Teacher Suspended for Anti-Gay Marriage Post

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
This is the proposed revision of the definition of pedophilia by the APA for the DSM V:

Pedohebephilic Disorder

A. Over a period of at least six months, one or both of the following, as manifested by fantasies, urges, or behaviors:

(1) recurrent and intense sexual arousal from prepubescent or pubescent children [5]

(2) equal or greater arousal from such children than from physically mature individuals [6]

B. One or more of the following signs or symptoms:

(1) the person has clinically significant distress or impairment in important areas of functioning from sexual attraction to children

(2) the person has sought sexual stimulation, on separate occasions, from either of the following:

(a) two or more different children, if both are prepubescent

(b) three or more different children, if one or more are pubescent [7]

(3) repeated use of , and greater arousal from, pornography depicting prepubescent or pubescent children than from pornography depicting physically mature persons, for a period of six months or longer [8]

C. The person is at least age 18 years and at least five years older than the children in Criterion A or Criterion B

So, that was also nonsense, but is quite a staple for a loooooot of sites that are short on facts and long on outrage. [/quote]

As I said they are moving one step closer. Do you ever get anything right?

[quote]The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is working toward full
normalization of pedophilia and pederasty. Dr Fred Berlin of Johns Hopkins
is a main spokesman for the “normality” of pedophilia and pederasty…[/quote]

Judith Reisman:
APA Pro-Pedophilia
Please Note,
The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is working toward full
normalization of pedophilia and pederasty. Dr Fred Berlin of Johns Hopkins
is a main spokesman for the “normality” of pedophilia and pederasty, they
just shouldn’t “act on it.” This is the third “intellectual” and medical
generation building on Kinsey’s fraudulent child abuse data used to destroy
laws protecting women and children via the American Law Institute in 1955.
Judith Reisman, Ph.D.

Psychiatric Association Debates Lifting Pedophilia Taboo
By Lawrence Morahan
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
June 11, 2003

(CNSNews.com) - In a step critics charge could result in decriminalizing
sexual contact between adults and children, the American Psychiatric
Association (APA) recently sponsored a symposium in which participants
discussed the removal of pedophilia from an upcoming edition of the
psychiatric manual of mental disorders.

Psychiatrists attending an annual APA convention May 19 in San Francisco
proposed removing several long-recognized categories of mental illness -
including pedophilia, exhibitionism, fetishism, transvestism, voyeurism and
sadomasochism - from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders (DSM).

Most of the mental illnesses being considered for removal are known as
“paraphilias.”

Psychiatrist Charles Moser of San Francisco’s Institute for the Advanced
Study of Human Sexuality and co-author Peggy Kleinplatz of the University of
Ottawa presented conferees with a paper entitled “DSM-IV-TR and the
Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal.”

People whose sexual interests are atypical, culturally forbidden or
religiously proscribed should not necessarily be labeled mentally ill, they
argued.

Different societies stigmatize different sexual behaviors, and since the
existing research could not distinguish people with paraphilias from
so-called “normophilics,” there is no reason to diagnose paraphilics as
either a distinct group or psychologically unhealthy, Moser and Kleinplatz
stated.

Participants also debated gender-identity disorder, a condition in which a
person feels discomfort with his or her biological sex. Homosexual activists
have long argued that gender identity disorder should not be assumed to be
abnormal.

“The situation of the paraphilias at present parallels that of homosexuality
in the early 1970s. Without the support or political astuteness of those who
fought for the removal of homosexuality, the paraphilias continue to be
listed in the DSM,” Moser and Kleinplatz wrote.

A. Dean Byrd, vice president of the National Association for Research and
Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) and a clinical professor of medicine at the
University of Utah, condemned the debate. Taking the paraphilias out of the
DSM without research would have negative consequences, he said.

“What this does, in essence, is it has a chilling effect on research,” Byrd
said. “That is, once you declassify it, there’s no reason to continue
studying it. What we know is that the paraphilias really impair
interpersonal sexual behavior…and to suggest that it could be ‘normalized’
simply takes away from the science, but more importantly, has a chilling
effect on research.”

“Normalizing” pedophilia would have enormous implications, especially since
civil laws closely follow the scientific community on social-moral matters,
said Linda Ames Nicolosi, NARTH publications director.

