|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Harm in Homosexuality? | |||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
That's bullshit, Nazort! AIDS is far from the only STD, and most of its victims are straight, not gay.
And could you please explain what you mean by your simple-minded reference to the "homosexual lifestyle"? Dog is my copilot.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
General Nazort erroneously claims:
quote: No, you gave me bullshit and you're doing it again. Let's examine some of it, shall we?
One of the characteristics of the emergence of 'gay culture' has been the encouragement of the high level of promiscuity which, for various reasons, is a feature of male homosexuality the world over. How do gays compare to unmarried straights? Who "encouraged" gays to be promiscuous? Could it be the straights who deny gays the right to marry and thus the legal protection against adultery that married people enjoy? BTW, I doubt you noticed it, but the "study" you cite is dated 1978. Can you think of anything that might have happened since 1978 that could have an effect on promiscuity rates? Come on, think really, really hard; you can do it.
quote: Yes, sober stats are available from the World Health Organization. I shouldn't need to look it up for you, it's quite well known that AIDS affects more heterosexuals than homosexuals. Are you so provincial in your thought processes that you think only the US matters? AIDS affects people all over the world.
quote: Because it is only AIDS that primarily affects gays, and even then only in the US. Again, AIDS affects the whole world, and there are scores of other STDs that affect far more straight Americans (again I don't see why only Americans matter to you) than gays. Why are non-Americans of no importance to you, and why are other STDs besides AIDS of no importance to you? Dog is my copilot.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
quote: No there isn't, Lam. The man was correct that for a short time several homosexuality threads were hanging at the top of the topic list. He was also correct that many of them simply repeat arguments that have been made in previous threads ad nauseum. The admins are apparently not interested in running a gay rights message board. They want to run a creation vs. evolution message board. That is their right. Dog is my copilot.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
I am one of an apparently growing number of people who favor civil unions for gays IF AND ONLY IF the government gets out of the marriage business altogether. In other words, the word 'marriage' will be bestowed and recognized only by churches, not the law.
Much of the opposition to gay marriage seems to be centered on the idea that marriage is a blessing or sacrament from God. If that's true, then why does the government issue civil marriages at all? Shouldn't the blessing or sacrament be reserved for the churches to dispense? The government can issue civil unions, with precisely the same rights and benefits as marriage, to any couple, straight or gay. The churches can choose for themselves which of these civil unions they wish to recognize as marriages, but the government would be restricted to only recognizing civil unions. If we can't have it this way, then I agree with Lam and others that gays and like-minded straights should unrelentingly push for full marriage rights for every couple, straight or gay.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
Did anyone see my post about getting the government out of the marriage business altogether? I was hoping to get some comments about why it is that the government should recognize anyone's marriage if, as the argument against gay marriage tends to go here in the South, marriage is a sacrament or blessing from God.
Why should the government ever grant or recognize anything more than a civil union? Dog is my copilot.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
jazzlover_PR writes:
quote: Incorrect. Logic is logic, and it is never influenced, in any way whatsoever, by "feelings beliefs or any other type of bias".
|
|||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
logic (ljk) noun Abbr. log. 1. The study of the principles of reasoning, especially of the structure of propositions as distinguished from their content and of method and validity in deductive reasoning. 2. a. A system of reasoning: Aristotle's logic. b. A mode of reasoning: By that logic, we should sell the company tomorrow. c. The formal, guiding principles of a discipline, school, or science. 3. Valid reasoning: Your paper lacks the logic to prove your thesis. 4. The relationship between elements and between an element and the whole in a set of objects, individuals, principles, or events: There's a certain logic to the motion of rush-hour traffic. 5. Computer Science. a. The nonarithmetic operations performed by a computer, such as sorting, comparing, and matching, that involve yes-no decisions. b. Computer circuitry. c. Graphic representation of computer circuitry. Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition 1996 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from INSO Corporation; further reproduction and distribution in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved. Where in this do you see room for beliefs or bias?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
That's all true, but it's quite clear that one side has all reason and logic on its side while the other has only beliefs, superstition and bias.
Dog is my copilot.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
holmes writes:
quote: Two issues: one, why do you characterize our arguments as "supporting homosexuality"? What I see is support for equal treatment under the law for everyone, regardless of sexuality. Two, the phrase "everyone else" would include me. My major contributions to this thread can be found here and here . How are these posts based on belief, superstition or bias? The worst offenders on this score are those who base their beliefs, superstitions and biases on a book written by xenophobic, uncivilized, pre-historic tribal nomads. Any morality based on such nonsense isn't morality at all, it is merely (yep, you guessed it) belief, superstition and/or bias. Dog is my copilot.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
holmes writes:
quote: Yes it is. What are we supposed to do, open another thread? We've been told in no uncertain terms NOT to do that!
quote: How so? Do you think that straights would be less promiscuous than gays if they didn't have the force of law to maintain their relationships?
quote: What's wrong with that? People make a choice to be christian; they don't make a choice to be straight or gay. If they choose to close their minds and believe things simply because of something written in a book from thousands of years ago, they should be prepared to suffer a little bashing.
quote: All I'm hearing is THAT god forbids homosexuality; I still haven't heard the first logical reason why. Wanna give it a try? Dog is my copilot.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024