I came across a news report of a teacher of Raffles Institution who had his 2,000-word coming-out blog post removed under pressure from the Ministry of Education. Just google his name “Otto Fong” and you’ll find lots of stuff on it. Is this an injustice that is being done to homosexuals?
We know that for some time, homosexuals have campaigned for and succeeded in obtaining the legal right to ‘marry’ in some countries. Is forbidding homosexuals to marry a injustice done to them?
In Singapore, up until recent years, homosexuals were not even allowed to commit homosexual acts, and it is still, on paper, against the law. Is this an injustice to homosexuals?
Perhaps, but I would propose that the greatest injustice done to homosexuals was not done in recent years, but in 1973. What’s the big thing that happened that year?
In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed homosexuality as a disorder from the Sexual Deviancy section of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. In other words, the APA declared that homosexuality was not a psychological disorder. This declassification is largely based on the research of Alfred Kinsey, who showed (through flawed statistics) that 10 percent of all people are homosexual, hence homosexuality wasn’t so uncommon.
This study was done in 1948 and 1953. More recent studies have been unable to duplicate the statistics that Kinsey acquired. Remember the South Korean scientist who faked his own results regarding cloning? People only realised something was wrong when his results could not be duplicated. Similarly, people are now, or have been since the 1990s, been realising that there is something wrong with Kinsey’s research, since his results could not be duplicated.
The highest percentage of homosexuals in any population in any study that has been properly conducted and verified by its scientific peers is 2.5 percent. And this is the result now, in present day. Do you think there would have been more homosexuals (or people who declare themselves homosexuals) today or back in 1948? Obviously there is something wrong with Kinsey’s data. But what?
The reason that Kinsey’s data is flawed is that he threw out more than 75 percent of samples acquired from the normal population, and kept only those that matched what he wanted. He chose to take samples largely from prisoners, and not only regular prisoners, but those who had been imprisoned for sexual crimes.
Any amateur scientist can see the one fundamental flaw in Kinsey’s research – he didn’t set out to discover the truth. He set out to match the data to fit his own ideas. Having found the data to match his own ideas, and throwing out all the rest, he presented it to the public who eagerly lapped it up without thinking to consider his research techniques. He gave the public what they wanted to hear, not the truth.
Even today, people are citing that “10 percent”. I know of homosexuals who continue to cite it, despite knowing that it is an inaccurate figure. But this 10 percent figure is what resulted in the APA removing homosexuality as a psychological disorder.
I say that this is the greatest injustice done to homosexuals because it indicates to homosexuals that the condition they have is normal. It is not, and I think all homosexuals deep down know this. No homosexual chooses to be the way he or she is.
Leslie Lung, founder of Liberty League, believes that homosexuals are essentially people whose psychological development has been interrupted. Homosexuals, I believe and he agrees, are people who have not accepted themselves as a man or a woman. But Leslie goes one step further and proposes that the best way of helping a homosexual to accept his manhood or her womanhood is to show him or her love, respect, understanding and acceptance.
He should know… for Leslie himself was formerly a sexually-broken transsexual. And a beautiful one to boot. Today, Leslie has devoted his life to working with homosexuals who desire to become whole.
In short, the greatest injustice that has been done to homosexuals, is not preventing them from the legal right ‘to marry’, it is not external pressure to keep their sexual disorder hidden… it is the continued propagation of the lie that homosexual is a valid sexual orientation, rather than sexual brokenness manifesting itself in a psychological disorder. After all, if no one classifies it as a disorder, no one will try to bring order back to it, and almost any homosexual who does want to become sexually whole, will be denied treatment.
Resources:
- more information about Kinsey’s skewed research can be found by googling “Judith Reisman” or visiting her webpage at www.drjudithreisman.com. It is currently under construction, but you can find an older version of the page here.
- Liberty League is a non-profit, non-religious organization dedicated towards helping homosexuals heal their sexual brokenness.
Related articles:
Filed under: Homosexuality, News, Truth
Hi CW,
I’d like to answer about some things you said in your comments and article.
1/ The APA never got homosexuality off the list of mental illnesses because Kisney said they made up 10% of the population. They did because it became very evident that what troubles homosexuals suffered at the time were external (=came from society) and not internal (=from homosexuality in itself). Just as it is difficult to be a Black person in the US because there is racism, not because being a Black person means you’re stupid and troubled. So the whole argument about the APA is completely misinformed and misinforming.
2/ You spend a lot of time explaining why heterosexuals can achieve a union of body and soul but homosexuals cannot.
- When a man rapes a woman, are they achieving the union of body and soul? No. So this achievement is not inherent to heterosexual sex, it is a “bonus” that can be achieved, or not, between two individuals, generally becase they love each others.
