CLC Blog

CLC Blog

Gay teens will die, but who is to blame?

Over the past year, Ontarians have been inundated with media allegations about an “epidemic” of gay teens being bullied in school and this is the reason why every high school, including Catholic ones, must have Gay-Straight Alliances.

However, hard data did not support this claim, and in fact, legitimate studies show that the #1 cause of bullying in schools is body size/shape.  For example, in a 2006 study done by a consultancy firm for the Toronto District School Board, sexual orientation was not even mentioned in the top 6 reasons it found for why kids are bullied in school.

Media Alleges Schoolyard 'Homophobia' is the Source of Gay Suicide "Epidemic"
The media also claimed, without any hard data whatsoever to back it, that there is an epidemic of same-sex attracted youth taking their lives as a result of the “homophobic bullying” supposedly rampant in schools.  If one reads between the lines, those ultimately responsible for this gay suicide ‘epidemic’ are - wait for it – Christians, of course.  Here’s the twisted logic:  the belief that God designed sex as proper to a man and woman within the marriage covenant for the purpose of babies and bonding, somehow creates a “climate of hatred and violence” towards people who experience same-sex attraction.

I don’t buy the theory that magic “pixie dust” emanating from Christians is killing gay youth.  You see, Christianity teaches that we must love our neighbor (including those who identify as ‘gay’) and that hating anybody will land us in hell. So the ingredients for the pixie dust ‘hate cloud’ simply aren’t present.   Of course, I condemn all forms of bullying, including for reasons of a perceived same-sex attraction. But common sense tells us that if a kid is bullying a kid with same-sex attraction, it’s because he’s being a mean kid, not because Christianity compels him.

However, the media is half right - people who identify as ‘gay’ are indeed dying at a staggering rate in comparison to the general population, most strikingly, the males.  And someone is to blame for their deaths, but the culprit is neither school bullying, Christianity nor  ‘homophobia’.

Stunning Stats on HIV
I recently  discovered a shocking epidemiological study on the prevalence of HIV amongst men who have sex with men (MSM) in Ontario. This infection rate is shocking.  The study was done in collaboration with the Ontario Ministry of Health & Long-Term Care. Yes, that does mean the McGuinty government!

The report is based on 2008 data from Ontario’s Public Health Units, the most current data year.

It shows that almost 1 in 4 MSM in Toronto are living with HIV. That’s a real epidemic! Not one fabricated to advance a political agenda.

Please - let that fact sink in for a couple of seconds… We’re talking about a government admission that almost one in four actively homosexual men who live in Toronto, have HIV.

These guys have a uniformly fatal disease that will eventually kill them.  That is heart-breaking, but it gets worse.

Extrapolating the current growth rate for infection tells us that by the time 2012 public health data becomes available, almost 1 out of every 3 actively gay men in Toronto will have HIV.  

Outside the big city, the situation is a little less severe, but still an epidemic.  The average HIV prevalence rate amongst MSM for all of Ontario is 1 out of every 6.  

Government Epidemiologist Admits the Health Risk
During the course of subsequent research, I was directed to an article by the Christian Heritage Party  which referenced an earlier version of the same study.  The CHP apparently contacted the lead epidemiologist and asked why active homosexual men had a rate of HIV infection that was radically higher than the rate amongst heterosexual men.   His response to them was: 
The higher HIV infection rates among MSM are likely due to the greater efficiency of HIV transmission through anal intercourse compared to vaginal intercourse and the higher number of sexual partners among MSM compared to heterosexuals."(emphasis added)

The reason for this is structural.  It’s because the rectum is significantly different from the vagina. The vagina was designed for friction. It has lubricants and is supported by a network of muscles that allows it to endure friction without damage. In comparison, the anus is the ‘exit only’ end of the digestive system and was not designed for friction. It is a delicate mechanism of small muscles that can be easily damaged and give infections access to the bloodstream. Furthermore semen has immunosuppressive chemicals which trick the body’s immune-defense system into letting foreign organisms pass, including the HIV virus.

