The Homosexual Question in public policy

For more information on this see these links:

Hopeforhomosexuals.com  or Family Research Institute

During the debate over the Arts and "Parents Rights" a related debate arose over the question of "homosexual rights" - in particular,  "Should society approve, condone, or condemn homosexual conduct". Charlotte and Mecklenburg County became embroiled in this debate and it became the central issue for a number of years.

To some, the issue was one of "civil rights", to others (most Charlotte region parents) the issue was twofold:

1. Whether society would endorse unhealthy behavior, and 

2. Whether society would uphold current law.

In North Carolina, as in some 13 or so other states, homosexual conduct is classified as an illegal act (anal and oral sex). Homosexuals attempt to separate  what they "do" from "who they are". It is much easier to gain acceptance of homosexual's if the issue not their conduct. 

Even so, society places limits on people's behavior. We put warning labels on cigarettes because it is unhealthy, we place restrictions on when and where someone can smoke in public. In short, some activity is deemed to be illegal (smoking marijuana or taking drugs for example). Even though these are so-called "victimless" crimes occurring in the "privacy" of ones own home they are still to varying degrees of severity illegal.

So, the two questions remain; is it illegal and is it unhealthy. This web page is designed to provide the answers to both of these questions in a logical fashion.

  NC Law defines homosexual conduct as a felony 

North Carolina General Statute 14,-177 says the following:

CHAPTER 14. Criminal Law.

SUBCHAPTER VII. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALITY AND DECENCY. Article 26. Offenses against Public Morality and Decency.

§ 14-177. Crime against nature. If any person shall commit the crime against nature, with mankind or beast, he shall be punished as a Class I felon. 

(This law covers what is typically referred to as homosexual sex (anal and oral sex) as well as bestiality - sex with animals)

Other citations in this section of criminal law include:

§ 14-183. Bigamy. If any person, being married, shall marry any other person during the life of the former husband or wife, every such offender, and every person counseling, aiding or abetting such offender, shall be punished as a Class I felon. Any such offense may be dealt with, tried, determined and punished in the county where the offender shall be apprehended, or be in custody, as if the offense had been actually committed in that county. If any person, being married, shall contract a marriage with any other person outside of this State, which marriage would be punishable as bigamous if contracted within this State, and shall thereafter cohabit with such person in this State, he shall be guilty of a felony and shall be punished as in cases of bigamy. Nothing contained in this section shall extend to any person marrying a second time, whose husband or wife shall have been continually absent from such person for the space of seven years then last past, and shall not have been known by such person to have been living within that time; nor to any person who at the time of such second marriage shall have been lawfully divorced from the bond of the first marriage; nor to any person whose former marriage shall have been declared void by the sentence of any court of competent jurisdiction.

§ 14-184. Fornication and adultery. If any man and woman, not being married to each other, shall lewdly and lasciviously associate, bed and cohabit together, they shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor: Provided, that the admissions or confessions of one shall not be received in evidence against the other. 

§ 14-190.9. Indecent exposure. (a) Any person who shall willfully expose the private parts of his or her person in any public place and in the presence of any other person or persons, of the opposite sex, or aids or abets in any such act, or who procures another to perform such act; or any person, who as owner, manager, lessee, director, promoter or agent, or in any other capacity knowingly hires, leases or permits the land, building, or premises of which he is owner, lessee or tenant, or over which he has control, to be used for purposes of any such act, shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor. (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a woman may breast feed in any public or private location where she is otherwise authorized to be, irrespective of whether the nipple of the mother's breast is uncovered during or incidental to the breast feeding. (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a local government may regulate the location and operation of sexually oriented businesses. Such local regulation may restrict or prohibit nude, seminude, or topless dancing to the extent consistent with the constitutional protection afforded free speech. 

§ 14-203. Prostitution. Definition of terms. The term "prostitution" shall be construed to include the offering or receiving of the body for sexual intercourse for hire, and shall also be construed to include the offering or receiving of the body for indiscriminate sexual intercourse without hire. The term "assignation" shall be construed to include the making of any appointment or engagement for prostitution or any act in furtherance of such appointment or engagement.

