meeting, and when I physically latched onto him and refused to let go, OUT advisors were forced to restrain me. I had also brought a knife with me with plans to commit suicide and possibly attempt to murder [JL] along with myself. I was arrested on domestic assault charges. I think this is one example, among many I have already shown, that reveals the inherent dangers an organization like OUT creates for vulnerable youth. Even before that, there was a court-issued order against [JL] to not have any contact with me, and while Lis Clark (advisor) knew this, she still allowed us to sneak and see one another at OUT meetings, helping us lie to [JL]’s parents on several occasions. Advisors have been known to lie to parents. One 14 year old (Eric); his parents were under the impression he was attending an art class every Friday night.

With my terminated membership, I’ve had time to reflect on the horrors of this organization and how much influence it has on the Rockland community and beyond — especially impressionable youth — youth who are encouraged by OUT advisors to disobey their parents and develop their GLB or T orientation. OUT hands out condoms and lubricant like candy. Being the web designer and owning exclusive rights to all photos and code, I, being permanently exiled from the organization I brought up, made the obvious, perhaps bitter choice to take the site with me. I threatened legal suit if they did not remove all web content from the URL www.outasiwanttobe.org.

I am writing to you because I fear for the well-being of OUT youth members, especially now that meetings are being held 3 times more often and now in a private home rather than a public facility. It is my hope that the Bureau of Health will do everything in their power to seriously investigate this seemingly innocent organization that has such a dark past full of negligence, irresponsibility, sexual harassment, abuse, and ultimately emotional harm that could leave permanent scars in the lives of many vulnerable youth in Maine, or even destroy their lives completely. It makes me wonder, what horrendous acts will occur this week, or the next, or in the many months to come? More importantly, what will the BoH and the Rockland community do to make sure these destructive adult “advisors” are no longer allowed to have influence on these poor youth?

I appreciate your time and hope you will consider my words seriously with the utmost concern for the welfare of Maine’s children.

Sincerely,
Adam Flanders

TAKE ACTION — Do you know whether your child’s teachers, school counselors, and principal are normalizing homosexual behavior in your local school? Find out! (You can use the Risk Audit PDF from Mission America.) Then react to what you learn — for example, if your school has a “GSA” make it known in writing that your children are not permitted to participate in their presentations, meetings, or activities.

Excerpted from Gay Teens Coming Out Earlier to Peers and Family, by Marilyn Elias, published Feb 8, 2007, by USA Today:

…Gay teenagers are “coming out” earlier than ever, and many feel better about themselves than earlier generations of gays, youth leaders and researchers say. The change is happening in the wake of opinion polls that show growing acceptance of gays, more supportive adults and positive gay role models in popular media.

…Still, many continue to have a tough time. The worst off, experts say, are young people in conservative rural regions and children whose parents cannot abide having gay offspring. Taunting at school is still common…

…Schools are more likely than in the past to have openly gay staff members who can help young people, says Anthony D’Augelli, an associate dean at Pennsylvania State University. In a recent national survey, one-third of school psychologists said they had counseled students or parents about sexual orientation.

In the mid-1990s, a few dozen Gay-Straight Alliance clubs were in U.S. high schools; now 3,200 are registered with the education network, Jennings says.

The Internet also has eased isolation for gay teens, offering a place for socializing and support, says Stephanie Sanders of the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction in Bloomington, Ind.

Cultural diversity is prevalent

Teens are coming out in an era when more Americans than ever consider homosexuality acceptable. In 2006, 54% found homosexuality acceptable, compared with 38% in 1992, Gallup polls show.

Youths also swim in a cultural sea that’s far more pro-gay than ever, says Ritch Savin-Williams, a psychologist at Cornell University and author of The New Gay Teenager. From MTV’s The Real World to Will & Grace and Ellen DeGeneres hosting the Oscars, “kids can see gays in a positive light,” he says…

…Not everyone applauds the soaring number of school-based gay/straight alliances and adult-led programs for gay teens. “Homosexuality is harmful to society, and young people have no business committing to a sexual identity until they’re adults,” says Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council, a conservative policy group. The council backs a new Georgia law, first in the nation, that requires schools to tell parents about clubs and allows them to forbid their children to participate in gay/straight alliances.

Lobbying is underway to pass similar laws in North Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee, Alabama and Texas, says Joe Glover of the Family Policy Network, a Christian family advocacy group. “Parents shouldn’t have to check their rights at the school room door,” he says.

Researchers traditionally have emphasized that gay teens have worse mental health and higher suicide rates than straight teens. But Cornell’s Savin-Williams says these conclusions are primarily based on small, older studies skewed to troubled youths. A few newer studies suggest teens who are attracted to both sexes may have the worst problems. But most research has grouped them with homosexuals.

Gay kids are more likely than straight teens to think about or try suicide, but there’s no evidence they’re more likely to kill themselves, says sociologist Stephen Russell of the University of Arizona. He has analyzed findings from a study of 12,000 teens followed up to a decade so far. Those with same-sex attractions are more depressed and anxious, Russell says, but there’s also evidence that many who say they’re attracted to others of their sex grow up to be heterosexual. He says stigma and prejudice still prompt undue stress for gay kids.

Continue reading at USA Today…

“…they invent ways of doing evil…”

–Romans 1:30

In a future post, we’ll revisit the flack that Greg Freeman got from the Thought Police over at GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) for writing this piece.

The following is excerpted from Bug Chasers, by Gregory A. Freeman, published Jan 23, 2003, by Rolling Stone:

Carlos nonchalantly asks whether his drink was made with whole or skim milk. He takes a moment to slurp on his grande Caffe Mocha in a crowded Starbucks, and then he gets back to explaining how much he wants HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. His eyes light up as he says that the actual moment of transmission, the instant he gets HIV, will be “the most erotic thing I can imagine.” He seems like a typical thirty-two-year-old man, but, in fact, he has a secret life. Carlos is chasing the bug…

Carlos spends the afternoon continually calling a man named Richard, someone he met on the Internet. They met on barebackcity.com about a year ago, while Carlos was still with his boyfriend. That boyfriend left because Carlos was having sex with other men and because he was interested in barebacking — the practice of having sex without a condom. Carlos and Richard are arranging a “date” for later that day.

Carlos is part of an intricate underground world that has sprouted, driven almost completely by the Internet, in which men who want to be infected with HIV get together with those who are willing to infect them. The men who want the virus are called “bug chasers,” and the men who freely give the virus to them are called “gift givers.” While the rest of the world fights the AIDS epidemic and most people fear HIV infection, this subculture celebrates the virus and eroticizes it. HIV-infected semen is treated like liquid gold. Carlos has been chasing the bug for more than a year in a topsy-turvy world in which every convention about HIV is turned upside down. The virus isn’t horrible and fearsome, it’s beautiful and sexy — and delivered in the way that is most likely to result in infection. In this world, the men with HIV are the most desired, and the bug chasers will do anything to get the virus — to “get knocked up,” to be “bred” or “initiated into the brotherhood.”

Like a lot of sexual fetishes and extreme behaviors, bug chasing could not exist without the Internet, or at least it couldn’t thrive… Carlos surfs online about twenty hours a week looking for men to have sex with… Most of the Web sites use the pretense that they actually are about barebacking, which is in itself risky and controversial but still a long way from bug chasing. For the Web sites, that distinction is at best razor-thin and more often just an outright lie. “We got Poz4Poz, Neg4Neg and bug chasers looking to join the club,” the welcome page to barebackcity.com, which claims 48,000 registered users, up from 28,000 about a year ago, recently said. “Be the first to seed a newbie and give him a pozitive attitude!”

Within this online community, bug chasers revel in their desires, using their own lingo about “poz” and “neg” men, “bug juice” and “conversion” from negative to positive. User profiles include names such as BugChaser21, Knockmeup, BugMeSoon, ConvertMeSir, PozCum4NegHole and GiftGiver. The posters are upfront about seeking HIV, even extremely enthusiastic, possibly because the Web sites are about the only place a bug seeker can really express his desires openly. Under turn-ons, a poster called PozMeChgo craves a “hot poz load deep in me. I really want to be converted!! Breed me/seed me!” Carlos’ profile on one Web site lists his screen name as ConvertMe, and he says he wants a man “to fill me up with that poison seed.” His AOL Instant Messenger name is Bug Juice Wanted.

It’s not uncommon to see people post replies to the profiles encouraging the men to seek HIV. One such comment reads, “This guy knows what he wants!! I would love to plant my seeds ) Come and join the club. The more we are, the stronger we are.”…

Condoms and safe sex are openly ridiculed on bug-chasing Web sites, with many bug chasers rebelling against what they see as the dogma of safe-sex education; constantly thinking about a deadly disease takes all the fun out of sex, they say, and condoms suck. Carlos agrees and says getting HIV will make safe sex a moot point. “It’s about freedom,” he says. “What else can happen to us after this? You can f*** whoever you want, f*** as much as you want, and nothing worse can happen to you. Nothing bad can happen after you get HIV.”…

Carlos should meet Doug Hitzel, but he probably never will. A year ago they might have been online buddies, both sharing a passion for HIV that few others understood. Now Hitzel understands all too clearly what bug chasing can do to a young man’s life, but it’s too late for him. After six months of bug chasing, Hitzel succeeded in getting the virus. He’s now a twenty-one-year-old freshman at a Midwestern university, so wholesome-looking you’d think he just walked out of a cornfield.

Hitzel’s experience started when he moved from his home in Nebraska to San Francisco with his boyfriend. When that relationship broke up, Hitzel was at the lowest point in his life, and alone. He sought relief in drugs and sex, as much of each as he could get. At first, he started out just not caring whether he got HIV or not, then he found the bug-chasing underground and embraced it. He was sure he’d get HIV soon anyway. He thought he would always feel exactly like he did then; he was certain that ten, twenty, thirty years later he’d still be partying every night. It lasted only six months — then Hitzel got sick with awful flulike symptoms and lost a lot of weight. A doctor’s visit cleared him of hepatitis and other possible problems, but the clinic sent him home with an HIV test he could do himself. Hitzel waited before doing the test and decided to go home to Nebraska, to give up the bug chasing and the rest of the life that was killing him. Once he got home, he did the test and found out he was positive. He now wakes up each day with a terrible frustration that’s just below the surface of his once sunny demeanor. He hates the medication he has to take every day, and he realizes that HIV affects nearly every part of his life…

Looking back on it, Hitzel says he was committing suicide by chasing HIV, killing himself slowly because he didn’t have the nerve to do it quickly. Hitzel is ashamed and embarrassed that he actually sought HIV, but he’s willing to tell his story because he hopes to dissuade others who are on the same path. He gets angry when he hears bug chasers talking in the same ways he talked a year earlier. The mention of “bug chasing” and “gift giving” sets him off.

” ‘Bug chasing’ sounds like a group of kindergartners running around chasing grasshoppers and butterflies,” Hitzel says, “a beautiful thing. And gift giving? What the hell is that? I just wish the terms would actually put some real context into what’s going on. Why did I not want to say that I was deliberately infecting myself? Because saying the word infect sounds bad and gross and germy. I wanted it to be sexualized.” He’s particularly angered by the idea of HIV being erotic: “How about you follow me after I start new medications and you watch me throw up for a few weeks? Tell me how erotic that is.”

Though he’s older, Carlos lives a life that has a lot in common with Hitzel’s in San Francisco. Carlos estimates that he has had several hundred sex partners throughout his life, and he routinely hooks up with three or four guys a week, all of them HIV-positive or at least uncertain about their status.

That’s a common trait among bug chasers, says Dr. Bob Cabaj…

When I asked about bug chasing, leaders of groups such as Gay Men’s Health Crisis in New York, the San Francisco AIDS Foundation, the Stop AIDS Project, and the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation weren’t interested in providing much education or increasing public awareness. To the contrary, most were dismissive of the issue and some actively dissuaded me from writing the article at all…

The assistant director of community education at GMHC, Daniel Castellanos, acknowledges that bug chasing exists but claims there’s not much need to discuss it because it involves such a small population. But would he try to talk a bug chaser out of trying to get HIV? “If someone comes to me and says he wants to get HIV, I might work with him around why he wants to do it,” he says. “But if in the end that’s a decision he wants to make, there’s a point where we have to respect people’s decisions.”…

“It may be a small number of actual people, but they may be disproportionately involved in continuing the spread of HIV,” [Cabaj] says. “That’s a major issue when you’re talking about how to control the spread of a virus. A small percentage could be responsible for continuing the infection. The clinical impact is profound, no matter how small the numbers.”…

What frustrates health-care professionals the most, [Dr. Robert Janssen, director of the division of HIV/AIDS Prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta,] says, is that “gay men who are doing this haven’t a clue what they’re doing,” he says.

“They’re incredibly selfish and self-absorbed. They don’t have any idea what’s going on with the epidemic in terms of the world or society or what impact their actions might have. The sense of being my brother’s keeper is never discussed in the gay community because we’ve gone to the extreme of saying gay men with HIV can do no wrong. They’re poor victims, and we can’t ever criticize them.”

Furthering the epidemic doesn’t bother Carlos. Bug chasing requires a great deal of self-delusion, and he easily acknowledges the contradictions in what he’s doing. He notes that while he seeks HIV, he doesn’t eat junk food or smoke, and that he drinks only socially. “I take care of myself,” he says proudly. He also notes the hypocrisy in his doing volunteer work at GMHC, in which he tells other men to use condoms and practice safe sex, while he’s hunting for partners for his secret hobby. The conflict doesn’t bother him in the least…

After several phone calls to work out a time, Carlos is ready to go see Richard. He’s had sex with Richard about thirty times in the past year. “Knowing he’s positive just makes it more fun for me,” he says. “It’s erotic that someone is breeding me.” Richard is in the entertainment business, in his mid- to late forties.

“Lots of guys want to know who breeds them,” Carlos continues. “When I have sex, I like to always make it special, a really good time, something nice and memorable in case that is the one that gives it to me.”

Carlos offers, not for the first time, to have me come along and watch him and Richard have sex, but I decline. In the taxi to Richard’s place, the conversation falls silent. He hasn’t been tested in a couple of years, and he’s reluctant to get a test now. He might very well be positive already. But as long as he doesn’t know for sure, he can always hope that tonight is the night he gets the virus. Every date is potentially The One. Stepping out of the cab into the rain, I ask what he will do if he finds out one day that he has succeeded in being infected — ending the fun of being a bug chaser. He stops, then says he might move on to being a gift giver:

“If I know that he’s negative and I’m f***ing him, it sort of gets me off. I’m murdering him in a sense, killing him slowly, and that’s sort of, as sick as it sounds, exciting to me.”

Continue reading in Rolling Stone…

For the last three days, media outlets from across the country have flooded FRC with calls on our reaction to the news that Vice President Cheney’s daughter, who has a lesbian partner, is expecting a child. We have purposefully declined to comment on the story, in order to maintain FRC’s focus on policy discussions. However, when an event such as this is used by some as a catalyst for advancing a political agenda or promoting public policy that attacks traditional marriage or parenting, I have no reservations about stepping forward and defending morality and the family — regardless of who is involved. Today’s Washington Post features such an attempt by editorial columnist Ruth Marcus. With an air of noble tutelage, Marcus writes, “Whether she intends it or not, [Mary Cheney's] pregnancy will, I think, turn out to be a watershed in public understanding and acceptance of this phenomenon.”