“If pedophilia is deemed normal by psychiatrists, then how can it remain
illegal?” Nicolosi asked. “It will be a tough fight to prove in the courts
that it should still be against the law.”

In previous articles, psychiatrists have argued that there is little or no
proof that sex with adults is necessarily harmful to minors. Indeed, they
have argued that many sexually molested children later look back on their
experience as positive, Nicolosi said.

“And other psychiatrists have written, again in scientific journals, that if
children can be forced to go to church, why should ‘consent’ be the defining
moral issue when it comes to sex?” she said.

But whether pedophilia should be judged “normal and healthy” is as much a
moral question as a scientific one, according to Nicolosi.

“The courts are so afraid of ‘legislating someone’s privately held religious
beliefs’ that if pedophilia is normalized, we will be hard put to defend the
retention of laws against child molestation,” Nicolosi noted.

In a fact sheet on pedophilia, the APA calls the behavior “criminal and
immoral.”

“An adult who engages in sexual activity with a child is performing a
criminal and immoral act that never can be considered normal or socially
acceptable behavior,” the APA said.

However, the APA failed to address whether it considers a person with a
pedophile orientation to have a mental disorder.

“That is the question that is being actively debated at this time within the
APA, and that is the question they have not answered when they respond that
such relationships are ‘immoral and illegal,’” Nicolosi said.

Dr. Darrel A. Regier, director of research for the APA, said there were “no
plans and there is no process set up that would lead to the removal of the
paraphilias from their consideration as legitimate mental disorders.”

Some years ago, the APA considered the question of whether a person who had
such attractions but did not act on them should still be labeled with a
disorder.

“We clarified in the DSM-IV-TR…that if a person acted on those urges, we
considered it a disorder,” Regier said.

Dr. Robert Spitzer, author of a study on change of sexual orientation that
he presented at the 2001 APA convention, took part in the symposium in San
Francisco in May.

Spitzer said the debate on removing gender identity disorder from the DSM
was generated by people in the homosexual activist community “who are
troubled by gender identity disorder in particular.”

Spitzer added: “I happen to think that’s a big mistake.”

What Spitzer considered the most outrageous proposal, to get rid of the
paraphilias, “doesn’t have the same support that the gender-identity
rethinking does.” And he said he considers it unlikely that changes would be
made regarding the paraphilias.

“Getting rid of the paraphilias, which would mean getting rid of pedophilia,
that would not happen in a million years. I think there might be some
compromise about gender-identity disorder,” he said.

Dr. Frederick Berlin, founder of the Sexual Disorders Clinic at the Johns
Hopkins Hospital, said people who are sexually attracted to children should
learn not to feel ashamed of their condition.

“I have no problem accepting the fact that someone, through no fault of his
own, is attracted to children. But certainly, such an individual has a
responsibility…not to act on it,” Berlin said.

“Many of these people need help in not acting on these very intense desires
in the same way that a drug addict or alcoholic may need help. Again, we
don’t for the most part blame someone these days for their alcoholism; we
don’t see it simply as a moral weakness,” he added.

“We do believe that these people have a disease or a disorder, but we also
recognize that in having it that it impairs their function, that it causes
them suffering that they need to turn for help,” Berlin said.

[/quote]

A) Its all bullshit, one gay claims he kind of heard something and a psychiatrist makes the point that technically, not all pedophiles qualify as “having a mental disorder” and then 1 gazillion sites copay from each other.

B) Whether the APA classifies anything as anything has very little bearing on how it is viewed by the society at large.

C) The point could be made that a non disordered pedophile can be put in jail much easier but nooooo, let us all engage in mindless histrionics.

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Which lead us to the claim that “1-Fact The very fabric of society has been based, for 5000 years, on the family structure one man one woman in marriage. Traditional marriage has been a stabilizing, nurturing unit for thousands of years.” which can easily refuted by a simple Wikipedia search:

According to the Ethnographic Atlas Codebook, of 1231 societies noted, 186 were monogamous. 453 had occasional polygyny, 588 had more frequent polygyny, and 4 had polyandry.[3] At the same time, even within societies which allow polygyny, the actual practice of polygyny occurs relatively rarely. There are exceptions: in Senegal, for example, nearly 47 percent of marriages are multiple.[6] To take on more than one wife often requires considerable resources: this may put polygamy beyond the means of the vast majority of people within those societies. Such appears the case in many traditional Islamic societies, and in Imperial China. Within polygynous societies, multiple wives often become a status symbol denoting wealth, power, and fame.

