The Purpose of This Bl;og

By and large, liberals are very decent, kind, and compassionate people who genuinely want what is best. This should be kept in mind as we explore the Law of Unintended Negative Consequences near invariably resulting from Leftist big-hearted solutions to societal problems.

Saturday, June 29, 2013

Same-sex Marriage--Destructive Compassion

For more than a quarter century liberals have been motivated by their renown compassion to make the world safer for homosexuals. This is a commendable goal, and one that I whole-heartedly champion.

Liberals have pursued this compassionate goal by condemning violence against homosexual and not faulting or ostracizing homosexuals for their orientation--both of which I fully support.

However, liberals have also pursued this compassionate goal by means of accepting, condoning, celebrating, and ultimately normalizing homosexual behaviors and lifestyles--i.e. by wiping out social stigmas and by welcoming homosexuals out of "the closet," and by legalizing same-sex marriage.

Yet, given the disturbing homosexual-related statistics I quoted in previous posts (see HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE), which some homosexuals now call the new gay epidemic (see HERE), and given the broadening acceptance of  homosexuality in society (see HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE), there is a clear correlation and plausible causation between social acceptance of homosexual behaviors and the Leftist LUNCs of increased homosexual-related social ills--the greater the acceptance of homosexual behaviors, the greater the homosexual social ills.

For instance, according to conservapedia, "The British Medical Journal (BMJ) wrote: 'Between the 1960s and the late 1970s homosexually acquired syphilitic infection increased, in keeping with liberalization of attitudes towards homosexual behaviour.'" (See also HERE)

In short, liberal compassion towards homosexuals, particularly with the legalization of same-sex marriage, may well have factored into the proliferation in the rate of homosexual suicides, homosexual STDs/STIs, homosexual domestic violence, homosexual promiscuity and infidelity, etc., and even gay teen pregnancies.

[Update 7/2/2016: As indicated above, suicide rates have increased since the dawn of the SSM movement. Many attribute this rise to social stigma, which makes no sense since societies have become increasingly more accepting of homosexuality over the last decade (see HERE), which means that suicide rates should be declining were social stigma the cause. Here is the real culprit, which underscores the point of this post: Study: relationship problems, not family rejection, leading cause of higher gay suicides]

Liberal compassion, then, has been very destructive and to some extent fatal to homosexuals. Liberalism is killing homosexual through misguided compassion. As the saying goes, "with friends like that, who needs enemies?"

In retrospect, it appears that liberal compassion for homosexuals was most destructive during the AID's/HIV epidemic. Folks with seemingly good intentions on the Left were so hypersensitive to social stigmas and so fearful of hurting the feelings and reputations of homosexuals, that they changed the name of the disease from "Gay Related Immune Deficiency (GRID)" to the more generic "AIDS." (See HERE)  And, they took extraordinary steps that were unprecedented and unlike with any other epidemic. They intentionally downplayed the risks of infection. They obfuscated the prevailing mode of infections and the predominate population affected by the infection (the common claim was that "AIDS was not a gay disease"). They went to extremes measures in securing the anonymity of those infected. And, they prevented any form of quarantine, and encouraged public interaction with AIDS patients. (See HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE)

Consequently, far more infections and deaths occurred than presumably would have occurred were the AIDS/HIV epidemic handled as have other epidemics (imagine how much worse the swine flu of 2009 would have been were the same measures used in the U.S. as with AIDS/HIV).

As things now stand, there have been about 1.2 million people in the U.S. infected by AIDS, and 650,000 deaths (ibid)--which entails more casualties than the civil war. (See HERE)  Approximately 19% of gay men have been infected. (ibid)  And, while AIDS cases began to decline in 1995 (about 14 years after initial discovery of the disease--see HERE), they started to rise again around 2004, once gay marriage began to be legalized. and public acceptance of homosexuality spiked. (See HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE)  In 2009 there were an estimated 18,000 deaths in the U.S. from AIDS, which is about the same number as in 2001. (See HERE)  "To put this in context, about 9,100 Americans died in gun homicides that same year." (ibid)

Another form of destructive compassion that impacted the AIDS epidemic and other aspects of the gay agenda, was whitewashing the gay movement. Gay activists knew that if they were going to change public opinion about homosexuality, from condemnation to condoning and then to embracing, they needed to put an attractive face on their lifestyle. This meant not only flooding the media with admired celebrities coming out of the closet, and TV shows depicting homosexuals in a positive light, and all sorts of public love and empathy expressed towards homosexuals, but also there was a concerted effort to screen out unflattering and disconcerting information.  In addition to whitewashing the AIDS epidemic, there were a number of statistics that have been carefully kept out of the public eye (something I am attempting to counter here), or that have been spun favorably (it is interesting how a number of the studies regarding same-sex violence have the same language about the rates being comparable to heterosexuals--when, in fact, digging deeper into the studies shows otherwise), and a number of studies that should have been done that weren't conducted for political or public policy reasons. (See HERE) Consequently, things like gay-on-gay violence went generally unnoticed and not widely addressed, and thus a number of homosexual health and safety issues continued and even got worse--as indicated in my article on Spike in Social Ills.

Statistically and ironically, then, the safest place for homosexuals was in "the closet," and the most protective strategy has been moderate social stigma. True and sensible compassion towards homosexuals would thus incline one towards the "good o'l days" before the gay movement and liberals jumped well-intentionally and inanely onto the bandwagon.

The destructive compassion of liberals found its way into programs intended to help the children of same-sex couples by purportedly providing them with a stable, loving, two-parent home, with the same federal and state benefits as children of heterosexual parents. (See HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE)

Again, in some respects, this was a noble cause.

However, rather than sticking with the relatively successful specialized programs offered by states and the federal government (such as child/family-focused legislation or civil unions and domestic partnerships), liberals determined instead to accomplish their worthy objective through mangling the several millennium-old definition of marriage .

This not only added to the war on traditional families (see previous sections), but it offered no discernible improvement for children of gay couples. Very few homosexual couples live in the same household (30%--see HERE) and relatively few homosexual couples choose to marry (about 6%, see HERE), and fewer still end up with children (about 19% and declining--see HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE)

So, instead of producing stable homes for those children, liberals have encouraged, through government sanction, the very relationships that not only broke-up traditional homes to begin with (most of the children of same-sex couples came from prior opposite-sex relationships, many of which were destroyed by the homosexual spouse/parent leaving the opposite-sex marriage for a homosexual relationship--see HERE and HERE and HERE), but which are culturally short-lived (see HERE) and inclined towards infidelity (see HERE), and "nearly three times more likely to divorce than were heterosexual couples." (See HERE, See also John Smoot's article on how same-sex marriage is worst for children--HERE)

If liberals had sensible compassion for children, they would have encourage traditional marriage rather than working to legalize same-sex marriage. Since they have done the opposite, Leftist LUNCs have occurred.

For an explanation as to why these same-sex marriage Leftist LUNC have happened, see: The politics of Victimization, Compassion, Equality, Emotions, Bullying, Propaganda and Disinformation. [the unlinked topics will be posted later as they are completed] 

No comments:

Post a Comment