PATHOPHYSIOLOGY OF MALE HOMOSEXUALITY

Prepared for the
Committee to Study Homosexuality of The United Methodist Church
by James W. Holsinger Jr., M.D.
Committee Member
January 14, 1991

[Note: click HERE for a PDF copy of this paper, and HERE for the (liberally biased) June 7, 2007 ABC News report on Dr. Holsinger quoting June Reinisch, director emeritus of the Kinsey Institute, strongly criticizing this paper as “unscientific.”]

During the course of the meetings of the Committee to Study Homosexuality, biology has come to mean the nonpsychological causation of homosexuality. However, biology also means “the division of physical science which deals with organized beings or animals and plants, their morphology, physiology, origin, and distribution” (Oxford English Dictionary, 1971). I believe that we must seriously consider the scientific disciplines of anatomy (structure or morphology), physiology (function), pathology (abnormal anatomy), and pathophysiology (abnormal function). Not to do so would simply fail to be true to our charge as a committee.

There is absolute consensus in the scientific community concerning the structure and function of the human alimentary [pertaining to the digestive tract] and reproductive systems. These two systems are absolutely separate since the human does not possess a cloaca. Reproduction can occur only by utilizing the reproductive system, requiring both the female ovum (egg) and the male sperm. Ova are fertilized naturally in the fallopian tubes of women following sexual intercourse by the sperm which transits through the vagina and uterus following release from the penis. Although artificial methods are available and used, the anatomy and physiology of humans have resulted in a natural means for conception.

The structure and function of the male and female human reproductive systems are fully complementary. Anatomically he vagina is designed to receive the penis. It is lined with squamous epithelium and is surrounded by a muscular tube intended for penile intromission. The rectum, on the other hand, is lined with a delicate mucosal surface and a single layer of columnar epithelium intenuea primarily for the reabsorption of water and electrolytes. The rectum is incapable of mechanical protection against abrasion and severe damage to the colonic mucosa can result if objects that are large, sharp, or pointed are inserted into the rectum (Agnew, 1986).

 Doesn’t e-Harmony.com and its Christian founder have a fundamental right to promote traditional marriages between a man and a woman — and not cater to unnatural “unions”? Will this and all private American companies be forced to promote the homosexual agenda? Above are happy normal couples brought together by e-Harmony’s online dating service.

TAKE A MINUTE TO SUPPORT e-HARMONY.com and respectfully ask that they support real marriage by not leaving open the possibility of providing “matches” for homosexuals. Write them via their Contact page or call their corporate offices in Pasadena, California, at 626-795-4814 (hit #9 when you get the machine). Their snail-mail address is e-Harmony.com, P.O. Box 60157, Pasadena, CA 91116.
Also, call or write your U.S. Representative and Senators (202-224-3121; http://www.congress.org/) and urge them to oppose H.R. 2015, the “Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA), the pro-homosexual/pro-trannsexual employment bill — which will only embolden “gay” harassment lawsuits against tradition-minded companies.

Below is a Reuters news story describing the homosexual activist lobby’s latest attack on the freedom to be moral. There are plenty of places offering “match” services for homosexual couples — just try any (liberal) “City Paper,” where all sorts of disordered unions can be arranged. But no, e-Harmony must bend to the tiny minority of homosexual militants who have no regard for others’ liberties — including your freedom to live out your religious beliefs as you see fit.

We hope eHarmony.com, a private business run by a born-again Christian, Dr. Neil Clark Warren, does not cave in to this outrageous demand by lesbian Linda Carlson. (It appears that by keeping open the possibility of including “gay” matches, eHarmony is moving away from Warren’s assertion to ex-homosexual Christian activist Steve Bennett that he would never consider such a thing; also, see Warren’s 2005 NPR interview HERE.)

If eHarmony capitulates, it will only encourage other lawsuits. Who’s next? Christian-owned day care centers? Summer camps run by orthodox Jews? The message coming from the liberal, pro-homosexual activists here is simple: you can have your beliefs in your church or synagogue or home (for now…) but don’t you dare try to live them out in the public square.

They are telling us: retreat into your church closet. All of America — our schools, corporations, and our laws — must now affirm homosexuality.

It’s become all too clear: no special interest group threatens our basic freedoms like the homosexual and gender confusion (“transgender”) lobbies. They are the new legal bullies on the block, and can only be stopped if good people lose their apathy and their fear of being Politically Incorrect — and say “No” to this oppressive, unhealthy agenda. Call (626-795-4814) or write eHarmony today!

May 31, 2007
 
eHarmony sued in California for excluding gays
 
By Jill Serjeant

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – The popular online dating service eHarmony was sued on Thursday for refusing to offer its services to gays, lesbians and bisexuals.

A lawsuit alleging discrimination based on sexual orientation was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on behalf of Linda Carlson, who was denied access to eHarmony because she is gay.

Lawyers bringing the action said they believed it was the first lawsuit of its kind against eHarmony, which has long rankled the gay community with its failure to offer a “men seeking men” or “women seeking women” option.

They were seeking to make it a class action lawsuit on behalf of gays and lesbians excluded from the dating service.

eHarmony was founded in 2000 by evangelical Christian Dr. Neil Clark Warren and had strong early ties with the influential religious conservative group Focus on the Family.

Media Release, May 28. 2007

Repent America, P.O. Box 30000, Philadelphia, PA  19103                                                         

Contact:  Michael Marcavage 1-800-3-REPENT, Ext. 5

PHILADELPHIA – Repent America (RA) has learned from a law enforcement official that the U.S. Department of Justice has been using its ministry as an example of a Christian “fundamentalist hate group” because of its Biblical opposition to homosexuality during its law enforcement “mediation and conflict resolution” training classes.

On Thursday, May 24, 2007, the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE), which operates 14 publicly-owned universities, manages approximately 300 police officers, and oversees over 100,000 students, hosted a mandatory class entitled “Mediation and Conflict Resolution Skills for Law Enforcement” at its central headquarters in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. The class is part of a police training series under the direction of the U.S. Department of Justice Community Relations Service, which is provided at different times to PASSHE police officers.

During this class, Timothy Johnson, Sr. Conciliation Specialist for the U.S. Department of Justice Community Relations Service, falsely characterized “Repent America” as a Christian “fundamentalist hate group” and had law enforcement officials participate in a role-playing activity to illustrate this point. Johnson directed a number of police officers to stage a campus dramatization before the class between a mock Repent America evangelism team and a group of upset homosexuals. While these officers were role-playing the two groups, another officer was instructed to “mediate the conflict” by removing the Christians, instead of affirming their constitutional rights to be on a public campus. The removal instruction was because the homosexuals were hurt and offended by the Biblical message of repentance and call to believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The same dramatization occurred on at least one other occasion before a previous training class.

Americans For Truth Exclusive 

Editor’s note: the following firsthand report tells of an invasion of women’s privacy by a male “transgender” activist using the ladies restroom in Maryland — as the state’s pro-family movement was fighting legislation granting rights based on homosexuality. Neither Galladora nor Fortlage can recall the year of the incident, but it was between 1999 and 2001, when Maryland’s legislature passed a “sexual orientation” nondiscrimination bill, later signed into law by the state’s Democratic governor, Parris Glendening.

When a society raises gender confusion (men in dresses) and its cousin, homosexuality, to the level of “civil rights,” it’s time to recognize that this nation is in a state of moral decline unheard of in our history. –– Peter LaBarbera

TAKE ACTION:  If enacted into law, The Employment NonDiscrimination Act (ENDA, H.R. 2015) and the federal “hate crimes” bill, H.R. 1592 (recently passed by the House), would be the first time that “gender identity rights” are recognized in federal law. This would usher in a new wave of persecution for people opposed to homosexuality and gender confusion of the sort described below. Call your senators (202-224-3121; www.congress.org/) – and the White House (202-456-1111) –– to oppose H.R. 1592, and call all of your federal elected officials to oppose the ENDA bill.
 
