Support Dr. James Holsinger for Surgeon General against Homosexual Lobby’s Bigoted Smear Campaign

 TAKE ACTION:  Help counter the pro-homosexual lobby’s smear campaign attempting to “Bork” Dr. James Holsinger, President Bush’s nominee for U.S. Surgeon General. Here’s how: 

1. Call your U.S. Senators at 202-224-3121 or write them (http://www.congress.org/) and politely urge them to support Dr. James Holsinger, Jr. as Surgeon General; the members of the Senate Health Committee, which will first consider Holsinger, can be found HERE (e-mail the committee at: help_comments@help.senate.gov) — but Holsinger’s nomination will likely be voted on by the whole Senate, so tell your Senators to use their influence to insure that he is treated fairly;
2. Thank the White House (202-456-1111 or -1414; e-mail: comments@whitehouse.gov; www.whitehouse.gov/contact) and urge the President to stand by Dr. Holsinger and not to be swayed by the pro-homosexual lobby’s distortions and anti-Christian bigotry;
3. Tell your friends to support Dr. Holsinger with a quick e-mail or call.

Click HERE TO READ DR. HOLSINGER’S 1991 PAPER, “PATHOPHYSIOLOGY OF MALE HOMOSEXUALITY,” which liberal, pro-homosexual groups are distorting to discredit him.

 __________________________

Dear Americans For Truth Reader, 

By Peter LaBarbera 

Folks, anti-Christian homosexual activists and their liberal allies are out again in force to take down another good man — Dr. James Holsinger, Jr., President Bush’s nominee for U.S. Surgeon General — who happens to agree with the ancient Judeo-Christian moral understanding of homosexual practice as unnatural, unhealthy and wrong.

The ABC report below is Orwellian in its framing of the campaign against Dr. Holsinger — a Christian medical doctor (cardiologist) who also holds a doctorate in anatomy and physiology. Holsinger is being vilified because he wrote in 1991 that male homosexual sex practices are unhealthy, and because he believes that men and women can abandon homosexuality.

The ABC report below — which includes a politically correct quote by the spokesman for the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) — implies that Holsinger’s writings, such as his 1991 paper, “Pathophysiology of Male Homosexuality,” are obsolete and way outside of the scientific mainstream. Hello… Has there been some change in human anatomy (perhaps some hyperactive “evolutionary” mutation in the last 16 years) that suddenly makes rectal sex between men natural and good for the human body?

Please take a few minutes to read Dr. Holsinger’s 1991 paper, reprinted on our website. It was written for a United Methodist Church committee studying homosexuality. See for yourself if the paper has the ring of extremism. Here’s an excerpt:

From the perspective of pathology and pathophysiology, the varied sexual practices of homosexual men have resulted in a diverse and expanded concept of sexually transmitted disease and associated trauma. “Four general groups of conditions may be encountered in homosexually active men: classical sexually transmitted diseases (gonorrhea, infections with chlamydia trachomatis, syphilis, herpes simplex infections, genital warts, pubic lice, scabies); enteric diseases (infections with hig gel la species, Campylobacter jejuni, Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia lamblia, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, hepatitis non-A, non-B, and cytomegalovirus); trauma (fecal incontinence, hemorrhoids, anal fissure, foreign bodies, rectosigmoid tears, allergic proctitis, penile edema, chemical sinusitis, inhaled nitrite burns, and sexual assault of the male patient); and the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)” (Owen, 1985).

Project Smear-the-Good-Doctor Has Begun 

The “gay” activist reaction to Holsinger’s appointment was as swift as it was condemnatory:  

The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, in a statement opposing Holsinger’s nomination, ominously states, “Holsinger authored a 1991 paper titled ‘Pathophysiology of Male Homosexuality,’ which essentially equates homosexuality with disease in lurid terms.”

 

Our reliable nemesis, Wayne Besen, never one to let facts and reason get in the way of some good Christian-bashing, writes of the man he calls “Dr. Discrimination”: “Holsinger is an ideologue whose medieval medical views on gay and lesbian people resemble sorcery more than sound science.” For more Besen-isms on Holsinger, click HERE.

 

The “Reverend” Troy Plummer, director of an outfit called the “Reconciling Ministries of United Methodist Church,” made this very un-‘reconciling’ remark about Dr. Holsinger: “For the last 20 years, James Holsinger has been the worst kind of bully inside the United Methodist Church…  As a member of a sexuality study team in 1991, he used his position as a medical doctor to promote skewed and inaccurate information regarding gay men.” 

