Skip to comments.Top Stories of 2001: Researcher Says Statistics Show Reality -- Homosexuals a Tiny Minority in U.S.
Posted on 12/29/2001 12:11:46 AM PST by truthandlife
A pro-family expert on the homosexual agenda says the homosexual community, a tiny minority in the United States, wants the rest of society to change.
Homosexual activists continue to boast about the number of same-sex couples living in the U.S., using statistics gleaned from the 2000 U.S. Census to intensify their demands that society embrace their agenda. But Ed Vitagliano, director of research for the American Family Association, suggests the opposite is true -- that the real numbers demonstrate just how small a sliver of the population is actually homosexual.
"Part of the strategy [of homosexual activists] is to always try to inflate their numbers," Vitagliano says. "They try to inflate the incidence of hate crimes, they try to inflate the number of homosexuals that lose their jobs because of their sexual orientation. And now with this latest brouhaha over the U.S. Census statistics, they are trying to inflate the influence that same-sex couples would have in the political arena, and the fact of the matter is that one-half of [one] percent of the people in this country are living in same-sex households."
Vitagliano says homosexual activists have been touting the recent statistics as evidence that homosexuals are a potent political force, and their agenda should be heeded. In fact, a lesbian real estate agent in Mississippi recently told the Clarion-Ledger in Jackson that if people knew "how many of us there were, there would be less hysteria and we might have some political power." But the researcher points out the census statistics do not translate in a powerful voting bloc.
"[W]e're not saying that they shouldn't have any right to participate in the political process -- they certainly do, no matter how small their group is," he says, "but they really are expecting the vast majority of people in this country to change their traditional views on morality, sexuality, marriage and family ... and that's just not going to happen."
Vitagliano says rather than looking to overturn traditional morality, legislators in every state should be looking at the devastating effects brought on by the sin of homosexuality. An AFA press release earlier this week noted that a study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology revealed that male homosexuals lose anywhere from 8 to 20 years off their life span compared to heterosexual men. According to the press release, other studies demonstrate that homosexuals suffer vastly increased rates of sexually transmitted diseases -- even apart from AIDS -- as well as dramatically higher incidence of mental health problems, and much higher rates of domestic violence between same-sex couples.
This wouldn't have anything to do with the Clinton propaganda machine pushing the Census and getting back numbers that they want to see? Do you truly believe that the Census numbers are a true representation of our demographics in this country?
male homosexuals lose anywhere from 8 to 20 years off their life span compared to heterosexual men.
Now, whod have thunk? I guess the indiscriminate sex in bathhouses, parks and public restrooms wasnt as healthy as Id been lead to believe
dramatically higher incidence of mental health problems
I hope theyre not trying to insinuate that promiscuity nearing nymphomania would be indicative of a mental health problem. Very UN P.C.
The press does everything in its power to inflate the number of homosexuals. Absent media lying, homosexuals wouldn't have any political power.
No they should not. Freedom has responsibility. Responsibility means paying the consequences or reaping the benefits for your own behavior, either in the here and now or in heaven. Keep all us free and paying our own consequences. I don't want to be responsible for anyone's sexual behavior, nor do I want to make anyone else pay for mine.
Let's talk about political power. I'll bet there are more than 1/2 of 1% of the people in the Unitied States who are SELF-EMPLOYED. Yet we apparently have little or no political power. We get screwed on the payroll tax. Are deductions STINK. We can't even deduct 100% of heatlh insurance costs.
That is why they need political correctness, to have a reason to shout down voices of reason as insensitive so the the charade by a few can dominate the many.
Why not? If the citizens in my county wish to outlaw certain types of behavior, I've got no problem with local legislatures doing so. If I disagree with the actions of my LOCAL government, I've got 3 choices: Motivate people to elect new bodies to office, Live with the policies they enact (on my behalf, whether by consent or by apathy), or Leave. Everyone else is free to choose between these same choices. There is no reason to force homogenization upon the VERY diverse citizens of this nation, in any case. If Vermont wishes to have gay marriage, then they can have it. Virginia cannot be forced to recognize Vermont's marriage licenses, in that case. (This, by the way, is the nature of a "Republic," which we are still in part.)
Then the citizens in your county own your property, not you. Why is this so hard for people to understand. If someone other than the property owner has a say in what "behaviors" can be done on that property, then those who make the rules own the property, not the one paying the mortgage or holding the deed.
So? I bet there are Elvis impersonators (not that there's anything wrong with that) living in 99.3% of US counties. That doesn't make them any thing other than a cultural oddity, not a political force. The media megaphone that the gay movement has grossly overestimate their actual numbers.
*sigh*. It is not the "private property" which I am most concerned about, but illegal activities on "shared" ("public", if you will) grounds. I do think that local governments (such as Montgomery County, here in the DC metro area, which wrote legislation essentially banning at-home smoking) are free to try and legislate issues related to private property. The local citizens can and will smack down errant legislation, as is what happened in Maryland.
I do still assert quite loudly that States and localities should have the freedom to write legislation which fits their citizens best, and I continue to assert that this provides for the greatest amount of freedom by preventing tyranny of the minority, while still giving those not in the majority the opportunity to affect change in their community. IF unable to change local legislation which they disagree with, they still have the option to move along.
(Oh, btw, until I've paid off the full mortgage on my home, the bank owns my house, not me. Seeing that this is the case, it would not be prudent for me to exercise my "freedom" to burn my house down, as the bank, being the current owner of the deed, would not agree that my behavior is "sufficient display of my liberties." Does this illustrate the problem with "unlimited individual liberties" for you well enough? In clear and concise terms, if we permit no legislation on anything deemed "personal liberties," then we can draft absolutely no legislation, as everyone has different definitions of what "liberties" consist of.)
What a bunch of friggen idiots!
Hmmm, I must've missed the hateful vitriol in that article. Oh yeah, that would be because it wasn't there. Therefore, I fail to see where they've missed the definition of "agape" (namely, "divine love"). Perhaps you're reading things through a hate-filled glass?
I think youve captured the essence at the very core of leftist thought. They are trying to mirror in society the chaos that inhabits their own brains. As you later point out, reason is the enemy to the left. A powerful weapon used by the rest of society that cant possibly be comprehended by the liberal mind.
We're here! Get no free beer!
And our taxes are dear!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.