[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
harris447 wrote:
…Kind of like the relationship my Great-Uncle Tommy had with his companion, Patrick. They were together for over 50 years.
…
Did Uncle Tommy tell you it was a pack of lifesavers in his pocket when you sat on his lap? (j/k)[/quote]
LOL - thanks for bring a little humor to the mix, Zap.
[quote]Lonnie123 wrote:
fatsensei wrote:
Ahhh liberals. This is probably a poor attitude but I really hope that on judgement day when you are trying to explain to God why being a homosexual is ok that I can be there. It’ll be a hoot.
FatSensei
Well God, You make all people in your image, and some people come out gay (or become gay, if you will). I’m not saying you are gay God, but perhaps you are tolerant of gay people because afterall, you did make them.
Furthermore God, you are an all loving being. I don’t recall ever hearing that you are “A being that loves all straight people.”, but maybe that got lost in the english translation of the bible.
I don’t understand this mentality that gay people are “wrong”. I’ll concede that it is abnormal, by definition, to be gay… but I’ll never declare that its wrong. What about straight people engaging in anal sex? Do they go to hell, I mean surely you can’t bear a child that way, heathens.
Liberate your minds people, does everything need to be spoon fed to you to form your opinion?[/quote]
Thanx for pointing that out, Lonnie. I always love the bible-thumping, I-speak-for-God types who don’t realize that ANY non-procreating sex is considered sodomy by bibilical definitions.
This means that if you want to practice what you preach, you need to give up blow-jobs from your girlfriend or wife.
Scott
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Professor:
I’m not sure but next to the gay epidemic (higher suicide rate, more STD’s, higher rate of AIDS, higher depresion and anxiety etc.) I wouldn’t call that too bad.
[/quote]
The “gay epidemic”? What the hell is the gay epidemic? Has there been a sudden surge in homosexuality?
Someone please post a link to this “gay epidemic”!
[quote]simon-hecubus wrote:
Lonnie123 wrote:
fatsensei wrote:
Ahhh liberals. This is probably a poor attitude but I really hope that on judgement day when you are trying to explain to God why being a homosexual is ok that I can be there. It’ll be a hoot.
FatSensei
Well God, You make all people in your image, and some people come out gay (or become gay, if you will). I’m not saying you are gay God, but perhaps you are tolerant of gay people because afterall, you did make them.
Furthermore God, you are an all loving being. I don’t recall ever hearing that you are “A being that loves all straight people.”, but maybe that got lost in the english translation of the bible.
I don’t understand this mentality that gay people are “wrong”. I’ll concede that it is abnormal, by definition, to be gay… but I’ll never declare that its wrong. What about straight people engaging in anal sex? Do they go to hell, I mean surely you can’t bear a child that way, heathens.
Liberate your minds people, does everything need to be spoon fed to you to form your opinion?
Thanx for pointing that out, Lonnie. I always love the bible-thumping, I-speak-for-God types who don’t realize that ANY non-procreating sex is considered sodomy by bibilical definitions.
This means that if you want to practice what you preach, you need to give up blow-jobs from your girlfriend or wife.
Scott[/quote]
Scott, you need to read your bible closer Bro. The bible defines sexual immorality as guys having sex with guys; women with woman; adultery; fornication; and incest. Nothing is mentioned about what a man does with his spouse.
One of the most interesting things that t-ivan and ZEB and lorisco go on about is how gay marriage will inspire others to try homosexuality. I have a question: would you? Would any of you guys run out and try gay sex just because it was legal for gays to marry?
You’d think with the ban on sodomy laws (remember lawrence v Texas, lorisco?) tons of people would have started trying gay sex. I mean, doesn’t the Supreme Court saying sodomy laws are unconstitutional seem to suggest gay sex is okay?
ZEB’s stats don’t prove anything at all about gay people, except for the ones in the sample. Did you know that the stats about queer alcoholism he likes to post are from a study that was conducted in a bar? Wonder if that could have caused a sample bias. Did you also know that the people in Spitzer’s study were all recruited from places like NARTH and other ex-gay organizations? I wonder if that could be some sample bias.
I wonder if harris’ great uncle Tommy and his partner wanted children? It may come as a surprise to ivan, lorisco and even ZEB but not everyone wants kids. I have a number of straight friends who are not interested in raising kids. Those of us queers who are interested can adopt, whether we can marry or not and we can also make babies. See, being gay means you like people of the same sex as you, not that your ovaries or spermies don’t work.
[quote]Well Harris, based on current statistics, your Uncle seems to be a rare case. The most recent numbers I read were that Gays have the least stable (monogamous) relationships and that they average more than 1 sexual partners every three months (62% of gays poled), (See AIDS Behav. 2005 Dec 3;:1-11).
[/quote]
“62% of gays poled” This is hilarious. Props to anyone who knows why.
Here’s a fun article: http://admin.urel.washington.edu/uweek/archives/issue/uweek_story_small.asp?id=1407
Here’s another from lorisco’s favorite journal: http://www.haverford.edu/psych/ble/teaching/psy325/readings/nonhetero/haas&stafford.pdf
Another: Taylor & Francis - Harnessing the Power of Knowledge
Yet another: http://www.glma.org/programs/lhf/reports/RothblumE_Lesbians_Sisters.pdf
ullo: http://allpsych.com/journal/homosexuality.html
Just for fun: http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/oldergay.html
I suppose that’s enough for now.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
harris447 wrote:
yeh, us liberals: the people arguing that gays are immoral and shoule be changed back into proper, god-fearing christians.
Pot, this is the kettle: you’re black.
Do you honestly think that you are showing love by closing out any possible opportunity for those who do want to change?
Screaming at the top of their collective lungs liberals say “THEY ARE BORN THAT WAY.”
How does this help the large percentage of those with same sex attraction who are not happy?
[/quote]
The only gays who “want to change” are the ones who have been made to feel like they are less than human by people like you.
[quote]harris447 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
harris447 wrote:
yeh, us liberals: the people arguing that gays are immoral and shoule be changed back into proper, god-fearing christians.
Pot, this is the kettle: you’re black.
Do you honestly think that you are showing love by closing out any possible opportunity for those who do want to change?
Screaming at the top of their collective lungs liberals say “THEY ARE BORN THAT WAY.”
How does this help the large percentage of those with same sex attraction who are not happy?
The only gays who “want to change” are the ones who have been made to feel like they are less than human by people like you.
[/quote]
Sure that is why many gays are trying and committing suicide. Because Zeb told them too!
Give me a break!
[quote]WMD wrote:
One of the most interesting things that t-ivan and ZEB and lorisco go on about is how gay marriage will inspire others to try homosexuality. I have a question: would you? Would any of you guys run out and try gay sex just because it was legal for gays to marry?
[/quote]
I have never stated that.
Then explain why there are more gay people now than before? Are they having babies some new biological way no one knows about? No, it’s more accepted to be gay, so more kids who are going through the normal sexual identity stuff are told that it is ok to be gay. So they wake up one day and say, hey, I guess I’m gay. Just like Anne Heash (don’t know how her name is spelled). One days she is gay going out with Ellen Degenerate and the next she is hetero going out with some guy.
Unfortunately, the supreme courts decision does indicate a government support of any kind of sexual debasement you can come up with. It is a sad state for sure. But, they are being hypocrites as they need to also let drug addicts use drugs now as well, because that is unconstitutional (apparently) to let them be with their debasement as well.
I’m sure any statistics that don’t agree with your opinion are biased. Sure! Riiiight!
Sorry babe, can’t make a baby without an man. Doesn’t matter where you get the sperm, you still needed a man to do it. Now doesn’t that just irritate you. When it comes down to it you still need a man. So babe, the answer is no, you can’t make babies unless you have help. And to answer your other question, no, I will not be a donor for you!
[quote]WMD wrote:
One of the most interesting things that t-ivan and ZEB and lorisco go on about is how gay marriage will inspire others to try homosexuality. I have a question: would you? Would any of you guys run out and try gay sex just because it was legal for gays to marry?[/quote]
Not me but then again I’m not a young impressionable kid either. Kids are more likely to try smoking, drinking, drugs and if it was accepted by society who knows what else?