Unlike Marcus, authorities on child and family health do not use anecdotes as the basis for public policy. Their analysis is fact-driven, not emotion-driven. And those facts have seldom changed. Marcus writes that “To be a badly wanted child… in a home with two loving parents is no tragedy. If they’re worried about ‘emotional devastation,’ they would do better to reserve their lamentations for children in poverty, those who are abused or neglected, or for children in families splintered by divorce.” Children’s needs, however, are more than the sum of the wants in the lives of the adults who reside with them. Study after study demonstrates that no amount of care or financial privilege can compensate for the missing physical and emotional benefits experienced by children who enjoy the lifelong love and presence of a married mother and father.

Comprehensive studies published in the peer-reviewed journals Archives of General Psychiatry, Interpersonal Violence, Social Service Research, Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Nursing Research, Developmental Psychology, Adolescence, and others too numerous to list here, all cite the devastating effects of domestic violence, increased substance abuse, mental health problems, sexual identity confusion, depression, and suicide associated with the homosexual lifestyle. A child fortunate enough to escape those realities still faces a distinct disadvantage throughout childhood — the irreplaceable influence of the missing biological parent. In rearing children, the complementary contributions of a mother and father are rooted in the innate differences of the two sexes, and can no more be arbitrarily replaced than can the very nature of male and female.

But besides dismissing science, Marcus misrepresents the reality of Virginia law. In her eagerness to exploit the circumstances, she asserts that the state’s new marriage protection amendment “casts doubt on the ability of Cheney and Poe to write binding medical directives and wills.” The law casts no doubt on the matter. It implicitly allows individuals to engage in private contracts. Here Marcus succeeds in personalizing her argument but not substantiating it. She concludes, “[This] high-profile pregnancy will help the Republican party come to grips with [the] facts of life. If not, [Mary Cheney] will have to explain to her child what mommy was doing trying to help a party that doesn’t believe in fairness for families like theirs.” What is at stake in these debates, however, is ultimately not the fate of political parties or the lateral “fairness” adults seek, but what is fair and favorable for children, all of whom have a stake in whether our nation stands by the ideal of homes embraced by, and embracing, a mother and father, a husband and a wife.

From Why Isn’t Homosexuality Considered A Disorder On The Basis Of Its Medical Consequences?, by Kathleen Melonakos, M.A., R.N.Delaware Family Foundation, published first by NARTH and also by LifeSite News:

I worked as an RN for several years during the eighties and nineties at Stanford University Medical Center, where I saw some of the damage homosexuals do to their bodies with some of their sexual practices. As a result of that eye-opening experience, I much admire the work of NARTH in the research and treatment of homosexuality.

I have long been concerned about the serious medical consequences which result from the gay-affirming attitudes that predominate in the San Francisco Bay Area. For example, I knew personally a prominent dermatologist, a dentist, an engineer, and a hairdresser that died in their mid-forties of infectious diseases related to their homosexual behavior patterns. I know of many others that have died young as a result of living a gay lifestyle.

The co-author of my own medical reference book, Saunders Pocket Reference for Nurses,[i] was the head of the surgery department at Stanford. She related case histories of homosexuals needing emergency surgery due to “fisting,” “playing with toys,” (inserting objects into the rectum) and other bizarre acts. I am certain — in light of my clinical experience, and since doing considerable amount of studying about it since that time — that homosexuality is neither normal nor benign; rather, it is a lethal behavioral addiction as Dr. Jeffrey Satinover outlines in his book, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth.[ii]

As far as I know, there is no other group of people in the United States that dies of infectious diseases in their mid-forties except practicing homosexuals. This, to me, is tragic, when we know that homosexuality can be prevented, in many cases, or substantially healed in adulthood when there is sufficient motivation and help.

I now live in Delaware and work in conjunction with the Delaware Family Foundation to inform the public about homosexual issues. We are debating gay activists who want to add “sexual discrimination” to our anti-discrimination code. In trying to make the case that homosexuality is not healthy and should not be encouraged, we come up against the fact that neither the American Psychiatric Association, nor the American Psychological Association recognize it as a disorder. Our opponents say we are using “scare tactics.”

Dr. Satinover brilliantly laid out in his book, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth, the solid, irrefutable evidence that there are lethal consequences of engaging in the defining features of male homosexuality–that is, promiscuity and anal intercourse.

It doesn’t take someone trained in medicine to recognize that, as Brian Camenker of the Parent Right’s Coalition said on national TV, “A lifetime of anal sex does not do great things for the body.” Brian also said, “As troubling as that statement sounds, there is no logical argument against it.” Thus, even lay people recognize what should be obvious, especially to those trained in medicine, and who know the basic facts about homosexuality. It seems to me that medical professionals should be more aware and concerned about the consequences of habitually engaging in promiscuous anal intercourse, and other oral-anal practices of active homosexuals.[iiia]

The risk of anal cancer soars for those engaging in anal intercourse. According to one report, it rises by an astounding 4000%, and doubles again for those who are HIV positive.[iiib]

Can anyone refute that anal intercourse tears the rectal lining of the receptive partner, regardless of whether a condom is worn, and the subsequent contact with fecal matter leads to a host of diseases?

