You have said that any deaths at all are not worth the risk, so you have refuted you own argument. Your primary context from the beginning of this thread regarding your secular arguments against homosexuality has been risk, and millions of heterosexuals in the U.S. alone are at risk. You said that heterosexuals need to have sex in order to maintain that population. I adequately refuted that argument.
No I didn't. I have typed until my fingers hurt that is not worth the risk given the lack of compensating gains. I said no life is worth the risk if lust is the only justification. I only have two main points and you seem to forget both in every other post.
In your post #304, you said:
"I will not comment further on this it has made me sick. I have never seen more lewd and grotesque displays than at a gay parade. Many are not contempt to quietly practice it they wish to rebelliously flaunt it and do so in disgusting ways. Since there are over 3 million sites that contain the problems of homosexuality I can't fathom why the question was asked."
A gay parade has nothing to do with medical problems.
Probably not but it has to do with the issues I must discuss to cover the subject and the grotesqueness of them.
Quite obviously, it is irrelevant how many websites discuss the problems of homosexuality, but how reliable they are, what percentage of all homosexuals have a particular problem, and what options homosexuals have. Much of your post #304 is false, misleading, or poorly documented.
I have no idea what is in that post and have consolidated my entire arguments into two points that are true even if everything in that post was wrong. I have told you to chunk anything you honestly thought was wrong in that long ago post and my points would still be true so it is irrelevant.
It is important to note that some research only deals with the percentages of homosexuals who have medical problems as compared with the percentages of heterosexuals who have medical problems, not with what percentages of all homosexuals, and heterosexuals have medical problems. If you wish, I can give you some examples of that misleading tactic in your post #304. How many statistics do you know of that deal with percentages of all homosexuals? "Er, uh......., not very many."
You often believe only what you want to believe, and there is no way that you checked out most of the sources in your post #304 in order to compare them with other sources. I just read that post again, and it is even worse than I thought it was. Most of it is trash. It is no wonder that you are so ignorant regarding the health of the general homosexual population.
You have repeatedly condemned even my suspicions concerning data accuracy and now your condemning data on the same basis.
All that it takes to have 1.4 million healthy homosexuals in the world is 1% of them, and that is a given. It is a fact that the vast majority of homosexuals are not alcoholics, are not drug abusers, are not murderers, are not pedophiles, and do not have HIV, or AIDS.
And all that it takes to have far more than 1.4 billion healthy homosexuals (if there are such a thing) is to stop practicing it.
Just so you understand my position, I agree with you, and with most experts, who say that homosexuals generally have more medical problems than heterosexuals do. I disagree with you about the percentages of homosexuals who have some particular medical problems.
I have provided very little in the way of stats so I have no idea how they could be wrong but even if they were you have admitted the only thing necessary to make my main contentions valid.
You do not have to discuss your post #304 since anyone who is interested can read it if they want to. Any qualified expert would immediately know that much that post is false, misleading, or poorly documented.
I tell you what you may delete that post if you wish. It will not change a thing. I doubt it is significantly in error but it would make no difference if it was.
But from a secular, and practical perspective, no behavior is wrong if there are not any better solutions. No solutions are needed for at least 1.4 million homosexuals.
There are better solution. Don't do it.
That is a ridiculous comparison. When a murder is committed, there is always an injured party. When homosexuals have safe sex, there is often not an injured part.
You say this every time and it makes no difference every time. Just to humor you and avoid wasting more time let me change it to attempted murder.
That is another ridiculous argument. There is obviously no comparison that can be made between practicing abstinence for a year or two, and practicing it for decades.
The heck there can't. I know of no reason there would be any additional problems but here certainly would be not prohibitive problems. This is more rationalization.
In addition, when you practiced abstinence, you knew that after a year or so, you would be able to enjoy having sex again.
No I didn't.
There is little doubt that eventually, you would have become frustrated with practicing abstinence.
As I pointed out it got increasingly easier not harder. The first few weeks were the hard part. Eventually it became a non-issue.
