04/08/2020
Is homos*xuality dangerous to society?
by Matt Slick
Is homos*xuality dangerous to society? The answer depends on what constitutes a danger. First of all, there is no objective moral standard that secularists have with which to identify wickedness, evil, and moral decay. At best, all that can be offered is the generic claim that what is dangerous is what causes undue harm and suffering among the general population. Such dangers could include economic collapse or upheaval, war, famine, plague, earthquakes, disease, etc. We could add that dangers to society are things that weaken it, make it less viable to care for its population, make it vulnerable to attack from outside and/or within. This could be anything from bad religion to bad government. Also, such things as rampant lying, stealing, and murder would seriously undermine a healthy society and be dangerous to it since they increase the harm and suffering of the society as a whole.
Okay, so now that we have something to work with, let's take a look at homos*xuality and see if it is beneficial or harmful to society. Let's start with disease and see what the statistics teach us.
Disease
• 2% of U.S. population is gay yet it accounts for 61% of HIV infection: "Men who have s*x with men [MSM] remain the group most heavily affected by new HIV infections. While the CDC estimates that MSM represent only 2 percent of the U.S. population, they accounted for the majority (61 percent; 29,300) of all new HIV infections in 2009. Young MSM (ages 13 to 29) were most severely affected, representing more than one quarter of all new HIV infections nationally (27 percent; 12,900 in 2009)." (Center for Disease Control, cdc.gov/nch hstp/newsroom/HIVIncidencePressRelease.html)
• "A recent CDC study found that in 2008 one in five (19%) MSM in 21 major US cities were infected with HIV, and nearly half (44%) were unaware of their infection." (http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm).
• 25% of HIV infected in U.K. unaware of their infection: "Of the estimated 86,500 people living with HIV in the United Kingdom, about 25 percent are not aware they are infected, the Health Protection Agency said recently." (The Body, thebody.com/content/art59714.html)
Clearly, the disease statistics related to a homos*xual lifestyle prove that such a lifestyle is harmful not only to themselves but also to others, especially when you note that in both the U.S. and U.K. large percentages of HIV infected people don't know they are infected. This is a danger to society since it supports the spread of disease on a large scale.
Financial Impact
• $12.1 Billion annual cost in US: "Future treatment for the 40,000 people infected with HIV in the United States every year will cost $12.1 billion annually, a new study showed." (msnbc.msn.com/id/15528984/ns/health-aids/t/new-us-hiv-cases-cost-billion-year/)
• $1.5 Billion Cost for 2001 in Canada: "June 2001, Halifax, Nova Scotia--HIV/AIDS cost Canadians more than $2 billion in 1999 in direct and indirect costs. Health care costs accounted for about $560 million; prevention, research and supports to AIDS victims for about $40 million; and lost economic production due to premature death and disability for nearly $1.5 billion." (gpiatlantic.org/releases/pr_cost_aids.htm)
The financial drain on society due to the medical costs of HIV is huge. The greater the impact, the more damage it does to the society's financial stability.
Mental Health How is the mental health of homos*xuals and le****ns? Does it have the same bell-curve as the rest of society? No, it does not. Take a look at these statistics and note that the mental health issues are not due to social pressure and rejection by the majority of society who considers homos*xuality to be aberrant.
• " . . . homos*xuals are about 50% more likely to suffer from depression and engage in substance abuse than the rest of the population, reports Health24.com . . . the risk of su***de jumped over 200% if an individual had engaged in a homos*xual lifestyle . . . the lifespan of a homos*xual is on average 24 years shorter than that of a heteros*xual . . . While the Health 24 article suggested that homos*xuals may be pushed to substance abuse and su***de because of anti-homos*xual cultural and family pressures, empirical tests have shown that there is no difference in homos*xual health risk depending on the level of tolerance in a particular environment. Homos*xuals in the United States and Denmark--the latter of which is acknowledged to be highly tolerant of homos*xuality--both die on average in their early 50's, or in their 40's if AIDS is the cause of death. The average age for all residents in either country ranges from the mid-to-upper-70s." (one news now.com/Culture/Default. aspx? id=255614)
• 73% of the psychiatrists in the Psychiatric Association who responded to a survey by Harold I. Lief said that they thought that homos*xual men are less happy than others. 70% percent said they believed that the homos*xuals' problems were due more to personal conflicts than to social stigmatization. Study by Harold I. Leif, S*xual Survey Number 4: Current Thinking on Homos*xuality, Medical Aspects of Human S*xuality 2 (1977), pp.110-111 (Cited in Growing Up Straight by George A. Reker)." (exodusglobalalliance.org/ishomos*xualityhealthyp60.php)
S*xual Molestation
• Higher s*xual molestation with homos*xual parents: “A disproportionate percentage--29--percent--of the adult children of homos*xual parents had been specifically subjected to s*xual molestation by that homos*xual parent, compared to only 0.6 percent of adult children of heteros*xual parents having reported s*xual relations with their parent. . . . Having a homos*xual parent(s) appears to increase the risk of in**st with a parent by a factor of about 50.” (P. Cameron and K. Cameron, "Homos*xual Parents," Adolescence 31 (1996): 772" (exodusglobalalliance.org/ishomos*xualityhealthyp60.php).