§ 14-204.1. Loitering for the purpose of engaging in prostitution offense. (a) For the purposes of this section, "public place" means any street, sidewalk, bridge, alley or alleyway, plaza, park, driveway, parking lot or transportation facility, or the doorways and entrance ways to any building which fronts on any of those places, or a motor vehicle in or on any of those places. (b) If a person remains or wanders about in a public place and (1) Repeatedly beckons to, stops, or attempts to stop passers-by, or repeatedly attempts to engage passers- by in conversation; or (2) Repeatedly stops or attempts to stop motor vehicles; or (3) Repeatedly interferes with the free passage of other persons for the purpose of violating any subdivision of G.S. 14-204 (Prostitution) or 14- 177 (Crimes Against Nature - homosexual conduct), that person is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.

Some homosexual activists try and claim that since the law applies to heterosexuals as well that it isn't really about "homosexuals". Of course, they know better and the evidence is that for years they have been attempting to eliminate this law completely.  In any event, NCGS 14-204 regarding Prostitution ALSO refers 14-177 and is used routinely by the Police to round up homosexuals in public parks and restrooms  in Charlotte because "prostitution" is defined as "solicitation" for sex even if money is not involved and between two "consenting adults. In a following section you will see evidence from a homosexual magazine indicating that a large number of homosexuals use parks, public bathrooms, and roadsides as their primary meeting places for sexual liaisons.

  What do the Courts say? 

There are several significant court cases regarding North Carolina that govern the legality of treatment of homosexuals:

1. The 1986 US Supreme Court decision in Bowers V. Hardwick (upholding sodomy laws against homosexuals).

2. The 1998 NC Supreme Court decision in Pulliam V. Smith (stripping homosexual parents of their natural rights to be parents based on "moral turpitude".)

3. A decision in "Lawrence" and another in Texas ruled that homosexuals could not be arrested for sodomy and other "crimes of nature" in their own homes. This has not stopped either the State of NC nor the local DA (a Democrat) from arresting homosexuals for 'soliciting' a crime against Nature.

  Pulliam v. Smith No. 499PA96 (Filed 30 July 1998) from the NC Supreme Court (a court controlled by Democrats at the time I might add):

"With regard to findings of fact 49 and 54, uncontroverted evidence was presented that defendant-father and Mr. Tipton engaged in oral sex approximately once a week in the home with the children present. Defendant-father and Mr. Tipton intended to continue such homosexual activity in the home. Defendant- father saw nothing wrong with such conduct and would not counsel the two minor children that such conduct was improper."

"Evidence was also presented tending to show that the children had seen the two men demonstrate physical affection, including kissing each other on the lips. This activity took place in the home in front of the children as the "provider" of this couple prepared to leave for work. The minor child Joey had observed his father and Mr. Tipton in bed together."

"The evidence further tended to show that the door of the bedroom occupied by defendant-father and Mr. Tipton was directly across the hall and approximately three feet from the door to the children's bedroom. Defendant-father and Mr. Tipton testified that both their bedroom door and the children's bedroom door were open at all times, except when the two men engaged in sexual activity. Further, testimony tended to show that the children went in and out of the two men's bedroom at will, often during the night when the two men were in bed together."

"Defendant testified that he had told the children that society was not accepting of such a homosexual relationship. There was also evidence that Mr. Tipton kept photographs of 'drag queens' in the home, despite his admission that the children should not be exposed to such material. Further, evidence was presented that Mr. Tipton had, on at least one occasion, taken the children away from the home without defendant's knowledge of their whereabouts."

"The foregoing evidence was admitted by the trial court and was not disputed by defendant. This evidence was substantial evidence and clearly supports findings of fact 49 and 54. We conclude that activities such as the regular commission of sexual acts in the home by unmarried people, failing and refusing to counsel the children against such conduct while acknowledging this conduct to them, allowing the children to see unmarried persons known by the children to be sexual partners in bed together, keeping admittedly improper sexual material in the home, and Mr. Tipton's taking the children out of the home without their father's knowledge of their whereabouts support the trial court's findings of "improper influences" which are 'detrimental to the best interest and welfare of the two minor children'."

"The trial court could reasonably find from this substantial evidence, as well as the other evidence discussed above, that 'the activity of the Defendant will likely create emotional difficulties for the two minor children'."

"The judgment of the trial court was proper, and the decision of the Court of Appeals to the contrary was in error. The decision of the Court of Appeals must be and is reversed, and this case is remanded to that court for its further remand to the District Court, Henderson County, for reinstatement of the judgment of the trial court."

By agreeing with and remanding back to the trial court, the NC Supreme Court ratified the conclusion of the Henderson County trial judge that stripped Mr. Smith (the homosexual) of the custody of his children and defined the activity he was engaged in as "moral turpitude".

Recently (August 2001), a Federal judge in Florida upheld Florida's law that banned the adoption of children by homosexuals. This law was passed by the Florida legislature in 1977. This law is as follows:

  Florida Statute 63.042 covers "Who may be adopted; & who may adopt". It  says:

(1) Any person, a minor or an adult, may be adopted.

(2) The following persons may adopt:

(a) A husband and wife jointly;

(b) An unmarried adult, including the birth parent of the person to be adopted;

(c) The unmarried minor birth parent of the person to be adopted; or

(d) A married person without the other spouse joining as a petitioner, if the person to be adopted is not his or her spouse, and if:

1. The other spouse is a parent of the person to be adopted and consents to the adoption; or

2. The failure of the other spouse to join in the petition or to consent to the adoption is excused by the court for reason of prolonged unexplained absence, unavailability, incapacity, or circumstances constituting an unreasonable withholding of consent.

(3) No person eligible to adopt under this statute may adopt if that person is a homosexual.

(4) No person eligible under this section shall be prohibited from adopting solely because such person possesses a physical disability or handicap, unless it is determined by the department or the licensed child-placing agency that such disability or handicap renders such person incapable of serving as an effective parent.

Recent Supreme Court Decisions and the law:

Several years ago the US Supreme Court in a narrow decision said that homosexuals could not be prosecuted for engaging in Sodomy (a crime against nature) in a private setting. This has not deterred NC officials from using the "crimes against Nature" statute to round up homosexuals who attempt to locate anonymous partners in public parks, rest areas and rest rooms. See study below for more details  where they find their partners and the risky activity.

Some individuals in the homosexual community attempt to use this recent decision to claim that outlawing Sodomy is the same thing as outlawing the law that was enacted. Of Course, this is nonsense. While homosexuals can't be prosecuted in their own homes (few were anyway) they continue to be the target of law enforcement because of their seedy behavior.

One key distinction between a casual meeting between a man and a woman in a park and that of two homosexuals shows the clear differences in the laws intent and application. if a man sees a woman in a park and strikes up a conversation with her and develop a friendship and either one invites the other "back to their place" - no law has been broken as long as the "offer" did not involve money (prostitution) and both were consenting adults.

Conversely, if a homosexual man were to make the offer to another man, it is consider 'solicitation' of a crime against nature and the homosexual is arrested and taken to jail. One recent example of where a large number of homosexuals were arrested in a sting operation was a Kilbourne Park here in Charlotte, NC.

The difference is obvious. if two men meet and solicit sex (even if no money changes hands and both are consenting) the one proffering the offer can be thrown in the slammer. The reason is that the "crimes against nature" law in NC is still be used to insure that homosexual conduct is condemned.

Individuals who disagree with this assessment are free to review media accounts of arrests in Kilborne Park and other places.

Alternatively, State law (NCGS 115C-81) also defines that the only relationship that the state endorses to be taught to public school students is a "faithfully monogamous heterosexual relationship with the bounds of marriage".

  Is homosexual conduct "normal" ? 

Well, no.  The evidence gathered by homosexual advocate organizations (and others) show that the activity they engage in is high-risk, subject to significant disease but even more informative is the disclosure that 26% of homosexuals (OVER 1/4) find their sexual mates in bathrooms or parks, 15% by hanging out in roadside areas, 29% go to "sex clubs" or "bathhouse", and 65% of homosexuals find their frequent sexual partners in a bar.

Homosexuals attempt to paint themselves as "your brothers, your sisters, your sons or your daughters". While this may make a nice brochure, the fact is that someone's brother will become an alcoholic, someone's sister will get snared by drugs, someone's daughter will sadly turn to prostitution, and some sons (and daughters) dive into homosexuality. Just because it is someone's relative does not mean society should endorse that which is dangerous and unhealthy.