Did you know that good pollsters like Zogby can tell you who the next President will be by sampling under 1000 people?
Are you denying that gays statistically have higher suicide, AIDS, STD’s and a host of other physical and emotional problems above and beyond the population. Because if you are denying that you are going to be badly embarassed!
Want to talk about suspect links? Your first one is from a Professor from the University of Berkeley! (I’m choking up with laughter right now…and I thank you 
Your next one is from the University of Vermont…(rolling on floor laughing now).
And your final one is from the University of Webster. (more laughter more fun).
Okay since you asked for it again I will give you some serious adult statistics from credible sources like Johns Hopkins, the Center for Disease Control. And even some surveys by your very own gay and lesbian magazines.
All well known statistics-
"Risky Sexual Behavior on the Rise Among Homosexuals. Despite two decades of intensive efforts to educate homosexuals against the dangers of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) and other stds, the incidence of unsafe sexual practices that often result in various diseases is on the rise.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), from 1994 to 1997 the proportion of homosexuals reporting having had anal sex increased from 57.6 percent to 61.2 percent, while the percentage of those reporting “always” using condoms declined from 69.6 percent to 60 percent.[2]
The CDC reported that during the same period the proportion of men reporting having multiple sex partners and unprotected anal sex increased from 23.6 percent to 33.3 percent. The largest increase in this category (from 22 percent to 33.3 percent) was reported by homosexuals twenty-five years old or younger.[3]
Homosexuals Failing to Disclose Their HIV Status to Sex Partners
?A study presented July 13, 2000 at the XIII International aids Conference in Durban, South Africa disclosed that a significant number of homosexual and bisexual men with hiv “continue to engage in unprotected sex with people who have no idea they could be contracting HIV.”[4] Researchers from the University of California, San Francisco found that thirty-six percent of homosexuals engaging in unprotected oral, anal, or vaginal sex failed to disclose that they were HIV positive to casual sex partners.[5]
A CDC report revealed that, in 1997, 45 percent of homosexuals reporting having had unprotected anal intercourse during the previous six months did not know the HIV serostatus of all their sex partners. Even more alarming, among those who reported having had unprotected anal intercourse and multiple partners, 68 percent did not know the HIV serostatus of their partners.[6]
Young Homosexuals are at Increased Risk. Following in the footsteps of the generation of homosexuals decimated by AIDS, younger homosexuals are engaging in dangerous sexual practices at an alarming rate.
A Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health study of three-hundred-sixty-one young men who have sex with men (MSM) aged fifteen to twenty-two found that around 40 percent of participants reported having had anal-insertive sex, and around 30 percent said they had had anal-receptive sex. Thirty-seven percent said they had not used a condom for anal sex during their last same-sex encounter. Twenty-one percent of the respondents reported using drugs or alcohol during their last same-sex encounter.[7]
A five-year CDC study of 3,492 homosexual males aged fifteen to twenty-two found that one-quarter had unprotected sex with both men and women. Another cdc study of 1,942 homosexual and bisexual men with HIV found that 19 percent had at least one episode of unprotected anal sex–the riskiest sexual behavior–in 1998 and 1997, a 50 percent increase from the previous two years.[8]
Homosexual Promiscuity. Studies indicate that the average male homosexual has hundreds of sex partners in his lifetime:
?A.P. Bell and M.S. Weinberg, in their classic study of male and female homosexuality, found that 43 percent of white male homosexuals had sex with 500 or more partners, with 28 percent having 1,000 or more sex partners.[9]
In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al., found that only 2.7 percent claimed to have had sex with one partner only. The most common response, given by 21.6 percent of the respondents, was of having a hundred-one to five hundred lifetime sex partners.[10]
?A survey conducted by the homosexual magazine Genre found that 24 percent of the respondents said they had had more than a hundred sexual partners in their lifetime. The magazine noted that several respondents suggested including a category of those who had more than a thousand sexual partners.[11]
In his study of male homosexuality in Western Sexuality: Practice and Precept in Past and Present Times, M. Pollak found that “few homosexual relationships last longer than two years, with many men reporting hundreds of lifetime partners.”[12]
Promiscuity among Homosexual Couples. Even in those homosexual relationships in which the partners consider themselves to be in a committed relationship, the meaning of “committed” typically means something radically different from marriage."
