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.
If that's what you think I was saying, then you truly don't get it.
Again, context is everything. Most people use different forms of communication depending on who they're talking to. Using your logic, you would believe that if a black person casually refers to himself or a friend as "n*gger", then a white stranger should have a right to call him that too. That couldn't be farther from the truth.
What about your obsession with calling Tea Partiers Teabaggers?
As off topic as this is, if someone doesn't like being called a n*gger nor do they like the word perpetuated, perhaps they, themselves, should stop ****ing saying it.
That really pisses me off when people use racial slurs in the safety zone of referring to themselves.
What's even more offensive and ridiculous is that these exact same people say that because the Tea Partiers called themselves Teabaggers, it is perfectly fine to call them that even though they know it's a slur. Gays and minorites live in a double standard world where they are NEVER wrong!
Are you trying to force your morals (or lack thereof) on me?
Who is to say that your standards are right?
There is no right or wrong. It just is.
But, because we value freedom in this country, YOU are free to not engage in any sex act you think is immoral, based on whatever hangup, book of religion of your choice, etc. that you please.
Why is it so hard to understand that YOU are the one seeking to force your morals on others by seeking to restrict behaviors, and not the other way around? Why are you not satisfied with allowing people to live the way they want? Has anyone ever told you that you HAVE to engage in a certain sex act?
And I'm supposed to believe that....why? I think I should probably ask for a link to that info, but since I can pretty much guess where you got it, maybe I won't ask.
I think you could find this information in a lot of places because it is true and important. But here, try this, the International Journal of Epidemiology:
Age-specific mortality was significantly higher for gay and bisexual men than all men aged 30–44. Life expectancy at age 20 for gay and bisexual men ranged from 34.0 years to 46.3 years for the 3% and 9% scenarios respectively. These were all lower than the 54.3 year life expectancy at age 20 for all men. The probability of living from age 20 to 65 years for gay and bisexual men ranged from 32% for the 3% scenario, to 59% for the 9% scenario. These figures were considerably lower than for all men where the probability of living from 20 to 65 was 78%. Conclusion. In a major Canadian centre, life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday. Under even the most liberal assumptions, gay and bisexual men in this urban centre are now experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by all men in Canada in the year 1871.
I think you could find this information in a lot of places because it is true and important. But here, try this, the International Journal of Epidemiology:
Age-specific mortality was significantly higher for gay and bisexual men than all men aged 30–44. Life expectancy at age 20 for gay and bisexual men ranged from 34.0 years to 46.3 years for the 3% and 9% scenarios respectively. These were all lower than the 54.3 year life expectancy at age 20 for all men. The probability of living from age 20 to 65 years for gay and bisexual men ranged from 32% for the 3% scenario, to 59% for the 9% scenario. These figures were considerably lower than for all men where the probability of living from 20 to 65 was 78%. Conclusion. In a major Canadian centre, life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday. Under even the most liberal assumptions, gay and bisexual men in this urban centre are now experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by all men in Canada in the year 1871.
I read a similar study. They found out that more homosexuals have mental and drug issues and die from suicide or overdose or other drug complications like AIDS than do heterosexuals.
But, because we value freedom in this country, YOU are free to not engage in any sex act you think is immoral, based on whatever hangup, book of religion of your choice, etc. that you please.
Why is it so hard to understand that YOU are the one seeking to force your morals on others by seeking to restrict behaviors, and not the other way around? Why are you not satisfied with allowing people to live the way they want? Has anyone ever told you that you HAVE to engage in a certain sex act?
And it all boils down to this post.
Some people feel an obsessive need to force others to comply with their view of the world.
I am sure that there are psychological issues at play, but I just dont have the energy to dig all that up today.
i pesonaly think that sexuality should be private, i dont go flaunting my straightness around in west hollywood, so why should they talk about their homo-lisiousness when im around?
I think you could find this information in a lot of places because it is true and important. But here, try this, the International Journal of Epidemiology:
Age-specific mortality was significantly higher for gay and bisexual men than all men aged 30–44. Life expectancy at age 20 for gay and bisexual men ranged from 34.0 years to 46.3 years for the 3% and 9% scenarios respectively. These were all lower than the 54.3 year life expectancy at age 20 for all men. The probability of living from age 20 to 65 years for gay and bisexual men ranged from 32% for the 3% scenario, to 59% for the 9% scenario. These figures were considerably lower than for all men where the probability of living from 20 to 65 was 78%. Conclusion. In a major Canadian centre, life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday. Under even the most liberal assumptions, gay and bisexual men in this urban centre are now experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by all men in Canada in the year 1871.
Over the past few months we have learnt of a number of reports regarding a paper we published in the International Journal of Epidemiology on the gay and bisexual life expectancy in Vancouver in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
From these reports it appears that our research is being used by select groups in US and Finland to suggest that gay and bisexual men live an unhealthy lifestyle that is destructive to themselves and to others. These homophobic groups appear more interested in restricting the human rights of gay and bisexuals rather than promoting their health and well being.
The aim of our research was never to spread more homophobia, but to demonstrate to an international audience how the life expectancy of gay and bisexual men can be estimated from limited vital statistics data. In our paper, we demonstrated that in a major Canadian centre, life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 21 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality continued, we estimated that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years would not reach their 65th birthday.
In contrast, if we were to repeat this analysis today the life expectancy of gay and bisexual men would be greatly improved. Deaths from HIV infection have declined dramatically in this population since 1996. As we have previously reported there has been a threefold decrease in mortality in Vancouver as well as in other parts of British Columbia.
i pesonaly think that sexuality should be private, i dont go flaunting my straightness around in west hollywood, so why should they talk about their homo-lisiousness when im around?
Well, thats extremely ignorant and stupid...
Whoever voted Neutral might as well vote for supporting the gay-bashers, because "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil"
So neutrals are just tolerating what heterosexual gaybashers say about homosexuals
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.
