Paul Cameron
U.S. university/research complex now an apologist for homosexuality?
FacebookTwitter
By Paul Cameron
May 8, 2024

Before WWII the Nazis had a problem: homosexuality was on the rise and Germany’s birth rate had plummeted. Heinrich Himmler, head of the SS and the Nazi second-in-command, estimated that around two million German men engaged in homosexuality. He feared homosexuality inhibited births and threatened the productivity of a merit-based social system.

Much of what Americans know about homosexuality is from what its supporters or practitioners tell us. But few humans or professional associations ever tell (or know) the whole truth. Homosexuals and their supporters are known to dissemble, so their reports – as respondents or investigators – are even more questionable. The U.S. just hit its lowest birth rate and homosexuality is rising. Might the U.S. learn anything from the Nazi response to their shrinking birth rate and rising homosexuality?

The Nazi reasoning is summarized in a 1937 address to his SS by Himmler (available in many online translations). Within weeks of taking power, the Nazis destroyed Magnus Hirschfeld’s homosexual institute in Berlin. Himmler then led a decade of surveillance, interrogating, and killing of homosexuals (but also claimed to have "cured" many). Himmler said he approached homosexuality in 1933 “like an ignorant fool” since homosexuality was so strange, he could “hardly imagine it.” He claimed that “in the first six weeks of our activity in 1934 we brought more cases to court than had the entire police department in Berlin in 25 years… in the field of homosexuality, [at least in suppression]….we [are] the most experienced people in the field.”

Although despising Christianity, Himmler agreed with it that homosexuality threatened society. Moses claimed societal success depended upon suppressing homosexuality while the Church seconded him, but primarily focused on pederasty. Himmler barely mentioned lesbianism but given that so many German men engaged in homosexuality worried there were too few sexually capable males for the “balance and equilibrium between the sexes” required for marriage and children. Himmler did not believe ‘every adult has the right to express his sexual preferences in his bedroom” but rather held that everything “in the sexual sphere …[bears] upon the life and death of the nation…. A people that has many children has the qualifications for world power and world domination. A people [with] too few children has a sure ticket for the grave, for insignificance in 50 to 100 years, for burial in 250.” “We need to be clear about this, if we continue to have this vice in Germany …., then that is the end of Germany, the end of the Germanic world.” He also warned that any SS member caught in homosexuality would be shot. While he is worth listening to because of his experiences with homosexuality, Himmler’s racial beliefs undergirded great loss of life (and may have kept Germany from treating Jews well enough to have a shot at getting the first A-bomb and winning the war)

As FRI has recently detailed, about 10% of younger U.S. men and over twice that percentage of younger women claim to be LGBT. Himmler was shaken that even though it was illegal, 10% of German men engaged in homosexuality. Now that the U.S. teaches our children about homosexuality and protects it as a civil right, might homosexuality threaten our existence?

We assume Himmler put forward his most important arguments to the SS. His case against homosexuality was based on: 1) its negative impact on Germany’s demographic; and his/discovery that 2) homosexuality so dominated its participants’ lives that they: a) lied/dissembled constantly to support it and b) crippled merit-based advancement by hollowing out "homosexual enclaves" in their positions, creating ruinous social inefficiencies. As evident from his remarks above, Himmler was trying to prepare Germany for aggressive warfare.

Himmler detailed where homosexuals "hired in" more homosexuals and lied about normals’ supposed failings to get rid of them and hire still more homosexuals. He warned, “homosexuality therefore undoes in the state every merit, … and destroys the state in its foundations.”

Ruinous Homosexual Control In U.S. Marriage and Caretaking of Children

In the U.S., LGBTs have not just gotten control of various employment opportunities, but now control the social sciences/social services in academia. Below we detail how homosexual corruption of marriage may be partially to blame for our demographic decline and our placing of more and more children under homosexual caretakers in adoptive and foster homes.

Historically, the church argued that homosexuals will lie and cheat to have sex with children. Further, gay "marriage" 1) reduces the status of marriage making it merely a "loving relationship" rather than the place to have and raise kids, and 2) qualifies LGBTs to gain custody of children.

Have children experienced problems with allowing homosexuals access to them? Not if you believe the professional associations associated with psychology, sociology, or psychiatry. Their recommendations are full of misrepresentations, asserting that studies have produced no evidence that homosexual parents do worse by kids than conventional man/woman marriages.

Himmler was worried about demographics and the corruption of German efficiency. While he referenced the dissembling and lying of homosexuals, the U.S. is much further along the corrupted scale. There are tremendous pro-LGBT biases in Academia – biases that almost assure that research on whether homosexuals’ caretaking is defective or accompanied by disproportionate sexual molestation will not be documented.

Whether homosexuals are allowed to raise others’ kids is an important issue – both for the children involved and society. Alas, the studies on homosexuals’ parenting are rare, small, poor (often based on volunteers), and tremendously distorted in their write-ups. Laymen seem quite aware of what homosexuals want when they ask to "read to kids" or "entertain the kids" while dressed in bizarre outfits of the opposite sex. They want kids to copy them and possibly have sex with them. But laymen may be unaware that what the professional associations claim about homosexual parents or what these associations have allowed to be published in their "scientific" journals is similarly laced with dissembling that serves the same wicked purpose.

Belcastro, et al (1993) were the first to review these studies of homosexual parents and concluded that claims “that there are no significant differences in children reared by homosexual parents versus heterosexual parents is not supported by the published research base.” One of the "dirty little secrets" is that most reviewers study the abstracts rather than the entirety of published articles. Abstracts are key, as what the journal’s editor approves as an abstract is supposed to rigorously summarize the key aspects of the study. Belcastro and his team of scholars noted that the abstracts of studies of homosexual parents often tended to support the opposite of the findings they supposedly summarized! As such, the "scientific literature" on homosexual parents is biased, with almost all the abstracts contradicting what was reported in the text. Looking at this, a fair-minded person might say there is something wrong with the intellectual ability of these researchers (but if he knew the researchers were involved in homosexuality, he would have a ready explanation: to wit, homosexuals are dissemblers and cheaters).

Things in academia/social science were bad in 1993.

Today, homosexuals (and their sympathizers) dominate academia: 1) promoting lying about the findings of empirical studies on homosexual marriage, homosexual parenting or homosexual caretakers and, 2) forbid non-supportive academics to research these issues.

As such, kids are at risk from policymakers being misinformed about gay marriage or what children with homosexual parents (adoptive-, foster-, or biological) experience and/or how they turn out as teens or adults.

An academic has provided FRI with this list of conservative-leaning professors engaging in research on same-sex marriage or LGBT caretakers being fired or such research being forbidden. The informant has nestled within the university/scientific journals complex for decades:

  • A professor with millions of annual grant funding was fired and forced to vacate his office within one hour. His sin? Making a speech in Oceana against Same Sex Marriage [SSM]. He wasn’t even allowed to retrieve his research files from his computer! Ten years of research down the drain – at a well-known Christian university.

  • An associate professor at a secular university got complaints from 200+ scholars for his 2012 article that raised questions – even in the mainstream press – about same-sex parenting. His promotion to full professor was only saved by the intervention of the university president. He hasn’t since submitted any "anti-SSM articles" in journals publishing in English. The editor of the journal that had published his noteworthy research was changed.

  • A professor at a secular university had his office ransacked when a fire marshal demanded 90% of its contents be moved – in the same week his book on Same-Sex Parenting was published. After criticizing an article by lesbian researchers and getting a student complaint, he gets a letter of reprimand from his department head. After a student complained at a scientific conference, he is banned for life from even attending it, much less presenting future papers. An increasingly hostile work environment led to his early retirement.

  • A professor at a Christian university got articles that were anti-SSM retracted or semi-retracted. Some gay "scholars" created a fake paper and got it published in the same journal as this professor to discredit the journal and by extension, that professor's research.

No study and no scholar are perfect – there are always limits to what can be proven and different ways to interpret the same set of facts. But children’s lives (and our society’s life) are at stake. The U.S. has allowed homosexuals to transform its university/research/journal system into a cheering section for homosexuality. Its scientific publications are tilted in homosexuality’s favor and conservative-leaning scholars are dismissed or forbidden to do research that might besmirch its glory. Is not the U.S. at even greater risk than the Germany Himmler tried to protect?

____________________

Ref: Belcastro, P. A., Gramlich, T., Nicholson, T., Price, J., & Wilson, R. (1993). A review of data-based studies addressing the effects of homosexual parenting on children's sexual and social functioning. J Divorce & Remarriage, 20, 105-122.

© Paul Cameron

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)


Paul Cameron

Dr. Paul Cameron was the first scientist to document the harmful health effects of second-hand tobacco smoke. He has published extensively on LGBT issues in refereed scientific journals. In 1978 he predicted that equal treatment of homosexuality and heterosexuality would strongly favor growing homosexuality and shrinking heterosexuality. His prediction is coming true.

Subscribe

Receive future articles by Paul Cameron: Click here

More by this author

 

Stephen Stone
HAPPY EASTER: A message to all who love our country and want to help save it

Stephen Stone
The most egregious lies Evan McMullin and the media have told about Sen. Mike Lee

Siena Hoefling
Protect the Children: Update with VIDEO

Stephen Stone
FLASHBACK to 2020: Dems' fake claim that Trump and Utah congressional hopeful Burgess Owens want 'renewed nuclear testing' blows up when examined

Cliff Kincaid
Honor victims of the U.S. government on Memorial Day

Linda Goudsmit
CHAPTER 20: In their own words: The sexual revolution begins in Kindergarten

Jim Wagner
Islam for Dhimmis—Part I

Rev. Mark H. Creech
Repeating history: Medicinal whiskey’s echoes in medical marijuana policy

Randy Engel
A documentary: Opus Dei and the Knights of Columbus – The anatomy of a takeover bid, Part VI

Jerry Newcombe
Electoral College dropout?

Curtis Dahlgren
The "Hand of History" writes its own reply to arrogance

Pete Riehm
Our fallen fought not just for freedom but truth

Linda Kimball
Christendom and Protestant America’s apostasy into paganism: A timeline

Jim Wagner
Why the Left loves Allah

Randy Engel
A Documentary: Opus Dei and the Knights of Columbus – The anatomy of a takeover bid, Part V

Peter Lemiska
For Democrats, justice is a one-way street
  More columns

Cartoons


Click for full cartoon
More cartoons

Columnists

Matt C. Abbott
Chris Adamo
Russ J. Alan
Bonnie Alba
Chuck Baldwin
Kevin J. Banet
J. Matt Barber
Fr. Tom Bartolomeo
. . .
[See more]

Sister sites