Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I went to the effort of producing hardcore facts from the CDC showing that homosexuality is a leading cause for the spread of STDS, and of course, it was brushed off. That's a pretty serious consequence.
And those links were discussed with you at length in the past too. You simply ignored the posts that did so. I am not sure why it is always the people engaging in dodging that spend so much time accusing others of doing so. Projection I guess.
What causes the spread of STDs is promiscuity and not practicing safe sex. Homosexuality is nothing special in this. Promiscuity is.
Further the statistics you presented on Homosexuality were skewed because they focus specifically on male homosexuals in ORDER to skew the statistics. If you are going to mediate the morality of homosexuality based on STD, then you are arguing, whether you realize it or like it or not, that female homosexuality is not just moral, but is more moral that both male homosexuality AND heterosexuality. Because STD incidents in the lesbian community is lower than both.
But the simply fact you are missing in all of this is we do not mediate the morality of something based on the potential for disease or injury generally. Do we, for example, argue that extreme sports are immoral because base jumping has statistically more injuries per participant than, say, baseball? No, we do not. So why do you feel you can do so here?
I went to the effort of producing hardcore facts from the CDC showing that homosexuality is a leading cause for the spread of STDS, and of course, it was brushed off. That's a pretty serious consequence.
Lesbians are the group least likely to spread STDs, which blows your theory out of the water. Why don't you stop worrying about things you can't change, and work on fixing your short comings? You can start by reading The Serenity Prayer.
You are lost, far from God, and the only person whom I've read on CD that sounds more like the archenemy of God than the bearer of Good News. How can you write such horrible things about homosexuality and claim to be Christian?
Whoever taught you to use the Bible to hate rather than love will proceed you to your final unheavenly destination.
And how's that "witness" working out for you on CD. More than one poster admitting to be homosexual has REJECTED GOD based on REJECTION from people like you claiming to know God.
You don't know God. You don't know Jesus who saved me. You don't know your own heart. Repent before it is too late.
Last edited by mensaguy; 11-07-2014 at 02:37 PM..
Reason: Quoted post removed
Lesbians are the group least likely to spread STDs, which blows your theory out of the water. Why don't you stop worrying about things you can't change, and work on fixing your short comings? You can start by reading The Serenity Prayer.
See that is why it is pointless to try and answer the consequences question because your side always deflects it to another group or me personally. My response is so what? That doesn't change the fact that male on male sex is unhealthy and dangerous. Dodge it all you want. It's a fact. And society giving a thumbs up to homosexuality will only encourage more of this activity.
Also, studies reveal that most lesbians have had more than one sex partner including men which certainly blows the sexual orientation from birth theory out of the water.
You are lost, far from God, and the only person whom I've read on CD that sounds more like the archenemy of God than the bearer of Good News. How can you write such horrible things about homosexuality and claim to be Christian?
Whoever taught you to use the Bible to hate rather than love will proceed you to your final unheavenly destination.
And how's that "witness" working out for you on CD. More than one poster admitting to be homosexual has REJECTED GOD based on REJECTION from people like you claiming to know God.
You don't know God. You don't know Jesus who saved me. You don't know your own heart. Repent before it is too late.
Haven't you beat that horse to death enough? We don't need every reply from you to state that you don't think we are Christians. Only God can judge the condition of a man's heart.
I rather a homosexual receive the hard truth than be deceived into thinking they can serve God yet remain in a rebellious sinful lifestyle.
Last edited by mensaguy; 11-07-2014 at 02:38 PM..
Reason: Quoted post edited
See that is why it is pointless to try and answer the consequences question because your side always deflects it to another group or me personally.
No one did any such thing! You did. This is a thread about homosexuals. Lesbians ARE homosexuals. So how is that a "deflection to another group"???? Do you even read what you write before you hit submit?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
My response is so what?
I already explained the So What but as usual you dodge and ignore my posts. The So what relates to the fact that if you are going to mediate morality based on STD implications, then you are actually arguring that lesbianism is MORE moral that not just male homosexuality, but heterosexuality too.
The So What is the implications of your own arguments, which you do not appear to consider before presenting your arguments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
That doesn't change the fact that male on male sex is unhealthy and dangerous.
That depends on what sex they practice and HOW they do so. What is "male on male sex"? In the past you have clearly indicated that you think homosexuality is synonymous with anal sex, when it is not, and you have been pulled up on this numerous times. A huge number of homosexuals do not practice it at all. A huge number of heterosexuals do.
So what you keep doing, time and time again, is level arguments against promiscuity and anal sex..... while pretending to yourself.... and convincing no one BUT yourself.... that you are discussing homosexuality. You are not. At all.
Secondly safe sex practiced between homosexuals is actually safer in terms of STD than heterosexual sex practiced without protection. So once again you are making the right arguments but on the WRONG subject. It is not homosexuality that is immoral due to STD.... it is unsafe sex practiced without protection or consideration.
Dodge it all you want. It's a fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
And society giving a thumbs up to homosexuality will only encourage more of this activity.
Sexuality has nothing to do with thumbs up. You are either attracted to the same sex, or you are not. Society telling you it is ok is not suddenly and magically going to change your sexual orientation. Please at least _try_ to make sense here would you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Also, studies reveal that most lesbians have had more than one sex partner including men which certainly blows the sexual orientation from birth theory out of the water.
No. It does not. It is called Bisexuality. Look it up.
Secondly MANY homosexuals engage in straight sex too. Most of them because they are trying to deny their sexuality for what it is. They try to "fit in" and be "normal" because society has been demanding it of them. But they often often fail, because they are living a lie.
So no, you are simply 100% wrong as usual on the subject. That homosexuals have in their history had opposite sex partners says NOTHING on the subject about gay from birth and EVERYTHING about what homosexuals feel compelled by society and peers to do despite their sexuality.
You are entirely wrong to think that how a person engages with sex, is a clear indicator as to their sexuality. There is often a disparity between the two. And that disparity for the homosexual tends to be bigger. Your error is like saying that because some people refuse to wear glasses for the start of their life, that we can not say they had vision troubles since birth. You are talking nonsense.
And those links were discussed with you at length in the past too. You simply ignored the posts that did so. I am not sure why it is always the people engaging in dodging that spend so much time accusing others of doing so. Projection I guess.
What causes the spread of STDs is promiscuity and not practicing safe sex. Homosexuality is nothing special in this. Promiscuity is.
Wrong. M2M sex is considered to be the easiest way to transmit a disease because tissue in this area can easily be broken and exposed to disease. God didn't design that part of the body for sex.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nozzferrahhtoo
Further the statistics you presented on Homosexuality were skewed because they focus specifically on male homosexuals in ORDER to skew the statistics. If you are going to mediate the morality of homosexuality based on STD, then you are arguing, whether you realize it or like it or not, that female homosexuality is not just moral, but is more moral that both male homosexuality AND heterosexuality. Because STD incidents in the lesbian community is lower than both.
But the simply fact you are missing in all of this is we do not mediate the morality of something based on the potential for disease or injury generally. Do we, for example, argue that extreme sports are immoral because base jumping has statistically more injuries per participant than, say, baseball? No, we do not. So why do you feel you can do so here?
I presented the stats to show that there are real world consequences to homosexuality. You run from these facts and put the focus completely on lesbians. That doesn't change the fact that M2M sex has a real world consequence. You can't run away from this fact. And it's just one of many consequences.
See that is why it is pointless to try and answer the consequences question because your side always deflects it to another group or me personally. My response is so what? That doesn't change the fact that male on male sex is unhealthy and dangerous. Dodge it all you want. It's a fact. And society giving a thumbs up to homosexuality will only encourage more of this activity.
Also, studies reveal that most lesbians have had more than one sex partner including men which certainly blows the sexual orientation from birth theory out of the water.
Actually it was you who blew your own theory of sexual orientation out of the water, thereby by proving a homosexual can't will themselves to become a heterosexual, and either can your god.
When are you going to invite me to your house to see your porn collection? Man, you must be sitting on a stack of it.
The first biblical cases of incest began with Adam and Eve and then their offsprings slept with one another in massive incestous sexual intercourses. In biblical terms, we are the consequence of incest.
We all already know the passages condoning slavery and the beating of slaves almost to death without the slave owner being punished for it, unless the slave dies.
Women are heavily oppressed in the bible. One of those misogynistic pasages is the one about bitter water. Women suspected of adultery were to drink bitter water which eventually could cause abortion. (Doesn't god hate abortion? O.o)
Numbers 5:24
He shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her.
Wrong. M2M sex is considered to be the easiest way to transmit a disease because tissue in this area can easily be broken and exposed to disease. God didn't design that part of the body for sex.
Nice of you to so accurately start your paragraph with a description of the following contents of the paragraph. You are indeed wrong and it was nice of you to label it thus. Though nice of you to at least attempt to reply to one of my posts for the first time in some time.
As I said above you are making two clear errors here. The first is that you consistently equate homosexuality with anal sex when that equation is simply entirely wrong. And secondly you are not comparing like for like, as unprotected heterosexual sex brings with it higher risks and higher statistical down sides, than protected homosexual sex. You are simply warping the statistics to fit a propaganda attempt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
I presented the stats to show that there are real world consequences to homosexuality.
And as I said we have addressed those stats and they are not saying what you think they are, for the reasons I just laid out twice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
You run from these facts and put the focus completely on lesbians.
Not accurate at all, one of your misrepresentations of my words that you are so fond of.
I am not focusing on lesbians, I am bringing lesbians into the equation to highlight the fact that you are focusing not just solely on male homosexuals, but one sexual practice practiced by only a portion of homosexuals. Your issue is not with homosexuals, but with anal sex. Quite simply not a single statistic you have offered on the subject of anal sex is any more relevant to a discussion of homosexuality than it is to heterosexuality.... because they practice it too.
So you are focusing on one specific sex act in one specific group, and then misrepresenting me as focusing on a single group when I did no such thing. Wow. Just wow.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
