Any Dudes Wanna Get Married?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
903

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I can’t wait until they do that for alcoholics. I have an uncle who can’t stop drinking and when they change the definition he won’t have to try quitting anymore/ After all every time he tried quitting it really ticked him off.

Miraculous, one stroke of the pen and he’ll be healed![/quote]

That’s just silly. Alcoholism shouldn’t really be classified as a disease.[/quote]

Oh but it is.[/quote]

Yes indeed it is?[/quote]

If those Anglo Saxon puritans ever find out about the average Finnish alcohol intake they would probably invade to rescue you.

904

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I had no idea at the time where sex machine got the info. But I will reiterate, if the facts are true, and they are to the best of my knowledge as they’re backed up by more reputable web sites–WHO CARES?[/quote]

I assume you’re talking about my posts on Greek pederasty. I sourced the material from many different websites over the years. Greek/Macedonian nationalist sites, articles on historical revisionism and Christian sites challenging biblical and historical revisionism. Never been to stormfront in my life. That’s a site I only seem to hear about from the orion for some reason.[/quote]

When the politically correct know that they’re wrong they attack the source (whether it’s the real source or not) and decline to take on the facts as they know they will lose-AGAIN![/quote]

They can’t in this case. EVERY SINGLE source I provided was a contemporary source and they were from the leading orators, philosophers, playwrights and politicians of their day. How can you argue with that?

905

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
An organisation doesn’t have to be ‘morally corrupt’ to present findings that are wrong. They could be just wrong or they could be conducted by people who are ideologically predisposed to expect/want consciously or unconciously certain results. They could be fanatics prepared to deliberately distort results. There’s certainly no abscence of this in mainstream science and academia.[/quote]

So prove the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, National Association of Social Workers, American Counseling Association, American Association of School Administrators, American Federation of Teachers, American School Health Association, National Education Association, and Surgeon General are all “just wrong”, or that every single one of them is “ideologically predisposed to expect/want consciously or unconsciously certain results”.

What’s more likely:

Either every single major health organization is under a confirmatory bias, OR

You and others with an acknowledged aversion to homosexuality are under a confirmatory bias?

I’ll put my money on the scientific organizations dedicated to fostering human health.[/quote]

I’ve already said I’m not disputing the results of the studies you have posted. Whether a gay is gay because of biology/environment/whatever doesn’t interest me.
[/quote]

If you’re not disputing the results, then you’re agreeing with the major health organizations that homosexuality is not a mental illness, that people don’t choose their orientation, that you can’t change your orientation, and that trying to do so can be damaging.
[/quote]

Actually no, that’s ridiculous illigocial bullshit. I don’t agree with those findings at all. I’m inclined to believe they’re largely untrue but I’m not certain and I don’t care. I’ve said that three times now.

906

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
An organisation doesn’t have to be ‘morally corrupt’ to present findings that are wrong. They could be just wrong or they could be conducted by people who are ideologically predisposed to expect/want consciously or unconciously certain results. They could be fanatics prepared to deliberately distort results. There’s certainly no abscence of this in mainstream science and academia.[/quote]

So prove the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, National Association of Social Workers, American Counseling Association, American Association of School Administrators, American Federation of Teachers, American School Health Association, National Education Association, and Surgeon General are all “just wrong”, or that every single one of them is “ideologically predisposed to expect/want consciously or unconsciously certain results”.

What’s more likely:

Either every single major health organization is under a confirmatory bias, OR

You and others with an acknowledged aversion to homosexuality are under a confirmatory bias?

I’ll put my money on the scientific organizations dedicated to fostering human health.[/quote]

This is boring, lets see whether I can make a better argument.

While it may be true that changing your sexual orientation might make the one changing it less healthy, that does not necessarily mean that homosexuality is not a mental disease.

True, it is no longer classified as such, but it was for a long time and definitions of mental disorders are necessarily ideological/political, especially in a climate of state sponsored medicine and research where the definition of what a disease is can have enormous financial implications.

If we look at it without any label attached, the homosexual mind, just like the depressed, bi polar or schizophrenic mind correlates strongly with other diseases, drug use and suicide, which means at the very least that a strong point can be made that homosexuality should be classified as a mental disorder.

[/quote]

If you actually bothered to read the conclusions of the major health organizations, you would see that unanimously they conclude based on 40 years of research that homosexuality is NOT a mental disease, and that any emotional disturbance can be traced to social rejection.

Want to help gays? Encourage them to be who they are, instead of telling them they are mentally ill and pushing them into crackpot reparative programs that double the risk of suicidal thoughts, alcohol abuse, drug abuse, anxiety, and depression.

I wasn’t in great emotional health during my years in the closet. Since coming out, I’m much happier and more integrated as a human being. Imagine what it would be like to grow up being told that you are an abomination and mentally ill. Thankfully, this message is changing as society becomes more educated.
[/quote]

What causes what is really just conjecture, there is no such thing as measurable psychological causality as long as you do not get strictly behaviorist.

Also, maybe schizophrenics or bi polar people have additional problems too, because of how their environment reacts to them.

That does not mean though that their mental attitude is not far outside the norm and that it correlates strongly with other diseases.

The same is true for homosexuality.

Just replace homosexual with bi polar whenever you bring up an argument and see if it makes sense to, it makes for a better presentation no matter on which side you fall on this issue.

So:

Fact: Homosexuality strongly correlates with diseases, drug use and suicide.

Interpretation: entirely up to you, but that is just what it is, an interpretation.

[/quote]

With a strictly correlational study, that is true. But with a controlled pre-post treatment design, you can determine causality. For example, when the incidence of negative outcomes (suicidal thoughts, drug abuse, anxiety, depression, alcohol abuse) doubles following reparative therapy, controlling for other variables, you can reliably conclude that reparative therapy was the cause of this increase in negative outcomes.

907

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
An organisation doesn’t have to be ‘morally corrupt’ to present findings that are wrong. They could be just wrong or they could be conducted by people who are ideologically predisposed to expect/want consciously or unconciously certain results. They could be fanatics prepared to deliberately distort results. There’s certainly no abscence of this in mainstream science and academia.[/quote]

So prove the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, National Association of Social Workers, American Counseling Association, American Association of School Administrators, American Federation of Teachers, American School Health Association, National Education Association, and Surgeon General are all “just wrong”, or that every single one of them is “ideologically predisposed to expect/want consciously or unconsciously certain results”.

What’s more likely:

Either every single major health organization is under a confirmatory bias, OR

You and others with an acknowledged aversion to homosexuality are under a confirmatory bias?

I’ll put my money on the scientific organizations dedicated to fostering human health.[/quote]

I’ve already said I’m not disputing the results of the studies you have posted. Whether a gay is gay because of biology/environment/whatever doesn’t interest me.
[/quote]

If you’re not disputing the results, then you’re agreeing with the major health organizations that homosexuality is not a mental illness, that people don’t choose their orientation, that you can’t change your orientation, and that trying to do so can be damaging.
[/quote]

Actually no, that’s ridiculous illigocial bullshit. I don’t agree with those findings at all. I’m inclined to believe they’re largely untrue but I’m not certain and I don’t care. I’ve said that three times now.[/quote]

So the unanimous conclusions of the major health organizations are correct when it comes to the genetics of sexual orientation.

But the unanimous conclusions of the major health organizations when it comes to the damage from being in a homophobic society, and trying to change your orientation, are ridiculous, illogical bullshit.

Because you say so.

Gotcha.

908

[quote]forlife wrote:
you can reliably conclude that reparative therapy was the cause of this increase in negative outcomes.
[/quote]

Except for the almost 35% of the people who it works for. You don’t have much to say to them do you?

Uh huh…

909

And still no comment on why anxiety, depression and suicide rates are no lower in the Netherlands. A place where gay marriage has been around for 10 plus years. And a place where being homosexual is no big deal.

Would you call this avoidance behavior forlife?

:slight_smile:

910

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
An organisation doesn’t have to be ‘morally corrupt’ to present findings that are wrong. They could be just wrong or they could be conducted by people who are ideologically predisposed to expect/want consciously or unconciously certain results. They could be fanatics prepared to deliberately distort results. There’s certainly no abscence of this in mainstream science and academia.[/quote]

So prove the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, National Association of Social Workers, American Counseling Association, American Association of School Administrators, American Federation of Teachers, American School Health Association, National Education Association, and Surgeon General are all “just wrong”, or that every single one of them is “ideologically predisposed to expect/want consciously or unconsciously certain results”.

What’s more likely:

Either every single major health organization is under a confirmatory bias, OR

You and others with an acknowledged aversion to homosexuality are under a confirmatory bias?

I’ll put my money on the scientific organizations dedicated to fostering human health.[/quote]

I’ve already said I’m not disputing the results of the studies you have posted. Whether a gay is gay because of biology/environment/whatever doesn’t interest me.
[/quote]

If you’re not disputing the results, then you’re agreeing with the major health organizations that homosexuality is not a mental illness, that people don’t choose their orientation, that you can’t change your orientation, and that trying to do so can be damaging.
[/quote]

Actually no, that’s ridiculous illigocial bullshit. I don’t agree with those findings at all. I’m inclined to believe they’re largely untrue but I’m not certain and I don’t care. I’ve said that three times now.[/quote]

So the unanimous conclusions of the major health organizations are correct when it comes to the genetics of sexual orientation.

But the unanimous conclusions of the major health organizations when it comes to the damage from being in a homophobic society, and trying to change your orientation, are ridiculous, illogical bullshit.

Because you say so.

Gotcha.[/quote]

Did I say I say ‘the unanimous conclusions of the major health organisations…are ridiculous, illogical bullshit’ or did I say that your assertion that if I don’t 'disptute the results then (I’m) agreeing with (the results) is ‘ridiculous, illogical bullshit’? Think about it…(are you orion with a second account BTW?)

911

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
An organisation doesn’t have to be ‘morally corrupt’ to present findings that are wrong. They could be just wrong or they could be conducted by people who are ideologically predisposed to expect/want consciously or unconciously certain results. They could be fanatics prepared to deliberately distort results. There’s certainly no abscence of this in mainstream science and academia.[/quote]

So prove the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, National Association of Social Workers, American Counseling Association, American Association of School Administrators, American Federation of Teachers, American School Health Association, National Education Association, and Surgeon General are all “just wrong”, or that every single one of them is “ideologically predisposed to expect/want consciously or unconsciously certain results”.

What’s more likely:

Either every single major health organization is under a confirmatory bias, OR

You and others with an acknowledged aversion to homosexuality are under a confirmatory bias?

I’ll put my money on the scientific organizations dedicated to fostering human health.[/quote]

I’ve already said I’m not disputing the results of the studies you have posted. Whether a gay is gay because of biology/environment/whatever doesn’t interest me.
[/quote]

If you’re not disputing the results, then you’re agreeing with the major health organizations that homosexuality is not a mental illness, that people don’t choose their orientation, that you can’t change your orientation, and that trying to do so can be damaging.
[/quote]

Actually no, that’s ridiculous illigocial bullshit. I don’t agree with those findings at all. I’m inclined to believe they’re largely untrue but I’m not certain and I don’t care. I’ve said that three times now.[/quote]

So the unanimous conclusions of the major health organizations are correct when it comes to the genetics of sexual orientation.

But the unanimous conclusions of the major health organizations when it comes to the damage from being in a homophobic society, and trying to change your orientation, are ridiculous, illogical bullshit.

Because you say so.

Gotcha.[/quote]

Did I say I say ‘the unanimous conclusions of the major health organisations…are ridiculous, illogical bullshit’ or did I say that your assertion that if I don’t 'disptute the results then (I’m) agreeing with (the results) is ‘ridiculous, illogical bullshit’? Think about it…(are you orion with a second account BTW?)[/quote]

Fair enough, I must have misread your earlier post. I’m glad you don’t dispute the conclusions of the major health organizations on homosexuality not being a choice, on the damage caused by homophobic societies, and on the negative outcomes from trying to change your sexual orientation. These health organizations do not consider homosexuality to be a mental illness, and believe gays can live healthy, productive lives by embracing their sexuality. Not only are their conclusions derived from 40 years of scientific research, but my life and the lives of my gay family and friends are proof of that.

912

[quote]forlife wrote:
I’m glad you don’t dispute the conclusions of the major health organizations on homosexuality not being a choice, on the damage caused by homophobic societies, and on the negative outcomes from trying to change your sexual orientation. [/quote]

Yet, you have no answer for why the rates of depression, anxiety and suicide are incredibly high for homosexuals in societies like the Netherlands, where homosexuality is fully accepted.

Therefore, you are full of shit. But then most who have seen your tired act before know this.

You can run from the truth, but it does seem to follow

:slight_smile:

913

[quote]ZEB wrote:
… in societies like the Netherlands, where homosexuality is fully accepted.
[/quote]

I very much doubt that, dutch are very much like danes, easygoing outwards, but exclusive and traditional in their own community. Eph should answer on this how tolerant the dutch are.

914

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
… in societies like the Netherlands, where homosexuality is fully accepted.
[/quote]

I very much doubt that, dutch are very much like danes, easygoing outwards, but exclusive and traditional in their own community. Eph should answer on this how tolerant the dutch are.[/quote]

So, then what you’re saying is that regardless of the fact that homosexuals have been allowed to marry for 10 plus years the attitudes toward gay men are basically the same?

Thanks for clearing that up.

One more fun fact, the number of cases of HIV, STD’s and numerous other physical diseases for gay men have also remained high in the Netherlands. Gay marriage didn’t seem to clear that up either. Is this because gay men are overly promiscuous and no matter where they live on the planet they are going to find as many partners as they can to have sex with? And this in the face of 10 plus years of gay marriage!

Gay men just can’t catch a break can they? I guess there’s more to this problem than allowing gay marriage. I think that homosexuals are actually going to have to take (GASP) responsibility for their actions!

(Oh man that was just mean huh? Asking people to take responsibility—just mean)

915

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
… in societies like the Netherlands, where homosexuality is fully accepted.
[/quote]

I very much doubt that, dutch are very much like danes, easygoing outwards, but exclusive and traditional in their own community. Eph should answer on this how tolerant the dutch are.[/quote]

I would be interested in hearing Eph’s perspective as well.

The Netherlands has made progress by legalizing gay marriage, but they
haven’t yet provided fully equal rights for gays.

[quote]Gays want ‘real’ equal rights
Thursday 31 March 2011

Homosexuals in the Netherlands may be able to marry, they still do not
enjoy all the rights of heterosexual couples, gay organisation COC
chairman Vera Bergkamp writes in a letter to prime minister Mark Rutte
and parliament and reported in the Dutch press.

There are still too many councils where civil servants refuse to
conduct gay marriages, according to Bergkamp. ‘It’s unthinkable that
anyone refusing to marry Jews or people of colour would be protected,’
she writes.

The COC wants the government to introduce a bill that would put an end
to this practice.

Children

The COC also wants the government to give gay couples the same rights
when one of them has a child as heterosexual couples. ‘At the moment,
the other mother has to adopt the child, a long, emotional and
expensive process,’ she writes.

But a heterosexual couple who have a baby using a sperm donor do not
have to go through the same process, she points out.

The third area where the COC wants equality is on family reunions. The
government is planning to restrict reunions to couples who were
married abroad. But most countries do not allow gay couples to marry,
meaning they will miss out, Bergkamp says.

The Netherlands legalised gay marriage on April 1, 2001. Since then,
nearly 15,000 couples have married.[/quote]

As we’ve seen in our own country, support for gay rights has increased
over time, but it is often a case of two steps forward, one step back.
Support increased through 2001, then the resurgence from the religious
right sabotaged that support through 2004. Since then, support has
increased steadily.

Currently, the Netherlands seems to have taken a step back. There have
been increasing reports of hate crimes against gays (as well as rising
anti-semitism and Islamophobia) among Moroccan-Dutch youth, for
example.

http://religionresearch.org/martijn/2010/07/02/anti-semitism-homophobia-and-islamophobia-in-the-netherlands/

Over time, I’m confident that fairness and equality will win out. It
just takes time, as it has taken time to overcome racial prejudice and
misogyny in our country.

916

[quote]forlife wrote:

Over time, I’m confident that fairness and equality will win out. It
just takes time, as it has taken time to overcome racial prejudice and
misogyny in our country.[/quote]

Oh you mean in time the majority of homosexual men will act responsibly? That they’ll actually reamain loyal to one partner? As they’ve done neither yet, with or without gay marriage. Regardless of country or law! The average homosexual male who claims to be in a committed relationship continues to have multiple partners outside that relationship.

The CDC has this to say:

[quote](men who have sex with men) MSM most likely have higher rates of multiple diseases than men who have sex with women (MSW) of the following sexually transmitted diseases (STDs): ; syphilis; HIV/AIDS; various strains of HPV, including types 6,11,16,and 18 (several of these are linked with anogenital warts and anogenital cancer) (2); herpes simplex virus types 2 and 8; hepatitis A and B; and other enteric (bacteria or viruses that can infect the intestines) STDs.

In addition, male-male long-term relationships may not be sexually exclusive, as there are those within the homosexual community who have â??redefinedâ?? monogamy. When using the term â??monogamy,â?? they donâ??t necessarily mean â??sexually monogamous,â?? but they mean â??emotionally monogamous." These men talk about being in a committed relationship, but may have outside sexual partners or bring other partners into the relationship. Dr. Spinelli refers to this in his column. In addition to older reports, recent news stories and studies have discussed men in long-term same-sex relationships with such â??openness."[/quote]

You’re part of a very sad group forlife. In fact, I find it ironic that they are referred to as “gay” Indeed very cruel irony.

917

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
… in societies like the Netherlands, where homosexuality is fully accepted.
[/quote]

I very much doubt that, dutch are very much like danes, easygoing outwards, but exclusive and traditional in their own community. Eph should answer on this how tolerant the dutch are.[/quote]

So, then what you’re saying is that regardless of the fact that homosexuals have been allowed to marry for 10 plus years the attitudes toward gay men are basically the same?

Thanks for clearing that up.
[/quote]

You used the words fully accepted to back up your claims, now why would you do that? Do you yourself believe that homosexuality is now fully accepted in Netherlands?

918

So, let’s talk about the CDC.

While it is true that high risk sexual behaviors are a significant
problem for some gay men in this country (not so much for lesbians),
the conclusions that homophobes draw from this are factually
incorrect, and in fact contribute to the problem. I will
reiterate, because this is important:

Telling people to change their sexual orientation does NOT solve
any of these issues, and in fact makes them WORSE.

The CDC is well aware of these high risk behaviors among a segment of
the gay male population, but their solution is not for men to stop
being gay. It is for gay men to practice safe sex, in an
environment and culture that accepts them for who they are.

For the record, here is what the CDC has to say:

[quote]Homophobia, stigma, and discrimination persist in the United
States and negatively affect the health and well-being of gay,
bisexual, other men who have sex with men (MSM), and other members of
the LGBT community. Homophobia, stigma, and discrimination are social
determinants of health that can affect physical and mental health,
whether MSM seek and are able to obtain health services, and the
quality of the services they receive. Such barriers to health need to
be addressed at different levels of society, such as health care
settings, work places, and schools in order to increase opportunities
for improving the health of MSM.

Homophobia and stigma persist in the United States even though
acceptance of same-sex relationships has been steadily increasing. For
example, a Gallup poll conducted in May 2010 found that more than half
(52%) of Americans believed that gay and lesbian relationships were
acceptable. Forty-three percent of Americans believed that gay and
lesbian relationships are not morally acceptable.

The Effects of Negative Attitudes About Homosexuality
Negative attitudes about homosexuality can lead to rejection by
friends and family, discriminatory acts and violence that harm
specific individuals, and laws and policies that adversely affect the
lives of many people; this can have damaging effects on the health of
MSM and other sexual minorities. Homophobia, stigma and discrimination
can:

  • Limit MSM’s ability to access high quality health care that is
    responsive to health issues of MSM

  • Affect income, employment status, and the ability to get and keep
    health insurance

  • Contribute to poor mental health and unhealthy behaviors, such as
    substance abuse, risky sexual behaviors, and suicide attempts

  • Affect MSM’s ability to establish and maintain long-term same-sex
    relationships that reduce HIV & STD risk

  • Make it difficult for some MSM to be open about same-sex behaviors
    with others, which can increase stress, limit social support, and
    negatively affect health

The effects of homophobia, stigma and discrimination can be especially
hard on adolescents and young adults. Young MSM and other sexual
minorities are at increased risk of being bullied in school. They are
also at risk of being rejected by their families and, as a result, are
at increased risk of homelessness. A study published in 2009 compared
gay, lesbian, and bisexual young adults who experienced strong
rejection from their families with their peers who had more supportive
families. The researchers found that those who experienced stronger
rejection were:

  • 8.4 times more likely to have tried to commit suicide

  • 5.9 times more likely to report high levels of depression

  • 3.4 times more likely to use illegal drugs

  • 3.4 times more likely to have risky sex

Reducing the Effects of Stigma and Discrimination
MSM and their family and friends can take steps to reduce the effects
of homophobia, stigma and discrimination and protect their physical
and mental health. One way to cope with the stress from stigma and
discrimination is social support. Some studies show that gay men who
have good social support - from family, friends, and the wider gay
community - have:

  • higher self-esteem,

  • a more positive group identity, and

  • more positive mental health.

Whether you are gay or straight, you can help reduce homophobia,
stigma and discrimination in your community and decrease the negative
health effects. Even small things can make a difference, such as
supporting a family member, friend, co-worker.[/quote]

919

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
… in societies like the Netherlands, where homosexuality is fully accepted.
[/quote]

I very much doubt that, dutch are very much like danes, easygoing outwards, but exclusive and traditional in their own community. Eph should answer on this how tolerant the dutch are.[/quote]

So, then what you’re saying is that regardless of the fact that homosexuals have been allowed to marry for 10 plus years the attitudes toward gay men are basically the same?

Thanks for clearing that up.
[/quote]

You used the words fully accepted to back up your claims, now why would you do that? Do you yourself believe that homosexuality is now fully accepted in Netherlands? [/quote]

The people in the Netherlands are much more accepting of homosexuality than they are in the US. They prove this with 10 years of gay marriage. Therefore, it stands to reason that disease rates and mental problems in the gay community should be lower - BUT they’re not.

Now why do you suppose that is?

920

[quote]forlife wrote:
So, let’s talk about the CDC.

While it is true that high risk sexual behaviors are a significant
problem for some gay men in this country (not so much for lesbians)[/quote]

Not so fast lesbians have their own problems. Not the least of which is domestic abuse. But there are far more than that.

Ah there you go with the name calling. It’s about time. I knew you couldn’t resist marking all of your detractors with the title “homophobe” we must be after all we are pro traditional marriage therefore we are “afraid” of homosexuals. And if I don’t like to eat my broccoli I am afraid of it right? You idiot!

[[quote]Telling people to change their sexual orientation does NOT solve
any of these issues, and in fact makes them WORSE.[/quote]

Wrong, as I have pointed out about 33% of those who seek reparative therapy actually do change. You don’t hear about this in the main stream liberal media but it is a fact and I’ve verified it right here many times. You don’t like that fact because YOU tried to change and failed. But others tried and succeeded. They are now living normal lives, many are married with children…the way you were…at one point. What would you say to those men forlife? That they have not changed? That they are not enjoying sex with their wives? That they do not have children? That they are all liars?

[quote]The CDC is well aware of these high risk behaviors among a segment of
the gay male population, but their solution is not for men to stop
being gay. It is for gay men to [b]practice safe sex, in an
environment and culture that accepts them for who they are[/quote]

Yes, that’s always been the plan since…um the last 50 years or so. Now tell us all forlife, how has that worked out? Are gay men more responsible now? NO! In fact, they are far less responsible even though 10’s of millions of dollars has been spent on “education”. Your people still have reckless sex with no regard for their partner, or themselves. Always out for the short term thrill caring not at all that they’re spreading disease at a more rapid rate than any other single group in the United States!

They first need a moral base which is sadly missing. Now where is that moral base that tells them right from wrong? Hmmmm…

Care to answer that one forlife or will you run?

921

More Facts On Homosexuality From The CDC

[quote]HIV and AIDS Diagnoses3 and Deaths
A recent CDC study found that in 2008 one in five (19%) MSM in 21 major US cities were infected with HIV, and nearly half (44%) were unaware of their infection.

In this study, 28% of black MSM were HIV-infected, compared to 18% of Hispanic/Latino MSM and 16% of white MSM. Other racial/ethnic groups of MSM also have high numbers of HIV infections, including American Indian/Alaska Native MSM (20%) and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander MSM (18%).

In 2007, MSM were 44 to 86 times as likely to be diagnosed with HIV compared with other men, and 40 to 77 times as likely as women.

From 2005â??2008, estimated diagnoses of HIV infection increased approximately 17% among MSM. This increase was likely due to a combination of factors: increases in new infections, increased testing, and diagnosis earlier in the course of infection; it may also have been due to uncertainty in statistical models.

In 2008, an estimated 17,940 MSM were diagnosed with AIDS in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the US dependent areasâ??an increase of 6% since 2005.

By the end of 2007, an estimated 282,542 MSM with an AIDS diagnosis had died in the United States and 5 dependent areas.

Why should MSM be concerned about syphilis?
Over the past several years, increases in syphilis among MSM have been reported in various cities and areas, including Chicago, Seattle, San Francisco, Southern California, Miami, and New York City. In the recent outbreaks, high rates of HIV co-infection were documented, ranging from 20 percent to 70 percent. While the health problems caused by syphilis in adults are serious in their own right, it is now known that the genital sores caused by syphilis in adults also make it easier to transmit and acquire HIV infection sexually.[/quote]

The fact is homosexual men lead the way in every sexually transmitted disease! In fact, if there were no homosexual men AIDS would practically be wiped out! And in addition (gay men) lead the way in every psychological disturbance as well!

Very sad indeed!

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm

922

[quote]ZEB wrote:
The people in the Netherlands are much more accepting of homosexuality than they are in the US. They prove this with 10 years of gay marriage. Therefore, it stands to reason that disease rates and mental problems in the gay community should be lower - BUT they’re not.

Now why do you suppose that is?[/quote]

That gay marriage is legal says were little about acceptance, only that the dutch have a practical way of thinking, which they have demonstrated several times.

I have no clearcut opinion on that, there are too many variables, it could be the reasons you point out, that gays just are morally corrupt and mentally unstable, or it could be something else. Since we are talking about statistics the reasons can’t be deduced, only extrapolated. But if I say the reason is that gays just are morally corrupt and mentally unstable, I’m not sure I have explained much anything yet.