Certainly, no one wants children molested by adults. (Unfortunately, pe******ia is now being pushed as another 's*xual orientation' see http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=11517). Society needs to protect its children--not subject them to s*xual pressures and molestation. However, the homos*xual lifestyle clearly presents an increased threat to our children.
S*xual Promiscuity S*xual promiscuity helps support the spread of disease. What are the promiscuity statistics of the homos*xual community? Shockingly bad!
• 28% of homos*xual men had more than 1000 partners: "Bell and Weinberg reported evidence of widespread s*xual compulsion among homos*xual men. 83% of the homos*xual men surveyed estimated they had had s*x with 50 or more partners in their lifetime, 43% estimated they had s*x with 500 or more partners; 28% with 1,000 or more partners. Bell and Weinberg p 308." (exodusglobalalliance.org/ishomos*xualityhealthyp60.php)
• Low rate of s*xual fidelity among homos*xuals. "There is an extremely low rate of s*xual fidelity among homos*xual men as compared to married heteros*xuals. Among married females 85% reported s*xual fidelity. Among married men, 75.5% reported s*xual fidelity. Among homos*xual males in their current relationship, 4.5% reported s*xual fidelity. (Sources: Laumann, The Social Organization of S*xuality, 216; McWhirter and Mattison, The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop (1984): 252-253; Wiederman, "Extramarital S*x," 170. This is extracted from http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02)
Does anyone think that such mind-blowing promiscuity is healthy for any society, especially when the homos*xual community is particularly subject to HIV infection? Homos*xuals are members of society; and their behavior, which is a manifestation of their "orientation," is extremely dangerous.
Death of a society If we produce no children, our society will die. There won't be enough people to support the infrastructure, medical needs, economic development, etc. That is a fact. So, common sense would tell us that homos*xuality is a danger to society since it cannot produce children to further the society.
Opening the door wide Homos*xuality is a behavior that is based, as many claim, on an orientation. What about other s*xual orientations such as pe******ia, voyeurism, necrophilia, be******ty, polygamy, in**st, exhibitionism, fetishes, frotterism, masochism, sa**sm, etc.? The arguments for and against these other "orientations" are many, and we won't go into them here. But, who is to say that those who fall into these s*xual categories won't use the homos*xual agenda's orientation argument as a basis to further their own causes? If you think this is a ridiculous idea, then you are not aware of the fact that pedophiles are doing just that. See the article "Pedophiles want same rights as homos*xuals." Muslims practice polygamy, and they are increasing in America. Mormons have practiced it in the past, and who is to say they won't get another revelation declaring that it is permissible again once the homos*xual movement and its redefinition of marriage is ingrained in society? In**st is sure to follow (See the article "Rick Sa****um was right about In**st and the Slippery Slope )." The slippery slope is exactly the issue. Once s*xual morays are loosed, marriage definitions and fidelity are loosened, too. Nothing happens in a society by itself since their intertwining social strings have collateral effects.
Conclusion
So, is homos*xuality dangerous to society? The facts show that it is. We have to ask, why then would it be promoted so heavily when it is so harmful? The only answer I can come up with (aside from a biblical one) is that the politically correct don't care about the facts. Instead, they want their agenda promoted. They want their s*xual freedom without responsibility. They, like so many tyrants in history, want to force their minority opinion on the majority to satisfy their own appetites. By Matt Slick.
frc.org Advanced Search page (new)