The
two
leading
Democratic
presidential
candidates
—
both
U.S.
senators
—
said
they
will
vote
against
President
Bush’s
surgeon
general
nominee
because
of
his
past
views
on
homosexuality,
despite
Dr.
James
Holsinger’s
statement
last
week
that
he
no
longer
believes
gay
male
sex
is
unhealthy.
Sens.
Hillary
Rodham
Clinton
(D-N.Y.)
and
Barack
Obama
(D-Ill.)
said
a
1991
paper
Holsinger
wrote,
in
which
he
linked
male
homosexuality
to
sexually
transmitted
diseases,
raises
serious
questions
about
whether
he
would
inject
his
personal
views
into
matters
relating
to
science
and
medicine.
“Because
of
the
questions
that
have
been
raised
about
Dr.
Holsinger’s
qualifications
and
ability
to
fulfill
the
duties
of
the
job,
I
do
not
believe
that
he
will
be
able
to
provide
adequate
leadership
in
the
public
health
field
as
Surgeon
General,
and
I
must
go
on
record
as
opposing
his
nomination,”
Clinton
said
in
a
statement.
In
a
statement
released
on
June
7,
Obama
said,
“America’s
top
doctor
should
be
a
doctor
for
all
Americans,
and
so
I
have
serious
reservations
about
nominating
someone
who
would
inject
his
own
anti-gay
ideology
into
critical
decisions
about
the
health
and
well-being
of
our
nation.”
Obama
said
in
the
statement
that
he
would
carefully
listen
to
Holsinger’s
testimony
at
his
July
12
confirmation
hearing.
This
week,
Obama’s
Senate
press
secretary,
Ben
LaBolt,
told
the
Blade
that
Obama
plans
to
vote
against
the
Holsinger
nomination.
In
testimony
before
his
Senate
confirmation
hearing
on
July
12,
Holsinger
said
his
current
views
no
longer
reflect
the
position
he
took
in
the
1991
paper,
in
which
he
wrote,
“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.”
Responding
to
questions
at
the
hearing,
Holsinger
said
he
was
troubled
over
claims
by
critics
that
the
paper,
entitled
“Pathophysiology
of
Male
Homosexuality,”
indicates
he
would
be
biased
toward
public
health
issues
involving
gay
people.
“I
am
deeply
troubled
personally
by
these
claims,
which
do
not
reflect
who
I
am,
what
I
believe
or
how
I
have
practiced
medicine
for
the
past
40
years,”
he
told
the
Senate
Committee
on
Health,
Education,
Labor &
Pensions.
“I
think
that
I
can
serve
all
Americans,
including
gay
and
lesbian
Americans,”
he
said.
“I
can
only
say
I
have
a
deep,
deep
appreciation
of
everybody,
regardless
of
their
personal
circumstance,
including
their
sexual
orientation
or
any
other
personal
characteristic.”
Holsinger’s
comments
about
gays
came
in
response
to
sharp
questioning
by
Sen.
Edward
Kennedy
(D-Mass.),
who
chairs
the
committee.
Kennedy
said
the
1991
paper
and
Holsinger’s
personal
religious
beliefs
as
a
Methodist
Church
leader,
in
which
he
opposed
allowing
gays
to
enter
the
ministry,
raised
the
issue
of
whether
his
“ideological
beliefs
cloud
his
scientific
judgment.”
According
to
Holsinger,
he
wrote
the
paper
after
a
committee
of
the
United
Methodist
Church
asked
him
to
review
whether
gay
male
sex
practices
are
more
prone
to
disease
and
health
problems
than
heterosexual
sex.
At
the
time,
the
church’s
Committee
to
Study
Homosexuality
was
preparing
recommendations
for
possible
changes
in
its
position
on
homosexuality
and
gay-related
issues.
The
paper
provides
detailed,
anatomical
descriptions
of
anal
intercourse
and
concludes
that
anal
sex
is
contrary
to
the
human
body’s
“natural”
biological
functions.
It
cites
studies
showing
gay
men
are
more
prone
to
sexually
transmitted
diseases,
including
AIDS.
Holsinger’s
critics
have
questioned
the
credibility
of
the
studies
he
cites
in
his
paper,
saying
most
experts
in
public
health
agree
that
gays
and
straights
are
equally
susceptible
to
sexually
transmitted
diseases,
including
AIDS.
Critics
have
said
the
determining
factors
for
transmission
of
sexually
transmitted
diseases
are
unprotected
sex
and
the
frequency
of
unprotected
sexual
encounters,
regardless
of
whether
such
encounters
are
between
same-sex
or
opposite-sex
couples.
Kennedy
said
he
received
a
letter
from
nine
doctors
with
knowledge
of
human
sexuality
who
denounced
Holsinger’s
paper
as
“wholly
unscientific,
biased
and
incredibly
poor
scholarship.”
“Dr.
Holsinger’s
paper
cherry
picks
and
misuses
data
to
support
his
thesis
that
homosexuality
is
unhealthy
and
unnatural,”
Kennedy
said
at
the
hearing.
“We’ve
heard
reports
of
Dr.
Holsinger’s
kindness
toward
people
who
are
gays
or
lesbians,”
Kennedy
said.
“I
have
no
reason
to
doubt
any
of
these
individual
accounts
of
benevolence,”
he
said.
“But
as
surgeon
general,
Dr.
Holsinger
will
be
responsible
for
providing
the
best
medical
and
scientific
information
to
all
Americans
and
we
must
be
assured
that
he
can
do
so
free
of
interference
from
his
personal
views,”
Kennedy
said.
Holsinger
said
his
paper
was
an
unpublished
review
of
the
medical
literature
on
health-related
issues
pertaining
to
male
homosexuality
nearly
20
years
ago.
“I
did
not
attempt
to
write
a
definitive
scientific
paper,”
he
said.
He
said
he
now
believes
the
paper
is
outdated.
“First
of
all,
the
paper
does
not
represent
where
I
am
today,”
he
said.
“It
does
not
represent
who
I
am
today.”
‘An
impressive
choice’
Senator
Michael
Enzi
(R-Wyo.),
the
ranking
Republican
member
of
the
committee,
said
he
was
satisfied
that
Holsinger
would
place
science
over
ideology.
He
called
on
his
Senate
colleagues
to
consider
Holsinger’s
long
career
as
a
doctor,
medical
school
professor
and
physician
and
administrator
with
the
U.S.
Department
of
Veterans
Affairs.
Former
Surgeon
General
C.
Everett
Koop,
who
has
been
praised
by
...
