Jack Fonseca

,

Gay teens will die, but who is to blame?

Jack Fonseca
By Jack Fonseca
Image

Oct. 10, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - 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 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.

Jack Fonseca is the project manager for Campaign Life Coalition. This piece is republished with permission.

Truth. Delivered daily.

Get FREE pro-life, pro-family news delivered straight to your inbox. 

Select Your Edition:


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, prefect of the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
Thaddeus Baklinski Thaddeus Baklinski Follow Thaddeus

Vatican pressing forward with reform of US feminist nuns: Cardinal Müller

Thaddeus Baklinski Thaddeus Baklinski Follow Thaddeus
By Thaddeus Baklinski

Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, says the Vatican is pressing forward with plans to reform the U.S.-based Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR).

In an interview published in the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano, the cardinal said that the reform of the LCWR, which was undertaken after an assessment of the group found serious doctrinal problems, will be carried out with the goal of helping them "rediscover their identity.”

“Congregations have no more vocations and risk dying out," Müller said. "We have first of all tried to reduce hostility and tensions, partly thanks to Bishop Sartain whom we sent to negotiate with them; he is a very gentle man. We wish to stress that we are not misogynists, we are not women gobblers! Of course we have a different concept of religious life but we hope to help them rediscover their identity.”

Moreover, the cardinal said that problems specific to the LCWR are not a reflection of all the women religious in the US.

"We need to bear in mind that they do not represent all US nuns, but just a group of nuns who form part of an association,” Müller said.

“We have received many distressed letters from other nuns belonging to the same congregations, who are suffering a great deal because of the direction in which the LCWR is steering their mission.”

Cardinal Müller's remarks confirmed the assertion he and the Holy See’s delegate to the LCWR, Archbishop Peter Sartain of Seattle, made in an address to LCWR officials in Rome on April 30, that the theological drift the feminist nuns are taking constitutes a radical departure from the foundational theological concepts of Catholicism.

The Holy See “believes that the charismatic vitality of religious life can only flourish within the ecclesial faith of the Church,” Müller said in the address.

Click "like" to support Catholics Restoring the Culture!

“The LCWR, as a canonical entity dependent on the Holy See, has a profound obligation to the promotion of that faith as the essential foundation of religious life. Canonical status and ecclesial vision go hand-in-hand, and at this phase of the implementation of the Doctrinal Assessment, we are looking for a clearer expression of that ecclesial vision and more substantive signs of collaboration,” he stated.

The LCWR has openly defied the mandate of reform intended to bring their organization into line with basic Catholic doctrine on the nature of God, the Church, and sexual morality.

Among the CDF’s directives, to which LCWR has strenuously objected, is the requirement that “speakers and presenters at major programs” be approved by Archbishop Sartain. This, Müller has explained, was decided in order to “avoid difficult and embarrassing situations wherein speakers use an LCWR forum to advance positions at odds with the teaching of the Church.”

The LCWR has invited speakers to their Annual Assembly such as New Age guru Barbara Marx Hubbard, and Sr. Laurie Brink, who is particularly noted for flagrantly denying the Divinity of Christ and telling the sisters that to maintain their “prophetic” place in society they need to “go beyond” the Church and even “go beyond Jesus.”

In one of the first public statements of his pontificate, Pope Francis affirmed that the investigation and reform of the LCWR must continue.

Share this article

Advertisement
Brian Fisher

Birth mothers: real heroes of the pro-life movement

Brian Fisher
By Brian Fisher
Image

What does it mean to be brave? Is it the doctor who dedicates himself to improving the health of a third-world nation? Is it the woman who faces her third round of chemotherapy to fight the progression of cancer? Is it the teacher who forgoes the comforts of a suburban school to reach minorities in the inner city? All of these are examples of bravery demonstrated in exceedingly challenging circumstances. And our society longs for stories of bravery to inspire us and fill us with hope.

As someone who works day in and day out with those on the front lines of helping rescue babies from abortion, I’m no stranger to stories of bravery. I see courage every day in the eyes of the men and women who sacrifice their time and energy to help women facing unplanned pregnancies. I see it every time a young mom — despite being pressured by her parents or significant other to get an abortion — chooses LIFE. And perhaps more profoundly than in any other situation, I see it when an expectant mom with no relational support, job, or income chooses to place her baby for adoption rather than abort her son or daughter.

This was Nicky’s situation.

When Nicky found herself pregnant with her boyfriend’s child, her life was already in shambles. During her 26 years, Nicky had already given birth to and surrendered sole custody of a little girl, committed several felonies, lived in her car, lost several jobs, and barely subsisted on minimum wage. So when she met up with an old boyfriend, Brandon, Nicky believed she was being given a second chance at happiness. “Our first year together was beautiful. We were getting to know each other and deciding if we would stay together forever.” Unfortunately, a positive pregnancy test result changed everything.

