Most believe homosexuality is acquired, especially through gay recruitment of children. The gay movement hates ‘common sense’ of this sort, realizing that such a belief impedes its access to others’ children and blocks the growth of homosexuality. The psychiatric profession also says common sense is absolutely wrong, though 60 years ago it touted this same (now rejected) notion.

From asserting that ‘homosexuals are no more apt to molest’ to ‘people are born, not trained, that way,’ professional associations now reinforce the gay movement’s propaganda. It makes no difference that testimonials abound linking a person’s homosexuality with their being molested. Where is the scientific proof, they say.

Of course, no one can do a prospective study of molestation — that is, where kids are randomly molested homosexually to see ‘how they turn out.’ Such an experiment would not ‘prove it’ in any case. Molestations do not have a predictable outcome. Some kids will take up homosexuality, others will rebel, perhaps even hating any and all things associated with their abuse (one woman hated all women because of her grandmother’s molestation), some will ‘adjust to it,’ and so forth. But previous research by both Kinsey and FRI indicated that the first sexual experience for boys (but not necessarily for girls) strongly tilted them toward the variety of sexuality to which they were exposed.

If homosexuals reported a higher rate of having been molested by adults (today termed child sexual abuse [CSA]), it would ‘fit’ a model of ‘homosexuality being acquired through molestation.’ Sure enough, almost all studies have reported male and female homosexuals as more apt to say they were molested as kids. But these studies were small convenience samples and lacked a heterosexual comparison group. So researchers could not be sure of the higher rate of CSA among homosexuals, or by how much.

Now a large random survey has been published that included both homosexuals and heterosexuals[1]Sweet:2012. The results are as they should be if ‘common sense’ is correct: 33,902 adults — the largest random sample to date on this issue — were asked if they had been molested by an adult. “Molested” in this survey meant “sex they didn’t want.” Since the law does not care whether a child wanted the sex, some illegal child/adult sex apparently was not counted. For instance, some students might ‘want’ to have sex with their teacher, but law forbids it.

Even with this limitation, the results were dramatic: those who engage in homosexual sex were “sharply,” as the authors put it, more likely to report molestation [CSA]. How sharply? Using a broad definition of molestation, the almost 3% of women who reported same-sex sex in adulthood were about three times as likely to report CSA as straight women, while the 4% of men who reported homosexual activity in adulthood were about four times more apt to report CSA than straights. For the most stringent definition of molestation, the differences were eight times more for men!

This study validates ‘common sense’ about how homosexual tastes are acquired and maintained. The data show that it is very much more likely for a homosexual to have been molested as a child than for someone who is heterosexual. Nonetheless, the on-going corruption of science to favor or ‘cover for’ homosexuality is evident in the authors’ statement that the “data presented here must be analyzed cautiously so that CSA is not identified as causally related to individuals becoming gay/lesbian or bisexual as adults”!

As demonstrated in the last Family Research Report [2]FRR:Feb2013, male homosexuals are exceptionally interested in having sex with kids. The gay movement has tended to be open about this desire. In 1948, Alfred Kinsey — a homosexual himself who arguably started gay rights — said some boys are “definitely aggressive in seeking contacts [with adults]” [3]Kinsey:1948 and in 1994 Larry Kramer, the homosexual who started Gay Men’s Health Crisis, argued

“I don’t understand the irrational fear that apparently grips so many parents of school-aged children, that we will ‘recruit’ these children.… In those instances where children do have sex with their homosexual elders, be they teachers or anyone else, I submit that often, very often, the child desires the activity, and perhaps even solicits it.”

Since homosexuals produce so few children, they must garner others’ children to maintain their numbers. Kramer’s and Kinsey’s rationalization is certainly clever: if the kids did not want it, were not “aggressive” or “solicited it,” it wouldn’t happen. Poor homosexuals, the kids make them do it!

Size of the Homosexual Population

Sweet and Welles do not directly indicate how many folks regularly engage in homosexuality because “we classified sexuality into 5 groups: gay/lesbian, bisexual, heterosexual with no same-sex sexual partners or attraction, heterosexual with some same-sex attraction but no same-sex partners, and heterosexual with at least some same-sex sex partners.” So all those who ‘tried it and do not like it’ or ‘did it for a while and abandoned it’ are included in the authors’ ‘homosexual minority.’ Since the majority of these ‘homosexuals’ of both sexes called themselves ‘heterosexuals’ only with some adult homosexual experience, it is possible most were what might be termed ‘ex-gays’!

As with other studies, the lines between homosexual and non-homosexual are always somewhat blurry. While some are getting ‘into’ homosexuality and others are ‘leaving it,’ the ‘hard core’ of homosexuals (who call themselves gay or bisexual and actively engage in such behavior) translates into about 1.4% of women and 1.5% of men.

What Happened to the Missing Gays?