The truth is that anal sex is the most efficient method of transmitting HIV, bar none.   Gay-activists try to distract from this reality by saying that we just need more condoms and more “safe sex” education.  But we’ve had “safe sex education” for decades, and it hasn’t helped. These so-called solutions try to mask the real problem. In fact, they have exacerbated the spread of AIDS.  Condoms are not very effective in stopping the transmission of HIV.  What we know is that condoms are perhaps 60 to 80% effective in stopping the transmission of HIV.  When you’re talking about catching a fatal disease, 60 to 80% protection is nowhere close to being “safe”.  Even the term “safe sex” lulls people into the false belief that the behavior they’re engaged in is “safe” when in fact, it is extremely dangerous.

Male on male sexual activity is a public health crisis that is killing men in their prime of life. Shouldn’t genuine compassion involve warning people against behaviours that could cause their death?  So, why is nobody warning MSM about the high risks of this behavior in the stark terms necessary?

Connection to GSA School Mandate
Let’s bring this back to Premier McGuinty’s imposition of homosexual clubs in schools, as mandated by Bill 13. 

GSAs, which are already popping up as early as grade six, will encourage same-sex attracted youth to embrace a “gay” identity. The clubs will send kids the message that the gay lifestyle is just as normal, natural and healthy as heterosexuality. This lesson will also be reinforced by the pro-gay curriculum changes inherent in Bill 13.   What we know is that if a child embraces a gay identity, it is inevitable they will eventually enter the gay lifestyle and seek same-sex ‘love’.   For the male students, that means one day they’ll be engaging in the risky practice of anal sex. 

Essentially, the government is encouraging same-sex attracted male youths to embrace a lifestyle that it has already proven will cause one in six of them to contract a fatal disease.

What business does the government (or a school board) have to push kids into a lifestyle that carries a real risk of causing their early deaths? If an obligation rests anywhere with the State, it is to warn children against behaviours that will cause high rates of suffering and death.

Years from now, this is going to blow up in the faces of school boards and the Ontario government, in the same way that pushing cigarettes onto kids eventually blew up in the face of Big Tobacco. I predict that infected men will sue the school boards and the Ontario government for pushing them into a deadly lifestyle ... and for not advertising the truth about the risks of anal sex.

Who Is To Blame For Gay Teen Deaths?
This is a bit of a trick question. They likely won’t die as teens (although they could contract the virus at this time), but rather as adults.  Signs of HIV infection can take 7 to 10 years to develop, and with the advent of anti-retroviral drugs, full-blown AIDS can be forestalled for many years.   But there is no cure for AIDS and we don’t know if there ever will be. Eventually, the disease will prematurely end their lives. For some, it will be in the prime of life.  Even for those on anti-retroviral drugs, it is not a pleasant existence. They have to take $10,000 to $15,000 worth of drugs each year. It is not without multiple infections and multiple hospitalizations. 

Who is to blame? First, the government is to blame for casting overboard its obligation to defend the common good, just so it curries favour with the powerful gay lobby and its allies in the mainstream media.    Secondly, school boards  for going along with this social engineering experiment.  Third, the militant gay-activist organizations who don’t really care whether people with same-sex attraction live or die, so long as their sexual revolution is successful.  These radical activists are using people with same-sex attraction as pawns in their war against the Judeo-Christian world view.  They actively deny that AIDS is a gay disease when almost 70% of new AIDS cases come from less than 2% of the population – that is, gay males.   The mounting body count does not seem to matter at all to these sex-activists. Only the goal of sexual revolution.

Higher Standard for Catholic Bishops and Trustees
As for Catholic trustees and Bishops, they have a higher moral obligation given their religious character. In my view,  for these Catholic leaders to permit GSAs and the resulting high rates of disease and death amongst a portion of its students, represents material cooperation with evil. 

For this reason alone, never mind the spiritual harm, Ontario’s Catholic Bishops need to reject McGuinty’s GSA mandate and Bill 13 altogether.  They have the constitutional power to do so under Section 93 of the Constitution Act of 1867 and they should not delay in using it. Children’s lives are at stake.

Now, let’s stop talking about the imaginary epidemic of gay suicides caused by ‘homophobic bullying’.  Let’s start talking instead about the real epidemic of HIV infecting men who have sex with men and whether it's appropriate for schools to encourage children  into that lifestyle.