Diseases to which active homosexuals are vulnerable can be classified as follows:

• Classical sexually transmitted diseases (gonorrhea, infections with Chlamydia trachomatis, syphilis, herpes simplex infections, genital warts, pubic lice, scabies);
• Enteric diseases (infections with Shigella species, Campylobacter jejuni, Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia lamblia, ["gay bowel disease"],
• Hepatitis A, B, C, D, and cytomegalovirus);
• Trauma (related to and/or resulting in fecal incontinence, hemorroids, anal fissure, foreign bodies lodged in the rectum, rectosigmoid tears, allergic proctitis, penile edema, chemical sinusitis, inhaled nitrite burns, and sexual assault of the male patient);
• And the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS).[iv]

Can anyone refute that increased morbidity and mortality is an unavoidable result of male-with-male sex — not to mention the increased rates of alcoholism, drug abuse, depression, suicide and other maladies that so often accompany a homosexual lifestyle?[v] People with this whole cluster of behavior patterns are somehow “normal”?

My primary question is: why isn’t homosexuality considered a disorder on the basis of its medical consequences alone? Dr. Satinover and others have made a solid case for why homosexuality parallels alcoholism as an unhealthy addiction. It should have a parallel diagnosis.

There is a lot of literature, including on the NARTH website, discussing the 1973 removal of homosexuality as a diagnosis. The arguments against the change in diagnosis seem to center around “societal standards,” moral relativism, “subjective distress” of the client, and whether or not there is any objective standard for “psychological” normalcy (for instance, the debate between Joseph Nicolosi and Dr. Michael Wertheimer in A Clash In Worldviews: An Interview with Dr. Michael Wertheimer).

While these considerations are important, it seems like we can set aside, for the moment, the debate on whether homosexuality should be classified as a developmental disorder. Very simply, it seems, an objective person just looking at homosexuality’s lifestyle consequences would have to classify it as some kind of pathology. Does it or does it not lead to a dramatically shortened lifespan? Studies say it does, some by as much as 40%; the Cameron study being only one of many other studies that suggest this.[vi]

Taken together, these studies establish that homosexuality is more deadly than smoking, alcoholism, or drug addiction. However, it appears that far too few physicians or other professionals are making arguments in favor of homosexuality as a diagnosis based on its adverse health consequences.

While doing research into the history of the 1973 decision to remove homosexuality from the diagnostic manual of disorders, I have been shocked to find out the specious reasoning upon which the decision was based, and that qualified physicians have allowed the decision to stand.

On Feb. 5, 2002, I corresponded by e-mail with Dr. Robert Spitzer of the APA and asked him to send me references for the position papers and studies upon which his committee based its decision to remove the diagnosis. He told me to read Ron Bayer’s book,[vii] the “closest thing to a position paper” (American Journal of Psychiatry,130:11, 1207-1216), and he said, “There was no specific list of references, but what was influential too was the Evelyn Hooker Rorshach study and the Eli Robins community study.”[viii]

I have read many of the criticisms of the Hooker study — how respondents were specifically selected rather than at random, and other methodological limitations.[ix] Dr. Charles Socarides informs us also that Spitzer was influenced by the Kinsey Report, which was recognized as early as 1976 by “social progressives” like Prof. Paul Robinson of Stanford as “a pathetic manifestation of Kinsey’s philosophical naivete.. a mechanical contrivance, which…bore little relation to reality,”[x] and since has been discredited by the work of Judith Reisman and others.

It is clear that Dr. Socarides was right when he said that the decision to remove homosexuality as a diagnosis “involved the out-of-hand and peremptory disregard and dismissal not only of hundreds of psychiatric and psychoanalytic research papers and reports, but other serious studies by groups of psychiatrists, psychologists and educators over the past seventy years…”[xi]

It appears even more obvious that the Task Force on Nomenclature cavalierly ignored (and the APA’s continue to ignore!) the substantial and unambiguous evidence that homosexuality involves a life-threatening behavior with an addictive component which has serious health implications.[xii]

That the APA’s have escaped accountability for their lack of scientific and professional integrity is especially incredible since the advent of the AIDS epidemic. There are currently an estimated 900,000 people in the United States that are infected with the HIV virus, or 1 in 300 Americans. Though there has been a decrease in AIDS deaths per year due to drug therapy, (which costs an average of $12,000 per patient per year) the rate of new infections per year has remained the same, at 40,000, despite the twenty year “safe-sex” campaign.[xiii]

These facts demonstrate the failure of current policies in containing the AIDS epidemic. While drug therapy will briefly extend the life of these patients, AIDS remains the fifth leading cause of death among those aged 25-44, and 60% of new cases are contracted by men who have sex with men.[xiv] According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), homosexual men are a thousand times more likely to contract AIDS than the general heterosexual population.[xv]

Dr. Satinover has said in an interview with NARTH:

“A recent article in a psychiatric publication informed us that 30% of all 20-year-old homosexual men will be HIV positive or dead by the age of thirty. You would think that the objective, ethical approach would be: let’s use anything that works to try to take these people out of their posture of risk. If it means getting them to wear condoms fine. If it means getting them to give up anal intercourse, fine. If it means getting them to give up homosexuality, fine. But that last intervention is the one intervention that it absolutely taboo.

“There is no doubt that a cold, statistical analysis of this epidemic would lead you to believe that this attitude of political correctness is killing a substantial proportion of these people. I think there is an element of denial, in the psychological sense, of what gay-related illnesses really mean.”[xvi]

It seems to me that the APA’s should be aggressively pressed to recognize the facts about the morbidity and mortality directly attributed to homosexuality, or be exposed for the recklessly irresponsible “guardians of the public health” they have become, at least on this issue.

When will doctors and other health care workers demand that officers in the American Psychiatric Association respond to the clear evidence in the following: Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth: the mortality rates listed in their own “APA’s Practical Guidelines for Treating Patients with HIV/AIDS“;[xvii] and other important reports, such as the Monograph put out by the Institute of Sexual Health, Health Implications of Homosexuality?[xviii]

Lest we think that APA officers justify their neglect of medical consequences of homosexuality on the basis that sexual orientation cannot be changed, we note that Robert Spitzer acknowledged in his original 1973 position paper on Nomenclature that “modern methods of treatment enable a significant proportion of homosexuals who wish to change their sexual orientation to do so.”[xix]

He has now confirmed the fact that sexual orientation can be changed with his recent study.[xx] We know that changing sexual orientation only became “impossible” in the nineties, as part of a political strategy by gay activists.[xxi]

Spitzer and his allies’ rationale for removing homosexuality as a diagnosis in 1973 was that to be considered a psychiatric disorder,

“it must either regularly cause subjective distress, or regularly be associated with some generalized impairment in social effectiveness or functioning….Clearly homosexuality per se does not meet the requirements for a psychiatric disorder, since, as noted above, many are quite satisfied with their sexual orientation and demonstrate no generalized impairment in social effectiveness or functioning.” (Spitzer, et.al, p. 1215).

The Task Force’s reasoning fails for several reasons. First, even if we grant the validity of their stated criteria (which is questionable), the fact that many homosexuals “are satisfied with their sexual orientation,” fails to take into account the large number of homosexuals who are not satisfied with their sexual orientation and who do experience “subjective distress and generalized impairment in social functioning.” The removal of the diagnosis is not just unfair, but cruel to those who would seek treatment for their condition.

Secondly, there are unambiguous reasons to think that homosexuality per se does cause “generalized impairment in social effectiveness or functioning.” If in fact it is a lethal addiction, and the many studies documenting the behavior patterns of homosexuals are correct (that show compulsive patterns of promiscuity, anonymous sex, sex for money, sex in public places, sex with minors, concomitant drug and alcohol abuse, depression, suicide), for the APA to argue that these features do not constitute an “impairment of social effectiveness or functioning,” stretches the boundaries of plausibility. To argue that early death does not constitute an “impairment of social effectiveness or functioning” is absurd.

The APA claims its mission is “to promote a bio-psycho-social approach to understanding and caring for patients, in all aspects of health care, including illness prevention” (APA’s Strategic Goals Statement). Thus the APA violates its own goals then when it ignores evidence that homosexuality can in many cases be prevented, and denies reorientation therapy to those who want it.

A careful reading of the articles opposing reorientation therapy reveals their authors’ rationale that they find such therapy to be “oppressive” to those who do not want therapy.[xxii]

What if this logic was applied to any other lethal illness? What if doctors said, “We refuse to treat cancer (or, say, alcoholism) because we only achieve a 50% cure rate–and many people who don’t want to be cured find it oppressive that we do cure the others?” Why wouldn’t the lawsuits for malpractice be filed?

We know that Ronald Gold of the Gay Activist’s Alliance, an openly gay man, was a member of the committee to remove homosexuality as a diagnosis in 1973. We know that gay activists were disrupting meetings, threatening doctors, and using other strong-arm tactics to get their way at that time.[xxiii]

We also know that homosexual activists like Dr. Richard Isay in the APA have pressed for resolutions to punish therapists for practicing reorientation therapy, and that threats of lawsuits appear to be the main reason the APA has not implemented his proposals.[xxiv]

We know homosexual advocates in the APA continue to suppress debate about Spitzer’s new study documenting that sexual orientation can be changed (and to suppress debate about other supporting studies).[xxv] We also know that active homosexuals such as Clinton Anderson at the American Psychological Association refuse to permit NARTH to engage in open debate or announce NARTH meetings in APA publications simply because he disagrees with the premises upon which reorientation therapy is based.[xxvi]

For these reasons, I do not think it is far-fetched to use the analogy that the “drunks are running the rehab center,” in reference to the APA’s–at least as far as homosexuality is concerned. Active homosexuals can hardly be objective about an addictive behavior they engage in themselves. In light of the medical evidence, it seems that the Galenic dictum, “physician heal thyself,” should apply, as it did it in the past, as Dr. Satinover suggests.[xxvii]

It seems to me the situation in this country will only get worse until the APA is held directly responsible for what is arguably their criminal negligence. In failing to reckon with serious medical consequences of the homosexual behavior pattern, they are harming our whole society, and especially the upcoming generation.

The recent decision by the American Academy of Pediatrics to endorse gay adoptions is yet another disturbing example of how the decision to “normalize” homosexuality by the APA has had a broad ripple effect. Health professionals especially, should heed Dean Byrd’s outcry on the NARTH web site that it is time that the American people “insist on truth, not politics, from all of our professional organizations.”

What will it take to insist on truth? Lawsuits? Protests? In my opinion, doctors and other health professionals must exert pressure, or share culpability.

What if every person reading this article sent a copy of it to the president of the American Psychiatric Association and asked for a response? Reasoned debate is the least that psychiatrists owe our society–especially those whose lives and loved ones are at risk.

The following is relevant contact information If interested in contacting these organizations, remember that our aim is to open up a principled, civil debate:

American Psychiatric Association

President, Richard Harding, M.D.
RHarding@Richmed.medpark.sc.edu

President-Elect, Paul Appelbaum, M.D.
appelbap@ummhc.org

American Psychiatric Association
1400 K Street N.W., Washington, DC 20005
phone (888) 357-7924
fax 202-682-6850
apa@psych.org

[i] Melonakos, Kathleen, Saunders Pocket Reference for Nurses, Philadelphia: Saunders, 1990, (2nd ed)., with Sheryl Michelson, , 1995.

[ii] Satinover, Jeffrey, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth, Hamewith/Baker Books, 1996.

[iiia] For an eye-opening survey of the medical studies and journal reports describing the unhygienic and disease-producing practices of homosexuals, see http://www.cprmd.org, “Homosexual Myths–Male Homosexuals are Healthy and Have Normal Sex Lives.”

[iiib] Fenger, C. “Anal Neoplasia and Its Precursors: Facts and Controversies,” Seminars in Diagnostic Pathology 8, no. 3, August 1991, pp.190-201; Daling, J.R. et al., “Sexual Practices, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, and the Incidence of Anal Cancer,” New England Journal of Medicine 317, no.16, 15 October 1987, pp. 973-77; Holly, E.A. et al., “Anal Cancer Incidence: Genital Warts, Anal Fissure or Fistula, Hemorrhoids, and Smoking,” Journal of the National Cancer Institute 81, no. 22, November 1989, pp. 1726-31; Daling, J.R. et.al, “Correlates of Homosexual Behavior and the Incidence of Anal Cancer,” Journal of the American Medical Association 247, no.14, 9 April 1982, pp. 1988-90; Cooper, H.S., Patchefsky, A.S. and Marks, G., “Cloacogenic Carcinoma of the Anorectum in Homosexual Men: An Observation of Four Cases“; Diseases of the Colon and Rectum 22, no. 8, 1979, pp. 557-58. Also see Between the Lines, Michigan’s statewide gay newspaper, reporting on the risk of anal cancer for men who have sex with men, http://www.afa.net/homosexual_agenda/ha031901.asp

[iv] W.E. Owen Jr., “Medical Problems of the Homosexual Adolescent,” Journal of Adolescent Health Care6, No.4, July 1985, pp. 278-85.

[v] See O’Leary, Dale, “Recent Studies on Homosexuality and Mental Health,” http://www.narth.com/docs/recent.html. O’Leary gives a summary of health findings and references for specific studies.

[vi] Mr. Trey Kern, President of the Citizen’s for Parent Rights, in Pasadena, Maryland has collected an impressive amount data on studies documenting the diminished lifespan of active homosexuals. See http://www.cprmd.org, “Homosexual Myths: Homosexuals Live Long Lives, Fact Sheet. Studies include: (G. Tardieu, 1858; M. Hirschfield, 1914, Kinsey, 1930’s, 1940’s; Mattachine Society, 1950’s: Berger, 1960’s, Kinsey Institute, 1969; Spada Report 1978; M. Mendola, 1979; Cameron, Playfair, Wellum, 1994; Hogg, R.S., et. al, International Journal of Epidemiology, 1997; Cameron, P, Cameron, K, Playfair, WL., Psychological Reports, 1998.

[vii] Bayer, R. Homosexuality and American Psychiatry, Princeton University Press, 1987. Mr. Bayer chronicled the story of how homosexuality was removed as a diagnosis. It confirms that the APA did not officially investigate or study the issue thoroughly before it gave formal approval of the deletion of homosexuality from the DSMII.

[viii] Personal e-mail correspondence with Dr. Spitzer, Feb. 5, 2002.

[ix] Socarides, Charles, W., “Sexual Politics and Scientific Logic: The Issue of Homosexuality,” The Journal of Psychohistory, 10:3, 1992, p. 309 Dr. Socarides explains that a task force within the APA itself concluded in 1973 that Hooker’s study was full of methodological errors, and did not warrant her conclusions. See also, Joseph Nicolosi, “Clash of Worldviews: Interview with Michael Wertheimer“, http://www.narth.com.

[x] Socarides, p. 324.

[xi].Socarides, p. 315

[xii] Spitzer, R.L, et. al, in “Symposium: Should Homosexuality Be in the APA Nomenclature?” American Journal of Psychiatry, 130:11, 1973 make no mention whatsoever of any health implications of homosexuality. Also, I asked Dr. Spitzer in an e-mail correspondence April 4, 2001, whether there was any chance the APA might change its policy in light of evidence that sexual orientation can be changed and the negative impact of homosexual practices upon lifespan. He acknowledged nothing about shortened lifespan, but gave a one-sentence reply that said there was no possibility that APA would change its policy on homosexuality at that time.

[xiii] “APA’s Practical Guidelines for the Treatment of Patients with HIV/AIDS,” Epidemiology, Clinical Features Influencing Treatment, sections, http://www.psych.org/aids/

[xiv] Ibid, Anti-Viral Treatment section.

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

[xvi] Satinover, Jeffrey, “Reflections: Interview with NARTH,” Feb. 5, 2001, http:http://www.narth.com/docs/satinover.html.

[xvii] See American Psychiatric Association website, http://www.psych.org/aids/, or obtain bound copy of report available from American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc., 1-800-368-5777, or http://www.appi.org.

