Homosexuality harms no one?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 12:11 AM GMT
    Stuttershock saidMake gays feel abnormal and isolated, then blame them for suffering depression... icon_confused.gif

    Deny gays the same opportunities straight people have to strengthen a relationship and then accuse them for acting like bachelors.... icon_confused.gif


    Cause and effect.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 12:19 AM GMT
    Vaughn said
    Christians did support eugenics laws even when the Supreme Court struck them down in the 1970s.


    That's quite a sweeping generalization. I'd say "ignorant people including religious fundamentalists" because there are other religions who support that sort of thing as well as quite a few atheists and agnostics.

    "Christians" don't have a monopoly on idiocy. Besides, I've known plenty of Muslims, Hindi, Buddhists, Christians who have less hate and spite and are more genuinely altruistic than those who are blindly hateful towards people with some (or some other) faith system.

    People find a way to use religious systems as an easy way to justify hate and intolerance, but there are many people who use their intellect to justify hate and intolerance if it serves their personal needs (greed and avarice as examples.)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 12:21 AM GMT
    it's a religious website..what did you expect? some people try to make outlandish remarks and try to make it sound scientific when it's just a bunch of bullshit..people with agendas don't give impartial results.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 1:20 AM GMT
    I read an article like this and it reminds of a piece of wisdom I once heard:

    Liars use statistics like a drunk uses a light pole, more for support than illumination.

    Even a cursory glance at the alleged statistics in this article and most people even slightly involved in gay political issues can debunk them. Most of this is a rehashing of old canards that have been proven untrue or misleading 20 years ago. Yawn!

    This kind of article is written for an audience of credulous and gullible Christians who want their prejudices and vitriol affirmed and don't care to ever investigate whether any of it is true.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 1:34 AM GMT
    Shitty articlePromiscuity

    While it could be argued that two men (or two women) having sexual intercourse with each other and only each other can't harm anyone else, the fact is that homosexuality is not a "monogomous affair." The homosexual lifestyle is by nature promiscuous, as the facts demonstrate.
    •"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 "the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101–500." In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than 1000 lifetime sexual partners. Paul Van de Ven et al., "A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men," Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997): 354." (See more statistics on Promiscuity at http://www.carm.org/statistics-homosexual-promiscuity)

    To ignore the facts of incredible sexual promiscuity among homosexuals is the admission that the problem exists, and by ignoring it they hope it goes away. Also, to ignore the facts of such promiscuity is dangerous in itself since policies and arguments are made based on facts. To ignore the facts means the policies and arguments are not sound when used to promote the homosexual lifestyle.


    dumbest paragraph in the whole thing...icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 1:53 AM GMT
    "To ignore the facts of incredible sexual promiscuity among homosexuals is the admission that the problem exists, and by ignoring it they hope it goes away."

    Ever been in a port town when the Navy hits the beach?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 2:16 AM GMT
    I'VE GOT IT. Outlaw sex!! Problem solved! Women can still have babies through artificial insemination. Think about! No more STDs! No more post hookup, break up depressions. No more homosexuals! No more heterosexual! No more bisexuals. And no more stupid articles like this one.

    Behind every homophobic article like this is a sexually repressed dick head who must never get laid.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 4:20 AM GMT
    tazzari said"To ignore the facts of incredible sexual promiscuity among homosexuals is the admission that the problem exists, and by ignoring it they hope it goes away."

    Ever been in a port town when the Navy hits the beach?


    icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif
    icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif
    icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 4:28 AM GMT
    Vaughn said
    JR_RJ said
    OneSongGlory said
    paulflexes saidBeing human hurts everyone, because all humans eventually die. Maybe we should outlaw being human, since it's such a dangerous thing to be.


    I love you.

    You down for some polyamory in this thread? I know people do that! icon_twisted.gif


    If I'll be the pass-around-party bottom can I taste all of your GAIDS?

    Don't hog it all! Don't forget to share it with community! We got a stereotype to keep frequency with.icon_razz.gif
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11422

    Oct 24, 2012 4:34 AM GMT
    What a load of crap .. I responded to their 'Submit Correction' icon_mad.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 4:46 AM GMT
    JR_RJ said
    Vaughn said
    JR_RJ said
    OneSongGlory said
    paulflexes saidBeing human hurts everyone, because all humans eventually die. Maybe we should outlaw being human, since it's such a dangerous thing to be.


    I love you.

    You down for some polyamory in this thread? I know people do that! icon_twisted.gif


    If I'll be the pass-around-party bottom can I taste all of your GAIDS?

    Don't hog it all! Don't forget to share it with community! We got a stereotype to keep frequency with.icon_razz.gif


    I want to make sure I'm not immune! I haven't got it yet!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 6:19 AM GMT
    I mean if you made projections based off of the article's data the entire gay population will have HIV in a few years assuming no one among the gays had it in 2009 but only if both the rate of infection and the total population remains constant (R 0 of 1). If the R 0 were greater than 1 (R 0 is around 8 for HIV, meaning the population would increase in exponants of 8 ) how is it I'm not HIV +?

    There are 309 million in the US. 0.6% or 1,854,000 of that has HIV. If 2% of the population is gay that would be 6,180,000:309,000,000... yutta yutta, you can do the math...
    ... In short my roommate and I tried to put these numbers into context (creationist math is a hobbie of ours). Some of the given numbers like 29,300 wouldn't work with the data. The totals begin to contradict one another.

    Seriously it makes no sence.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 7:11 AM GMT
    I'm the suppressed bi/curious/confused/questioning closeted community have something to do with the.inconsistencies in the data across the board.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 7:36 AM GMT
    I do agree with the thread title, cause gender based sexuality doesn't harm anyone, because sexuality isn't a problem. The social conformist mainstream constantly beating the evils of homosexuality, and inferiority of homosexuals, is the real problem.
    I'd like to compare homophobia to prohibition, in that both did little to nothing change the behavior of the "guilty", but instead encourage the deeper fulfillment of the desires in dark corners. In some places this is normal, "under rug swept" thinking for some cultures that refuse Truth, cause "that's the it is".
    I'm not bashing on them for stupidity or ignorance; cause anyone worth their salt would find the lack of rationale and would see the devil in the devices they've come skilled to replace. You could settle for demonizing them on their own terms, but I've come to my own simpler conclusion in my observations. These bastards get a sick kick out doing what they themselves is wrong. And may only do it all cause its what they perceive as wrong on a whole. We as honest sinners be damned, and hell or high water before we be allowed to Win For Losing!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 7:40 AM GMT
    It's just creationist math.

    WHO places the actual homosexual population as having a floor of 5% but hives no range. The MSM (men who have sex with men? male not men there is a correct language) and FSF or people who experince transient bisexuality or bisexuality (the correct language) is placed at around 20%.

    Being there is a -50% error varience (i think it's - when the conclusion will be around that much under otherwise substitute a +) these are consiered a rough estimate and no ranges are given.

    I'm confused where this 2% comes from. That might be the first problem with the data, this figure may be 10 times less than it needs to be. Of course the needed frequency of sexual interaction between same sex partners isn't explained.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 7:41 AM GMT
    Vaughn saidI mean if you made projections based off of the article's data the entire gay population will have HIV in a few years assuming no one among the gays had it in 2009 but only if both the rate of infection and the total population remains constant (R 0 of 1). If the R 0 were greater than 1 (R 0 is around 8 for HIV, meaning the population would increase in exponants of 8 ) how is it I'm not HIV +?

    There are 309 million in the US. 0.6% or 1,854,000 of that has HIV. If 2% of the population is gay that would be 6,180,000:309,000,000... yutta yutta, you can do the math...
    ... In short my roommate and I tried to put these numbers into context (creationist math is a hobbie of ours). Some of the given numbers like 29,300 wouldn't work with the data. The totals begin to contradict one another.

    Seriously it makes no sence.


    I forgot to point out that the disease has been around since the 1980s... so... We're all dead.


    Oh and the pop number for the US I gave was for 2009 not now. Just to clarify.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 7:43 AM GMT
    JR_RJ saidI do agree with the thread title, cause gender based sexuality doesn't harm anyone, because sexuality isn't a problem. The social conformist mainstream constantly beating the evils of homosexuality, and inferiority of homosexuals, is the real problem.
    I'd like to compare homophobia to prohibition, in that both did little to nothing change the behavior of the "guilty", but instead encourage the deeper fulfillment of the desires in dark corners. In some places this is normal, "under rug swept" thinking for some cultures that refuse Truth, cause "that's the it is".
    I'm not bashing on them for stupidity or ignorance; cause anyone worth their salt would find the lack of rationale and would see the devil in the devices they've come skilled to replace. You could settle for demonizing them on their own terms, but I've come to my own simpler conclusion in my observations. These bastards get a sick kick out doing what they themselves is wrong. And may only do it all cause its what they perceive as wrong on a whole. We as honest sinners be damned, and hell or high water before we be allowed to Win For Losing!


    Define "gender based sexuality".
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 7:54 AM GMT
    I was overpadding with that one, out thin air, but simply meaning sexuality based solely on being attracted to gender, versus sexual desires rooted in fetish like things like blondes, redheads, bondage, or whatever... it made total sense in mind, but theres no need for references, or pretext in all I conceive. icon_confused.gif
  • Buddha

    Posts: 1822

    Oct 24, 2012 8:03 AM GMT
    I like the fact that not being monogamous was automatically bad. "No no, no explanation needed, we all know it's bad. Awful". I'm not saying all monogamous couples cheat, but I've seen it a lot; straight and gay couples alike.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 8:18 AM GMT
    JR_RJ saidI was overpadding with that one, out thin air, but simply meaning sexuality based solely on being attracted to gender, versus sexual desires rooted in fetish like things like blondes, redheads, bondage, or whatever... it made total sense in mind, but theres no need for references, or pretext in all I conceive. icon_confused.gif


    Lets go with sex not gender. icon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 8:25 AM GMT
    Vaughn said
    JR_RJ saidI was overpadding with that one, out thin air, but simply meaning sexuality based solely on being attracted to gender, versus sexual desires rooted in fetish like things like blondes, redheads, bondage, or whatever... it made total sense in mind, but theres no need for references, or pretext in all I conceive. icon_confused.gif


    Lets go with sex not gender. icon_biggrin.gif

    Got me there! Haven't had anyone to discuss these things out loud since I've moved to South Carolina. Its different down here, and most are slow to help cure my ignorance.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 1:35 PM GMT
    AMoonHawk saidWhat a load of crap .. I responded to their 'Submit Correction' icon_mad.gif

    Good. I feel a lot of it was based on stereotypes.

    Not all. But a lot.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 1:37 PM GMT
    Stuttershock saidMake gays feel abnormal and isolated, then blame them for suffering depression... icon_confused.gif

    Deny gays the same opportunities straight people have to strengthen a relationship and then accuse them for acting like bachelors.... icon_confused.gif


    BINGO!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 1:55 PM GMT


    a rubbery R U B B I S H ! article.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 24, 2012 3:02 PM GMT
    Vaughn: The reason HIV infection rates are higher in the gay population is because they get tested the most.

    jockfever: If only the article were "rubbish."

    As others have noted, the article is footnoted. Footnoted articles are convincingly refuted by facts, evidence, and logic, e.g., footnotes, not expletives.

    Even if the word "infection" were replaced by the word "detection" in the above quote, it still taxes credulity.

    Blaming Judeo-Christianity for higher rates of STD infection in the GLBT population is like blaming Judeo-Christianity for other by-products of promiscuity, such as abortions.