1. denialism
  2. A Bigot Surgeon General Nomination (part II)

A Bigot Surgeon General Nomination (part II)

By denialism on June 11, 2007.

Last week we discussed the nomination of Dr. James Holsinger to be Surgeon General of the United States, and our concerns considering his anti-gay views.

Now Jim Burroway has done a thorough dissection of Holsinger's attempt to use science to advocate for homophobic policies in his church and it's about as skewed and cherry-picked as something Paul Cameron would advocate.

This is of significant concern as the Surgeon General is supposed to be a science educator, someone who informs the public about medicine and health-related issues. The fact that this nominee has abused science previously to bash homosexuals is a sign this is yet another unqualified nominee being advanced to a scientific position for political reasons. Write your senator, call or send an email. This man should not be Surgeon General of the United States.

Tags
homophobia

More like this

Family Research Council endorses Homobigot Surgeon General
Bible Belt Blogger brings us this excerpt from the Family Research Council's "Dear Praying Friends" letter: Surgeon General Nominee under Fire - Dr. James Holsinger, President Bush's nominee for Surgeon General, has been harshly condemned by pro-homosexual activists for a 1991 paper he wrote for…
Bush's Surgeon General nominee. Holy Shit!
It's not as if the Surgeon General was such an important post. The SG's mission is mainly to educate the public and advise the President. No big deal, really. And in fact the past SGs might as well have been invisible. Hell, they were invisible. No use of the position as a bully pulpit to educate…
Fair and Balanced View of Surgeon General Nominee
Here are ScienceBlogs, we have been href="http://www.scienceblogs.com/sample/fastsearch?order=date&IncludeBlogs=49%2C83%2C3%2C11%2C8%2C55%2C64%2C10%2C87%2C60%2C22%2C80%2C15%2C95%2C78%2C52%2C4%2C48%2C45%2C63%2C14%2C25%2C53%2C50%2C42%2C89%2C5%2C47%2C90%2C71%2C96%2C9%2C62%2C16%2C38%2C67%2C43%…
More on political interference with science
In my reaction to Bora's interview with Senator Edwards, I focussed on the importance of institutional safeguards for government scientists and presidential science advisors. In particular, I cited the way that President Bush misrepresents the scientific support for his stem cell policies from…

What is sad is that this is so normal with this administration that I almost don't even want to think about it. I pretty much assume until proven otherwise that all nominations by this president for all positions are as bad or worse than this one.

I really don't have the energy to protest them all. I think it would be easier to just impeach Bush and then that solves everything in one fell swoop. Too bad that isn't likely, either.

Maybe this nomination can be derailed- I've seen plenty negative things in the media about it, but then I am biased toward less fox-newsy sources.

Sometimes it is just so depressing to realize just how bad our government is right now.

The FRC has given their position on this: They claim that the Holsinger is right, and that anyone who disagrees with his paper is ignoring science because of political correctness. They then turn to some statistics showing that a few diseases are of higher incidence in homosexuals and heterosexuals, and suggest that homosexuality is a threat to public health that only Holsinger is able to admit.

They put it in much longer terms, but thats their general argument.