 

And Human Rights Campaign (HRC) President Joe Solmonese took Dr. Holsinger to task for being part of a church that helps homosexuals change their lifestyle: “Additionally, Holsinger and his wife were founders of Hope Springs Community Church which, according to the church’s pastor, ministers to people who no longer wish to be gay or lesbian. The pastor, the Rev. David Calhoun, said that the church has an ‘ex-gay’ ministry. ‘We see that as an issue not of orientation but a lifestyle,’ Calhoun said. ‘We have people who seek to walk out of that lifestyle.’ This type of ‘ex-gay’ conversion therapy has been condemned by almost every major, reputable medical organization — including the American Psychological Association, which issued a condemnation more than 10 years ago.

 

“Although the church’s theology isn’t being nominated, this discredited practice purports to be a psychological and medical service, and if Dr. Holsinger is involved in any way, it conflicts with his duty to accept and promote sound science in the interest of public health,” continued Solmonese.

Solmonese’s remarks testify to the “gay” movement’s increasingly brazen anti-Christian bigotry. The fact is, thousands of men’s and women’s lives have been changed through ex-“gay” ministries and church outreaches to bringing healing to people with unwanted homosexual attractions. So the Left is now calling for “investigations” into Christian nominees’ churches?

It is also telling that none of the above radical homosexual groups put a link to Dr. Holsinger’s 1991 paper on their web statements slamming his appointment. If the paper is such good proof of his poor credentials for Surgeon General, why don’t they make if available for all to see?

Incidentally, Carol Lloyd of Slate magazine has another (predictably liberal) take on the Holsinger paper, in a piece called “Hot, Homophobic Pseudoscience.” Lloyd highlights a few portions of the paper and then asks, “Is any else getting hot here”?

Sure, Carol, there’s no aphrodisiac quite like reading descriptions of diseases and bodily damage stemming from deviant sex acts like homosexual sodomy. 

Mysteriously, Slate, too, avoided a direct link to the supposedly awful paper. She linked to HRC’s website but, as we noted, that also has no link to the 1991 paper. Suddenly, it seems, all the high-tech liberals have forgotten how to link to easily available documents to make them accessible to all! 

Can’t Let Facts Get in the Way 

In its online story, ABC News ran the headline, “Homosexuality Isn’t Natural or Healthy,” above this mischievous sub-headline for the Holsinger story: “Bush’s Choice for Top Doc Compared Human Genitalia to Pipe Fittings and Said Homosexual Practices Can Cause Injury or Death.”

Perhaps it is big news to ABC, but isn’t it a reality of America’s post HIV/AIDS landscape that homosexuals men (i.e., “men who have sex with men,” or MSM), comprise an easy majority of all AIDS cases, so why is it a stretch to say that “gay” acts have caused death? 

The premature death of homosexuals and the massive health risks of men having sex with other men is the pink elephant in the room that “gay” activists are desperate to deny is there, despite the evidence all around them. This explains why one homosexual group, the Los Angeles Gay & Lesbian Center, caught flak from fellow “gay” activists when it launched a campaign with the message: “HIV is a gay disease. Own it. End it.” 

Regarding “pipe fittings,” here’s what Dr. Holsinger wrote:

It is absolutely clear that anatomically and physiologically the alimentary [relating to the digestive tract] and reproductive systems in humans are separate organ systems; i.e., the human does not have a cloaca. Likewise it is clear that even primitive cultures understand the nature of waste elimination, sexual intercourse, and the birth of children. Indeed our own children appear to “intuitively” understand these facts. I think we should note that these simple “scientific” facts are the same in any culture — patriarchal or matriarchal, modern or primitive, Jewish or gentile, etc. The anatomic and physiologic facts of alimentation and reproduction simply do not change based on any cultural setting. In fact, the logical complementarity of the human sexes has been so recognized in our culture that it has entered our vocabulary in the form of naming various pipe fittings either the male fitting or the female fitting depending upon which one interlocks within the other. When the complementarity of the sexes is breached, injuries and diseases may occur as noted above. 

Gee, controversial, hateful stuff. Here is the ABC News report on Dr. Holsinger, with our commentary in red:

‘Homosexuality Isn’t Natural or Healthy’
Bush’s Choice for Top Doc Compared Human Genitalia to Pipe Fittings and Said Homosexual Practices Can Cause Injury or Death 

By JAKE TAPPER
June 7, 2007 —

President Bush’s nominee for surgeon general, Dr. James W. Holsinger Jr., wrote a paper in 1991 that purported to make the medical argument that homosexuality is unnatural and unhealthy. Doctors who reviewed the paper derided it as prioritizing political ideology over science, and Democratic aides on Capitol Hill say the paper will make his confirmation hearings problematic, if not downright bruising.

