Mon | Jun 14, 2021

LETTER OF THE DAY - I haven't cooked data on gays

Published:Wednesday | July 30, 2014 | 12:00 AM


Unfortunately, Ian Boyne, as evidenced in his column, 'War over the buggery law' (Sunday Gleaner, July 27, 2014), does not fully understand my position re homosexuality and the buggery law. However, since Ian cannot be held accountable for what the media do not report, I am not holding it against him.

At the Jamaica CAUSE rally in Half-Way Tree on June 29, in a short address to the crowd, I cited the fact that when, in 1973, the American Psychiatry Association (APA) declared homosexual orientation (attraction, identity and behaviour) to be a normal aspect of human sexuality, it was, to the best of my knowledge, the first time a medical association was defining normal without reference to anatomy and physiology, i.e., design.

I informed the crowd that although the World Health Organization (WHO) and other significant medical associations soon followed, the APA, in declaring homosexual orientation normal, the position was illogical and not consistent with standard medical practice.

Normalisation of homosexuality

I further stated that as it relates to men who have sex with men (MSM), the Bronze Age writers of the Bible had been proven by science to be correct and the APA, etc, wrong. To the best of my knowledge, no media house has reported this statement.

My resistance to normalisation of homosexuality has always been primarily philosophical. The health statistics have merely been to support the philosophical position but have never been the primary consideration. I argue that HIV/AIDS epidemics among MSM are merely easily measurable manifestations of the illogic of ignoring design. This is, in fact, supported by research as 98 per cent of the difference in HIV rates between men who have sex with men (MSM) and heterosexuals is due to anal-receptive intercourse and the ability of men to play either role on different occasions.

Other manifestations will, no doubt, surface, but they may not be as easily measured. I am surprised that Ian does not seem to be aware that some local LGBT activists have suggested that I deliberately misrepresent the data.

Law is a teacher

The State has the responsibility to make law, but law is not only about punishment; it is also a teacher. If the State adopts a philosophical approach which, in such an important area, ignores design in the universe in its definition of normal, how then would it define abnormal?

As a Christian theist, I hold the view that a great, intelligent being, God, is the first cause, and that God designed the world with purpose and intent. It is, therefore, logical to expect that casual rejection of design will have negative consequences. In fact, even if one were atheistic, logic should still lead to the view that casual rejection of 'apparent' design would have negative consequences.

Our experience with the HIV epidemics among MSM has shown that rejection of design in matters of sex is against the common good. It is folly for the State to legislate that which is both illogical and does not serve the common good.


Kingston 6