By Leon Suprenant | March 15, 2008
In our series on the “pillars” of the argument for same-sex marriage, we have examined the claims that homosexuality is “genetic” and also a fixed, permanent condition. While these claims lack scientific support (and ultimately don’t establish the “rightness” of homosexual activity), activists have been largely successful in using these claims to establish the “gay community” as an oppressed minority who have the “right” to act in accordance with the way they were born.
This propaganda is then coupled with a two-pronged attack on organized religion, which stands in the way of their goals. One prong is to accuse people of faith, especially Catholics, as being hate-mongering, intolerant bigots. The other prong is to infiltrate churches and religious communities, preaching a gay-friendly Gospel.
The next pillar of the argument is to convince the public that this “alternative lifestyle” is “normal.” Using the American Psychiatic Association’s removal of homosexuality from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual as well as any and all anecdotal accounts of well-being they can find, the advocates of same-sex marriage insist that those who are engaged in a homosexual lifestyle are just as healthy in every way as the rest of the population—and further, to the extent they experience any difficulty, it’s because of our homophobic, intolerant society.
For years, this has been a serious point of contention. Yet four major scientific studies earlier this decade have provided further convincing evidence that persons with same-sex attractions (SSA) are significantly more likely to suffer from a range of psychological disorders, including major depression, anxiety disorders, substance abuse, suicide attempts, sexual promiscuity with an inability to maintain committed relationships, as well as a host of medical problems, not to mention a shortened life expectancy.
Faced with such overwhelming evidence, proponents of same-sex marriage then assert that these problems are attributable to the painful process of coming to terms with one’s homosexuality in a “homophobic” world.
The fact is, if these problems were caused primarily by the lack of public acceptance of SSA, we would expect to find fewer problems in places where “tolerance” is high and so-called “homophobia” is low. But that simply isn’t the case. Studies done in the Netherlands and New Zealand, for example, where there is generally high tolerance of sexual “diversity,” reveal the same high rates of psychological difficulties as those done elsewhere.
For more on this subject, here is a partial list of sources:
Dale O’Leary, One Man, One Woman: A Catholic’s Guide to Defending Marriage (Sophia, 2007), available through Emmaus Road Publishing
National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), www.narth.com
Dr. Rick Fitzgibbons, principal author of “Homosexuality and Hope,” issued by the Catholic Medical Association; “Homosexuality and Hope” is available at www.cathmed.org while the same information, in an abridged Q and A form, is available here
Donald DeMarco, “What Science tells us about Same-Sex Unions” (this article is excellent, check it out here!)