_________________________ 

By Bunny Galladora

The hearing room of the Judicial Committee in Annapolis, Maryland, was overflowing with all sorts of unusual looking people hours before the hearing on a bill to add “sexual orientation” to the list of protected categories was to begin. It would be a very long day. After many people had testified giving their various positions on the issue, the Judicial Committee took a break.

Conrae Fortlage and I left the hearing room to “freshen up” in the ladies’ restroom.  When it came time to wash our hands, I finished quickly and waited for Conrae inside the bathroom by the door, a few steps away. Conrae lingered slowly, applying lipstick and fiddling with her hair. She seemed to be staring in the mirror for an unusual amount of time. I paid little attention to the person dressed in a purple ladies pants suit with a white blouse standing next to Conrae — or to Conrae’s behavior which was out of character for her, but instead my thoughts were on the testimony I would be giving soon.

As we left the ladies’ room, the door shutting behind us, Conrae began to tell me that the person standing beside her in the bathroom was actually a man. Conrae said she first noticed that the person was unusually tall for a woman, then, while looking in the mirror, she had focused on his unusually large Adam’s apple — and other features normally found in a male. She noticed that the person was wearing a woman’s wig.

Press Release, Concerned Women For America (www.cwfa.org), May 11, 2006  

Washington, DC –– With much fanfare, liberals in Congress — led by openly homosexual congressman Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts) — recently introduced H.R. 2015, the ironically-titled “Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007” (ENDA).  According to proponents, this bill merely seeks to insulate people who choose to engage in homosexual behaviors (“sexual orientation”) or who suffer from gender confusion (gender identity) against employment discrimination.  But regrettably this legislation would effectively codify and encourage the very thing it purports to prevent — workplace discrimination. 

ENDA would apply to any business with 15 or more employees.  The bill’s language states that, “it shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer…to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to the compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment of the individual, because of such individual’s actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.”      

Matt Barber, Policy Director for Cultural Issues with Concerned Women for America (CWA), warned, “This bill would force Christian, Jewish or Muslim business owners to hire people who openly choose to engage in homosexual or cross-dressing behaviors despite a sincerely held religious belief that those behaviors are dangerous, sinful and not in keeping with basic morality.  ENDA would essentially force employers to check their First Amendment protected rights to freedom of religion, speech and association at the workplace door.  It’s absurd!  For instance, female employees would have to endure both systematic sexual harassment and a hostile work environment by being forced to share bathroom facilities with male employees who get their jollies from wearing a dress, high heels and lipstick.     

“Over the years, the homosexual lobby has done a masterful job of co-opting the language of the genuine civil rights movement in their push for special rights.  This bill represents the goose that laid the golden egg for homosexual activist attorneys,” concluded Barber.   

Shari Rendall, CWA’s Director of Legislation and Public Policy, said of ENDA, “This bill would unfairly extend special privileges based upon an individual’s changeable sexual behaviors, rather than focusing on immutable, non-behavior characteristics such as skin color or gender.   Its passage would both overtly discriminate against and muzzle people of faith.  Former Secretary of State Collin Powell put it well when he said, ‘Skin color is a benign, non-behavioral characteristic. Sexual orientation is perhaps the most profound of human behavioral characteristics. Comparison of the two is a convenient but invalid argument.’”  

CWA asks Congress to protect the First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech, religion and association for all Americans by voting NO on ENDA. 

Concerned Women for America is the nation’s largest public policy women’s organization.

H.R. 2015 Would Force a Gender Confusion Revolution on U.S. Businesses

By Peter LaBarbera

For once we agreed with Barney Frank (sort of), at least before he sold out to the “transgender” lobby. 

“There are workplace situations — communal showers, for example — when the demands of the transgender community fly in the face of conventional norms and therefore would not pass in any Congress. I’ve talked with transgender activists and what they want — and what we will be forced to defend — is for people with penises who identify as women to be able to shower with other women.”

—Homosexual Congressman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), BEFORE he changed his mind and embraced including “transgenders” in the Employment NonDiscrimination Act (ENDA)  

“Technically, you cannot truly change one’s sex. That’s why the procedure is not really called ‘sex change surgery’ but ‘sex reassignment surgery.’ The idea is to alter the physical appearance of a person’s anatomy to approximate as nearly as possible the anatomic arrangement of the other sex.”

— Melanie, “Sex Reassignment Surgery (SRS), the Nuts & Bolts,” a “Transgender Support Site” 

*          *          *

Employment NonDiscrimination Act (H.R. 2015) Language: 

“EMPLOYER PRACTICES.—It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer—

(1) “to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to the compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment of the individual, because of such individual’s actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity; or

(2) “to limit, segregate, or classify the employees or applicants for employment of the employer in any way that would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment or otherwise adversely affect the status of the individual as an employee, because of such individual’s actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.”

*          *         *

TAKE ACTION:  Call the Congress (202-224-3121) or use e-mail to urge your Representative and Senators to reject ENDA (H.R. 2015) and the insanity of forcing business across the nation to accommodate and subsidize gender confusion in the name of “civil rights.” Also, call President Bush (202-456-1414) or e-mail him at comments@whitehouse.gov to urge him to veto the “trans”-affirming ENDA, along with the “Hate Crimes” bill (H.R. 1592) that his aides have indicated will likely be vetoed. 

Fast on the heels of the “Hate Crimes” bill (H.R. 1597, recently passed by the House) is the second of two top homosexual activist priorities: ENDA, the “Employment Nondiscrimination Act,” H.R. 2015, recently introduced by homosexual Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.). Please read at the bottom of this story the homosexual newspaper Washington Blade’s analysis of the “transgender” provision of this radical bill.

To read about ENDA’s dubious “religious exemption” provision, click HERE.

Veteran observers of the “gay” movement will recall that Frank himself once strongly criticized the idea of including transsexuals in the ENDA bill (see above quote). But like most “progressives,” Frank has seen the light, or maybe he just heard the shouts — from radical “trans” activists who have skillfully adapted militant “gay” tactics to their own misguided cause, including calling their outspoken critics “transphobes.”

Several giant corporations have already settled on pro-“transgender” bathroom and dress policies — probably the same companies who would subject their employees to biased, pro-homosexual “diversity” lectures — but can you imagine inflicting these “transgender” regulations on small and mid-level companies through federal law via ENDA?

This is one of the most perverse applications of “civil rights” to date — and it’s headed straight for your business if you have 15 or more employees. What female employee wants to share the company restroom with a big-boned man claiming to be “transitioning” to “womanhood”? Will companies have to build “transgender male” and “transgender female” restrooms (or “Designated GLBT Restrooms”) to accommodate the various “orientations” and avoid government prosecution?

 

Churches and religious-oriented groups are quasi-exempt under ENDA but secular businesses owned by Christians or religious Americans are not. ENDA is a “gay” and “trans” lawyer’s dream. What about jobs such as a teacher in which the employer might not want the “transitioning” employee to model his newfound “gender identity” to children? Or service jobs (say a maitre d’) in which the employer may not want the newly “gender variant” employee to be in such a public role?

Imagine a male employee, John, who since he became employed at XYZ Corp., about a decade ago, has used the men’s restroom. Then one day he informs his boss that in a week he will come to work in a dress as “Joanna” and begin his MTF (“male-to-female”) metamorphosis into “womanhood.” (According to widely accepted regulations within the “transgender” world, he must “live” full-time as Joanna, taking female hormones, for a full year before he becomes eligible for “sex-reassignment surgery,” which will turn his healthy sex organ into a makeshift female sex organ. If you have the stomach to read what is actually done to a man’s body in “sex reassignment surgery,” click HERE, but be warned: it’s horrifying stuff. We must pray for these poor souls who are so confused that they would destroy their healthy, God-given bodies to assuage their inner conflict.)

Isn’t it a bit much to expect of normal, female XYZ employees to all of the sudden welcome “Joanna’s” presence in the ladies’ restroom? In fact, as I read the Blade account below, under ENDA’s proposed regulations, John/Joanna would be able to use the female restroom BEFORE his “sex reassignment” surgery. Indeed, the website “e-transgender,” quoting the homosexual/transgender group Human Rights Campaign, advises corporate human resources managers as follows:

“Employers should grant restroom access according to an employee’s full-time gender presentation.”

Read: if John “lives” (identifies) as Joanna full-time, he should be able to use the female restroom. Biologically-born ladies, beware!

What about the privacy rights of John’s female co-workers? Don’t they have the right not to feel personally invaded as they go to the restroom at their job? Will businesses have to put out new bathroom policies and undergo company-wide bathroom-usage training to explain the new policies?

 

But the situation becomes a crisis when the federal government — aided by politically correct activist judges — forces businesses to advance this Gender Confusion Revolution in the name of “civil rights.”

Is this really an area in which the federal government should even be involved? It’s bad enough that big business is rolling over to the bizarre “T” (Transgender) agenda — with some even subsidizing horrifying “sex-reassignment surgeries” that destroy men’s and women’s healthy bodies. (I once attended a conference for FTM (“female to male”) “transgenders” in which young women proudly showed off their flat chests — the result of “chest surgery” operations in which their healthy breasts were removed to make them look like the “men” they wanted to be.)

Of course, the larger goal here — shared by the “gay” and “transgender” lobbies — is to change your mind and heart regarding gender-confused conduct. The law is merely a tool in their never-ending quest to overturn America’s Judeo-Christian norms regarding family, sex and marriage.

We predict that businesses will deal with this very sad and strange “transgender” issue by building special restrooms and/or shower facilities for their “transgender” or alternatively “gendered” employees — spending countless millions to subsidize mentally disordered, deviant behavior. (Gender Identity Disorder, or GID, is a recognized mental disorder.) This corporate spending would accelerate dramatically should ENDA become law, as businesses would fear lawsuits if they failed to honor “trans” rights.

Call Congress (202-224-3121) or use e-mail to urge your U.S. Representative and Senators to reject ENDA, H.R. 2015. Also, call President Bush (202-456-1414) or e-mail him at comments@whitehouse.gov and ask him to veto the pro-“trans” ENDA, along with the “Hate Crimes” bill (H.R. 1592) that his aides have already indicated will likely be vetoed.

By Peter LaBarbera 

TAKE ACTION:  Call the Congress (202-224-3121) or use e-mail to urge your Representative and Senators to reject ENDA (H.R. 2015) and the insanity of forcing business across the nation to accommodate and subsidize gender confusion in the name of “civil rights.” Also, call President Bush (202-456-1414) or e-mail him at comments@whitehouse.gov and urge him to veto the “trans”-affirming ENDA, along with the “Hate Crimes” bill (H.R. 1592) that his aides have indicated will likely be vetoed.  

At bottom is the religious exemption language for H.R. 2015, ENDA, the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, which would use federal government powers to ban “employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.” (Emphasis is added below.) ENDA would apply to businesses with 15 or more employees.

We at Americans For Truth generally oppose the concept of religious exemptions to pro-homosexual laws because religious people alone should not be able to exercise their freedoms to oppose aberrant sexual behavior. What about secular-minded citizens who also believe that homosexual acts are immoral and unhealthy and shouldn’t be promoted as OK to kids?

Regardless, note the careful circumscription of the religious “exemptions” under ENDA. According to paragraph “b” below, the law would not apply to employees in a religiously-oriented business whose job is linked to “doctrine.” So, then, can we assume that in “partially exempt” religious organizations, the law WOULD apply to employees (e.g., a secretary) whose jobs are NOT directly linked to teaching religion or doctrine?

In my state of Illinois, the ACLU used similar language to argue along these lines: a Bible-believing church would have full freedom to hire and fire its pastors but it COULD fall under the state’s “sexual orientation/gender identity” law (our state’s version of ENDA) if it fired a janitor who announced he was homosexual — because the janitor’s job does not deal with church “doctrine.”

