Actually my research paper for school, so it's quite long (10ish pages). Hope you will still find time to read it though and give me your feedback. -In Christ, Phil
One of the most commonly arising topics in
the political sphere of America today is homosexuality: whether homosexuals
should have a civil union or not, what that union should be called, whether or
not they should be merited tax status alongside heterosexual couples, etc. So
many issues currently in legislation (alongside countless articles in the past
and the unimaginable number to appear in the future) apply to this 1-2% of the
American population. Not only to be found in America, however, homosexual
groups exist in virtually every society at present, being most prevalent in
Europe. More prominent perhaps than the political issues swirling around this
demographic are the societal and cultural quesitons that have amassed. Is
homosexuality a positive or negative force to society? Can qay or lesbian
couples raise “normal” children? What are the long-term consequences of
homosexuality’s complete acceptance on American society, culture, and future?
This indeed is a vast and sensitive issue. In order to gain a wider perspective
on homosexuality and its effect, one must consider its effects on the past
through homosexuality’s history; its effects on the present through
homosexuality’s moral and physical shaping of the individual; and its effects
on the future through homosexuality’s direct influence on children, the progeny
and future of the current culture. After a wider view is taken, it is not hard
to see how negative homosexuality and the open acceptance and encouragement
thereof is damaging our society on multiple levels.
The past of homosexuality is a hard history
to read or gather information on. From ancient times to relatively recent ages,
homosexuality has been rejected and smothered by “cultured” people groups.
Recently, however, with the growing acceptance of homosexuality as a facet of
sociology and life in general, more research has taken place into this field,
as historians delve into an entire “new” field of history. For quite some time,
many historians were afraid of researching homosexuality for fear of being
accused of such sexual bent themselves. When they finally did begin to search
out this history, especially in ancient times, they came across interesting
barriers. One of the primary roadblocks was the fact that many of these
cultures had no word for such a relationship; their categorizations of
relationships may not have been simply “heterosexual” and “homosexual”. Many
primitive societies such as those of the Americas and Africa had stages in
between the two or specific social roles combining the two (West, 17). A most
striking example of this would be the Kerski of New Guinea, where homosexual
intercourse was universal. Younger men were expected to “receive” such
treatment from older single men until the older man in the relationship was
married, at which the younger man took on the “giving” role and the cycle was
repeated. Across the world, there have been various classes of men who dressed
as women and fulfilled women’s roles and tasks for society, often including
marriage to another man (West, 18). Numerous tribes of the Americas allowed
semi-homosexual or fully homosexual relationships among unmarried young people,
for contact between single members of the opposite sex was rewarded with severe
punishment. Even in ancient Greece and Rome, relationships between men were
frequent, with nearly every Roman emperor except one having a male lover for
the greater part of Rome’s history. Socrates, the great philosopher, was held
as a character of remarkable self-control when he shared his bed with a young
man for a night without any sexual interaction occurring, though the young man
pursued his elder with passion and persistence.
On the other hand, several other non-European cultures
abhorred homosexuality in any form, such as the tribes of Tahiti and Colorado
(though representatives are found all across the world). The Trobrian island
people were extremely biased against homosexual relationships (West, 20). Any
such tendencies were quickly squelched through ridicule, and men found to be in
such relationships would often kill themselves. It is notable that the most
probable reason for cultures in which there is no such practice is that it was
strongly repressed by society. It is also crucial to recognize the
dissatisfaction that accompanied these cultures’ homosexuals: over time, gender
and societal role confusion caused shame and unbalanced the mechanisms of said
societies. Also, no society (discovered to date) has ever considered
exclusive homosexuality to be a permanent way of life. Why has none of this been
brought to light throughout the last few centuries? Well, as Europe slowly
emerged from the Dark Ages with the aid of the Protestant Reformation,
“refinement” and culture rejected such practices and even talk of them, to the
point that early translations of Greek manuscripts by Oxford scholars were
censored of any reference to homosexuality (Mondimore, 13). This effectively
walled off such “inappropriate” information from European and colonial American
society for a few centuries and up until the present age.
In recent times, the war over homosexuality’s acceptance
continues to rage on a number of faces, whether based on sociology or morality
or even simply prejudice. However, what is often overlooked is the physical and
mental damage homosexuality does to an individual. When and if these facts are
relayed, they are either understated or “softened”, as our society has bent
itself on protecting and defending the LGBT community. It is terrifying once
the particulars are laid bare precisely what this movement is having on our
culture’s overall health. Sound Teaching reports that 43% of gay men
have 500+ partners during their lifetimes, with 28% having 1000+. If that
doesn’t already reveal some problems, there are plenty of more specific
statistics on the subject. STD’s run rampant among the homosexual community.
Even protection will not cease or even slow this onslaught of diseases; condoms
and other preventatives are made to prevent conception, not the spread of
STD’s. According to Human Life International, greater than 33% of all condoms
will leak HIV-sized particles among other STD-causing particles. 78% of the gay
community are affected by AIDS (The Statistics), and the gay community has
consistently accounted for the vast majority of gonorrhea, syphilis,
tuberculosis and many other diseases in the American and international medical
communities. Discretion seems to disappear in this subculture where promiscuity
and frequency of “episodes” rule. In the decades leading up to the 21st
century, more and more programs were created in an effort to educate this
subculture to the dangers of unprotected intercourse, but the numbers have
taken a steady and massive turn for the worse. Percentages of those wearing
protection are steadily decreasing (Issue Analysis). Unprotected anal
intercourse, the riskiest kind, has increased dramatically, and fewer and fewer
men are reporting being aware of their sexual partner’s serostatus in regards
to AIDS and other diseases. Estimates say that over half of these sexual
encounters are with total strangers, while 79% are one-night (or “one-minute”)
stands (The Statistics).HPV, another common disease, is spread rapidly through
anal intercourse and causes anal cancer with alarming frequency of cases (Issue
Analysis). Aside from STD’s, other maladies are also prevalent. Hepatitis and
the afore-mentioned anal cancer can lead to tumors and cancer spread throughout
the body. Doctors have changed their minds about even so-called “monogamous”
homosexual relationships; they are no longer considered to be any healthier
than promiscuous homosexual lifestyles. The list of diseases and sicknesses
assaulting this subcommunity is long and filled with potent, life-changing
offenders.
The number of mental effects assailing homosexuals today
is also quite impressive. Gays and lesbians have much higher risk of committing
suicide, paired with a much shorter estimated life span than heterosexual
individuals. The average life span for a gay man is currently on the same level
as that for average Canadian men of the 1800’s (Issue Analysis): 42, while that
of a heterosexual man is 75 (The Statistics). The same holds true for lesbians,
whose median age at death is 45, compared to 79 for heterosexual women.
Homosexual encounters are extremely likely to involve dangerous levels of
alcohol and/or illegal drugs. Homosexuals themselves are much more likely to be
violent and abusive in their relationships, with over half of the reports of
“queer bashing” relating to homosexuals abusing other homosexuals. They are 100
times more likely to be murdered by another homosexual than a heterosexual, and
they account for more than half of the murder and suicide rates in large cities;
lesbians account for well over half of the inmates on death row.
"Homosexuality by definition is not healthy and wholesome. The homosexual
person, at best, will be unhappier and more unfulfilled than the sexually
normal person" is the verdict of Dr. Daniel Capron and many of the other
psychiatrists of the National Association for Research and Therapy of
Homosexuality.
Even after learning about the immediate and individual
effects, there are still more disturbing facts to be known about
homosexuality’s effect on our society: the effects it has on children. As
previously stated, homosexuals are notorious for their short-term relationships
and frequent change of partner. This in itself could be considered a
disqualifier for parental candidates. Studies have already shown how a single
parent’s dating can affect that child, whether causing embitterment, anger,
depression, fear, or rebelliousness. Wouldn’t this be magnified by the stunning
number of partners a homosexual pursues in his or her life? In 2005, the
American Psychological Association published a study stating that it was no
worse to be raised by homosexual couples than by heterosexual couples (Dean). A
few years later in 2010, a pair of sociologists proposed in their study that
being raised by a lesbian couple was actually superior to being raised
by a heterosexual couple. Thankfully, last year one Professor Mark Regenerus
published his own study after questioning the conclusions of the two earlier
studies. In his study, he screened more than 15,000 young adults over a wide
array of criteria. His findings showed that the children of same-sex parents
were more depressed, more negative, less healthy, less fulfilled, and more
likely to be sexually victimized among many other things, all of them negative
(interesting to note, Professor Regenerus was laid off shortly after the
publication of his study). Psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover, M.D., considers the
effects it has on children to be the primary reason for preventing same-sex
marriage (Brinkmann). He continues:
In every area of life, cognitive, emotional, social,
developmental ... at every phase of the life cycle ... social evidence shows
that there are measurable effects when children lack either a mother or a
father. ... The evidence is overwhelming. Mountains of evidence, collected over
decades, show that children need both mothers and fathers.
Literally
hundreds of hints differentiate the experiencing of a mother and a father, both
of which contribute integrally to a child’s formation. One somewhat scary
thought is how the parents’ shorter life spans (with high risks of various
diseases) will affect a child. Parent deaths early in a child’s life can also
deeply scar and affect his or her development.
As has been shown, homosexuality has had a
derogatory effect on humanity’s past, present, and future. If the source material
is accurate, this presents a sobering and dim outlook for the future course of culture.
Where can it go from here? According to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, things
only get worse, and this principle applies well to life in general. Perversity will
breed greater perversity. What will be the next step down that America cheerfully
takes as a nation?
WORKS CITED
Brinkmann, Susan. “Gay Marriage: Who’s Minding The
Children?” Catholic Education Resource Center. 2004. Web. 12 March 2013.
Dean, Jamie. “Less Than Ideal.” World Magazine.
World Publications, 30 June 2012. Web. 12 March 2013.
Halderin, David M. How to Do The History of
Homosexuality.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002. Print.
“Issue Analysis: The Negative Health Effects of
Homosexuality.” Family Research Council. FRCAction, n.d. Web. 18 Feb.
2013.
“The Statistics on Homosexuality and Its Effects.” Free Republic. Catholic Apologetics
International, 14 October 2005. Web. 12 March 2013.
West, Donald James. Homosexuality: Its Nature and
Causes. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co., 2008. Print.