BUT WAIT THERE’S MORE!
Let’s talk about those homosexuals who were not happy in that very disturbing lifestyle and wanted to change:
"Dr. Robert Spitzer (2001)
Dr Spitzer is a psychiatry professor at Columbia University. He conducted a study of 143 ex-gays and 57 ex-lesbians who reported that they have become “straight.” 2 He reported his findings at a meeting of the American Psychiatric Association on 2001-MAY-9. He concluded, as a result of 45 minute interviews with each subject, that 66% of the males and 44% of the females had arrived at "good heterosexual functioning.
According to Cnn.com, that term is defined as having been "in a sustained, loving heterosexual relationship within the past year, getting enough satisfaction from the emotional relationship with their partner to rate at least seven on a 10-point scale, having satisfying heterosexual sex at least monthly and never or rarely thinking of somebody of the same sex during heterosexual sex.
Lest you think that Doctor Spitzer is the only one who has had success read on:
Bieber, I., et al. (1962) Homosexuality: A Psychoanalytic Study of Male Homosexuals. NY: Basic Books.
?The therapeutic results of our study provide reason for an optimistic outlook. Many homosexuals became exclusively heterosexual in psychoanalytic treatment. Although this change may be more easily accomplished by some than by others, in our judgment a heterosexual shift is a possibility for all homosexuals who are strongly motivated to change.? (p. 319)
Bieber, I., Bieber, T. (1979) Male homosexuality. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. 24, 5:409-421.
?We have followed some patients for as long as 20 years who have remained exclusively heterosexual. Reversal estimates now range from 30% to an optimistic 50%.? (p.416)
Cappon, D., (1965) Toward an Understanding of Homosexuality. Englewoord Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Of patients with bisexual problems 90% were cured (i.e., no reversions to homosexual behavior, no consciousness of homosexual desire and fantasy) in males who terminated treatment by common consent. Male homosexual patients: 80% showed marked improvement (i.e., occasional relapses, release of aggression, increasingly dominant heterosexuality)? 50% changed.? (p. 265-268)
Clippinger, J., (1974) Homosexuality can be cured. Corrective and Social Psychiatry and Journal of Behavior Technology Methods and Therapy. 21, 2:15-28.
?Of 785 patients treated, 307, or approximately 38%, were cured. Adding the percentage figures of the two other studies, we can say that at least 40% of the homosexuals were cured, and an additional 10 to 30% of the homosexuals were improved, depending on the particular study for which statistics were available.? (p. 22)
Fine, R., (1987) Psychoanalytic theory. (in Diamant L. Male and Female Homosexuality: Psychological Approaches. Washington: Hemisphere Publishing.) 81-95.
??a considerable percentage of overt homosexuals became heterosexual? If patients were motivated, whatever procedure is adopted a large percentage will give up their homosexuality? The misinformation that homosexuality is untreatable by psychotherapy does incalculable harm to thousands of men and women?? (p. 85-86)
James, Elizabeth (1978) Treatment of Homosexuality: A Reanalysis and Synthesis of Outcome Studies (unpublished PhD dissertation, Brigham Young University, on file with Brigham Young University Library).
Elizabeth James meta-analyzed over 100 outcome studies published between 1930 and 1976, and concluded that when all the research was combines, 35% of homosexual clients “recovered” and 27% improved.
Kronemeyer, R. (1980) Overcoming Homosexuality. NY: Macmillian
?For those homosexuals who are unhappy with their life and find effective therapy it is ?curable?.? (p.7)
MacIntosh, H. (1995) Attitudes and Experiences of Psychoanalysts in Analyzing Homosexual Patients. Journal of the American Psychiatric Association 1183.