- When I make love with my boyfriend, I dare to think i’m achieving the union of body and soul. And the whole “the parts don’t fit” thing is ridiculous. I suppose even you have heard about sodomy? I know it is high on the list of horrible sins for you christians, but let’s not get religion involved here, because your argument about the “parts that don’t fit” wasn’t involving religion but a pure desire of “logical” thinking. Parts do fit, and tell you what, the prostate, man’s G point is not accessible by any other way than the rectum. Surely you who think that every part of the body has “a purpose” will agree then that sodomy is not unnatural. And well, even if it was, when my boyfriend (that I love dearly) and I achieve orgasm together, I dare to think there is a total union of mind and body at that moment.
3/ You say nothing prevents homosexuals from living a celibate life. Well, it is true, but why would you ask such a sacrifice from homosexuals when you would never ask it from heterosexuals? Do you honestly think that unfertile heterosexuals should remain alone and miserable all their life because *you* think they shouldn’t engage in sexual act if it’s not to reproduce? And do you honestly think that all heterosexuals in the world who have sex without the goal to have a child will go to hell? I think it is very easy to ask such sacrifices from others when you’re not concerned.
4/ Finally, I was very shocked by what you said about Alan Turing. You say he was a threat to society. I will just ask you that: Do you really think a man that saved millions of lives by disrupting the nazi communication system (and thus allowing people to flee from bombings, and the allies to debark and counter the nazis) is less worthy of respect because he was a homosexual? Do you think his contribution to society and humanity is less important than the heterosexual nazi officer who had a child but allowed millions of people to be tortured and killed? Do you honestly think that?
Hi C.
Sorry for the late response.
1. We cannot compare homosexuality with race because there is no undisputed scientific evidence to show that homosexuality is something that is inherited, like race is. A person cannot help what colour his skin is, and it may be true that a person cannot choose his sexual orientation. However, it is also true that a person with a homosexual orientation can choose what he or she does with that orientation that he or she finds himself or herself with.
In other words, I completely agree with those who say that a person with a homosexual orientation should not be made to suffer because of his or her orientation. But if a person chooses to act on his or her homosexual orientation, then that’s where I draw the line. If a person who chooses to act on his or her homosexual orientation suffers because of his or her behaviour, he or she cannot put the blame fully on the externals, because the root cause is his or her behaviour, which is internal.
2. A man’s g-spot. That’s the first time I heard of this being used to justify anal sex. The reason the parts don’t fit in anal sex are manifold. Here are some reasons:
- the anus is not made for the insertion of an object. When a penis is inserted forcefully into an anus, the rectal tissue is very much more likely to tear than if the penis were inserted into a vagina. This tearing of rectal tissue is the primary reason why men who have sex with men have a much higher rate of sexually transmitted diseases.
- when I speak of the parts, I mean more than just the genitals. I also refer to the sexual organs which include for males, the testicles and the production of sperm, and for females, the ovaries and the womb, among others. In anal sex, the testicles and sperm that is produced have no function whatsoever, as there is nothing that ejaculated sperm can do inside the anus and rectum.
The purpose of sex is twofold: for procreation, and for bonding between spouses. Pleasure is not one of the purposes of sex, but an effect of sex. Hence, a man’s G-spot does not need to be stimulated for sex to achieve its purpose. But if sex achieves nothing but pleasure for the parties involved, then the sex is not fulfilling its purpose either.
Rape also does not achieve the purpose of sex, because it is neither for procreation or for bonding.
If the bodies do not or cannot bond, neither can the souls, because the bodies are tangible expressions of the soul. This might sound a little complicated, but we do not need to go into it here.
I’m a little ignorant about a man’s G-spot. Can you tell me where it is? I thought it was something that only a woman has.
3. The Catholic Church teaches a simple rule about sex: abstinence outside of marriage, fidelity during marriage. Hence, all persons who are not married, including priests, religious brothers and sisters, are required to be celibate, as are those who, for one reason or another, choose not to get married. The presence of hundreds of thousands of celibate priests, religious brothers and sisters are living testimonies that people can be celibate and live joy-filled and fulfilling lives. I, for one, have been celibate all my life, and intend to remain so until I get married.
4. As explained in #1, I do not judge a person based on his or her sexual orientation. However, I am free to judge the morality of a person’s act – whether it be saving millions of lives or committing a homosexual act. By doing so, I pass no judgement on a person, merely a person’s act. Again, I cannot judge a person’s contribution to society based on his public acts, as there are many who contribute to society in hidden but powerful ways. I believe that each person is worthy of respect because each person is loved by God.
God bless,
Catholic Writer