Nathan Tabor,
January 20, 2005
With the big flap over so-called "gay marriage" temporarily on the back burner--now that their fearless but feckless leader John Kerry has gone down in flames, and with the first government-sanctioned same-sex unions already ending nastily in divorce courts and bitter custody battles--this just might be an opportune moment to discuss some rarely mentioned health problems inherent within the allegedly avant garde homosexual lifestyle.
Some would say it is a known fact that most homosexuals, and especially gay men, are promiscuous. Their rhetoric is carefully crafted to give the impression they are in "committed, caring relationships" while research suggests that the vast majority of gays are neither celibate nor monogamous. (all heterosexuals are not celibate or monogamous either.)
Some may say, so what? Well, the corollary to this homosexual health hypothesis is another proven fact: most sexually active homosexuals simply don’t live a very long time. The heartier they party, it seems, the shorter the time that party lasts.
according to a article entitled The Longevity of Homosexuals in the Omega Journal of Death and Dying, the median age of death from aIDS for homosexual men is 37, and the median age of death from other causes is 42. This does not compare favorably to the ever-increasing average lifespan of the rest of the heterosexual american population.
an analysis conducted at the end of 1997 by the Centers for Disease Control revealed that fully 60 percent of all aIDS cases in the United States are found among homosexual men. This is an amazingly high figure, especially when we consider that homosexuals--contrary to Kinsey's flawed study and fabricated "one-in-ten" myth--constitute only about 1 to 2 percent of our total population.
The conclusion is simple. Homosexual activists say they want equal rights and treatment. Fine. Let’s use their own arguments against them here. Let’s start by having them pay their fair share of the healthcare costs that accompany their lifestyle.
Long-term medical treatment for HIV and aIDS is usually protracted and tremendously expensive. Maybe that’s why gay activists are pushing so hard for spousal benefits for domestic partners of homosexuals--so somebody else, like the government or an employer, will pick up the tab.
"Risky" behavior is called risky for a reason. It means that by doing it, you put your life in danger. It’s really a lot like gambling for high stakes. The more you play, the more you stand to lose. For indulging in this risky behavior, you rightfully SHOULD pay more for both life and health insurance.
This isn’t a religious or even a moral values argument. This is strictly a common sense fiscal argument. You play risky, you pay more. That’s only fair. In fact, if these types of policies aren’t implemented, then health-conscious people are the ones being discriminated against.
You can’t blame the insurance companies for charging more. after all, their likelihood of having to pay out large sums of money on behalf of their gay clients is significantly greater.
Drinking and smoking, for example, are all directly related to dozens of diseases and medical conditions. So insurance companies habitually charge higher premiums. But non-smokers, non-drinkers and those who exercise get better rates than those who don’t practice such healthy lifestyle choices.
What about skydivers, hang gliders, and racecar drivers--do they pay the same life insurance premiums as those who watch birds or collect stamps? Not hardly.
The same logic should be applied to practicing homosexuals. When actuaries and insurance underwriters finally figure out this formula, we may see some instantaneous lifestyle changes.
after all, their risky homosexual behavior is a lifestyle choice, not a destiny. If the proven threat to their health won’t do the trick, maybe the cost to their pocketbooks will.
Copyright © 2004 by Nathan Tabor
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2018 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2018 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement