We Are Paying Family Benefits for This?

Homosexuality is a Promiscuous Lifestyle

Homosexuals argue that their relationships are as deep and committed as those within a legal marriage. This is not the case.

Promiscuity is an inherent aspect of homosexuality. Although a few homosexuals maintain stable, monogamous relationships, these are rare exceptions. In particular, male homosexuals show a high degree of promiscuity as indicated by the following seminal studies:

· A 1981 study found that only 2% of homosexuals could be classified as monogamous or semi-monogamous (10 or fewer partners); (A.P. Bell, M.S. Weinberg, and S.K. Hammersmith, Sexual Preferences, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Indiana 1981, pp. 308-309.)

· A 1978 study (A.P. Bell and M.S. Weinberg, Homosexuality: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1978, pp. 308-309) found that:

a) 43% of white male homosexuals estimated that they had sex with 500 or more partners.

b) 28% reported having more than 1000 partners.

A study (A.P. Bell and M.S. Weinberg, Homosexuality: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1978,pp. 308-309) by the American Psychological Association found that:

· 79% of homosexuals said that more than half their partners were strangers;

· 70% of homosexuals said more than half their partners were men with whom they had sex only once;

· due to the AIDS epidemic, homosexual promiscuity manifested itself in n average of 50 partners per year (vs. 70).

These studies and the views expressed by leaders of the homosexual movement today indicate clearly that homosexuals do not wish to conform to the traditional understanding of marriage - that is, faithfulness and commitment to one partner for life.

Ken Popert, homosexual activist, editor of Toronto's homosexual magazine Xtra and lover of Brian Mossop (who argued before the Supreme Court of Canada that their relationship constituted a family) stated:

I am in a web of relationships but there is no centre and no boundaries. It's not structured and institutionalized the way the family is. Each person can feel at the centre of it -- because in fact, it has no centre. (Globe and Mail, June 27, 1992)

Brian Mossop, his partner at the time, stated:

I don't believe in the concept of family. The only useful purpose it serves is that it provides a method of distributing benefits. (Western Report, March 15, 1993)

The reason why homosexual relationships are so promiscuous can best be explained by a regular columnist, Andrew Griffin, in the homosexual newspaper, Capital Xtra. In the June 23, 2000 issue, Mr. Griffin explains homosexuality to us. He states:

Because in the end, being gay is all about getting and giving a good f…. It is about seeing members of the same sex as sources of pleasure, not potential enemies and competitors.

Mr. Griffin has written many other articles explaining to his readers the "joys' of sexual encounters in the semi-darkness of a gay bathhouse where most frequently, sexual encounters take place between complete strangers.

It is obvious from other articles that homosexuals accept promiscuity as an essential part of their orientation, and this is the case even in their so-called "long-term" relationships.

For example, David Walberg, Publisher of Xtra, May 6, 1999, stated:

I love my boyfriend. … He makes me happy, and I would do anything for him. Almost.

A few years ago, I was having an affair. It was driving my boyfriend crazy. We discussed ending the affair to ease the strain on our relationship. I considered it. But in the end, I didn't.

You see, I love sex. With my boyfriend, yes. But with other men, too. My boyfriend and my sex life - with and without him - are central to my happiness.

Kamal Al-Solaylee, Xtra, May 6, 1999:

… Many gay men of my generation - now in their mid to late 30s - have come to see non-monogamy as inevitable. It's unrealistic, my friends repeatedly tell me to expect complete sexual and emotional fidelity from one partner. Boys will be boys and men will be pigs.

… I set off to explore the historical, psychological and social factors that make monogamy such a rare commodity in the gay male community.

… The form of non-monogamy that many people believe to be the most realistic is one where both partners share an understanding of, let's just say, the sexual urges of the male species. Outside sexual activity is accepted within certain limits, from occasional encounters during holidays or business trips, to quick and infrequent visits to the local bathhouse, cruising area or gay bar. In the classic open relationship model, such understanding doesn't affect the emotional bond two men have between them.

… quite often, gay men's inability to commit to a monogamous relationship stems from a refusal to take emotional responsibility seriously; and from a mentality that prioritizes sexual pleasure over any form of gratification. It's a sexual greed that designates every other gay man as a potential sexual conquest.

Garth Kirby, Managing Editor, Xtra West (Vancouver) as reprinted out in Xtra, June 3, 1999:

… Gay culture has never had a time-based hierarchy that rates relationships based on their longevity. And our culture has another central belief that clearly sets us apart: most of us keep our exes in our tight circle of friends. When the hot and steamy love affair is over, we part and each add the other to our support network. It's foolish, we say by our actions, to invest all this love in a person and want nothing more to do with them when we find we don't want to stay involved sexually.

If homosexuals are successful in obtaining legal recognition of their relationships, the very fabric of Canadian society will be irreparably damaged. The relationship between homosexuals is based on their personal sexual preference, while the traditional heterosexual marriage is not merely a private commitment between two people, but, more importantly, a social contract which is the very foundation of our society. From this union comes children - upon which the future of society depends.

The state has recognized the valuable contributions of children and the stability that the biological family provides by according it certain benefits. When such benefits are given to all and sundry, regardless of their willingness to live in committed, long-term relationships (although rare and not sexually faithful), the duties and sacrifices of marriage and family are devalued to the detriment of all.

The purpose of family benefits is to encourage marriage and the birth of children. Homosexuals do not believe nor can they take part in this traditional understanding of marriage, which is a bonding, permanent commitment to past, present and future generations. It is the cement that holds society together.

Why then are homosexual being provided "family" benefits? Why should they be given legal married status? If makes no sense. Homosexuals should not be given financial benefits which are based on their sexual activity. Homosexuals should not be entitled to enter into legal marriages.

BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS