Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Study Says Only 1.4% of Population Homosexual

Source: The American Culture

A scientific study commissioned by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has found that only 1.4 percent of people are homosexual. I suppose that that must surprise you.

The first thing I thought of when I read  Michael Medved’s article about the study was how different the facts are from what the contemporary culture tells us. When watching television, after all, it seems as if 50 percent of the population is homosexual. It’s evident that a tiny minority of Americans have enormous power in Hollywood, the entertainment capital of the world.

Similarly, our cultural elites in media and education unanimously profess to believe that sexual orientation is not a choice but as innate as skin color; that has indeed become the dominant cultural message about this issue.

In light of such an onslaught, is it any wonder that so many young people are reported as struggling with their sexuality? I have an example.

My daughter grew up with a friend, a boy, who danced with her for the nine years she was involved in a local park district dance company. They even had a bit of a romantic involvement early in high school, and until he went away to college he was fully an opposite-sex kind of guy. He ended up attending an arts school of some kind, to attend their dance program. After a year of being surrounded by homosexual young men and an environment that forces the dominant, elite cultural understanding of homosexuality, he came to the conclusion that he was a homosexual.

When at first he “came out” to my daughter, he was confident and bold in his announcement. My daughter didn’t believe it, having known him all those years, and knowing the kind of environment he was in as a male dancer. She also knows young people such as her friend have no way to challenge the current homosexual zeitgeist absent engaged parents. So it was clear to her that when doubts arose about his sexual proclivities—resulting, obviously, at least in great part from the intense pressure from his peers to fit in—and the environment encouraged it, he took the plunge and embraced what he now believed to be  his true self.

But this confidence in his so-called orientation hasn’t lasted. In discussions with my daughter, who shares my Christian convictions about human sexuality, he has expressed doubts about whether he is doing the right thing. This rather tragic situation is illustrates one of the points in the Medved article, where he indicates  how dishonest those pushing the homosexual rights agenda are. For them, changing sexuality is a one-way street:

Gay pride advocates applaud the courage of those who “come out,” discovering their true nature as homosexual after many years of heterosexual experience. But enlightened opinion denies a similar possibility of change in the other direction, deriding anyone who claims straight orientation after even the briefest interlude of homosexual behavior and insisting they are phony and self-deluding. By this logic, heterosexual orientation among those with past gay relationships is always the product of repression and denial, but homosexual commitment after a straight background is invariably natural and healthy. In fact, numbers show huge majorities of those who “ever had same sex sexual contact” do not identify long-term as gay.

The numbers cited in the study indicate that there are only approximately 420,000 people in all of the United States who are actually committed homosexuals. Our cultural elites want us to believe that homosexuality is ubiquitous, yet the day-to-day experience of the average American belies this, despite what we see on TV. This study confirms what our eyes have seen.

As Medved points out, being a very small portion of the American public doesn’t mean that homosexuals should be discriminated against as they were decades past (and being against same-sex marriage doesn’t count as discrimination, despite what its proponents assert). What it does mean is that we all ought to be extremely wary of this and other secular leftist shibboleths such as global warming, socialism, etc. Many people with great access to the media are not well acquainted with the truth.


  1. Fr. Johannes Jacobse :

    I’ve been thinking about this all day. I wonder if the Episcopalians regret demolishing their Church for 1.4%?

  2. Geo Michalopulos :

    It’s a little late in the day for that, isn’t it? The only practical question at this point is why do we want the Orthodox Church to embrace this rejiggering of civilization for such a tiny percentage?

  3. Hieromonk Mark :

    I just downloaded the CDC study, to have a closer look at it. But Medved’s complete article, in USA Today, mentions not only the extremely small number of respondents self-identifying as ‘homosexual’ or even ‘bisexual’ but, also, a great deal of what is called fluidity in identity among the minority population but not among the majority (i.e., ‘straight’) population. The real key to dealing effectively with this issue, I think, is not about numbers or percentages but about the fluidity, variability and ambivalence that present among the minority at a much greater rate than among the majority.

    Couple that with the irrationality and immaturity of so much ‘gay’ ideology, mythology and behaviour and the fact that many people are able to move beyond homoerotic feelings and relations, if they choose to do so and actively seek repairative therapies and experiences , and I think that we begin to be able to formulate not merely a reactive, negative opposition to problematic behaviours but a proactive and positive policy of loving, nurturing and supportive therapeutic outreach based upon a message of growth and progression, in both the emotional and spiritual aspects of life, that gives hope to so many people virtually imprisoned in the limiting and desperate gay dogma of ‘born that way; can’t change.’

    The experience of Mike D’Virgilio’s daughter and her friend is very illustrative of the pressure being exerted on people, especially vulnerable young people, to conform to a pernicious revolutionary ideology. The irony is that this is all being done in the name of ‘freedom’ when it is really a sinister form of oppression and slavery to the amorphous, faceless ‘ubiquitous other’ and the malevolent power behind it determined to destroy souls and their relationship with their Lord and others.

    So many good people are trapped in this delusion! Focusing on proscribing behaviour without dealing with the underlying affectual issues is not the answer. Accepting the false notion of the radical otherness of ‘those people’ is really contrary to the whole purpose of the Incarnation, to bring all people out of the darkness of sin, brokenness and alienation into the Kingdom of God. Are we not all struggling with wounds, traumas, brokenness and estrangement, from God, each other and even our true selves? There’s where the real work of the Church is to be done. Abbot Tryphon, of All-Merciful Saviour Monastery, in his daily blog, today, quotes the Moscow Patriarchate’s document on social policy:

    1.4. The unity of the Church overcomes all barriers and frontiers, including racial, linguistic and social differences. The message of salvation is to be proclaimed to all nations in order to bring them into one fold, to unite them by the power of faith and the grace of the Holy Spirit (Mt. 28:19-20; Mk. 16:15; Acts 1:8).

    Doesn’t that help establish a positive and functional focus in this matter, too?

  4. Can someone tell me how, specifically, the 1.4% is arrived at?

    I have looked at the tables and, depending on the number I add together, can come up with a percentage significantly larger than 1.4.

    • Help. Anyone?

    • Fr. Johannes Jacobse :

      Why not write the CDC and ask about their methodology?

    • Greg, I think the 1.4% figure is derived from the figures in Tables 12 and 13 on pages 29 and 30 (“Sexual Identity among [women/men] aged 18-44 years…”). By my math the numbers work out this way (all figures in thousands, as noted on the tables):

      From table 12 (women): In 2006-2008 1.1% of the 56,032 women surveyed are homosexual; that works out to 616.352 homosexual women

      From table 13 (men): In 2006-2008 1.7 % of 55,556 men surveyed are homosexual; that works out to 944.452 homosexual men

      Combining the figures for both sexes, 1,560.804 out of 111,588 people surveyed are homosexual. By my math that works out to 1.399%, or about 1.4%

      Math was never my strongest subject; any reliable corrections to these figures will be gratefully accepted.

      • Thanks for taking a shot at helping me understand the numbers. I wonder if this 1.4% will ever get any traction? When you add in the bisexual and “something else” percentages it moves up to about 8%.

        I do think it is interesting to note how much confused sexuality there is out there. I bet that if serious secular medical professionals ever do muster up the courage to discuss the percentages they will be shouted down by the entertainment industry.


  1. […] In a piece on “percentages” it’s odd that he quotes 3% as the Gay population in the wake of last weeks CDC announcement that that 3 is 1.5.  […]

  2. […] In a piece on “percentages” it’s odd that he quotes 3% as the Gay population in the wake of last weeks CDC announcement that that 3 is 1.5.  […]

  3. […] For example, one dominant assumption of the group is that homosexual identity is fixed. The jury is still out on this. The Center for Disease Control just released a study (.pdf) that only 1.7% of the population is homosexual and 35% of this number is bisexual. The study cites that only approximately 420,000 people in all of the United States are actually committed homosexuals. Many men move into homosexuality for a season and then move out. Homosexual self-identity is not as fixed as the gay lobby or the Listening group would have us believe. (See: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Study Says Only 1.4% of Population Homosexual.) […]

  4. […] of depression.Don't abuse drugs or alcohol.Take precautions to prevent sexually transmitted disease.(HealthDay News) — College is an exciting time. For many students, it's their first extended stint … Disease Control and Prevention offers these suggestions for staying healthy at college:Get regular […]

Care to Comment?