Fifty percent of ‘gay’ men will be infected with HIV by age
50.
Doc faces
boot for citing 'gay' health dangers, 'This
is almost a fascist effort at mind control'
Citing government statistics and offering warnings about the
dangers of “gay” sex has one prominent doctor facing the possible loss of his
job and what effectively could be a banishment from his work, and he’s not
taking it without a fight.
Dr. Paul Church, a veteran urologist who has been on the
staff of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center for nearly 30 years, is appealing
a board decision against him, and is planning for a hearing in July on his
fight over his right to warn people that the facts prove “gay” sex is a
dangerous lifestyle.
Church, who also is a member of the Harvard Medical School
Facility and has conducted life-saving research on diagnosing bladder and
prostate cancer, told WND, “It is incredible to think they would be able to
silence me and revoke my ability to be on the staff as a result of my raising
valid health concerns over a risky lifestyle. ”He continued, “This is almost a
fascist effort at mind control.”
The facts, he said, are on his side. “Although it has
declined over the past few decades, two-thirds of all new HIV/AIDS infections
in the U.S. are the result of men having sex with men. Fifty percent of ‘gay’
men will be infected with HIV by age 50. Those numbers are out there and they
are staggering,” he said. But the facts that Church has used, from the Centers
for Disease Control, appear to matter little in the case, he suggested.
He told WND he’s facing dismissal from BIDMC for speaking
out on a subject where he unquestionably has expertise. The problem first began
more than 10 years ago when BIDMC began promoting LGBT activities, including
Boston’s annual “Gay Pride Week.
Church expressed concerns to hospital officials and on the
hospital’s Intranet, noting that by supporting homosexual activities and
strongly encouraging staff participation the administration was acting against
its mission statement. After all, medical evidence shows homosexual activities
are destructive, he said.
Amd BIDMC’s mission statement says it exists to “serve our
patients compassionately and effectively, and to create a healthy future for
them and their families.” The hospital also lays claims to its religious roots,
saying, “Service to community is at the core of the religious tradition of both
of our founding hospitals, and an important part of our mission.”
He explained to WND that the hospital, by encouraging staff
to participate in “gay” pride events, was violating both standards.
The CDC and others have documented that those engaging in
the types of sexual activities practiced predominantly by the LGBT community
lead to psychiatric disorders as well as an extremely high likelihood of contracting
dangerous and deadly STDs such as HIV/AIDS, anal cancer, parasitic infections
and hepatitis. “The medical community should be cautioning people to avoid and
abstain from a behavior that is high risk,” Church said.
“Just because it has become politically correct and sexual
orientation has been written into anti-discrimination laws is not a reason for
the medical profession to be promoting and encouraging these risky behaviors.
On the contrary they should be cautioning people about it and offer help to
reduce the risk. But the idea that a major medical center is a propaganda tool
for pro-’gay’ activities is just beyond me.”
He continued, “We don’t have a smoker’s celebration so why
do we have a ‘gay’ pride celebration. The political agenda is superseding
common sense.”
The hospital did not immediately respond to a request for
comment. But Church also tried to remind officials there that among its
employees there were a wide variety of personal and religious views. Some felt
uncomfortable with being told to support a lifestyle contrary to the basic
tenets of their faith and their advocacy could be considered a form of
harassment against religious people, he said.
Hospital officials said his complaints about harassment were
… harassment. “I was told that my comments about the dangers of homosexual
behavior constituted ‘discrimination and harassment’ and were considered to be
‘offensive to BIDMC staff’ and would not be tolerated. Yet what was amazing is
no one has ever disputed the accuracy of my statements regarding the health
risks of ‘gay’ sex,” he said.
An inquiry was held in 2011. “I made statements to them
regarding the medical facts about the dangers of homosexual sex. I thought that
regardless of a person’s position on homosexuality I would at least have the
ear of my colleagues instead of the administration since the evidence was on my
side. To my surprise they seemed to ignore the medical evidence and sided with
the administration,” he said.
He was reprimanded. “I was told I was prohibited from discussing
my views about homosexuality to members of the staff, visitors, and patients.
It was essentially an all-encompassing gag order,” he said.
He said he left his own religious views out of the
conversations with patients. But he felt he couldn’t even provide them with the
evidence.
“I had plenty of patients over the years who self-identified
as LGBT but unfortunately I feel like I cannot counsel them on risky behaviors
that are unique to them because that would be viewed as advocacy for
traditional marriage,” Church explained. “When I am with them I provide the
same non-judgmental type of care that I provide to anyone else and ignore their
lifestyle issues.”
Church also requested they opt him out of receiving emails
advocating support for “gay” pride events but he was refused.
“I requested that my name be removed from the directory and
that they have it more of an opt out/opt in type of arrangement regarding
receiving emails supporting the ‘gay’ lifestyle but they ignored me and refused
to do that, so I continued to get stories that praised ‘gays’ whenever they
received an award or advocating for ‘gay’ pride week.”
Church said after having his requests for religious
accommodation being ignored and after talking to attorneys who advised him
under existing civil rights law and whistleblower legislation he was well
within his rights to discuss hospital policy, he posted comments on the
Intranet discussion board about whether the board should advocate for the
unhealthy lifestyle that comes with homosexuality.
“Finally, after these legitimate medical concerns were
ignored I decided to post just the scriptural verses from Leviticus and Romans
with no comments on the bulletin board. I figured if they would come after this
then their issue was with God and not with me, but they didn’t see it this
way.”
In September 2014 the hospital convened a special
“Investigating Committee” and charges were brought against him. Church said at
the time he felt he would be vindicated because the medical facts and the law
were on his side.
“I was not worried, thinking it would be obvious that their
promotion of the homosexual lifestyle was contrary to the hospital’s mission
statement which was to watch out for the public welfare. In addition, I was
assured by attorneys that under existing civil rights law and the whistleblower
act I had the right to speak out on issues of public policy. In spite of all
this, the board sided with the hospital administration and revoked my medical
appointment.” His appeal now is pending.
http://www.wnd.com/2015/06/doc-faces-boot-for-citing-gay-health-dangers/
No comments:
Post a Comment