Borrow Some Perspective

The new Surgeon General nominee is under fire for a report he wrote in 1991. Why? Read...

"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."

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."

Sorry, gay rights folks, but you're just dead wrong on this one. Someone stating something you don't like doesn't invalidate the statement. From a scientific and physiological point of view, he is entirely and undeniably correct. Even the most rabid of advocates should be able to see that quite clearly. The AIDS virus, for example, is transmitted only by blood-to-blood contact and dies instantly upon exposure to visible radiation, (I'll leave it to your imagination to create an inference from that data).

So what's their real beef?

Holsinger, 68, presented "The Pathophysiology of Male Homosexuality" in January 1991 to a United Methodist Church's committee to study homosexuality. The church was then considering changing its view that homosexuality violates Christian teaching, though it ultimately did not do so.

Ahh... Now I see. Vendetta, is it?

I am an atheist with gay friends and family members with whom I get along quite well, and I say again, you're dead wrong on this issue. Your personal distaste for the man does not automatically disqualify him or invalidate his credentials. I don't like the fact that he's apparently on this idiotic "childhood obesity prevention" bandwagon -- another vile concoction of an eternally clueless press -- but that hardly makes him incompetent.

To this day, in fact, I think C. Everett Koop is a bit of nutball, and I harbored very strong disagreement with several of his political positions. But again, my dislike of those issues and positions does not mean the person is incompetent or bigoted.

Short form: get over yourselves.