Are u going to leave USA now?

[Saint Frankenstein]

Reading Paul Cameron? Please cite credible sources, not hearsay or the writings of a thoroughly discredited fraud.

No, not Cameron. For the HIV/AIDS and STD rates, you can just go to the CDC for those. I mean, you're gay. I find it surprising if you're not aware of the high rates of HIV/AIDS and STDs in the gay male population compared to the general population. I had been involved with the gay community since my teens and I was aware of that for years. I knew two gay men around my age who got HIV in their teens. One of them was whoring himself out to older men for a place to stay and that's how he got it. The levels of promiscuity in the gay male community are pretty legendary and is an open secret that is even celebrated by some, so I find it hard to believe that you wouldn't know about that. Cruising, circuit parties, sex work, being on the "down low" and such like are pretty common in the gay male community. You can go into gay stores and find poppers for sale. We all know what poppers are for and the risky behaviors that go along with their usage. One of those types of stores, I actually applied to work for in my teens. The owner of the store was reluctant to give me a chance because I was female (this is before I was living as a man) and might not understand the sexuality of gay men, like what kind of poppers to recommend. Lol.
CDC Reports STD Rates Up Among Gay Men | Kaiser Health News
CDC: 20% of Gay Men Are HIV-Positive, but Nearly Half Don’t Know It | TIME.com
Shocking Increase in HIV Infection Rate Among Young Gay, Bi Men | Advocate.com
Higher Risk of Mental Health Problems for Homosexuals | Psych Central
Domestic Violence Likely More Frequent for Same-Sex Couples: Northwestern University News
Drug use 'seven times higher' among gays - Health News - Health & Families - The Independent

Based on religion which I excluded from the reasons.

You don't have to be religious to accept Natural Law arguments. NL arguments are structured so that they are self-evident without appealing to a Creator.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Firstly, you will need to show studies demonstrating this.

Secondly, is it any surprise that most of those things could be higher in a minority group who are persecuted, insulted, degraded and otherwise regarded as sub-human and forced to live on the fringes by a large portion of the society they live in? What if all of those things were also true of black or Hispanic communities in America? Would you therefore be against black or Hispanic people, or would you believe there was some explanation other than the fact that they were black or Hispanic?

The "it's because of discrimination" excuse doesn't seem to hold water since the same holds true even in those societies where there's a high acceptance of homosexuality, such as in Northwestern Europe. Regardless, that's just a form of shirking responsibility. Just because the larger society disapproves of you in some fashion, that doesn't mean you have to destroy yourself by slutting around a lot, doing drugs and such. I'm a transsexual and society largely does not understand transsexualism and it's extremely difficult for us to access appropriate medical treatment much of the time, but I'm not going to destroy myself over it. There's a certain point where you have to take responsibility for yourself and act like you have dignity and self-respect.

As for blacks and such, they have a cultural problem. But race/ethnic issues are not the same as sexuality issues were are sex (as in male/female) issues.

 

[leibowde84]

The rate of disease, mental illness, promiscuity, drug abuse, domestic violence, etc. are all higher among homosexual men than in the general population. Then there's also the Natural Law view that such acts (i.e. anal sex, aka sodomy) violate the natural order of sexuality, which is ordered towards procreation and bonding between a married man and woman.

Don't you think that the mental health and drug abuse might be caused by discrimination against homosexuals?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Don't you think that the mental health and drug abuse might be caused by discrimination against homosexuals?

It may, to a certain extent. But I hardly think it's the primary cause. Risky sexual behavior can do that on its own.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

The "it's because of discrimination" excuse doesn't seem to hold water since the same holds true even in those societies where there's a high acceptance of homosexuality, such as in Northwestern Europe.

Sources, please?

Regardless, that's just a form of shirking responsibility. Just because the larger society disapproves of you in some fashion, that doesn't mean you have to destroy yourself by slutting around a lot, doing drugs and such.

How is it shirking responsibility? I'm not saying that justifies it, I'm saying it's most likely a greater contributing factor to those problems than their homosexuality is. Those problems are not a direct result of their sexual preference, and there's insufficient evidence to indicate that it is. What you're doing is akin to looking at higher crime or disease rates among black communities and saying "It is because they are black, therefore there is something inherently wrong with being black". How is that logic any different to what you are doing now?

I'm a transsexual and society largely does not understand transsexualism and it's extremely difficult for us to access appropriate medical treatment much of the time, but I'm not going to destroy myself over it. There's a certain point where you have to take responsibility for yourself and act like you have dignity and self-respect.

Because, apparently, all people should function and deal with their individual situations in the exact same manner you deal with yours?

As for blacks and such, they have a cultural problem. But race/ethnic issues are not the same as sexuality issues were are sex (as in male/female) issues.

So you can brush of the problems in black or Hispanic communities as being "cultural", but you can't do the same for homosexual communities? Why?

It may, to a certain extent. But I hardly think it's the primary cause. Risky sexual behavior can do that on its own.

Except that your studies indicate that these problems also exist in lesbians. Care to name a single "risky sexual behaviour" lesbians commonly engage in?

 

[leibowde84]

It may, to a certain extent. But I hardly think it's the primary cause. Risky sexual behavior can do that on its own.

How so?

 

[Jainarayan]

I mean, you're gay. I find it surprising if you're not aware of the high rates of HIV/AIDS and STDs in the gay male population compared to the general population.

Why would I be aware of it since it doesn't affect me? Because I'm gay doesn't mean anything, I don't hang out in the "gay community". I'm married, been partnered and monogamous for over 19 years. There are far more of us than there are of those who are promiscuous. Do you have stats on how many monogamous or non-promiscuous gay men there are in the US? And yes, the natural law argument is bogus and subjective. Everything in modern life is more against "natural law", including the internet, than sexuality.

 

[leibowde84]

Why would I be aware of it since it doesn't affect me? Because I'm gay doesn't mean anything, I don't hang out in the "gay community". I'm married, been partnered and monogamous for over 19 years. There are far more of us than there are of those who are promiscuous. Do you have stats on how many monogamous or non-promiscuous gay men there are in the US? And yes, the natural law argument is bogus and subjective. Everything in modern life is more against "natural law", including the internet, than sexuality.

I agree. I think that the "Natural Law" argument is bogus. Sex should not be thought of as this sacred act that should only be done in marriage and for procreation. It is a healthy and completely normal part of life. Fun too.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Sources, please?

Sexual Orientation and Mental and Physical Health Status: Findings From a Dutch Population Survey

How is it shirking responsibility? I'm not saying that justifies it, I'm saying it's most likely a greater contributing factor to those problems than their homosexuality is. Those problems are not a direct result of their sexual preference, and there's insufficient evidence to indicate that it is. What you're doing is akin to looking at higher crime or disease rates among black communities and saying "It is because they are black, therefore there is something inherently wrong with being black". How is that logic any different to what you are doing now?

As I said, since this deals with sexual orientation, it's a sex issue. Most of these issues are with the gay and bisexual male community. I think the simplest explanation for them is that males are more likely to partake in risky behaviors but, among heterosexuals, that's curtailed to a certain extent by hetero females. Since gay male sexuality is oriented towards males, it's just more testosterone and so that leads to what you see here. That's my conclusion and it's the one that seems the most obvious and makes the most sense to me.

As for race issues, that's another topic and I'd prefer not to drag that into this discussion and derail the topic. I have a thread about the issues in the black community called "black people, stop embarrassing yourselves".

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Why would I be aware of it since it doesn't affect me? Because I'm gay doesn't mean anything, I don't hang out in the "gay community". I'm married, been partnered and monogamous for over 19 years. There are far more of us than there are of those who are promiscuous. Do you have stats on how many monogamous or non-promiscuous gay men there are in the US?

Oh, so you're sheltered, then. I think you need to show evidence that there's more monogamous gay men in committed relationships than not. The only evidence about married gay couples I know of says that most gay marriages are open marriages.
Most gay couples aren't monogamous: Will straight couples go monogamish?

And yes, the natural law argument is bogus and subjective. Everything in modern life is more against "natural law", including the internet, than sexuality.

I don't think you understand the subject. The definition of "natural" in Natural Law means that things have teleological meaning, that they have a purpose. You can say that this purpose is the cause of nature, through pure evolution, or the cause of nature's God. Doesn't matter.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Sexual Orientation and Mental and Physical Health Status: Findings From a Dutch Population Survey

I'm going to need a bit more than that to support your blanket statement that homosexuality is a cause of poor mental health on a global scale.

As I said, since this deals with sexual orientation, it's a sex issue.

No, it isn't. If a particular sexual group are condemned, mistreated and regarded as subhuman by the society or culture they are in, that is is societal or cultural issue. How is this any different to saying "drug abuse and crime by back communities is a race issue, therefore it is their race that is to blame". Cultural and societal factors contribute to the behaviour and mental health of sexual groups as well as they contribute to the behaviour of racial or cultural groups. We still live in a society where the vast majority of gay people struggle with their own sexual identity for years before coming out, because a large proportion of the society they live in still condemns and fears their sexual preference. How can you claim that has less of an impact on an individual's mental health than their sexual preference does?

Most of these issues are with the gay and bisexual male community. I think the simplest explanation for them is that males are more likely to partake in risky behaviors but, among heterosexuals, that's curtailed to a certain extent by hetero females. Since gay male sexuality is oriented towards males, it's just more testosterone and so that leads to what you see here. That's my conclusion and it's the one that seems the most obvious and makes the most sense to me.

It makes sense, but there's no actual evidence to suggest that it is the primary contributing factor towards the state of drug abuse or mental health among homosexuals.

As for race issues, that's another topic and I'd prefer not to drag that into this discussion and derail the topic. I have a thread about the issues in the black community called "black people, stop embarrassing yourselves".

I'm just bringing up race issues as a logical parallel of your approach to gay issues. I have no interest in dragging the subject up in this thread.

Also, you haven't answered my question: if the mental health issues in homosexuals is due to "risky sexual behaviour", then please tell me what risky sexual behaviour lesbians engage in.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'm going to need a bit more than that to support your blanket statement that homosexuality is a cause of poor mental health.


No, it isn't. If a particular sexual group are condemned, mistreated and regarded as subhuman by the society or culture they are in, that is is societal or cultural issue. How is this any different to saying "drug abuse and crime by back communities is a race issue, therefore it is their race that is to blame". Cultural and societal factors contribute to the behaviour and mental health of sexual groups as well as they contribute to the behaviour of racial or cultural groups. We still live in a society where the vast majority of gay people struggle with their own sexual identity for years before coming out, because a large proportion of the society they live in still condemns and fears their sexual preference. How can you claim that has less of an impact on an individual's mental health than their sexual preference does?


It makes sense, but there's no actual evidence to suggest that it is the primary contributing factor towards the state of drug abuse or mental health among homosexuals.


I'm just bringing up race issues as a logical parallel of your approach to gay issues. I have no interest in dragging the subject up in this thread.

Also, you haven't answered my question: if the mental health issues in homosexuals is due to "risky sexual behaviour", then please tell me what risky sexual behaviour lesbians engage in.

You're just repeating yourself. And your argument that it's due to discrimination falls apart because plenty of other groups have been discriminated against in society, yet they still thrived. Look at Jews. That's a group that's a probable winner of the Oppression Olympics going back centuries, but somehow they managed to become one of the most powerful groups in the world for such a small minority of the global population. That's to their credit as a people. I just saying that we need to look at other causes of this rather than being lazy and PC and falling back on the "it's discrimination!" excuse.

 

[Revoltingest]

You're just repeating yourself. And your argument that it's due to discrimination falls apart because plenty of other groups have been discriminated against in society, yet they still thrived. Look at Jews. That's a group that's a probable winner of the Oppression Olympics going back centuries, but somehow they managed to become one of the most powerful groups in the world for such a small minority of the global population. That's to their credit as a people. I just saying that we need to look at other causes of this rather than being lazy and PC and falling back on the "it's discrimination!" excuse.

