X Monkeys @ Y Keyboards = Z Funny (in the Usual Sad, Pathetic Way)

From an ABC News story by Jake Tepper, about President Bush's nominee for Surgeon General, Dr. James W. Holsinger Jr.: Holsinger, 68, presented "The Pathophysiology of Male Homosexuality" in January 1991 to a United Methodist Church's committee to study homosexuality. (Read the paper here.) The church was then considering changing its view that homosexuality violates Christian teaching, though it ultimately did not do so. Relying on footnotes from mainstream medical publications, Holsinger argued that homosexuality isn't natural or healthy. Noting that Holsinger also belongs to a church that offers a ministry to "cure" gays of the sexual orientation, gay and lesbian rights advocates immediately protested Holsinger's nomination. "His writings suggest a scientific view rooted in anti-gay beliefs that are incompatible with the job of serving the medical health of all Americans," said the Human Rights Campaign in a statement. "It is essential that America's top doctor value sound science over anti-gay ideology." Holsinger's paper argued that male and female genitalia are complementary -- so much so "that it has entered our vocabulary in the form of naming pipe fittings either the male fitting or the female fitting depending upon which one interlocks within the other." Body parts used for gay sex are not complementary, he wrote. "When the complementarity of the sexes is breached, injuries and diseases may occur." Holsinger wrote that "[a]natomically the vagina is designed to receive the penis" while the anus and rectum -- which "contain no natural lubricating function" -- are not. "The rectum is incapable of mechanical protection against abrasion and severe damage ... can result if objects that are large, sharp or pointed are inserted into the rectum," Holsinger wrote. The cardiologist details many different diseases gay men can catch, and several sexual practices they may engage in, including "anal eroticism," which can lead to injuries and even death. "From the perspective of pathology and pathophysiology, the varied sexual practices of homosexual men have resulted in a diverse and expanded concept of sexually transmitted disease and associated trauma …" In the context of the larger argument in his church as to whether homosexuality should be accepted, Holsinger presented a medical and scientific argument that anal intercourse was not natural. "It is absolutely clear that anatomically and physiologically the alimentary and reproductive systems in humans are separate organ systems, i.e., the human does not have a cloaca," he said, referring to the posterior orifice that serves as the one opening for genital, urinary and intestinal tracts in amphibians, birds and reptiles. The surgeon general nominee wrote that "even primitive cultures understand the nature of waste elimination, sexual intercourse and the birth of children. Indeed our own children appear to 'intuitively' understand these facts." "It's a totally faulty paper. The man doesn't know anything about human sexuality," said June M. Reinisch, Ph.D., director emeritus of the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender & Reproduction. "There's clearly a political agenda in this paper. This is not a scientific paper." Paragraph by paragraph, Reinisch said Holsinger presents faulty arguments. Many homosexuals do not engage in the sexual act he criticizes; 40 percent of heterosexuals do. "It seems to me he's arguing the only way reproduction happens is in a loving heterosexual environment which is of course not true," Reinisch said, noting artificial methods, rape and one-night stands. Reinisch, who was director of the Kinsey Institute when Holsinger wrote this paper, said that if Holsinger "is going to come up with this position in 2007 I think I can clearly say that he is not qualified to be surgeon general."

That's all well & good, and should make for some amusing confirmation hearings. But I'm the kind of person who always reads the letters section of any periodical or journal I encounter, & with all this innerweb crap, well, every moron in this great nation of ours, and many morons in other portions of this great globe of ours, many of whom actually think they have an opinion, can just type away to their hearts' delight, and short of threats of physical violence there is not only no censorship, but literally everyone who types in is published. So let the fun begin:

I was a teenager in the 60's and people said some pretty strange things but no one said things as absurd as this person. This man has no right to be surgeon general of anything. Posted by:paulettec0 Jun-6 Hey, I think I was one of those people. From the standpoint of nature, it certainly isn't natural, Homosexuality if the norm would have ended humanity as a species long ago. Political Correctness has no place in society as it serves only to control how people think and censors truth. Posted by:lorinkundert Jun-6 As oppposed to, say, religion? (Or, from the standpoint of redundancy, it certainly is redundant.) WOW for once someone in Bush's team that I can relate with. Couldnt have said it better myself. Posted by:cdigi187 Jun-6 This one I don't quite follow. Is it the new "Throw Bush under the bus'' talking point, i. e., "Well, after seven years of this, I've noticed (just in time for the election, heh) that Bush isn't really a conservative, he's just another Big Spender and he was only pandering to people of faith, blah, blah, blah, so this time vote for a real conservative who'll really put the pervs in their place."? Or someone who really thinks our president is generally bad news but is overly concerned w/ human pipefitting? (And in the picky dep't.: people generally say "on" rather than "in" a team, and relate "to" rather than "with" others, don't they?) 2008 is a comin' like a frieght train! Be sure you know which track to be standing on. Posted by:kisshammer Jun-6 "kisshammer." I'm scared. Is that like Hammerskins meet KIß™*? And I'm not sure which track to be standing on, either. Maybe I should be on the platform, rather than the track, then it won't matter which track that '08 freight train is on. *Sorry, Microsnoft or whoever the hell is responsible for the fonts or whatever here, fascists though they may be, don't have the ol' SS runes (for absolute KIß™ authenticity) available...yet. (You can get Polish accentery though.) (P. S.: That's the way Microsnoft is spelled. Deal w/ it.) Homosexualtiy is an abomination in God's eyes. It is both unhealthy and unnatural. Think about it...God created two sexes, not one. I don't think anyone should be calling this man an idiot or a religious zealot...he is both educated and intelligent, besides being 100% correct. Posted by:valentinosmom Jun-6 Always wondered about people who identify themselves only by their relationship to others. No respect for the "gay" community? Why should anyone have respect for homosexuals? Posted by:valentinosmom Jun-6 Now I'm really wondering. valatinosmom: I've read some of the other comments that you've made on other threads, and it appears that you think you think that the literal bible and the laws governing our country are interchangable. They are not. For the rest of us who are not bible thumping christian fundamentalists, please keep the scripture quotes to a minimum. Just like you wouldn't want a fundamental Muslim influencing the laws of our government, we don't want a fundamental christian influencing the health policies of our government either. You have a right to your opinion-but that's all it should be. Leave religion out of legislation!!!!! Posted by:je po Jun-6 Assuming "valatinosmom" is "valentinosmom", I can stop wondering. WE ARE A BACKWORDS COUNTRY READY TO THUMP ANYONE THAT DISAGREES WITH THE BIBLE!!!! DONT JUDGE, IM NOT ABOMINATION!!!!! AND IM GAY!!!!! ANYONE QUICK TO JUDGE IS NOT FOLLOWING “GODS” RULES YOU BELIEVE IN SO IN FACT IF HELL IS REAL YOU ARE CONDEMING YOUR SELF TO IT....GET OVER YOURSELF...AND IF GAY WASNT NATURAL WHY WOULD THEIR BE GAY ANIMALS IN NATRUE!!! WOLFS, LIONS, DOGS, CATS, ECT GO THUMP YOUR BIBLE ELSEWHERE!!! Posted by:djayed07 Jun-6 I'm just sayin... (Heh. Read it as "BACKWOODS." Which works too.) Uh oh. She's back. I am not a Bible thumper. I am not trying to put religion in legislation. I am entitled to my opinions...if you don't like them, so be it...I don't really care. Posted by:valentinosmom Jun-6 And, I am not judging anyone...I am simply stating what is in the Bible...the word of God and HIs laws. I am not a hypocrite by any means. I certainly don't state my opinion regarding homosexuality and then turn around and practice such filth. You want to put your eternal soul in jeopardy...go ahead! Personally, I prefer NOT to spend eternity in a lake of fire! Just remember this little discussion when you stand before Him for judgement, because He will remind you that valentinosmom tried to tell you and you wouldn't listen. Posted by:valentinosmom Jun-6 First words out of His mouth: "Dude, valentinosmom tried to tell you..." valentinosmom- You stated "Homosexuality is an abomination in God's eyes" who are you to judge that....are you god????? how do you know what he thinks is a abomination...and the chapter in the bible that says being gay is wrong also states you should kill men if they lay with other men....and kill anyone that cheats, and "stone" a step son that sleeps with his step mother!!! Come on now!!!! how backwards is that! Im sorry but MY personal opinion is that was written by someone that is scared of anything different then themselves not god and guess what no one can prove that so I guess I will find out when I die and im not afraid one bit!!!! Posted by:djayed07 Jun-6 Not one bit! Ever seen a two headed racoon? A bus full of kids did in 1998. Nope, not natural but nature is imperfect and anyone not heteralsexual should not be discriminated as any less the a natural produce of an imperfect world. Posted by:webwaxer Jun-6 No man on two-headed raccoon sex either, Godammit!!! Ever seen a two headed racoon? A bus load of kids did in 1998. Nature isn't perfect, never was and never will be. We must respect diversity. Posted by:webwaxer Jun-6 I guess that's better. I think he meant that you cant have babies being ####,lesbian etc... gay is not a word meant for people of that nature its meaning is happy..Therefore if everyone was ####,lesbian there would be no more babies other than unnatural ways to conceive them.Seriously when are people going to quit staying on the side lines and not say something about this it has gotten to the point where everyone is afraid to say anything in fear of loosing their jobs etc..Well I for one don't care I live in America and last time I checked I have freedom to say what I want.If you think in your mind that the world should accept things like this then you to are in danger of loosing the most endangered species The Human Race. Posted by:WereAllHuman Jun-6 No comment needed. (Scared I might "loose" my job. Oh, wait, I don't have one! Ha ha. Joke's on you.) It appears that because a scientific medical opinion is in conflict with the Democratic politcal agenda and certain fringe groups, it is deemed incorrect, unscientific, and Christian blabber. Common sense teels me that Dr. Holsinger was right and concerned for the health and well-being of people who engage in certain sexual practices, gay or straight. Homosexuality is no more 'normal' or 'natural' than alcoholism. You have the choice. Posted by:Jeri38 Jun-6 And don't you forget it. Opinion: Dr. Wolsinger should be applauded for NOT being afraid to express FACTS in light of the ignorant audience of our morally declining culture. Posted by:Dr. Fact Jun-6 What? (Oh, I know more or less what the good Dr. means, but try to be clear about it, even if your thought processes are a little murky.) As an MD myself, all I can say is that any physician who would spend his valuable time writing such a research paper does not have the common sense to be the Surgeon General. Whether gay or straight, the issue is that there are far more important issues out there in public health than "rationalizing" whether same sex is natural or not... come on... 40 million people with no insurance and another 40 million with under insurance, disparity in healthcare by race and income, smoking, obesity, globalization and the spread of disease, ect... I'm afraid that if this guy becomes SG, valuable time, $ and effort will be wasted on issues that don't deserve such focus. Posted by:silverkoi941 Jun-6 Well, whatever you say, Dr. Hoity-Toity, M. D. THE ULTIMATE POINT THAT DR. WOLSINGER WAS MAKING IS THAT THE MALE REPRODUCTIVE ORGAN IS NOT DESIGNED FOR THE MALE/FEMALE SANITARY SYSTEM. THE MALE REPRODUCTIVE ORGAN IS DESIGNED FOR THE FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE ORGAN. THIS IS NOT A DEBATE ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY AS MUCH AS IT IS ABOUT SODOMY.I AGREE THAT WE IN AMERICA ARE WASTEFUL, BUT I IMPLORE THAT NONE OF YOU PUT THINGS IN THE SANITARY SYSTEM THAT DON'T BELONG THERE. Posted by:Dr. Fact Jun-6 I'm on my knees begging and I'm screaming at you: no tampons in the toilets! To WereAllHuman, could you explain YOUR statement; my literate brain cannot understand it..."somehow I take it your offended by being your sexuality well if that be the case you already know in your heart its wrong." Oh and maybe you should check YOUR grammar. If YOU'RE going to insult me, at least do it grammatically. Posted by:legos2dot0 Jun-6 Yeah, it's least you could do, you cretinous sub-literate who might be able to type sense if you'd ever read anything besides your 17th C. book of fairy stories. Our post-modern sensibilities insist we make no judgements, even when lack of any judgement clearly points destruction. Separation of church and state? Fine. Why do we have to have a separation of common sense and state, too?Oh, and by the way, homosexuality, at least the modern 24/7/365 American version, can be "cured". I suggest you check our Exodus International for plenty of evidence. Posted by:curmudgeony Jun-6 Pomo homo. Ha ha. The modern 24/7/365 American version of homosexuality can be "cured." Well, maybe not actually cured, but, you know, "cured." The modern 24/7/365 American version, that is. Not the post-modern version, though. See brochure for further information. Sounds to me like "curing" the modern 24/7/365 American version really means shoving you all the way to the back of the closet, just as far as you can go, behind the Judy Garland LPs, maybe. And what are the other versions of the "sin that dare not speak its name?" And are they OK? The Catholic priest version, maybe? The noble, hyper-manly Spartans? Nothin' wrong with slappin' your pal on the ass after a good play, huh? No, the important thing is don't be a sissy, 'cause if the Moooooslims think we're all girly-men, they'll be swimming across all the oceans with their knives in their mouths, knowing that even after the exhausting swim, those infidel nancy-boy Americans will be easy meat. So butch up, dammit!! I am a leader in the anti-war movement, I believe Bush and Cheney are war criminals, and they should be tried, convicted and suffer the same fate of others convicted of mass murder. I have founded four homeless shelters, been a social worker for 30 years and am deeply concened about Americas central role in Global waming and the fiasco of our War on Terror. In other words, most would consider me quite liberal in my beliefs. I am also deeply concerned that each person, regardless of their beliefs, be treated with dignity and respect. Individuals who are gay deserve respect and should never be personally judged, for whom amongst us can claim the purity to judge another when there is sin in all of us? This all said, it is different to judge the act of homosexuality itself. Tho I am often appaled at Bush's appointments and ultimately may well find some other reason why this man should not be Surgeon General, the man's science is obviously sound and the real political issue is on the part of those who argue against nature on behalf of those they seek to protect from the truth. Respect them, care for them but stop lying to them and trying to decieve yoiurselves into the idea that homosexuality is a normal alternative. Homosexuality is a sexual preference born of hurt and a myriad of different reasons but it is not natural and it is not a legitimate human rights issue as the civil rights and women's movements were. Sorry my liberal friends but sometimes the truth really hurts, so I gues you yell loud and call science politics. The real problem is that it's not politically correct as the self-deluded pro=gay movement demands. Posted by:jonsvit Jun-6 I wish you fucking Catholics would just fuck off. Human idiocy aside, practically he's right. Homosexuality is inconvenient, against nature, and detracts from propigation of our species which is after all the ultimate goal if there is no God. Posted by:geekybryan Jun-6 Very inconvenient. I can't tell you how many times I've been inconvenienced by the whole thing. I thought "species propigation [sic]" was the ultimate goal because of God. Human idiocy aside, am I missing something here? The good doctor can't spell...second paragraph of his "paper" contains the word "concensus," correct spelling would be "consensus." I'm surprised this misspelling remains after 16 years. Perhaps, the "paper" has never been read! :) Posted by:dcspencer2003 Jun-6 There's always a smarty-pants in the crowd who has to go and read what everyone else is just talking about. The good doctor can't spell and I believe, perhaps, no one has read his "paper" over the past 16 years. 2nd paragraph, 1st page: the word "concensus" is used. I believe the correct spelling (and the only one to make any sense) would be "consensus." I find it alarming that someone as learned as Dr. Holsinger is as careless in his writings not to even bother with a spell-checker in his writings. [Even this program won't allow misspellings] Posted by:dcspencer2003 Jun-6 Alright already Mr. Know-it-All, we get it, you read the paper.