[xviii] Monograph is available from The Institute of Sexual Health, P.O.Box 162306, Austin, TX 78716, ph (512) 328-6268, fax (ph) 538-6269.

[xix] Spitzer, R.L, et. al, “Symposium: Should Homosexuality Be in the APA Nomenclature?” p.1215.

[xx] Spitzer, R.L, “Two Hundred Subjects Who Claim to Have Changed Their Sexual Orientation from Homosexual to Heterosexual,” presentation made at the American Psychiatric Association, May 9th, 2001, in New Orleans, available from NYS Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, 10032, phone (212) 543-5524.

[xxi] Rev. Dr. Earle Fox, former president of the chapter of Exodus Intl. whose members picketed the 2000 APA convention to protest the denial of therapy to those who want it (which resulted in Dr. Robert Spitzer’s 2001 study on reorientation therapy), tells in “Homosexuality Wrongly a Civil Right,” Delaware State News, January 13, 2002, how no one was disputing that sexual orientation could be changed until gay activists, Kirk and Madsen, in After the Ball: How America will Conquer It’s Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90’s, Doubleday, 1989, outlined their plan to convince America gays were “born that way,” and “beyond the realm of moral choice,” p. 189.

[xxii] For an extensive survey of the articles promoting the view opposing reorientation therapy, see Diamond, Eugene, et.al, Homosexuality and Hope, the results of a two-year study, published by the Catholic Medical Association, p. 14, obtainable at P.O. Box 757, Pewaukee, WI, 53072 or http://www.cathmed.org. Some of the articles quoted are Davison, G., 1982; Gittings, 1973; Begelman, 1975, 1977; Murphy 1992; Sleek 1997; Silverstein, 1972; Smith, 1988. See also, “Psychiatrists Reject Therapy to Alter Gays: Efforts aimed at Turning Homosexuals into Heterosexuals are Harmful, Professional Board Declares, Even for Those Not Being Treated,” Los Angeles Times, Dec. 12, 1998.

[xxiii] Socarides, p. 310. See also, Satinover, p. 31-40.

[xxiv] See Satinover, p. 36,180-182, and Stern, Mark, E, “The Battle Against the A.P.A. Resolution”, http://www.narth.com, Interviews/Testimonies.

[xxv] Rev. Dr. Earle Fox, Delaware State News, Jan. 13, 2002.

[xxvi] NARTH Bulletin, Vol. 10, No. 3, Dec. 2001, Letter from Clinton W. Anderson to Drs. Nicolosi and Byrd, p. 16.

[xxvii] Satinover, p. 47.

A woman who grew up with a same-sex-attracted father has launched an effort to help similar people deal with the pain they experience.

Excerpted from New Website Offers Support For Adult Children of Homosexuals, by Gail Besse, published Oct 8-14, 2006, in National Catholic Register:

She had every daughter’s natural need for affirmation,
but that was something her homosexual father just couldn’t give his little girl.

Now in her 40s, Dawn Stefanowicz knows there are others like her — others who as children ached with silent hunger for that missing connection. To help them, she has set up the first website that specifically addresses the impact of homosexual parenting from the adult child’s perspective.

“It pierces the inside of you when you know the truth. Men who struggle with their own masculinity cannot affirm femininity,” she said. “Six-year-olds cannot tell you how they’re being impacted. We can’t comprehend what we went through until we’re adults.

“People aren’t comfortable sharing this, but keeping it hidden hurts children,” she said. “The secular media is not carrying the message that this impacts children long-term.”

Now an accountant and home schooling mother of two, Stefanowicz and her husband of 22 years live in Ontario.

Her website, http://www.dawnstefanowicz.com, went online in early September. It outlines her childhood story, which includes being exposed to nude beaches, “gay cruising” sites and sexually transmitted diseases. The website lists scientific studies and news articles, secular and religious support groups, and confidential contact information.

Her Christian faith and counseling helped Stefanowicz come to terms with her past and with the biological father whom she loved but lost to AIDS.

In the past three years, she has testified in the United States and Canada on behalf of marriage protection laws, and she appeared Sept. 21 on EWTN’s “Life on the Rock.” Her autobiography, Out from Under: Getting Clear of the Wreckage of a Sexually Disordered Home, will be out in 2007.

She went public because children’s voices were one dimension missing from the same-sex “marriage” debate. Adults who as children had first-hand experience of the “gay” lifestyle could speak for them…

A host of parental problems can challenge children raised by those who act out same-sex attraction, according to Dale O’Leary, a writer and researcher for the Catholic Medical Association and author of ­ The Gender Agenda: Redefining Equality. For example, boys reared by two “mothers” face hostility toward their masculinity within the lesbian community.

“Same-sex attraction is the tip of the iceberg,” O’Leary said. “Many such people were victims of sexual child abuse themselves and have multiple problems. Many have suicidal impulses, anger management issues, drug and alcohol abuse, a high level of partner change, serious depression and mental illness. The scary thing is, when children are raised by dysfunctional parents, they often think the problems are their fault,” she said.

Even adult children hesitate to discuss their pain for fear of hurting their parents, Stefanowicz said. Some become promiscuous, when they are really seeking love. Others become perfectionists, seeking a sense of identity through their profession.

She hopes her website will be a vehicle for mutual support and healing, and a resource to uphold marriage as the union of a man and a woman for the sake of all children.

Continue reading in National Catholic Register…