Holsinger, 68, presented “The Pathophysiology of Male Homosexuality” in January 1991 to a United Methodist Church’s committee to study homosexuality. (Read the paper [PDF copy] here.) The church was then considering changing its view that homosexuality violates Christian teaching, though it ultimately did not do so. Relying on footnotes from mainstream medical publications, Holsinger argued that homosexuality isn’t natural or healthy.

“A confirmation fight is exactly what the administration does not need,” said David Gergen, a former adviser to Presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton, who predicted the paper would cause a “minor storm” among Democrats on Capitol Hill.

“You have to wonder given the quality of some of the nominations that have gone forward recently, whether the selection group in the White House has gone on vacation,” Gergen said. “There has been a growing criticism the administration favoring ideology over competence, and this nomination smacks of that.”

[Note that ABC News and Tapper do not quote a single non-administration conservative, pro-family or GOP leader in support of Dr. Holsinger.]

White House Avoids Direct Response to Paper
In its response to the controversy Thursday, the White House avoided directly discussing the controversial paper.

“Dr. Holsinger has dedicated his life to the care of others and public service and his respect for all is evidenced by his actions and his career ,” said White House spokesman Emily Lawrimore. “On numerous occasions, he has taken up the banner for under represented populations and he will continue to be a strong advocate for these groups and all Americans. Dr. Holsinger is a highly respected, well-qualified physician and educator. His impressive medical background, which includes leading one of the Nation’s largest healthcare systems, decades of service in the armed forces, along with his commitment to combating childhood obesity, will serve him well as Surgeon General. We urge the Senate for a swift confirmation.”

HHS: Paper Not Reflective of Holsinger’s Thinking
But Holly Babin, a spokeswoman for the Department of Heath and Human Services — the agency that will take the lead on trying to achieve Holsinger’s confirmation — insisted that the paper was by no means reflective of Holsinger’s thinking.

“That paper was a survey of scientific peer-reviewed studies that he was asked to compile by the United Methodist Church, it’s not that he was saying ‘this is what I believe,'” Babin said. “It’s a reflection of the available scientific data from the 1980s. It should be noted that in 1991, homosexuals were banned from the military and several years before that, homosexuality and Haitian nationality were considered risk factors for HIV/AIDS. Over the last 20 years, a clearer understanding of these issues has been achieved.”

[Backtracking rarely works in the face of aggressive attacks: of course the 1991 paper reflects Holsinger’s views. Moreover, medical studies and the CDC continue to point to the immense health risks of male homosexual and bisexual behaviors. See our story, ” ‘Gay’ and Bisexual Men at 17 Times Higher Risk than Straights for Anal Cancer: CDC.”  Recently, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) re-affirmed its lifetime ban on blood donation from men who have had sex with other men.]

Asked about medical experts who disputed that Holsinger’s paper expressed opinions timely in 1991 and pressed to explain what Holsinger’s views on homosexuality are currently, Babin said, “we look forward to the confirmation process, where we can share Dr. Holsinger’s qualifications and views.”

Advocacy Groups Protest Nomination

Those answers will likely not quell the controversy. Critics say the paper certainly seems to be written from Holsinger’s point of view.

Noting that Holsinger also belongs to a church that offers a ministry to “cure” gays of the sexual orientation, gay and lesbian rights advocates immediately protested Holsinger’s nomination. “His writings suggest a scientific view rooted in anti-gay beliefs that are incompatible with the job of serving the medical health of all Americans,” said the Human Rights Campaign in a statement. “It is essential that America’s top doctor value sound science over anti-gay ideology.”

[Again, why doesn’t Tapper quote an independent pro-family advocate here in support of Dr. Holsinger? Tapper would probably say that the Bush administration official he quoted serves as the “pro-Holsinger” spokesman, but the ABC reporter’s piece is heavily stacked with opposition comments, so it would have been fair to include remarks from the Family Research Council or another conservative, pro-family organization.]

Democrats will likely be sympathetic to such arguments. Holsinger’s confirmation hearing, which has yet to be scheduled, will be heard by the Senate Health Committee, chaired by longtime gay rights advocate Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass. Members of the committee include three Democratic presidential contenders … eager to prove their bona fides during the primary season to the gay and lesbian community.

Holsinger, a professor of preventive medicine at the University of Kentucky College of Public Health, did not return calls for comment.

When announcing his nomination on May 24, Bush said that as “America’s chief health educator, [Dr. Holsinger] will be charged with providing the best scientific information available on how Americans can make smart choices that improve their health and reduce their risk of illness and injury.”

What Holsinger’s Paper Argues
Holsinger’s paper argued that male and female genitalia are complementary — so much so “that it has entered our vocabulary in the form of naming pipe fittings either the male fitting or the female fitting depending upon which one interlocks within the other.” Body parts used for gay sex are not complementary, he wrote. “When the complementarity of the sexes is breached, injuries and diseases may occur.”

[Wow. Is this breaking news — that male and female anatomy are complementary?]

Holsinger wrote that “[a]natomically the vagina is designed to receive the penis” while the anus and rectum — which “contain no natural lubricating function” — are not. “The rectum is incapable of mechanical protection against abrasion and severe damage … can result if objects that are large, sharp or pointed are inserted into the rectum,” Holsinger wrote.

The cardiologist details many different diseases gay men can catch, and several sexual practices they may engage in, including “anal eroticism,” which can lead to injuries and even death. “From the perspective of pathology and pathophysiology, the varied sexual practices of homosexual men have resulted in a diverse and expanded concept of sexually transmitted disease and associated trauma?”

[Here Tapper distorts: the words “anal eroticism” are actually taken from a 1988 paper by Richard Giest titled “Sexually Related Trauma,” in the journal, “Emergency Medicine Clinics in North America.” The paper describes the “fist fornication” (fisting), which — according to Holsinger, citing Geist — “during the 1970s was practiced by approximately 5% of the male homosexual population.” As you can see by reading HERE, the heinous act of “fisting” is still practiced today by some homosexual men (sadomasochists).]

In the context of the larger argument in his church as to whether homosexuality should be accepted, Holsinger presented a medical and scientific argument that anal intercourse was not natural.

“It is absolutely clear that anatomically and physiologically the alimentary and reproductive systems in humans are separate organ systems, i.e., the human does not have a cloaca,” he said, referring to the posterior orifice that serves as the one opening for genital, urinary and intestinal tracts in amphibians, birds and reptiles. The surgeon general nominee wrote that “even primitive cultures understand the nature of waste elimination, sexual intercourse and the birth of children. Indeed our own children appear to ‘intuitively’ understand these facts.”

A Political Agenda?
Professor Eli Coleman, Director of the Program in Human Sexuality at the University of Minnesota Medical School said that the paper seems to have a pre-1970s view of human sexuality. “I can’t imagine that any scientific journal would be able to publish this material because of its very narrow views of homosexuality,” he said.

[This comment sets up a straw man, in that Holsinger’s paper was not written for a scientific journal. Of course, the average TV viewer has no inkling of what the 1991 paper is all about, except that it is now “controversial.”]

In fact, if one of his students handed the paper in, Coleman would give it a failing grade, he said. “I find it rather outdated in terms of its scientific knowledge and also narrow in its view of homosexuality,” Coleman said. “It concerns me because I think our public policy really should be based upon best available science.”

[How silly: can we blame Holsinger for the fact that his paper, written 16 years ago, would now be considered “outdated”? C’mon, professor!]

“It’s a totally faulty paper. The man doesn’t know anything about human sexuality,” said June M. Reinisch, Ph.D., director emeritus of the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender & Reproduction. “There’s clearly a political agenda in this paper. This is not a scientific paper.”

[Tapper brings in yet another left-leaning critic to bash Dr. Holsinger. The 1991 paper was written to buttress the case against changing the United Methodist Church’s policies regarding homosexuality and “gay” relationships. It used facts and academic research about the risks of homosexual practices to do so.]

Paragraph by paragraph, Reinisch said Holsinger presents faulty arguments. Many homosexuals do not engage in the sexual act he criticizes; 40 percent of heterosexuals do. “It seems to me he’s arguing the only way reproduction happens is in a loving heterosexual environment which is of course not true,” Reinisch said, noting artificial methods, rape and one-night stands.

[Here, the media consumer has no inkling of which “paragraphs” on which Ms. Reinisch is commenting. Dr. Holsinger’s 1991 paper talked only generally about the reproductive vs. the alimentary (digestive tract) systems, so her comments about rape and one-night stands seem out of place.]

Reinisch, who was director of the Kinsey Institute when Holsinger wrote this paper, said that if Holsinger “is going to come up with this position in 2007 I think I can clearly say that he is not qualified to be surgeon general.”

[Pretty sweeping conclusion from a biased read of a 16-year-old paper! This is a Washington smear-politics at its worst. Call or write your U.S. Senators at 202-224-3121 (www.congress.org) to support this good man who could become the latest victim of the Left’s attack machine.]

Holsinger holds a doctorate in anatomy and physiology and an M.D. from Duke University. He spent much of his career working for the Veteran’s Health Administration. From 2003 to 2005 he was Kentucky’s secretary of the Cabinet for Health and Family Services.