422 psychiatrists were asked if they had successfully treated homosexuals, and did they agree that a homosexual can be changed to heterosexual. Of the 285 responses, which involved 1,215 homosexuals, the survey stated that 23% changed to heterosexuality. 84% benefited significantly by reducing their attraction to other members of the same gender, with a decrease in homosexual activity.
Marmor, J. (1975) Homosexuality and Sexual Orientation Disturbances. (In Freedman, A., Kaplan, H., Sadock, B. Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry: II, Second Edition. Baltimore MD: Williams & Wilkins)
?This conviction of untreatability also serves an ego-defensive purpose for many homosexuals. ?however, there has evolved a greater therapeutic optimism about the possibilities for change? There is little doubt that a genuine shift in preferential sex object choice can and does take place in somewhere between 20 and 50 per cent of patients with homosexual behavior who seek psychotherapy with this end in mind.? (p. 1519)
Nicolosi, J., Byrd, A., Potts, R. (1998) Towards the Ethical and Effective Treatment of Homosexuality. Encino CA: NARTH.
Nicolosi surveyed 850 individuals and 200 therapists and counselors ? specifically seeking out individuals who claim to have made a degree of change in sexual orientation. Before counseling or therapy, 68% of respondents perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, with another 22% stating they were more homosexual than heterosexual. After treatment only 13% perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entire homosexuality, while 33% described themselves as either exclusively or almost entirely heterosexual, 99% of respondents said they now believe treatment to change homosexuality can be effective and valuable.
Pattison, E.M., Pattison, M.L. (1980, December) ?Ex-Gays?: Religiously Mediated Change in Homosexuals. American Journal of Psychiatry. 137 (12): 1553-1562.
Authors evaluated 11 white men who claimed to have changed sexual orientation from exclusive homosexuality to exclusive heterosexuality. Corollary evidence suggests that the phenomenon of substantiated change in sexual orientation without explicit treatment and/or long-term psychotherapy may be much more common than previously thought.
Rekers, J. (1988) The formation of homosexual orientation. (In Fagan, P. Hope for Homosexuality. Washington DC: Free Congress Foundation.)
?With major research grants from the National Institute of Mental Health, I have experimentally demonstrated an affective treatment for ‘gender identity disorder of childhood’, which appears to hold potential for preventing homosexual orientation in males.?
Schwartz, M.F., Masters, W.H. (1984, February). The Masters and Johnson treatment program for dissatisfied homosexual men. American Journal of Psychiatry. 141 (2): 173-181.
?Certain individuals who want to change their homosexual preference can be helped by a short-term intensive intervention. The failure rate in helping dissatisfied homosexuals establish heterosexual lifestyles after the intensive phase of the intervention was 20.9%, and after 5 years? follow-up it was 28.4%.
Throckmorton, W. (1996) Efforts to modify sexual orientation: A review of outcome literature and ethical issues. Journal of Mental Health and Counseling. 20, 4: 283-305.
?I submit that the case against conversion therapy requires opponents to demonstrate that no patients have benefited from such procedures or that any benefits are too costly in some objective way to be pursued even if they work. The available evidence supports the observation of many counselors ? that many individuals with same-gender sexual orientation have been able to change through a variety of counseling approaches.? (p. 287)
West, D. (1977) Homosexuality Re-examined. London Duckworth
Behavioral techniques have the best document success (never less than 30%); psychoanalysis claims a great deal of success (the average rate seemed to be about 5%, but 50% of the bisexuals achieved exclusive heterosexuality.)
Zucker, K., Bradley, S. (1995) Gender Identity Disorder and Psychosexual Problems in Children and Adolescents. NY: Guilford. ??we feel that parental tolerance of cross-gender behavior at the time of its emergence is instrumental in allowing the behavior to develop?? (p. 259)
??In general we concur with those (e.g. Green 1972; Newman 1976; Stoller, 1978) who believe that the earlier treatment begins, the better.? (p. 281) ?It has been our experience that a sizable number of children and their families can achieve a great deal of change. In these cases, the gender identity disorder resolves fully, and nothing in the children?s behavior or fantasy suggests that gender identity issues remain problematic? All things considered, however, we take the position that in such cases clinicians should be optimistic, not nihilistic, about the possibility of helping the children to become more secure in their gender identity.? (p. 282)
WMD I’ll give you credit for being a fighter, but that’s where the credit ends. You should not try to take on this topic relative to mental or physical health statistics-IT’S A LOSER FOR YOU!
But then again you are on the wrong side of the entire gay marriage debate…
[quote]I suppose that’s enough for now.
[/quote]
IT SURE IS!
[quote]harris447 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
harris447 wrote:
yeh, us liberals: the people arguing that gays are immoral and shoule be changed back into proper, god-fearing christians.
Pot, this is the kettle: you’re black.
Do you honestly think that you are showing love by closing out any possible opportunity for those who do want to change?
Screaming at the top of their collective lungs liberals say “THEY ARE BORN THAT WAY.”
How does this help the large percentage of those with same sex attraction who are not happy?
The only gays who “want to change” are the ones who have been made to feel like they are less than human by people like you.
[/quote]
Or, they are not all that happy with a lifestyle that is causing them a ton of emotional and physcial pain.
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Scott, you need to read your bible closer Bro. The bible defines sexual immorality as guys having sex with guys; women with woman; adultery; fornication; and incest. Nothing is mentioned about what a man does with his spouse. [/quote]
Adultery? As in any sex outside of marriage?
[quote]simon-hecubus wrote:
Lonnie123 wrote:
fatsensei wrote:
Ahhh liberals. This is probably a poor attitude but I really hope that on judgement day when you are trying to explain to God why being a homosexual is ok that I can be there. It’ll be a hoot.
FatSensei
Well God, You make all people in your image, and some people come out gay (or become gay, if you will). I’m not saying you are gay God, but perhaps you are tolerant of gay people because afterall, you did make them.
Furthermore God, you are an all loving being. I don’t recall ever hearing that you are “A being that loves all straight people.”, but maybe that got lost in the english translation of the bible.
I don’t understand this mentality that gay people are “wrong”. I’ll concede that it is abnormal, by definition, to be gay… but I’ll never declare that its wrong. What about straight people engaging in anal sex? Do they go to hell, I mean surely you can’t bear a child that way, heathens.
Liberate your minds people, does everything need to be spoon fed to you to form your opinion?
Thanx for pointing that out, Lonnie. I always love the bible-thumping, I-speak-for-God types who don’t realize that ANY non-procreating sex is considered sodomy by bibilical definitions.
This means that if you want to practice what you preach, you need to give up blow-jobs from your girlfriend or wife.
Scott[/quote]
I don’t think anyone here is claiming to speak for God. God did a pretty good job speaking for Himself when he directed the writing of the bible.
I’ll just chalk this up to more liberal “I don’t know what I’m talking about so I’ll make it up as I go along” jargon.
Jeeeezzzze - more people pretending to know what the bible says when they haven’t even read it.
Zeb,
I cant find the old post this thread is insanely long.
Im just wondering why when given other lifestyle habits that cause higher mortality, disease and lower quality of life you seek to address the underlieing problems rather than just not let them marry…
Why is it that you dont do the same for gays?
ie with rural areas, you want to address the underlieing issues… If we were to use the same logic you would not allow rural people to marry… but you rightly so justified a reason to allow them to…
with homosexuality though, you dont want to address that, you dont want to teach safe sex practices, you dont want to address public perception and acceptance so that they arent depressed as much…
do you have any data showing that people that are gay that dont live with the people that they love and stay in the closet are any happier or healthier than those that are practicing gays?
It seems that your stance here (with respect to this aspect only) is founded upon your general belief that homosexuality is wrong, rather than it being part of the reason…
to those that think that homosexuality is something that you just do to be cool or whatever…
How much would you need to be paid to let someone analy penetrate you… to have sex with you?
Id dont think there is enough money in the world… I just wouldnt do it…
I cant fathom someone doing it to be cool… all that i can say is that that someoen who does that is very very very different to me…
How much would you need to be paid to do it once?
What about to spend the rest of your life living with a member of the same sex regurarly having homosexual sex…
to me i just can not fathom it…
I just cant see social influences playing as big a role as you guys are making out…
[quote]Chris Aus wrote:
Zeb,
I cant find the old post this thread is insanely long.
Im just wondering why when given other lifestyle habits that cause higher mortality, disease and lower quality of life you seek to address the underlieing problems rather than just not let them marry…
Why is it that you dont do the same for gays?
ie with rural areas, you want to address the underlieing issues… If we were to use the same logic you would not allow rural people to marry… but you rightly so justified a reason to allow them to…
with homosexuality though, you dont want to address that, you dont want to teach safe sex practices, you dont want to address public perception and acceptance so that they arent depressed as much…
do you have any data showing that people that are gay that dont live with the people that they love and stay in the closet are any happier or healthier than those that are practicing gays?
It seems that your stance here (with respect to this aspect only) is founded upon your general belief that homosexuality is wrong, rather than it being part of the reason…
[/quote]
Chris,
Your assumption here is that being born in a rural area is the same as being gay. It is not. Your entire analogy is flawed right from the start. Here is why:
We have absolute proof that a person is born in a place where he is born. The person born in a rural area has not control over the area he/she is born in.
We have no proof that a person is born gay. In fact, there is a good deal of support for the notion that gays are not born gay, but that they become gay through environmental conditions (gay friends, molestation as a child, acceptance of social norms).
Just from reading the things that you wrote, it sounds to me like your position stems from a bias toward gay marriage…
[quote]Chris Aus wrote:
to those that think that homosexuality is something that you just do to be cool or whatever…
How much would you need to be paid to let someone analy penetrate you… to have sex with you?
Id dont think there is enough money in the world… I just wouldnt do it…
I cant fathom someone doing it to be cool… all that i can say is that that someoen who does that is very very very different to me…
How much would you need to be paid to do it once?
What about to spend the rest of your life living with a member of the same sex regurarly having homosexual sex…
to me i just can not fathom it…
I just cant see social influences playing as big a role as you guys are making out…[/quote]
How old are you Chris? Are you a young child? Growing up in a home with two daddies? Or two mommies? Just curious…
And, thanks for pointing out how strange and gross the act really is.
[quote]terribleivan wrote:
Chris Aus wrote:
Zeb,
I cant find the old post this thread is insanely long.
Im just wondering why when given other lifestyle habits that cause higher mortality, disease and lower quality of life you seek to address the underlieing problems rather than just not let them marry…
Why is it that you dont do the same for gays?
ie with rural areas, you want to address the underlieing issues… If we were to use the same logic you would not allow rural people to marry… but you rightly so justified a reason to allow them to…
with homosexuality though, you dont want to address that, you dont want to teach safe sex practices, you dont want to address public perception and acceptance so that they arent depressed as much…
do you have any data showing that people that are gay that dont live with the people that they love and stay in the closet are any happier or healthier than those that are practicing gays?
It seems that your stance here (with respect to this aspect only) is founded upon your general belief that homosexuality is wrong, rather than it being part of the reason…
Chris,
Your assumption here is that being born in a rural area is the same as being gay. It is not. Your entire analogy is flawed right from the start. Here is why:
We have absolute proof that a person is born in a place where he is born. The person born in a rural area has not control over the area he/she is born in.
We have no proof that a person is born gay. In fact, there is a good deal of support for the notion that gays are not born gay, but that they become gay through environmental conditions (gay friends, molestation as a child, acceptance of social norms).
Just from reading the things that you wrote, it sounds to me like your position stems from a bias toward gay marriage…[/quote]
are you serious?
I wasnt assuming that at all…
The statements have been that people who are gay shouldnt be able to marry because of a whole host of statistics relating to a lower quality of life…
When it was brought up that several minorities have similar health outcomes it was argued that those are not behaviours… Where you live is a behaviour… You get a choice…
someone cant move out of rural areas when they are 21? they are contracted to live there their whole lives…?
[quote]terribleivan wrote:
Chris Aus wrote:
to those that think that homosexuality is something that you just do to be cool or whatever…
How much would you need to be paid to let someone analy penetrate you… to have sex with you?
Id dont think there is enough money in the world… I just wouldnt do it…
I cant fathom someone doing it to be cool… all that i can say is that that someoen who does that is very very very different to me…
How much would you need to be paid to do it once?
What about to spend the rest of your life living with a member of the same sex regurarly having homosexual sex…
to me i just can not fathom it…
I just cant see social influences playing as big a role as you guys are making out…
How old are you Chris? Are you a young child? Growing up in a home with two daddies? Or two mommies? Just curious…
And, thanks for pointing out how strange and gross the act really is. [/quote]
We can all be smart arses…
How old are you? Do you have repressed homosexual tendencies?
I’m old enough, thanks…
I may not have articulated it well, but seriously to me its unfathomable to think that someone would be gay to fit societal pressures, or to be in fashion… especially when societal pressures push more in the fitting in with the straight community…
It’s not scientific but I’d bet that most straight men would agree with me…
its also no less scientific then a lot of what has been said so far
Since everyone around here likes personal stories so much, I’ve got one for you -
In the city I live there is a park. It’s a real nice park. It’s got slides and sand, fields and a bike path. And, it’s got a nice large forestry. It looks like the kind of place a family would take the kids for a relaxing afternoon. But, it’s not.
You see, this park has been overrun by homosexuals. It’s been going on for over 20 years, and it’s only getting worse. It used to be, that the gays would wait till night to do what they do at the park. But those days are gone. Now, they’ll do it in broad daylight.
Oh. You’re wondering what they do? I’ll tell you. They cruise the park looking for other gays. They make eyecontact. And then, they take a walk into the woods. Does that sound too bizzare to be true? Well, it is true.
A local newscrew decided to do a story on it a couple of months ago. In broad daylight they took a walk through the woods. And do you know what they found? Men with men! The men scattered like cockroaches, and left behind soiled pillows and lubricants. If memory serves me correctly, on one random day, in broad daylight, the crew found 3 groups of gay men doing what they do. IN BROAD DAYLIGHT!!!
One gay man stuck around to defend himself. When asked why, the gay man responded “I’m old and I’m lonely.”
Tell me…does this constitue risky sexual behavior? My contention is that it does.
[quote]Chris Aus wrote:
terribleivan wrote:
Chris Aus wrote:
Zeb,
I cant find the old post this thread is insanely long.
Im just wondering why when given other lifestyle habits that cause higher mortality, disease and lower quality of life you seek to address the underlieing problems rather than just not let them marry…
Why is it that you dont do the same for gays?
ie with rural areas, you want to address the underlieing issues… If we were to use the same logic you would not allow rural people to marry… but you rightly so justified a reason to allow them to…
with homosexuality though, you dont want to address that, you dont want to teach safe sex practices, you dont want to address public perception and acceptance so that they arent depressed as much…
do you have any data showing that people that are gay that dont live with the people that they love and stay in the closet are any happier or healthier than those that are practicing gays?
It seems that your stance here (with respect to this aspect only) is founded upon your general belief that homosexuality is wrong, rather than it being part of the reason…
Chris,
Your assumption here is that being born in a rural area is the same as being gay. It is not. Your entire analogy is flawed right from the start. Here is why:
We have absolute proof that a person is born in a place where he is born. The person born in a rural area has not control over the area he/she is born in.
We have no proof that a person is born gay. In fact, there is a good deal of support for the notion that gays are not born gay, but that they become gay through environmental conditions (gay friends, molestation as a child, acceptance of social norms).
Just from reading the things that you wrote, it sounds to me like your position stems from a bias toward gay marriage…
are you serious?
I wasnt assuming that at all…
The statements have been that people who are gay shouldnt be able to marry because of a whole host of statistics relating to a lower quality of life…
When it was brought up that several minorities have similar health outcomes it was argued that those are not behaviours… Where you live is a behaviour… You get a choice…
someone cant move out of rural areas when they are 21? they are contracted to live there their whole lives…?[/quote]
Yes, we should outlaw rural areas. Thanks for your valuable input.