"Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.[W:276]

[CriticalThought]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

It's different in a way that causes profound difficulties in one of the more important functions of life. Even accounting for reproductive assistance (which can be difficult and expensive) your potential dating pool is drastically reduced and-- as a homosexual male-- you are considerably more susceptible to sexually-transmitted diseases and various cancers. The argument that it's a negative for society is vaguely ridiculous and based on some truly specious logic... but the argument that it's negative for the people so afflicted is pretty obvious.

Your statements assume a few things. First, it is sexual behavior that puts gay men at greater risk, not being gay. Gay men who do not practice anal sex are not really at any greater risk than any of the rest of the population and they are certainly at a lower risk that those who do, whether heterosexual or homosexual.

The dating pool argument is also very relative. There are heterosexual men, who despite having a vastly greater number of potential partners, are unable to find a suitable mate due to their high, unrealistic standards. In fact, in some ways gays are advantaged in that they are limited because that often forces them to settle for less than perfect and to form a more realistic relationship. More choice is not necessarily a good thing.

As far as reproductive, gays are incentivized to adopt and provide homes for children who need them or to go through great pains and expense to have their children biologically, which filters out those who likely would not be committed parents. There is also something to be said that gays, more often than not, choose when they have kids, whereas heterosexuals have often experienced the great disadvantage of the unplanned pregnancy.

It truly is just different. I have never viewed being gay as a handicap.

 

[Bonzai]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

Your statements assume a few things. First, it is sexual behavior that puts gay men at greater risk, not being gay. Gay men who do not practice anal sex are not really at any greater risk than any of the rest of the population and they are certainly at a lower risk that those who do, whether heterosexual or homosexual.

The dating pool argument is also very relative. There are heterosexual men, who despite having a vastly greater number of potential partners, are unable to find a suitable mate due to their high, unrealistic standards. In fact, in some ways gays are advantaged in that they are limited because that often forces them to settle for less than perfect and to form a more realistic relationship. More choice is not necessarily a good thing.

As far as reproductive, gays are incentivized to adopt and provide homes for children who need them or to go through great pains and expense to have their children biologically, which filters out those who likely would not be committed parents. There is also something to be said that gays, more often than not, choose when they have kids, whereas heterosexuals have often experienced the great disadvantage of the unplanned pregnancy.

It truly is just different. I have never viewed being gay as a handicap.

You can't argue with those who believe that there is something fundamentally wrong about the world that needs to be fixed................That's why the pagans thought they were atheists......................

 

[Jerry]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

You can't argue with those who believe that there is something fundamentally wrong about the world that needs to be fixed................That's why the pagans thought they were atheists......................

Ellipsis are used to show omission. What are you leaving out of your post?

 

[CriticalThought]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

You can't argue with those who believe that there is something fundamentally wrong about the world that needs to be fixed................That's why the pagans thought they were atheists......................

Whenever there is a conflict between how people believe the world should be and how it is they will assume the discrepancy is evidence that there is something wrong with the ways things are rather than there is something wrong with their expectations with the world. We are all prone to that error in judgement because we all have egos that seek to make sense of an indifferent universe.

 

[Fallenangel]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

If it isn't "phony" then how would you use the argument that "sex is for procreation" against homosexuality?

And thank you for considering the links. I admire anyone who takes the time to consider additional evidence.

Hey,
I"ll do some more read-up (including your links) before i continue, cause if i'm wrong with my initial assertion there is no point in continuing this debate .

Cheers,
Fallen.

 

[Visbek]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

It's different in a way that causes profound difficulties in one of the more important functions of life.

Homosexuals can, and do, still reproduce. Straight couples also do, in many occasions, fail to produce offspring.

Even accounting for reproductive assistance (which can be difficult and expensive) your potential dating pool is drastically reduced...

Humanity, and human homosexuality, has been in existence for about 1 million years. Homosexuals definitely figured out how to reproduce during that time.

as a homosexual male-- you are considerably more susceptible to sexually-transmitted diseases and various cancers.

Or not. AIDS is rampant among heterosexuals in Africa. It's mostly a matter of luck that AIDS is more prevalent in the gay community than among heterosexuals in the US.

The problems facing homosexuals are due to prejudice, bias and hatred. That's not a logical reason to disparage homosexuals.

 

[Fallenangel]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

Scientists aren't cool....................

Yes they are!
I'm studying to be one...a Theoretical Astrophysicist...

Fallen.

 

[Bonzai]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

Ellipsis are used to show omission. What are you leaving out of your post?

There is nothing wrong with the world. There is, however, something seriously wrong with monotheists.

 

[Jerry]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

There is nothing wrong with the world. There is, however, something seriously wrong with monotheists.

I agree, there is something wrong with us. We have a word for it, "sin". Everyone is a sinner.

 

[StillBallin75]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

Heterosexual men as a rule will have their own kids. Homosexual men as a rule will not. Hardly surprising that men with their own children will spend more time with them than their nephews and nieces.

What do you mean by "their own kids"? Homosexual men are free to adopt, utilize in vitro, or simply not have kids at all. Why is this relevant?

 

[calamity]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

Being gay just thoroughly criminalized me, but what else could one expect to happen in this dump ?...................

I don't give blood, but being gay means you can't give blood. Being gay today is better than it was 20 years ago, and it's a whole world removed from being gay in 1970 or 80. But, it's still a situation that often results in ignorant misunderstandings from those who think gay is a defect or act of moral terpitude. That's just a lot to put up with.

 

[Bonzai]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

I agree, there is something wrong with us. We have a word for it, "sin". Everyone is a sinner.

You can describe yourself as you see fit. One of the things wrong with monotheists is that they presume to speak for everyone. They don't speak for me................................

 

[CriticalThought]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

I agree, there is something wrong with us. We have a word for it, "sin". Everyone is a sinner.

I appreciate the term "sin". As I was taught, it simply means to "miss the mark". Even in that sense I wouldn't call it "wrong with us", but rather what makes us human, our imperfection.

As my grandfather would say, flaws are just as much a part of craftsmanship as anything else, because they are what gives every piece its individual character.

 

[Bonzai]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

I don't give blood, but being gay means you can't give blood. Being gay today is better than it was 20 years ago, and it's a whole world removed from being gay in 1970 or 80. But, it's still a situation that often results in ignorant misunderstandings from those who think gay is a defect or act of moral terpitude. That's just a lot to put up with.

To be brutally frank with you, I think this civilization is finished. The people here are so stupid it's funny......................

 

[Jerry]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

You can describe yourself as you see fit. One of the things wrong with monotheists is that they presume to speak for everyone. They don't speak for me................................

Have I tried to speak for you?

 

[CLAX1911]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

Hey,

How?
And what do you mean by other forms of sex?

Cheers,
Fallen.

All sex that isn't provocative between any people or by yourself.

 

[Bonzai]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

Have I tried to speak for you?

I'm not a human being like you.

 

[Jerry]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

All sex that isn't provocative between any people or by yourself.

I'm fairly cretin that oral sex is not intended for reproductive purposes.

 

[Fallenangel]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

All sex that isn't provocative between any people or by yourself.

Hey,
I still don't get what you mean by that?! (EDIT: and how it addresses my assertion that the purpose of sex is reproduction.)
maybe it's my English or the fact that it's 5am here... can you explain what you mean, with more than one sentence.

Cheers,
Fallen.

 

[CLAX1911]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

I'm fairly cretin that oral sex is not intended for reproductive purposes.

Anal sex, vaginal sex while wearing a prophylactic, frankly any affection what so ever. I consider sex to be a form of affection. Lots of thinks that people do have many purposes.

 

[Jerry]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

I'm not a human being like you.

Never the less, I am a monotheist, and you are a part of "everyone". Have I ever tried to speak for you?

 

[Bonzai]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

Never the less, I am a monotheist, and you are a part of "everyone". Have I ever tried to speak for you?

That's a creepy statement..................

 

[CLAX1911]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

Hey,
I still don't get what you mean by that?!
maybe it's my English or the fact that it's 5am here... can you explain what you mean, with more than one sentence.

Cheers,
Fallen.

Most things that we call sex doesn't produce children. Sex while wearing a prophylactic, oral sex, anal sex, sex outside of reproductive cycle, oral sex, masturbation, mutual masturbation, vaginal sex using withdraw, vaginal sex while the woman is on birth control. It's clear that there is a very specific kind of sex for reproduction, out likely accounts for less than one percent of sexual intercourse.

I don't see how you can use the phony argument against homosexuality and not against all of the various forms of sex above

 

[CLAX1911]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

Hey,
I still don't get what you mean by that?! (EDIT: and how it addresses my assertion that the purpose of sex is reproduction.)
maybe it's my English or the fact that it's 5am here... can you explain what you mean, with more than one sentence.

Cheers,
Fallen.

Sorry, I meant procreative

 

[Jerry]

Re: "Logical" reasons for disagreeing with homosexuality.

That's a creepy statement..................

Have I ever tried to speak for you?