This very large study included those aged 60+ in its sampling frame, so the overall proportion of homosexuals identified by Sweet and Welles is much less than many government surveys have reported. For instance, the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth, which only sampled adults aged 15 to 44 years old, reported that 4.1% of both women and men said they were gay or bisexual. The authors of this latest study, apparently assuming that homosexuality has no impact on longevity or that homosexual participation is the same throughout the lifespan, considered this a ‘limitation.’ Not so! If those who engage in homosexuality do not live as long or tend to leave the lifestyle at older ages, this ‘discrepancy’ is easily accounted for. All in all, the results obtained by Sweet and Welles jibe favorably with the largest and best random probability surveys: the bigger and better the study, the more that ‘traditional common sense’ looks pretty solid.

Boy Scouts, Take Note

The Boy Scouts need to heed information about child molestation that seems to seldom get published nowadays. The results reported by Sweet and Welles suggest that about 1.5% of adults regularly, and an additional 1.5% episodically, engage in homosexuality. Yet this (at most) 3% of the population casts a disproportionate footprint in Child Sexual Abuse [CSA]. To wit:

• In 1992, just hours before speaking at the University of New Mexico, FRI chairman Dr. Paul Cameron met with officials of the Albuquerque school district. The official in charge of teacher molestations said that his “biggest problem was gay teachers.”
• FRI also talked to George Finch, Coordinator of Professional Practices at the Oregon Department of Education in February 2008. At that time, Mr. Finch kept the records and did much of the investigation of teacher-pupil sexual encounters for the state. Finch told FRI “that most of the molestations by male teachers in the elementary grades involved male homosexuals,” and he only knew of two instances (in over a decade) by female teachers, one of a boy and one of a girl.
• At the high school level Finch noted that boys, especially, were loath to testify about being molested, but that it ran about 70% heterosexual/30% homosexual for male teachers and about 50/50 for female teachers. Finch said that few girls were willing to testify about involvement with female teachers at the high school level. He believed “they were exploring their sexuality, and were often friends with the teacher with whom they had relations.”

One could argue that we already know that teachers engage in homosexual relations with their pupils at a disproportionate rate. What about a different stratum of our society? In March 1993, Randy McCracken (Univ. New Mexico, Youth Resource and Analysis Center) provided the following data (Table 1) regarding molestation of the at-risk children in the Albuquerque Safe House.

Table 1. Safe House Molestation Victims

Type of	Male	Female	Molested
Perpetrator	Victims	Victims	Homosexually
Male	213	699	213
Female	18	14	14
Total(%)	231(24%)	713(76%)	227(24%)

Twenty-four percent of all the single-perpetrator molestations were homosexual (male-on-male or female-on-female). The data regarding multiple perpetrators were similar: homosexuality was involved in 37% of those victimizations. Were homosexuals responsible for all the CSA? No. But were they involved in a disproportionate amount? Absolutely. Does this have implications for Scouting? Absolutely.

Living Under the Rainbow Curtain

Across the world, it is increasingly clear that a society can either live according to the gay movement’s lies or enjoy freedom of speech and association — but not both. The cowardly and anti-empirical statement by Sweet and Welles in the story above about the “data presented here must be analyzed cautiously so that CSA is not identified as causally related to individuals becoming gay/lesbian” is symptomatic of what is working its way through Western science. All kinds of inconveniences and losses of freedom are being endured lest ‘sexual minorities’ be unhappy.

A talk on homosexuality at Costa Rica’s Congress of Bioethics by Dr. Jokin de Irala, who regards homosexuality as a curable disease, was cancelled because homosexuals dislike his opinions. Homosexuals were incensed that the Health Ministry declared the congress of “public interest.”

So they appealed to the Constitutional Court. It annulled the decree of public interest. The Court said while the doctor’s freedom of expression should be ensured, the executive branch of government should not support a private activity (his speech) that could

“represent discrimination against part of society.… [as it] reverts to a stigmatization of a sector of the population and potential harm to their health, in addition to the fact that its scientific basis is highly questionable.”

Dr. Irala is not stupid; he knew what he had to do. Complaining there were “no guarantees of respect for freedom of thought” or his opinion, he cancelled his talk. Homosexual activists played the next card and “rallied to demand a public apology from the government for supporting the conference.”

The Soviet invasion of Europe resulted in an Iron Curtain. The West is voluntarily imposing a Rainbow Curtain over science, religion, politics, and even everyday discourse.

The threat issued by Boston homosexuals back in 1987 that all churches that ‘speak against homosexuality will be closed’ seemed insane. Today it is looking more and more possible. Football players who say they do not want to share a locker room with a gay player are sent to ‘reeducation,’ sportscasters who crack jokes about homosexuality are fired, professors who disagree with gay rights are silenced, and scientists who produce ‘incorrect research’ don’t get published.

The absurdities resulting from society groveling before homosexual sex addicts are growing. More absurdities are in line to placate those who claim they ‘don’t feel like they are in the body of the correct sex.’ How long can a society endure which abandons its most basic tenants so that its most sexually disturbed are ‘happy?’