The statistics cited above came from a 1994 survey of 2,500 homosexual men in  The Advocate (a national homosexual magazine). The results were published in the August 23, 1994 issue (see link to The Advocate). This information was included by reference in an American Family Association document.  The results of this survey are as follows (warning again - this material is explicit): 

• Sex acts homosexual men say they love:
  • Insertive oral intercourse 72%
  • Receptive oral intercourse 71%
  • Insertive anal intercourse 46%
  • Receptive anal intercourse 43%
  • Receptive anilingus (tongue in the anus) 45%
  • Insertive anilingus 29%
• Sex acts they engaged in (last five years):
  • Three-way sex 48%
  • Group sex (four or more) 24%
  • Bondage & discipline sex 20%
  • Use of nipple clamps 19%
  • Sadomasochism 10%
• Where they met their "partners" (last five years):
  • Bar/disco 65%
  • Bathhouse, sex club 29%
  • Adult bookstore 27%
  • Park, bathroom 26%
  • Roadside rest area 15%
• Most (57%) report having had more than 30 partners over their lifetime, and about a third (35%) report more than 100 partners.
• About one quarter (26%) of HIV-positive men who have had insertive oral intercourse have had sex in another man’s mouth, most typically with someone they have just met.
• Among men who have had insertive anal intercourse in the past year, 44% had sex with a partner without a condom. Among those who had receptive anal intercourse in the past year, 58% had a partner who had sex with them without a condom.
• Among HIV-infected men who have had insertive anal intercourse in the past year, 19% had sex without wearing a condom. They most typically did this with long-term partners or with men with whom they had a purely sexual encounter rather than within the context of a relationship.
• Anilingus (tongue on or in the anus) is fairly common:
  • 41% have performed it in the past year, and
  • 47% have received it.
  • When engaging in insertive and receptive anilingus, only 4% to 5%, respectively, have used dental dams to prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.
• Among men who had had a positive result from an HIV antibody test, 11% have said or implied that they were HIV-negative in order to have sex.

Another study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control in 1972 revealed that 50% of male homosexuals have had over 500 different sexual partners. Other studies show that AIDS victims average 1,100 different sexual partners.

• In one study, two homosexual researchers found that 73% of adult male homosexuals had had sex with boys age 19 or younger. 93% report anal sexual relations.
• 92% report oral/anal sexual activity.
• 17% report eating and/or rubbing themselves with the feces of their partners.
• 29% report urinating on or in their partners.
• 37% report sadomasochism.
• 42% report "handballing" or "fisting" where the hand or arm is inserted into the rectum of their partner.
• 32% report bondage.
• 12% report giving or receiving of enemas for sexual pleasure.
• 15% report sex with animals.

The above information was re-printed and published by The Berean League, June 1991, 2875 Snelling Ave. N., St. Paul, MN 55113. It was listed in a report of the American Family Association).

While some homosexual activists may "disagree" with the AFA, and conservative organizations, they clearly can't disagree with the results of the Advocate or of the CDC.

But, sadly, there is more and none of it is "positive".

  Does homosexual activity affect the length of their lives?  

Of course. any human being who consistently does those things listed above can be as sure of physical damage as someone who smokes 4 packs of cigarettes a day.

Not everyone who smokes 4 packs a day will die early (and doing something and stopping is not as dangerous medically speaking as continuing to do so) but it is a confirmed fact that  your CHANCES of dying early are enhanced if you are a consistent heavy smoker. The same thing applies to consistent homosexual conduct. 

There are several studies which confirm this.

In a survey reported in the official publication of the American Public Health Association, 78% of the gay respondents reported that they had been affected by a sexually transmitted disease at least one time or another (Enrique T. Rueda, The Homosexual Network, Old Greenwich, Conn., The Devin Adair Company, 1982, p.53).

Clearly, 78% of heterosexuals don't come down with STD's in a vacuum so "something" is causing this high level of disease. Promiscuity (the high number of sexual partners met in bars, parks, public restrooms, and bathhouses), and the acts themselves (see above) that are unhealhy.

One study was done by Dr.'s Cameron, Playfair, & Wellum, and presented to the Eastern Psychological Association Convention, April 17, 1993 entitled "The lifespan of homosexuals". Dr. Cameron's web site has the following statement regarding this study:

"Dr. Charles Smith of SUNY at Buffalo, chair of the session, publicly commended our novel approach and said he was going to warn the gays at his institution about the hazards of their ways.."i

The results excerpted from this 1993 report showed:

Obituaries numbering 6,516 from 16 U.S. homosexual journals over the past 12 years were compared to a large sample of obituaries from regular newspapers. The obituaries from the regular newspapers were similar to U.S. averages for longevity; the medium age of death of married men was 75, and 80% of them died old (age 65 or older). For unmarried or divorced men the median age of death was 57, and 32% of them died old. Married women averaged age 79 at death; 85% died old. Unmarried and divorced women averaged age 71, and 60% of them died old.

The median age of death for homosexuals, however, was virtually the same nationwide--and, overall, less than 2% survived to old age. If AIDS was the cause of death, the median age was 39. For the 829 gays who died of something other than AIDS, the median age of death was 42, and 9% died old. The 163 lesbians had a median age of death of 44, and 20% died old.

Two and eight-tenths percent (2.8%) of gays died violently. They were 116 times more apt to be murdered; 24 times more apt to commit suicide; and had a traffic-accident death-rate 18 times the rate of comparably-aged white males. Heart attacks, cancer and liver failure were exceptionally common. Twenty percent of lesbians died of murder, suicide, or accident--a rate 487 times higher than that of white females aged 25-44. The age distribution of samples of homosexuals in the scientific literature from 1989 to 1992 suggests a similarly shortened life-span.

While ridiculed by homosexual and liberal activists, the report was good enough for the refereed scientific journal Omega in 1994, a journal specifically devoted to studies of death and dying.  Liberals have tried to "discredit" Dr. Cameron (really anyone who dares to disclose the truth). One such rumor Dr. Cameron says is false is the idea that he was "removed" from the APA. This story can be found at APA rebuttal.

Here are several graphic representations of this study:

  Has there been any corroboration of decreased lifespan by others?

Yes. Dr. E. O. Laurnarm (along with Dr.'s  Gagnon, Michael, & Michaels) published The social organization of sexuality: sexual practices in the United States in 1994 ( Chicago: U. Chicago Press)

This report (referenced in Dr. Cameron's work) showed a CLEAR reduction in the number of homosexuals as they aged.

  What do medical journals report? 

As indicated above, the CDC did a study in 1972 showing the high level of homosexual partners (500 or so). This was confirmed by other studies including non-scientific ones by the Advocate and other studies.

One real "burning" question is what kind of diseases do homosexuals get and what are public health agencies reporting. Here are a few excerpts:

American Journal of Public Health, Vol 83, Issue 10 1451-1453, Copyright © 1993 by American Public Health Association

Am J Public Health 1992 82: 615-616.

JB de Wit, JA van den Hoek, TG Sandfort and GJ van Griensven
Department of Gay and Lesbian Studies, Utrecht University, The Netherlands.

Results are presented from two sources, data of which indicate an increase in high-risk sexual behaviors for human immunodeficiency virus infection among homosexual men. The number of cases of gonorrhea among homosexual and bisexual visitors to municipal sexually transmitted disease clinics in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, is increasing. An increase was also observed in unprotected anogenital intercourse among homosexual participants in the Amsterdam cohort. These findings indicate that a rebound in the behavior change process among homosexual men is occurring. Furthermore, longitudinal behavioral data show that lapse and relapse into unsafe sex are prevalent in the Amsterdam cohort.

  Behavioral, health and psychosocial factors and risk for HIV infection among sexually active homosexual men: the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study

American Journal of Public Health, Vol 81, Issue 2 194-196, Copyright © 1991 by American Public Health Association

L Penkower, MA Dew, L Kingsley, JT Becker, P Satz, FW Schaerf and K Sheridan
Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, PA 15260.

We examined whether 644 homosexual men who engaged in receptive anal intercourse were at particularly elevated risk for seroconversion if they also possessed specific behavioral, health or psychosocial vulnerability characteristics. Of 11 potential factors examined:

• heavy drinking, 

• moderate to heavy drug use, and 

• younger age were significantly related to seroconversion. 

These variables were also associated with 

• an increased number of sexual partners, 

• anonymous sex, and 

• failure to use condoms.
  

  Sexually transmitted infection as a cause of anal cancer

[Article in Danish]

Frisch M, Glimelius B, van den Brule AI, Wohlfahrt J, Meijer CJ, Walboomers JM, Goldman S, Svensson C, Adami HO, Melbye M.

Ugeskr Laeger 1998 Nov 30;160(49):7109-17

Afdeling for epidemiologisk forskning, Statens Serum Institut, Kobenhavn. mfr@ssi.dk

Interviews were carried out with 423 women and 93 men with invasive or in situ anal cancer in Denmark and Sweden in a search for clues to the aetiology of this neoplasm. Patients with rectal adenocarcinoma (n = 534) and persons drawn from the background population (n = 554) served as controls. Multivariate logistic regression analyses confirmed previous observations of a strong association between either male homosexual experience or a history of anogenital warts and the risk for anal cancer. Moreover, hitherto unknown, but strong and consistent associations were observed between measures of high heterosexual activity and the risk for anal cancer among both sexes. Polymerase chain reaction analysis revealed human papilloma-virus DNA in the majority (88%) of anal cancer specimens but in none of 20 examined rectal adenocarcinomas. It is concluded that most anal cancers appear to be caused by sexually transmitted types of human papillomaviruses and, consequently, that anal cancer is a potentially preventable neoplasm.

PMID: 9850615 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

  Serologic evidence of human herpesvirus 8 transmission by homosexual but not heterosexual sex

Smith NA, Sabin CA, Gopal R, Bourboulia D, Labbet W, Boshoff C, Barlow D, Band B, Peters BS, de Ruiter A, Brown DW, Weiss RA, Best JM, Whitby D.

J Infect Dis 1999 Sep;180(3):600-6

HIV/GUM, Chelsea and Westminster National Health Service Trust, Charing Cross Hospital, London, United Kingdom.

Epidemiologic studies link Kaposi's sarcoma with a sexually transmitted agent. Human herpesvirus 8 (HHV-8) is likely to be that agent, but routes of transmission are poorly described. A seroepidemiologic study was conducted to determine whether HHV-8 is transmitted sexually between heterosexuals. Sera from 2718 patients attending a sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinic were tested for antibodies to HHV-8 and herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2). Information on sex partners in the previous 12 months and past STDs were obtained by questionnaire. Relationships between possible risk factors and HHV-8 infection were assessed by logistic regression. Overall, seroprevalence of HHV-8 was 7.3%. Independent risk factors for HHV-8 in the whole group were homo/bisexuality and birth in Africa and, among homo/bisexual men, a history of syphilis and HSV-2 and human immunodeficiency virus seropositivity. Among heterosexuals there was no evidence for sexual transmission; the only independent risk factor for HHV-8 seropositivity was birth in Africa.

PMID: 10438345 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

  Rectal gonorrhoea in homosexual men: source of infection

McMillan A, Young H, Moyes A.

Int J STD AIDS 2000 May;11(5):284-7

Department of Genitourinary Medicine, Edinburgh Royal Infirmary NHS Trust, UK.

The objective of this retrospective study was to determine the possible source of infection in homosexual men with rectal gonorrhoea: the probable source of rectal gonorrhoea was identified in 46/155 cases. Although the urethra was the site of infection in 33 (72%) of these contacts, only pharyngeal gonorrhoea was identified in 9 (20%) men. In 25/26 cases, there was concordance in the auxo/serotypes of Neisseria gonorrhoeae between contacts with urethral gonorrhoea and the index men with rectal gonorrhoea. Eleven out of 12 pharyngeal isolates were of the same auxo/serotype as the index cases. This study supports the hypothesis that rectal gonorrhoea in homosexual men can be acquired from the oropharynx. Because infection at this site is an independent risk factor for acquisition of HIV, screening for rectal and pharyngeal gonorrhoea should be offered to men who have sex with men, even when there is no history of unprotected receptive anal intercourse.

PMID: 10824935 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

  The gay bowel syndrome. A review of colonic and rectal conditions in 200 male homosexuals

Sohn N, Robilotti JG Jr.

Am J Gastroenterol 1977 May;67(5):478-84

Our experience in the management of 260 male homosexuals with colorectal problems is described. The increased incidence of amebiasis, shigellosis and hepatitis, specific and nonspecific protocolitides, venereal disease and anal warts, is emphasized. It is important to recognize homosexual patients and the conditions to which they are predisposed.

PMID: 578386 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Note: Recently, homosexual activists were able to get medical organizations from referring to the "syndrome" as "Gay bowel". A good example of political pressure and the politically correct nature of the debate.  Note the reference above to their "predisposition" to these various diseases - e.g. they get these because of what they "do".

  Prevalence of enteric pathogens in homosexual men with and without acquired immunodeficiency syndrome

Laughon BE, Druckman DA, Vernon A, Quinn TC, Polk BF, Modlin JF, Yolken RH, Bartlett JG.

Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore.

We studied 388 homosexual or bisexual men from the Baltimore-Washington area to define the spectrum of enteric pathogen carriage in a population at high risk for "gay bowel syndrome" in association with human immunodeficiency virus infection. Seventy-seven patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, 68 gay men with symptoms of acute diarrhea or proctitis, and 243 gay men without gastrointestinal symptoms and participating in a natural history study of human immunodeficiency virus infection were selected for study. Approximately 12% of the asymptomatic men harbored at least one enteric pathogen; the most frequently recovered were Chlamydia trachomatis, herpes simplex virus, and Giardia lamblia. Men carrying a pathogen were more likely to be human immunodeficiency virus seropositive (48%) than men without a pathogen (25%) (p = 0.018), more likely to have fewer T helper cells (p = 0.015), and more likely to have a mucopurulent exudate (p = 0.014). We recovered an agent of enteric disease from 68% of gay men presenting with diarrhea or proctitis. Campylobacter species, herpes simplex virus, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, C. trachomatis, G. lamblia, and Shigella species were identified most frequently. The most common pathogen associated with diarrhea in acquired immunodeficiency syndrome was Cryptosporidium (16% of 49 cases). Other agents identified were Clostridium difficile, Vibrio parahemolyticus, Campylobacter species, G. lamblia, Isospora, and cytomegalovirus. Approximately half of the identifiable etiologic agents of diarrhea in acquired immunodeficiency syndrome patients were treatable with antibiotics, but these agents required special culture procedures for detection.

PMID: 2831107 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

  High grade anal dysplasia in visually normal mucosa in homosexual men: seven cases

Surawicz CM, Critchlow C, Sayer J, Hurt C, Hawes S, Kirby P, Goldbaum G, Kiviat N.

Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, USA.

BACKGROUND: Anal cancer and anal human Papillomavirus (HPV) infection are increased in homosexual men. METHODS: We screened high risk homosexual men as part of a longitudinal study examining the effect of HIV infection on the risk of development of high grade anal intraepithelial neoplasia (AIN II, III). RESULTS: We found seven men who had histological evidence of AIN II-III with visually normal findings by anoscopy. Two men were HIV-seronegative, five were HIV-seropositive, and only one of the HIV-seropositive men had a low CD4 count < 200. Abnormal cytological results seen over follow-up periods of 3 months to 2.5 yr suggest the persistence of visually inapparent anal abnormalities. Two of the men had had small internal warts at earlier examinations, and three of the seven men subsequently developed visually abnormal anal findings. All men had HPV 16 DNA detected at some point. CONCLUSIONS: We hypothesize that high grade anal neoplasia may develop deep in the glands and can be detected by cytology before visible lesions are detected even with the aid of a colposcope. However, the implications of finding high grade anal cytology are not known at this time. Natural history studies are ongoing.

PMID: 7572893 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Actually - there is no "safe homosexual sex" - it is all high-risk regardless of the "protections used". 

Like the rest of the world, there is a general desire on the part of homosexuals to engage in medically "unsafe sex" which are described as "high risk" in medical journals.  Because of political pressure, few medical professionals will specifically address the issue of homosexual behavior, though individual studies show conclusively that the activity is "high-risk" due to promiscuous and unhealthy behavior.

  What about Mental Health and homosexuals? 

In 1972, the American Psychological Association bowing to political pressure removed homosexuality as a mental illness. Even so, they continue to deny the high-incidence of mental health problems facing homosexuals. 

A relatively current large, nationwide, random survey of 7,076 Dutch adults aged 18 to 64. Like other similar studies, a little over 30% of those who were targeted for interview declined to participate. But of the 5,998 respondents who said that they had been “sexually active” the preceding year, 82 men (2.8% of the sexually active and perhaps 2.6% of all men in the sample) and 43 women (1.4% of the sexually active and perhaps 1.3% of all women in the sample) said that they had had homosexual sex in the past year.

That study, recapped below (from FRI) shows the double and nearly triple those of heterosexuals. Since the Netherlands is a "tolerant" society, has been for some time, you should expect to see no difference in the level of mental illnesses UNLESS, the reason for the mental illness is the homosexual conduct itself (something the APA refuses to discuss).

Prevalence of Mental Disorders in Netherlands

Hopeforhomosexuals (a web site) reports that in a 1977 survey of members of the American Psychiatric Association by Harold I. Lief titled "Sexual Survey Number 4: Current Thinking on Homosexuality, Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality 2" it was noted that:

•  73% of the psychiatrists responding said that they thought that homosexual men are less happy than others. 

• Seventy percent said they believed that the homosexuals' problems were due more to personal conflicts than to social stigmatization.

One study by Kinsey revealed that 43% of the homosexual men surveyed estimated that they had had sex with 500 or more partners (the same as the CDC 1972 study noted above); 28% with 1,000 or more partners. The survey ALSO showed that:

•  79% of the respondents indicated that over half of their sexual partners were strangers,

• 78% of male homo- sexual "affairs" (relationships entered into with an intent of commitment) lasted less than three years,

• 70% said that over half of their sexual partners were people with whom they had sex only once,

• Only 12% lasted five years or longer.

(cited by Hopeforhomosexuals (a web site)  and reported by them as being in a study by Bell and Weinberg  called "Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women" published by Simon and Shuster in 1978). 

A Study performed in 1999 by the University of Illinois compared twins where one was homosexual and one was not to determine if (given the same genetics) that homosexuals were more prone to suicide. The conclusion?

RESULTS: Same-gender sexual orientation is significantly associated with each of the suicidality measures.

CONCLUSIONS: The substantially increased lifetime risk of suicidal behaviors in homosexual men is unlikely to be due solely to substance abuse or other psychiatric comorbidity. 

So, even when the person is genetically the SAME, engaging in homosexual behavior creates a higher-risk of suicide than the exact genetic makeup of someone who is not homosexual. 

  Sexual orientation and suicidality: a co-twin control study in adult men

Herrell R, Goldberg J, True WR, Ramakrishnan V, Lyons M, Eisen S, Tsuang MT.

Comment in:

• Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1999 Oct;56(10):883-4

• Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1999 Oct;56(10):885-6

• Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1999 Oct;56(10):887-8

Division of Epidemiology-Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Illinois at Chicago, 60615, USA.

BACKGROUND: Several recent studies have found a higher lifetime prevalence of suicide attempts in homosexual males compared with heterosexual control subjects or population rates. These studies used either convenience samples, most without controls, or population-based samples in which confounding factors such as depression and substance abuse were not measured. METHODS: This study used twins from the population-based Vietnam Era Twin Registry, Hines, Ill. An analytic sample of 103 middle-aged male-male twin pairs from the registry was identified in which one member of the pair reported male sex partners after age 18 years while the other did not. Four lifetime symptoms of suicidality as measured by the Diagnostic Interview Schedule were analyzed: thoughts about death, wanting to die, thoughts about committing suicide, and attempted suicide. A composite measure of reporting at least one suicidality symptom was also assessed. RESULTS: Same-gender sexual orientation is significantly associated with each of the suicidality measures. Unadjusted matched-pair odds ratios follow: 2.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2 - 4.6) for thoughts about death; 4.4 (95% CI, 1.7 - 11.6) for wanted to die; 4.1 (95% CI, 2.1 - 8.2) for suicidal ideation; 6.5 (95% CI, 1.5 - 28.8) for attempted suicide; and 5.1 (95% CI, 2.4 - 10.9) for any of the suicidal symptoms. After adjustment for substance abuse and depressive symptoms (other than suicidality), all of the suicidality measures remain significantly associated with same-gender sexual orientation except for wanting to die (odds ratio, 2.5 [95% CI, 0.7 - 8.81). CONCLUSIONS: The substantially increased lifetime risk of suicidal behaviors in homosexual men is unlikely to be due solely to substance abuse or other psychiatric comorbidity. While the underlying causes of the suicidal behaviors remain unclear, future research needs to address the inadequacies in the measurement of both sexual orientation and suicidality in population-based samples. PMID: 10530625 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Either the American Psychiatric Association seems clearly ignorant of the damage that homosexual conduct long-term inflicts on those men & women that engage in it. This seems to raise a basic question of whether the APA is biased, refusing the address the question of "healthy sexuality".

  What do Charlotte Area folks think of homosexual conduct? 

Recent polls of Charlotte and Mecklenburg area  citizens show that the do not think that homosexual conduct should be tolerated as part of a "diverse" society.

A separate poll of citizens supported the concept of "parents rights" (the right to know what their children were being taught about sex) by 2/3's to 3/4's of the population (Charlotte Observer statistical poll - 1997)

So, current evidence shows that homosexual ACTIVITY is unhealthy and "high-risk".

Current law defines the activity as a felony.

That which is illegal should not be encouraged by government. That which is unhealthy should not be encouraged or promoted as "diversity" or accepted as behavior equal to that which is "normal" and healthy.