As I recall, Jews didn't just acquire the right to marry.
Nor did cops here arrest them merely for doing what they do.
But what is the point of highlighting the perceived shortcoming of gay folk?
Is there an unstated premise that a group which has flaws should therefore be deprived of some civil liberties?
If so, then this same standard should be applied to all.
(Of course, this then runs into unacceptable results.)

 

[Jainarayan]

Oh, so you're sheltered, then.

No, just responsible and mature.

The only evidence about married gay couples I know of says that most gay marriages are open marriages.

Operative phrase: I know of.

I don't think you understand the subject. The definition of "natural" in Natural Law means that things have teleological meaning, that they have a purpose. You can say that this purpose is the cause of nature, through pure evolution, or the cause of nature's God. Doesn't matter.

You don't know that homosexuality doesn't have a purpose.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Ah, the old "gay men are so dirty and promiscuous" argument. So gay men love sex. Got that. So do scores of straight religious people.

Just offering some personal experience here (from a non-sheltered person I might add)...

Folks that are the freakiest of freaks who have offered what they want to do to that hot bi "unicorn" chick in unimaginable ways are the ones have stood up at the podium on Sundays preaching about the unnaturalness of fornication, adultery, and homosexualtiy.

Actually, I've found not just those men who stand in front of congregations preaching as such, but their wives want in on the fun, too.

If I could share the number of times I've been approached by the pious...and then begged not to reveal who they are and to keep their desires and conversations a secret from the rest of the world...*chuckles*

Human sexuality has a tendency to rear its ugly head regardless of how much we like to show how pure we all are. Follow the trail of where folks get most passionate and heated about homosexuality or bisexuality. There's a reason why their blood gets boiling (hot).

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

No, just responsible and mature.

Okay, but it's not a matter of how you personally act.

Operative phrase: I know of.

I await your evidence to the contrary.

You don't know that homosexuality doesn't have a purpose.

That's not for me to argue.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

As I recall, Jews didn't just acquire the right to marry.
Nor did cops here arrest them merely for doing what they do.
But what is the point of highlighting the perceived shortcoming of gay folk?
Is there an unstated premise that a group which has flaws should therefore be deprived of some civil liberties?
If so, then this same standard should be applied to all.
(Of course, this then runs into unacceptable results.)

Thorbjorn asked me what specific reasons people might have for being against homosexuality and I gave him some examples. I'm not just randomly throwing it out there or going on a rant.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

No, just responsible and mature.



Operative phrase: I know of.



You don't know that homosexuality doesn't have a purpose.

Gosh you sound so normal and boring. Shouldn't you be furthering the Gay Agenda instead of going about like everybody else?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Ah, the old "gay men are so dirty and promiscuous" argument. So gay men love sex. Got that. So do scores of straight religious people.

Just offering some personal experience here (from a non-sheltered person I might add)...

Folks that are the freakiest of freaks who have offered what they want to do to that hot bi "unicorn" chick in unimaginable ways are the ones have stood up at the podium on Sundays preaching about the unnaturalness of fornication, adultery, and homosexualtiy.

Actually, I've found not just those men who stand in front of congregations preaching as such, but their wives want in on the fun, too.

If I could share the number of times I've been approached by the pious...and then begged not to reveal who they are and to keep their desires and conversations a secret from the rest of the world...*chuckles*

Human sexuality has a tendency to rear its ugly head regardless of how much we like to show how pure we all are. Follow the trail of where folks get most passionate and heated about homosexuality or bisexuality. There's a reason why their blood gets boiling (hot).

Yeah, there's hypocrites and perverts in sheep's clothing. We all know that. What's your point?

 

[Revoltingest]

You don't know that homosexuality doesn't have a purpose.

The oft heard problem of "purpose"....
It's a faith based view of the universe which many of us don't share.
Instead of a purpose, I see that things just are.
One person's finding of no purpose in something may govern their
own behavior, but shouldn't allow them to prohibit in others.

Btw, notice how mature I was by not referencing Navin Johnson's "special purpose"?