“When I told him I was pregnant, Brandon sat down on the bed, looked me in the eyes, and told me to ‘get an abortion’.” Nicky says those three little words changed everything for her. “I became depressed living with someone who wanted his child ‘dealt with.’”  Like thousands of women every day, Nicky began searching online for information on abortion, hoping her boyfriend would eventually change his mind. Through our strategic marketing methods, Online for Life was able to guide Nicky to a life-affirming pregnancy center where she received grace-filled counsel. “The woman I sat with was beyond wonderful. She helped me to just breathe and ask God what to do….And so I did.”

Nicky left the pregnancy center that day with a new resolve to choose life for her child, even though she still wasn’t sure how she’d financially support a child. “I was alone with just $10 in my pocket…and without any type of plan for what I was going to do.” So Nicky relied on the support of the staff she met at the life-affirming pregnancy center. With their help and through a chain of fortunate events, Nicky was put in contact with the couple who would eventually become her daughter’s adoptive parents.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

After meeting this couple face to face and coming to terms with her own desperate situation, Nicky conceded that the best thing for her unborn child would be to place her in someone else’s loving home. She told Brandon about her plans and he agreed that adoption would give their child the best chance at a happy and secure future. He even returned home to help Nicky prepare for the birth of their child. “The weeks leading up to my delivery were filled with a mixture of laughter, tears, protectiveness and sadness,” Nicky recalls. But one sentiment continued to be shared with her. “Brave…so brave.” That’s what everyone from the life-affirming pregnancy center to the adoption agency to the birthing center kept calling Nicky. “The nurses kept coming up to me and telling me they were honored to care for and treat someone like me.” After several weeks of preparation, Nicky finally gave birth to a healthy baby girl, and she made the dreams of a couple from the other side of the country come true.

Nicky’s adoption story continues to be riddled with a strange combination of pain and joy. “I cry every day, but I know my baby, who came out of a very bad time, ended up being loved by people from across the country.” When asked what message she’d like to share with the world about her decision to give up her child for adoption, Nicky responds, The voice of the mother who gives up a baby for adoption isn’t heard. We need to change that.”

To learn more about Online for Life and how we’re helping to make stories like Nicky and her daughter’s story a possibility, please visit OnlineforLife.org.

Author, speaker, and business leader Brian Fisher is the President and Co-Founder of Online for Life, a transparent, metric-oriented, compassion-driven nonprofit organization dedicated to helping rescue babies and their families from abortion through technology and grace.

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

,

New York farmers stop hosting weddings after $13,000 fine for declining lesbian ceremony

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins

New York farmers Robert and Cynthia Gifford, who were ordered last week to pay $13,000 for not hosting a same-sex "wedding," say they are closing that part of their operation.

"Going forward, the Giffords have decided to no longer host any wedding ceremonies on their farm, other than the ones already under contract," said Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) lawyer James Trainor. ADF represented the Giffords in their legal fight against New York's non-discrimination law.

Last week, the Giffords were ordered to pay a $10,000 fine to the state of New York and $3,000 in damages to a lesbian couple, Jennifer McCarthy and Melisa Erwin, who approached them in 2012 about hosting their "wedding." The Giffords, who are Roman Catholic, said their religious convictions would not let them host the ceremony, but that McCarthy and Erwin could hold their reception on their property.

Unbeknownst to the Giffords, the lesbian couple recorded the two-to-three minute conversation. After declining to hold the reception on the Giffords' farm, on which they live and rent property, the lesbian couple decided to make a formal complaint to the state's Division of Human Rights.

Eventually, Judge Migdalia Pares ruled that the Giffords' farm, Liberty Ridge Farm, constitutes a public accommodation because space is rented on the grounds and fees are collected from the public. The Giffords argued that because they live on the property with their children, they should be exempt from the state law, but Pares said that this does not mean their business is private.

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

Trainor told TheBlaze that the Giffords' decision to end wedding ceremonies at Liberty Ridge “will hurt their business in the short run," but that was preferable to violating their religious beliefs.

“The Giffords serve all people with respect and care. They have hired homosexual employees and have hosted events for same-sex couples,” he said.

However, "since the state of New York has essentially compelled them to do all ceremonies or none at all, they have chosen the latter in order to stay true to their religious convictions," Trainor explained to LifeSiteNews. "No American should be forced by the government to choose between their livelihood and their faith, but that’s exactly the choice the state of New York has forced upon the Giffords."

"They will continue to host wedding receptions," said Trainor.

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook