Homosexuality could be nature's way of population control (body, demon, created)

[SuperSoul]

Originally Posted by whoppers

Don't get the wrong impression, now!

Where does someone go for factual, unbiased information? That's an important question, indeed. Unfortunately, everyone brings their own biases (no matter how large or small) to the table - even in scholarly journals. It's hoped that the peer-review system will help expunge such biases, but these same peers have their own biases. It happens, and you know it. I'm not condemning all groups or studies - just pointing out that humans are humans, and despite our best efforts at scholarly objectivity, this goal is not always met. To use an example from archeaological studies: is the current emphasis by Israeli archaeologists digging in the Holy Land informed by current political issues of land ownership, or are they digging out of purely scholarly intent with a completely non-biased quest for knowledge? Well - a little bit of both: it's been clearly shown that some scholars are digging with preconceptions of a modern political nature. Not all of them - but some of them. And these scholars are published in peer-reviewed journals, and in charge of major digs. The origins of this practice can be found in a further example: Take this a little further back into the heyday of Biblical Archeaology, where the famous saying tells us that the scholars went diggging "with a Bible in one hand, and a shovel in the other" - they very clearly were relying on certain preconceptions and yet they were published in scholary, peer-reviewed journals.

The important thing to note here is that in scientific, scholarly research - the very nature of peer-review (in the pre-publication process) tends to lead later to the possibility of disagreeing with the results. It happens very frequently. So that needs to be understood, when you're quoting from articles and studies: there are almost always other scientists who will disagree with the findings, produce their own interpretation of the results, or conduct their own studies. The very nature of science precludes absolutely firm results, in many cases. And I don't think you're mentioning this at all. You mention older articles, then dismiss them with the advent of a new article - many times not mentioning that the very same article has been 'dismissed' by yet another article. Nothing is as cut-and-dry as it appears to be - especially in an area so explosive as the topic of this thread.

Now - just so we're clear, I never meant to give the impression that any publication or group that is openly 'anti-gay' is automatically 'pro-gay and biased'. I merely was pointing out that you chastise your opponents for using biased sources, while at the same time you clearly are getting some of your information from biased sources. Not ALL of your sources, but some of them. And this applies to some of the links you have provided - not just the actual studies themselves. Studies may be biased, and so may websites linking to these studies - as you studiously point out as evidence against your opponents, but fail to mention in regards to some of your own links.

All I'm trying to say is that ad hominem attacks do not work. Just because a website is openly "Anti-Gay" and run by religious zealots, does not automatically make every statement they claim, or article they reference, or study they point to, faulty and biased. Of course - it happens, but it's not guaranteed. Conversely, one could use the same ad hominem attack on you - you're very clear on what 'side' of the issue you stand on, so one could automatically say "Well, all these arguments and links to studies and articles are coming from a very pro-gay poster - Jaymax - so we can just dismiss them as .....etc"
It appears to go both ways, and it's just what I've noticed in these several threads on the subject. You're very quick to jump in with ad hominem attacks. They may be merited, or not - but I think you're using them too much. I guess it depends on what you're trying to accomplish - you speak as if every 'anti-gay' argument has been squashed by previous posts, or articles, or studies and anyone who disagrees is just using biased sources, or are ignorant. If the issues were so concretely decided by now - these threads wouldn't even exist, right?

I'm not trying to discredit all scientific studies everywhere - that's not my intention; just trying to point out that ad hominem attacks can be used in the same way against either side. Do you agree? It's difficult for the average person to find a non-biased, completely objective source - and I don't think any exist. I'm not saying that the bias is so large as to be 'pro-gay' or 'anti-gay' - but that biases are present, especially among studies using samples.

Good points, Whoppers.
I'd only add that some things we don't need scientific research to know, but simply know through experience... like that we each are a product of a sperm (from a father) & an egg (from a mother). We also know about reproductive anatomy - what fits together "naturally" & what doesn't.

[Fiyero]

Originally Posted by whoppers

I agree with you for the most part - but I wouldn't automatically claim that all claims of "anti-gay religious groups" are not based on fact.
And I wouldn't automatically assume that the other 'side' is not free of their own agendas, as well.

All claims made by anti-gay religious groups are not based on fact. Every claim they make is based on lies and false information, because if they based their statements on fact, they could no longer condemn and demonize gays.

As Jaymax pointed out, do you give equal credit to the Flat Earth Society compared to Geophysicists and organizations like the United States Geological Survey when discussing the shape and make-up of the Earth?

[whoppers]

Originally Posted by Fiyero

All claims made by anti-gay religious groups are not based on fact. Every claim they make is based on lies and false information,

Wow - every single claim? EVERY single one of them? Every eensy teensy little claim? All of them LIES and based on FALSE INFORMATION?

Now you're just exaggerating. Extremely. Demonizing the enemy, I see, is not something just practiced in war.

[whoppers]

Originally Posted by SuperSoul

Good points, Whoppers.
I'd only add that some things we don't need scientific research to know, but simply know through experience... like that we each are a product of a sperm (from a father) & an egg (from a mother). We also know about reproductive anatomy - what fits together "naturally" & what doesn't.

Thank you.

Careful, though - Fiyero might consider obvious biological data and observation as just LIES and based on FALSE INFORMATION lol!

[denverian]

As a gay man, I've suspected this most of my life. Humans can't just go on producing billions more of us without causing extinction. It's natures birth control. If anything, we need more and more gay people. Not to mention, many gay people adopt children, proving that they can even further be a part of the solution.

[denverian]

Originally Posted by SuperSoul

Good points, Whoppers.
I'd only add that some things we don't need scientific research to know, but simply know through experience... like that we each are a product of a sperm (from a father) & an egg (from a mother). We also know about reproductive anatomy - what fits together "naturally" & what doesn't.

If you check out some gay porn online, you'll see what fits together quite naturally

[Fiyero]

Originally Posted by whoppers

Wow - every single claim? EVERY single one of them? Every eensy teensy little claim? All of them LIES and based on FALSE INFORMATION?

Now you're just exaggerating. Extremely. Demonizing the enemy, I see, is not something just practiced in war.

Actually, what I said probably isn't far off from the truth. Not sure I've ever seen one claim against gays to be based on reality.

[Fiyero]

Originally Posted by denverian

As a gay man, I've suspected this most of my life. Humans can't just go on producing billions more of us without causing extinction. It's natures birth control. If anything, we need more and more gay people. Not to mention, many gay people adopt children, proving that they can even further be a part of the solution.

Yup, we just hit 7 billion people on the planet. 90% of which live in poverty. We need more gay people, because straights can't seem to stop sending us into extinction through overpopulation.

[SuperSoul]

Originally Posted by denverian

If you check out some gay porn online, you'll see what fits together quite naturally

I mentioned, "We also know about reproductive anatomy - what fits together "naturally" & what doesn't." (An anus is not a "reproductive" organ.) A penis fits "naturally" into a vagina - without health complications when involving a healthy male & female. It is anatomically impossible to fit 2 vaginas together, nor 2 penises.

Some engage in oral sex, which is another way of contracting STDS, which homosexuals statistically spread a lot. Anal sex also carries risks of spreading STDS & AIDS. Even anal sex with the use of a condom, or by 2 healthy males, involves risk of anal fissure, & colon rupture.

[Theophane]

And then there's the santorum ...