Can you see the immense capacity for “gay” troublemaking and harassing lawsuits under this proposed legislation? Even the threat of federal lawsuits, especially in states like Illinois that have their own “sexual orientation” laws, could inhibit morality-based groups from acting on their belief that homosexuality is wrong.

 

I suppose that is precisely the goal of the homosexual and “transgender” lobbies with regard to ENDA.

And remember: the discussion above is only for explicitly religious organizations. Under ENDA, an orthodox Jew who owns his own secular-oriented business (with 15 or more employees) would be out of luck if he endeavored to not hire homosexuals or transsexuals based on his own personal religious beliefs. Once again, “gay” (and “trans”) rights would supersede religious freedoms.

The following is ENDA’s (H.R. 2015) language pertaining to religious exemptions:

SEC. 6. EXEMPTION FOR RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS.
(a) In general.—This Act shall not apply to any of the employment practices of a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society which has as its primary purpose religious ritual or worship or the teaching or spreading of religious doctrine or belief.

 

(b) Certain employees.—For any religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society that is not wholly exempt under subsection (a), this Act shall not apply with respect to the employment of individuals whose primary duties consist of teaching or spreading religious doctrine or belief, religious governance, supervision of a religious order, supervision of persons teaching or spreading religious doctrine or belief, or supervision or participation in religious ritual or worship.

 

(c) Conformity to religious tenets.—Under this Act, a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society may require that applicants for, and employees in, similar positions conform to those religious tenets that such corporation, association, institution, or society declares significant. Under this Act, such a declaration by a religious corporation, association, educational institution or society stating which of its religious tenets are significant shall not be subject to judicial or administrative review. Any such declaration made for purposes of this Act shall be admissible only for proceedings under this Act.

Ex-‘Gay’ Christian Singer Dennis Jernigan

In response to the recently proposed Hate Crimes Bill (H.R. 1592) currently before Congress, singer/songwriter/author and former homosexual, Dennis Jernigan, fears his right to openly talk about how he was able to overcome homosexuality would be compromised since H.R. 1592 seeks to prosecute criminals based on their thoughts.  “I was able to come to a level of freedom the homosexual community never told me was possible,” says Jernigan. “Yet, through faith in God, I successfully walked out of that way of thinking and have met thousands of other men and women who have done the same. What about our civil liberties? To pass such a bill as H.R. 1592 is to invoke fear that I could be prosecuted for my religious beliefs and speech.”
 
Jernigan goes on to say that he fears for his nine children and their families in the days ahead should such legislation pass. “To lose one of our most basic rights, that of free speech, is to strip away what it means to be an American. Homosexuals already enjoy the same rights as all other Americans when it concerns the punishment of criminal acts against them. This legislation seeks to bestow special treatment upon a very small portion of our society. If this bill passes, Congress is telling me that I and countless others who have discovered they don’t have to be homosexual are of less value now than when we were living as homosexuals.  If we look down the road of this slippery slope, this legislation would actually pave the way to make it a criminal offense to think differently than someone else or to have religious convictions that are opposed to this politically correct ideology.  Do we really want such thoughts to be illegal?

“I strongly support President Bush’s expected veto of this bill, and I implore the Congress to take a stand for what’s right and protect my freedom to not be homosexual – as well as my freedom to be able to talk about it openly.”
 
Dennis Jernigan is a husband and father who has been out of the homosexual lifestyle for over 25 years. His new CD entitled I CRY HOLY will be released nationwide in mid-July.  In a music career that extends over two decades, Jernigan has amassed dozens of hit songs to his credit, recorded over 30 projects, and written five books.  His songs have been used in churches of every denomination across the globe, and consistently rank in the top 100 of CCLI’s Most Performed Songs List.  His song “Sit With Me A While” is a featured selection at the grave of President Ronald Reagan.  He travels around the world telling his story of freedom from homosexuality.  For more about who Dennis Jernigan visit Dennis Jernigan’s website. 

###

Source: Adams Group: Marketing to Christian Media.