[/quote]

Then why don’t you point out how many important and powerful societies allowed homosexual marriage.

Uh huh! [/quote]

Why would I, I am perfectly content with pointing out that your FACT !!!OMGD!!! is bullshit.

[quote]orion wrote:
Sooo, just to clear up some of Zebs delusions I hereby introduce exhibit A:

It seems that the average gay guy has about as much partners in his lifetime than straight men, it is just that a relatively small percentage of men (2%) own a relatively large share of the gay sex market (23%).

I seriously doubt that those 2% are the ones desperately looking to get married or to adopt kids.

http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/gay-sex-vs-straight-sex/ [/quote]

Dance Clown…

http://www.wpaag.org/Homosexuals%20and%20Same%20Sex%20Marriage.htm

http://factsaboutyouth.com/posts/promiscuity/

Homosexuals must be so proud!

Close to 60% of all new HIV cases are from the homosexual population. Monogamy? Where are you?

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

Just the sort of people we want to introduce marriage to. Um…NOPE!

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Sooo, just to clear up some of Zebs delusions I hereby introduce exhibit A:

It seems that the average gay guy has about as much partners in his lifetime than straight men, it is just that a relatively small percentage of men (2%) own a relatively large share of the gay sex market (23%).

I seriously doubt that those 2% are the ones desperately looking to get married or to adopt kids.

http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/gay-sex-vs-straight-sex/ [/quote]

Dance Clown…

http://www.wpaag.org/Homosexuals%20and%20Same%20Sex%20Marriage.htm

http://factsaboutyouth.com/posts/promiscuity/

Homosexuals must be so proud!

Close to 60% of all new HIV cases are from the homosexual population. Monogamy? Where are you?

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

Just the sort of people we want to introduce marriage to. Um…NOPE!
[/quote]

Sure when I dance it will be to the tune of the Women’s Prayer and Action Group (WPAAG).

If they allow music.

Or dancing.

The rest is just depressing.

So you are comparing self confessed homosexuals of around 1978 to the average gay man in 2011. No problem there, I am sure.

The second statistic interpretation is, once again, sloppy, biased, tendentious and unworthy of a serious reply.

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Sooo, just to clear up some of Zebs delusions I hereby introduce exhibit A:

It seems that the average gay guy has about as much partners in his lifetime than straight men, it is just that a relatively small percentage of men (2%) own a relatively large share of the gay sex market (23%).

I seriously doubt that those 2% are the ones desperately looking to get married or to adopt kids.

http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/gay-sex-vs-straight-sex/ [/quote]

Dance Clown…

http://www.wpaag.org/Homosexuals%20and%20Same%20Sex%20Marriage.htm

http://factsaboutyouth.com/posts/promiscuity/

Homosexuals must be so proud!

Close to 60% of all new HIV cases are from the homosexual population. Monogamy? Where are you?

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

Just the sort of people we want to introduce marriage to. Um…NOPE!
[/quote]

Sure when I dance it will be to the tune of the Women’s Prayer and Action Group (WPAAG).

If they allow music.

Or dancing.

The rest is just depressing.

So you are comparing self confessed homosexuals of around 1978 to the average gay man in 2011. No problem there, I am sure.

The second statistic interpretation is, once again, sloppy, biased, tendentious and unworthy of a serious reply.

[/quote]

Nice way to pick and choose. There is a lot of information there why don’t you take the time to actually read what it says. No wait…that would go against some sort of Austrian oath…right?

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Nice way to pick and choose.[/quote]

lol

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Nice way to pick and choose.[/quote]

lol[/quote]

Well any clown (except you I) can see that I have posted information from the 1970’s to 2008 which is the latest CDC data. But you as you can see your fellow atheist wonder boy decided to comment ONLY on the data from 1970.

(I feel like I’m explaining something to a child - But based on the cartoons and your world view you could be one)

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Nice way to pick and choose.[/quote]

lol[/quote]

Well any clown (except you I) can see that I have posted information from the 1970’s to 2008 which is the latest CDC data. But you as you can see your fellow atheist wonder boy decided to comment ONLY on the data from 1970.

(I feel like I’m explaining something to a child - But based on the cartoons and your world view you could be one)

[/quote]

Implying results skewed by past practices is a reliable indicator of the present.

[quote]orion wrote:
Sooo, just to clear up some of Zebs delusions I hereby introduce exhibit A:

It seems that the average gay guy has about as much partners in his lifetime than straight men, it is just that a relatively small percentage of men (2%) own a relatively large share of the gay sex market (23%).

I seriously doubt that those 2% are the ones desperately looking to get married or to adopt kids.

http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/gay-sex-vs-straight-sex/ [/quote]

You make several good points, but this one is especially important. It’s a common tactic to treat outliers as the norm, in an attempt to disparage an entire class of people. Sampling methods, statistical significance, standard deviation, and all those other pesky details pertaining to actual facts don’t matter to clown acts like Zeb.

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
This is the proposed revision of the definition of pedophilia by the APA for the DSM V:

Pedohebephilic Disorder

A. Over a period of at least six months, one or both of the following, as manifested by fantasies, urges, or behaviors:

(1) recurrent and intense sexual arousal from prepubescent or pubescent children [5]

(2) equal or greater arousal from such children than from physically mature individuals [6]

B. One or more of the following signs or symptoms:

(1) the person has clinically significant distress or impairment in important areas of functioning from sexual attraction to children

(2) the person has sought sexual stimulation, on separate occasions, from either of the following:

(a) two or more different children, if both are prepubescent

(b) three or more different children, if one or more are pubescent [7]

(3) repeated use of , and greater arousal from, pornography depicting prepubescent or pubescent children than from pornography depicting physically mature persons, for a period of six months or longer [8]

C. The person is at least age 18 years and at least five years older than the children in Criterion A or Criterion B

So, that was also nonsense, but is quite a staple for a loooooot of sites that are short on facts and long on outrage. [/quote]

As I said they are moving one step closer. Do you ever get anything right?

[quote]The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is working toward full
normalization of pedophilia and pederasty. Dr Fred Berlin of Johns Hopkins
is a main spokesman for the “normality” of pedophilia and pederasty…[/quote]

Judith Reisman:
APA Pro-Pedophilia
Please Note,
The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is working toward full
normalization of pedophilia and pederasty. Dr Fred Berlin of Johns Hopkins
is a main spokesman for the “normality” of pedophilia and pederasty, they
just shouldn’t “act on it.” This is the third “intellectual” and medical
generation building on Kinsey’s fraudulent child abuse data used to destroy
laws protecting women and children via the American Law Institute in 1955.
Judith Reisman, Ph.D.

Psychiatric Association Debates Lifting Pedophilia Taboo
By Lawrence Morahan
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
June 11, 2003

(CNSNews.com) - In a step critics charge could result in decriminalizing
sexual contact between adults and children, the American Psychiatric
Association (APA) recently sponsored a symposium in which participants
discussed the removal of pedophilia from an upcoming edition of the
psychiatric manual of mental disorders.

Psychiatrists attending an annual APA convention May 19 in San Francisco
proposed removing several long-recognized categories of mental illness -
including pedophilia, exhibitionism, fetishism, transvestism, voyeurism and
sadomasochism - from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders (DSM).

Most of the mental illnesses being considered for removal are known as
“paraphilias.”

Psychiatrist Charles Moser of San Francisco’s Institute for the Advanced
Study of Human Sexuality and co-author Peggy Kleinplatz of the University of
Ottawa presented conferees with a paper entitled “DSM-IV-TR and the
Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal.”

People whose sexual interests are atypical, culturally forbidden or
religiously proscribed should not necessarily be labeled mentally ill, they
argued.

Different societies stigmatize different sexual behaviors, and since the
existing research could not distinguish people with paraphilias from
so-called “normophilics,” there is no reason to diagnose paraphilics as
either a distinct group or psychologically unhealthy, Moser and Kleinplatz
stated.

Participants also debated gender-identity disorder, a condition in which a
person feels discomfort with his or her biological sex. Homosexual activists
have long argued that gender identity disorder should not be assumed to be
abnormal.

“The situation of the paraphilias at present parallels that of homosexuality
in the early 1970s. Without the support or political astuteness of those who
fought for the removal of homosexuality, the paraphilias continue to be
listed in the DSM,” Moser and Kleinplatz wrote.

A. Dean Byrd, vice president of the National Association for Research and
Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) and a clinical professor of medicine at the
University of Utah, condemned the debate. Taking the paraphilias out of the
DSM without research would have negative consequences, he said.

“What this does, in essence, is it has a chilling effect on research,” Byrd
said. “That is, once you declassify it, there’s no reason to continue
studying it. What we know is that the paraphilias really impair
interpersonal sexual behavior…and to suggest that it could be ‘normalized’
simply takes away from the science, but more importantly, has a chilling
effect on research.”

“Normalizing” pedophilia would have enormous implications, especially since
civil laws closely follow the scientific community on social-moral matters,
said Linda Ames Nicolosi, NARTH publications director.

“If pedophilia is deemed normal by psychiatrists, then how can it remain
illegal?” Nicolosi asked. “It will be a tough fight to prove in the courts
that it should still be against the law.”

In previous articles, psychiatrists have argued that there is little or no
proof that sex with adults is necessarily harmful to minors. Indeed, they
have argued that many sexually molested children later look back on their
experience as positive, Nicolosi said.

“And other psychiatrists have written, again in scientific journals, that if
children can be forced to go to church, why should ‘consent’ be the defining
moral issue when it comes to sex?” she said.

But whether pedophilia should be judged “normal and healthy” is as much a
moral question as a scientific one, according to Nicolosi.

“The courts are so afraid of ‘legislating someone’s privately held religious
beliefs’ that if pedophilia is normalized, we will be hard put to defend the
retention of laws against child molestation,” Nicolosi noted.

In a fact sheet on pedophilia, the APA calls the behavior “criminal and
immoral.”

“An adult who engages in sexual activity with a child is performing a
criminal and immoral act that never can be considered normal or socially
acceptable behavior,” the APA said.

However, the APA failed to address whether it considers a person with a
pedophile orientation to have a mental disorder.

“That is the question that is being actively debated at this time within the
APA, and that is the question they have not answered when they respond that
such relationships are ‘immoral and illegal,’” Nicolosi said.

Dr. Darrel A. Regier, director of research for the APA, said there were “no
plans and there is no process set up that would lead to the removal of the
paraphilias from their consideration as legitimate mental disorders.”

Some years ago, the APA considered the question of whether a person who had
such attractions but did not act on them should still be labeled with a
disorder.

“We clarified in the DSM-IV-TR…that if a person acted on those urges, we
considered it a disorder,” Regier said.

Dr. Robert Spitzer, author of a study on change of sexual orientation that
he presented at the 2001 APA convention, took part in the symposium in San
Francisco in May.

Spitzer said the debate on removing gender identity disorder from the DSM
was generated by people in the homosexual activist community “who are
troubled by gender identity disorder in particular.”

Spitzer added: “I happen to think that’s a big mistake.”

What Spitzer considered the most outrageous proposal, to get rid of the
paraphilias, “doesn’t have the same support that the gender-identity
rethinking does.” And he said he considers it unlikely that changes would be
made regarding the paraphilias.

“Getting rid of the paraphilias, which would mean getting rid of pedophilia,
that would not happen in a million years. I think there might be some
compromise about gender-identity disorder,” he said.

Dr. Frederick Berlin, founder of the Sexual Disorders Clinic at the Johns
Hopkins Hospital, said people who are sexually attracted to children should
learn not to feel ashamed of their condition.

“I have no problem accepting the fact that someone, through no fault of his
own, is attracted to children. But certainly, such an individual has a
responsibility…not to act on it,” Berlin said.

“Many of these people need help in not acting on these very intense desires
in the same way that a drug addict or alcoholic may need help. Again, we
don’t for the most part blame someone these days for their alcoholism; we
don’t see it simply as a moral weakness,” he added.

“We do believe that these people have a disease or a disorder, but we also
recognize that in having it that it impairs their function, that it causes
them suffering that they need to turn for help,” Berlin said.

[/quote]

A) Its all bullshit, one gay claims he kind of heard something and a psychiatrist makes the point that technically, not all pedophiles qualify as “having a mental disorder” and then 1 gazillion sites copay from each other.

B) Whether the APA classifies anything as anything has very little bearing on how it is viewed by the society at large.

C) The point could be made that a non disordered pedophile can be put in jail much easier but nooooo, let us all engage in mindless histrionics. [/quote]

I also like how they omit that the APA clearly states that pedophilic behavior is criminal and immoral, and that the organization itself is NOT considering declassifying pedophilia as a mental disorder. In the article, Spitzer said declassification would never happen in a million years. Oops.

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Nice way to pick and choose.[/quote]

lol[/quote]

Well any clown (except you I) can see that I have posted information from the 1970’s to 2008 which is the latest CDC data. But you as you can see your fellow atheist wonder boy decided to comment ONLY on the data from 1970.

(I feel like I’m explaining something to a child - But based on the cartoons and your world view you could be one)

[/quote]

Implying results skewed by past practices is a reliable indicator of the present.[/quote]

Lol…did you notice that the two recent studies posted by Orion, showing that sexual promiscuity is as high among heterosexuals as among homosexuals, were completely ignored? Shocking, I know.

[quote]orion wrote:
Whether the APA classifies anything as anything has very little bearing on how it is viewed by the society at large.[/quote]

The point has flown over your head. As I stated, this is the SAME organization which declassified homosexuality as a mental disease. AND…they are now working on pedophilia.

Grasp it!

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Which lead us to the claim that “1-Fact The very fabric of society has been based, for 5000 years, on the family structure one man one woman in marriage. Traditional marriage has been a stabilizing, nurturing unit for thousands of years.” which can easily refuted by a simple Wikipedia search:

According to the Ethnographic Atlas Codebook, of 1231 societies noted, 186 were monogamous. 453 had occasional polygyny, 588 had more frequent polygyny, and 4 had polyandry.[3] At the same time, even within societies which allow polygyny, the actual practice of polygyny occurs relatively rarely. There are exceptions: in Senegal, for example, nearly 47 percent of marriages are multiple.[6] To take on more than one wife often requires considerable resources: this may put polygamy beyond the means of the vast majority of people within those societies. Such appears the case in many traditional Islamic societies, and in Imperial China. Within polygynous societies, multiple wives often become a status symbol denoting wealth, power, and fame.

[/quote]

Then why don’t you point out how many important and powerful societies allowed homosexual marriage.

Uh huh! [/quote]

Why would I, I am perfectly content with pointing out that your FACT !!!OMGD!!! is bullshit.
[/quote]

Then all you have to do is fine ONE important powerful long lasting society from history which allowed homosexual marriage.

You can either do this or you can’t.

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Nice way to pick and choose.[/quote]

lol[/quote]

Well any clown (except you I) can see that I have posted information from the 1970’s to 2008 which is the latest CDC data. But you as you can see your fellow atheist wonder boy decided to comment ONLY on the data from 1970.

(I feel like I’m explaining something to a child - But based on the cartoons and your world view you could be one)

[/quote]

Implying results skewed by past practices is a reliable indicator of the present.[/quote]

This is data which has been culled directly from practicing homosexuals for over 30 years. And you want to disregard it because it doesn’t suit your politically correct (and quite naive) view of the world.

Idiot.

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Sooo, just to clear up some of Zebs delusions I hereby introduce exhibit A:

It seems that the average gay guy has about as much partners in his lifetime than straight men, it is just that a relatively small percentage of men (2%) own a relatively large share of the gay sex market (23%).

I seriously doubt that those 2% are the ones desperately looking to get married or to adopt kids.

http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/gay-sex-vs-straight-sex/ [/quote]

You make several good points, but this one is especially important. It’s a common tactic to treat outliers as the norm, in an attempt to disparage an entire class of people. Sampling methods, statistical significance, standard deviation, and all those other pesky details pertaining to actual facts don’t matter to clown acts like Zeb.[/quote]

And to homosexual activists like yourself you continue to turn a blind eye to the outrageous behavior of your brethren. Any way you slice it homosexual males are the sickest (physically and emotionally according to the CDC) group of people in the world. Do you also disregard the FACTS regarding alcoholics? No…no you will accept that the over consumption of alcohol on a regular basis is a bad thing for most people. But then again you have an agenda so ignoring evidence which spits in the face of your constant flow of drivel is something that you do.

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Nice way to pick and choose.[/quote]

lol[/quote]

Well any clown (except you I) can see that I have posted information from the 1970’s to 2008 which is the latest CDC data. But you as you can see your fellow atheist wonder boy decided to comment ONLY on the data from 1970.

(I feel like I’m explaining something to a child - But based on the cartoons and your world view you could be one)

[/quote]

Implying results skewed by past practices is a reliable indicator of the present.[/quote]

Lol…did you notice that the two recent studies posted by Orion, showing that sexual promiscuity is as high among heterosexuals as among homosexuals, were completely ignored? Shocking, I know.[/quote]

I’ll spell it out for you moron. Young males want a lot of sex. Young heterosexual males and homosexual males as well. However homosexual males do not have a woman telling them NO. Therefore, they are more promiscuous.

You know if you’re going to twist the facts you have to do it with something less obvious—Remember the way you used to twist and turn the facts in our many debates?

I think you’re slipping forliar.

[quote]forlife wrote:
You’re claiming straight couples are superior because they can produce children.

This requires assuming that producing children is always a good thing.

That assumption is a value judgment, and has nothing to do with facts. So stop pretending that your bias against gays is somehow factual. It’s not. It comes down to your value system.[/quote]

So, it is not a fact that homosexual unions can’t create babies?

Um…but homosexual unions can’t have biological children without going outside the marriage.

[quote]Your claim that straight couples do a better job raising children is also informed by your religious values, and in fact is contradicted by science. The facts show that children of gay couples are equally healthy on all measures of psychological, emotional, and physical health compared to children of straight couples.

Of course, you don’t like those facts because they fly in the face of your religious beliefs.[/quote]

Really, informed by my religious values? I didn’t know my religious values did studies on the relationship of homosexual unions. I’ll have to talk with my religious values about doing scientific studies behind my back and not letting me know about it. :wink:

[quote]orion wrote:
Sooo, just to clear up some of Zebs delusions I hereby introduce exhibit A:

It seems that the average gay guy has about as much partners in his lifetime than straight men, it is just that a relatively small percentage of men (2%) own a relatively large share of the gay sex market (23%).

I seriously doubt that those 2% are the ones desperately looking to get married or to adopt kids.

http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/gay-sex-vs-straight-sex/ [/quote]

25% of straight people asked if they had homosexual acts, but not homosexual…lol.

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Which lead us to the claim that “1-Fact The very fabric of society has been based, for 5000 years, on the family structure one man one woman in marriage. Traditional marriage has been a stabilizing, nurturing unit for thousands of years.” which can easily refuted by a simple Wikipedia search:

According to the Ethnographic Atlas Codebook, of 1231 societies noted, 186 were monogamous. 453 had occasional polygyny, 588 had more frequent polygyny, and 4 had polyandry.[3] At the same time, even within societies which allow polygyny, the actual practice of polygyny occurs relatively rarely. There are exceptions: in Senegal, for example, nearly 47 percent of marriages are multiple.[6] To take on more than one wife often requires considerable resources: this may put polygamy beyond the means of the vast majority of people within those societies. Such appears the case in many traditional Islamic societies, and in Imperial China. Within polygynous societies, multiple wives often become a status symbol denoting wealth, power, and fame.

[/quote]

Then why don’t you point out how many important and powerful societies allowed homosexual marriage.

Uh huh! [/quote]

Why would I, I am perfectly content with pointing out that your FACT !!!OMGD!!! is bullshit.
[/quote]

Then all you have to do is fine ONE important powerful long lasting society from history which allowed homosexual marriage.

You can either do this or you can’t.

[/quote]

No, I dont.

You can read your claim on the last page.

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
Whether the APA classifies anything as anything has very little bearing on how it is viewed by the society at large.[/quote]

The point has flown over your head. As I stated, this is the SAME organization which declassified homosexuality as a mental disease. AND…they are now working on pedophilia.

Grasp it![/quote]

Yeah, its also the same organization that classified them as mental disorders in the first place.

Cant have it both ways.