By: Ur narrow minded
October 10, 2012 @ 8:30pm
You guys (and i bet all most no women work here)are a bunch of narrow minded biggots and if i ever see you on the street you should cross to the other side!
By: Campaign Life Coalition
October 11, 2012 @ 10:55am
Hello 'Ur narrow minded',
It is rather disturbing that you have threatened violence against our staff. This blog is all about compassion for people who experience same-sex attraction. It's about saving their lives and having concern for their physical health. And your response to our compassionate concern, is to threaten physical assault against us? Please try to be a little more open minded about folks who care a great deal for the physical health of same-sex attracted men and women.
By: Marc
December 3, 2012 @ 1:23am
So I am to understand you have no problem with lesbian groups in schools? In fact, since lesbians are at even less risk of HIV shouldn't you be encouraging women to be gay? I'm guessing not, which proves your hypocrisy and false nobility you claim in "saving lives". This is just homophobia in more (but not much more) sophisticated garb than classic anti-gay discourse (you also find similar rhetoric in anti-segregation literature of the past).
By: Campaign Life Coalition
January 8, 2013 @ 1:01pm
Hi Marc. Before changing the channel to the topic of lesbians, you really need to address with your conscience the dramatic and very real health risks for men who have sex with men. You can't slough this off and just avoid thinking about it. Do you not care if homosexual men live or die? If you do care, then at an intellectual level, setting emotion aside, you have to come to the conclusion that sex between men is the direct cause of many of their deaths, and is in fact an epidemic at this point in history. If you accept that objective scientific reality, isn't it only reasonable to conclude that true compassion involves discouraging teenage boys from pursuing gay sexual activity that you know will prematurely end the lives of 1 in 6 of them? Isn't encouraging them to pursue and embrace this risk factor in fact, a form of negligence, if not hatred? As far as your question of whether we would endorse lesbian only clubs in Catholic schools, that's a red-herring. It has nothing to do with society's moral responsibility to prevent the deaths of young men caused by a known risk factor, that is, gay anal sex.
As far as your comparison of the homosexual lifestyle to skin colour, that's really a false analogy. Skin colour is innate, immutable and innocuous. It doesn't have a moral, behavioural dimension to it. When we're talking about homosexuality, we're talking about a behaviour that is chosen. Most people do not choose to experience same-sex attractions. That is absolutely true. However, they certainly do choose to engage in sexual acts. That's definitely a choice one makes whether to engage in a behaviour or not, regardless of how strong that pull is. While there is not one shred of proof that a gay gene exists, nor that gay people are 'born that way', there is a massive body of clinical psychological research and literature which provides support for the genesis of same-sex attraction being rooted in an attachment disorder with the same-sex parent. In fact, the original 'gay gene' study has been thoroughly debunked by subsequent, more powerful studies. Even the author of the original gay gene study himself, Dr. Dean Hamer, admitted in an interview in Gene magazine, "We have not found the gene - which we don't think exists - for sexual orientation... There will never be a test that will say for certain whether a child will be gay. We know that for certain".
The reason most Canadians believe a gay gene has been found is because the biased, liberal media took Dr. Hamer's study, lied about his findings, purported this to be settled science and has since refused to report all the more authoritative studies which debunk the theory. Check out for all the research and peer-reviewed literature you can get your arms around regarding the evidence for attachment disorder with the same-sex parent as a cause of same-sex attraction in early childhood. Scientific studies also show a very powerful correlation between a young child having been molested by a same-sex adult and themselves becoming same-sex attracted. For instance, The Archives of Sexual Behavior (2001) reported on a study that found that 46% of homosexual men had been molested by a person of the same gender in their childhood. In comparison, only 7% of heterosexual men and 1% of heterosexual women had been molested by a person of the same gender. David Finkelhor, child sex abuse expert also wrote: "[B]oys victimized by older men were over four times more likely to be currently engaged in homosexual activity than were non-victims... Further, the adolescents themselves often linked their homosexuality to their sexual victimization experiences." So, when nearly half of homosexual men report having been molested by an adult male as a child, doesn't that suggest it may be a causative factor in their having homosexual attractions? This is something to think about.