Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
For Draenor And Whomever Wants To Tear My Faith Apart :)
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
1: I could report you for calling me a "jerk"..I find it funny how I didn't insult anybody at all, yet I was flammed pretty hard by the third person to post in this thread...and I'm still the one who is being attacked for "being a jerk" You don't like my opinions? That's fine, it doesn't mean you have to act immature. I'm not the one that started throwing around insults. My reply to the OP was very well thought out and stated, and didn't contain a single drop of the venom that has been posted in response to it.
2: That's fine that you believe that death is the be all end all and that you don't believe in any sort of creator...the fact that I do does not make me stupid...any kind of analogy about whether or not I remember something that happened before I was born is completely inane and invalid anyway, as it has nothing to do with whether or not there is a spiritual afterlife, being that nobody is arguing that there is some sort of "fore-life"
3: If you want to think that your life has no purpose then that's your deal..why is it that you think that you can call me a jerk for believing something and expressing it, yet you do the exact same thing in your post? That's called being a hypocrite.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
"The bible is crap! Come on if it says the wasting of seed it would mean you could only have sex when the female partner would get pregnat. Casual sex would be a sin seeing as most people who don't want kids wear a condom, pull out, and any other method not to get a female pregnat. Religious fanatics who hate because they believe somthing need to be exterminated. Your not the judge last time I checked GOD is so let him decide who is right and wrong, not you. Get a clue."
First of all, by saying that an entire book on which some people's lives are based is "crap" you are being insulting. Second, me telling you that you don't know what you're talking about when it is obvious that you do not (and I expressely stated where your flaw in reasoning is located in your post) is not flaming.
"Oh no i do know what the bible says but its VERY VAGUE and you can interpret whatever you want from it. And the fact that its so vague lets simple minded people like you think you are judge, jury, and executioner for anything that doesn't fall into the same realm of your beliefs. So no you need to get a clue and stop being a simple minded puppet who believes everything he reads out of a book that was clearly made up by some MAN back Few thousand years ago."
This, however, is blatant flaming, and extremely immature on your part. Have a nice day, I'll save my debate time for someone who doesn't need to resort to childish attacks in order to attempt to prove a point.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Someone walking on their hands is a completely unnatural means of mobilization. The thought of someone choosing it over using their legs and feet is absurd. About as absurd as someone expecting a gay person to be attracted to and love a person of the opposite sex. Haven't you seen Brokeback Mountain? Bad things happen when gay people do not act as they are naturally made.
As for unhealthiness of being gay, that can be said of heterosexuals who have multiple partners as well. Which is why I believe that most of the problems gay's have are caused by heterosexuals giving them so much grief. If we left them alone and accepted their love and allowed them to solidify their monogamous love for one another, then the gay community would see a dramatic decrease in the spread of disease. The same thing you would expect from the straight community. People tend to act a lot more respectful towards themselves when people treat them respectfully. That's just human nature.
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
I don't know, I think Porgie might be onto something there. If society was more accepting of gay couples, there would be a lot less pressure on such relationships. Of course it isn't the whole answer, as we see a lot of promiscuity in heterosexuals. I don't think it follows that just because you're gay you're likely to be more promiscuous and STDs are still passed on through heterosexual sex too.
Personally, I'd rather see society being more disapproving of promiscuity of both gay and straight people, than be disapproving of gay relationships. One night stands tend to me more about lust and conquest, than intimacy. It cheapens sex and carries a high risk of spreading disease.
I would say it depends... All I know is my right hand is always there for me.
True. Don't got anything to add to this discussion as I don't understand what you're discussing, but I'm sure it's fun and adds much to your post counter.
I don't know, I think Porgie might be onto something there. If society was more accepting of gay couples, there would be a lot less pressure on such relationships. Of course it isn't the whole answer, as we see a lot of promiscuity in heterosexuals. I don't think it follows that just because you're gay you're likely to be more promiscuous and STDs are still passed on through heterosexual sex too.
Personally, I'd rather see society being more disapproving of promiscuity of both gay and straight people, than be disapproving of gay relationships. One night stands tend to me more about lust and conquest, than intimacy. It cheapens sex and carries a high risk of spreading disease.
There is a gay couple that lives on our street. They are very well respected by our neighborhood. They are what you would call upstanding I guess. Very active in the community and helping people out all the time. They are also looking into adopting a kid and I am positive they will make great parents. They've asked a few of us to be references and no one has told them no yet.I agree too. If you treat people with respect then they will be tons more likely to act respectable. If you treat them like dirt then only a few of them are going to be able to pull above that. And I don't think anyone can say that homosexuals are treated respectfully in this country. I find it very sad that they have to go through the abuse they do.
=============================
It all seems so stupid
It makes me want to give up
But why should I give up
When it all seems so stupid
It's right for people to be in a single loving relationship. Straight or gay. And it's also right to treat everyone with dignity and respect so that they can find that respect for themselves as well. Not call them an abomination or say their capability of love is wrong. If you discredit their love then eventually you're going to convince them that they are free to neglect their search for it.
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
Its like someone going on a killing or stealing spree but they have pages of scriptures defending their behavior. If you start picking the Bible apart and break up each story for excuses for ones behavior then they totally lose meaning of what the Bible stands for and Jesus beliefs and teachings. It reminds me of people who commit murders and start spouting scripture saying the Devil made them do it.
No one made them do it but themselves. Using the Bible as a scapegoat and cherry picking scripture instead of taking responsibility for their actions is odd and just shows other people they are irresponsible and are begging for justification for their actions and want to bring constant attention to themselves.
This scapegoating of anything using the Bible or someone elses writing to justify any type of behavior just shows a lot about your character and self esteem. Im not trying to single anyone out or offend anyone but if someone is constantly worrying about what other people think of your behavior they have other issues that are totally above the realm of messaging on an internet gaming forum.
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
It's right for people to be in a single loving relationship. Straight or gay. And it's also right to treat everyone with dignity and respect so that they can find that respect for themselves as well. Not call them an abomination or say their capability of love is wrong. If you discredit their love then eventually you're going to convince them that they are free to neglect their search for it.
Like I said, it has nothing to do with whether or not a homosexual couple is monogamous, and everything to do with the undeniable fact that disease is more easily spread through anal sex...you don't have to have multiple partners to get an STD.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Just to further explore this tangent: the chances of becoming infected with HIV through anal sex are 1/50; the chances are 1/1000 through heterosexual intercourse for the female involved and 1/2000 through heterosexual intercourse for the male involved. IV needle use is ½. HIV isn’t spread through membrane to membrane contact like most STDs but through open sores. The vagina is able to withstand penetration more easily than an anus and unless the sex is particularly rough, an STD (such as herpes) that produces open sores already exists, or for whatever other reason an open wound is present, it’s hard to spread HIV that way. It’s a lot easier to create a wound in an anus through penetration since it isn’t meant to “roughed up” as much.
It's right for people to be in a single loving relationship. Straight or gay. And it's also right to treat everyone with dignity and respect so that they can find that respect for themselves as well. Not call them an abomination or say their capability of love is wrong. If you discredit their love then eventually you're going to convince them that they are free to neglect their search for it.
Like I said, it has nothing to do with whether or not a homosexual couple is monogamous, and everything to do with the undeniable fact that disease is more easily spread through anal sex...you don't have to have multiple partners to get an STD. Heterosexuals are taught to remain a virgin until they get married. If two people have only had sex with each other then how are they going to spread an STD to each other? It's impossible, because they never would have caught one (unless it's something like fever blisters or whatever).
Why is it such a preposterous notion that homosexuals could be allowed to think the same way about their sexuality? If a person is gay, then why put the pressures on them to be straight? Allow them to know they're gay, have the dignity to remain a virgin until marriage, and then stay with one partner their whole life. It's good enough for heterosexuals to expect from each other.
I also know that in a lot of states before a couple can get married they are required to take blood tests to see if they have an STD. If gays were allowed to marry they could also take these tests prior to marriage. Once married, that would be an incentive to them to be faithful. They would know from marriage that they are both STD free.
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
If a couple remains monogamous and spends their life together, the chance of passing HIV still is 0%. Which is why we should give homosexuals the dignity they deserve and let them find their love and be recognized as being meaningful.
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
"An" is the correct form to use in this case, because in correct english, the 'H' is considered to be unsounding (as stated on page 3, called an 'aspirate H'), thus leaving the word 'istorical.' I've never met someone over the age of 16 who still gets this wrong... Please tell me you're 15...
Erm, HIV is transmitted via bodily fluids, namely blood, semen, and vaginal secretions. The abrasions caused by sex might increase the risk of the transmission of the disease, however any contact with infected bodily fluids and a mucous membrane, such as the eyes, or nasal passage can result in transmission. That's why you can get it from oral sex, too.
As far as the likelihood of transmission from anal vs vaginal intercourse, I'd like to know where you got those figures. Or are you just pulling them out of your ass? No pun intended.
The data was from Roger Hock's Human Sexuality. I also heard the exact same figures in a human sexuality course a few semesters back. Wikipedia shows even smaller numbers, but most of the data cited is about ten years old or so, making it a little sketchy for my taste. IV needle use is ~ 6/1000 (had to double check), though 24% of HIV positive folks in America are IV drug users (Hock).
[quote] The chance of a couple passing HIV to their partner when neither are infected is 0%.
If a couple remains monogamous and spends their life together, the chance of passing HIV still is 0%. Which is why we should give homosexuals the dignity they deserve and let them find their love and be recognized as being meaningful. [/quote]
I wasn't necessarily arguing one way or another; I posted it just for the sake of hard data.
The data was from Roger Hock's Human Sexuality. I also heard the exact same figures in a human sexuality course a few semesters back. Wikipedia shows even smaller numbers, but most of the data cited is about ten years old or so, making it a little sketchy for my taste. IV needle use is ~ 6/1000 (had to double check), though 24% of HIV positive folks in America are IV drug users (Hock).
[quote] The chance of a couple passing HIV to their partner when neither are infected is 0%.
If a couple remains monogamous and spends their life together, the chance of passing HIV still is 0%. Which is why we should give homosexuals the dignity they deserve and let them find their love and be recognized as being meaningful. [/quote]
I wasn't necessarily arguing one way or another; I posted it just for the sake of hard data. I understand. But my point was we wouldn't have to worry so much about those stats if homosexuals were instead allowed to live with respect towards themselves instead of being put down by society. I'm pretty sure that if I were called abomination and told my life was worthless I would give up too and be as promiscuous as I wanted to be. Heck, at that point what have you got to lose, you're considered nothing anyways.
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
Actually, according to the numbers for 2005 from the 33 states doing name based infection reporting, there isn't that huge of a difference between male/male and male/female instances of HIV. 18,722 cases for M/M vs 14,830 for high risk M/F. Cases where there was IV drug use involved was a separate category. Granted, this doesn't take into account other states where they don't do as name based statistical documentation and follow up, but I imagine the numbers would run about the same for the other states.
CDC HIV statistics for 2001-2005, published in 2006
Edit: Moral of the story? Wear a damned condom, people, regardless of what hole you prefer to stick your dick in.
Even if you think you're in a monogamous relationship, you don't know where they've been in the past, or what, or more precisely who, they're doing now. While it's nice to dream of a utopian paradise where everyone waits for marriage to have sex, and only ever has one partner, that's simply an extremely naive ideal to expect people to adhere to. It's that same line of reasoning that continually tries to stonewall sex ed in schools, or providing condoms to teens, which is where we want to start if we want to start bringing down STD numbers. Hell, it needs to start before they hit puberty, honestly. And clearly, despite their protestations, parents aren't doing the damned job.
It's right for people to be in a single loving relationship. Straight or gay. And it's also right to treat everyone with dignity and respect so that they can find that respect for themselves as well. Not call them an abomination or say their capability of love is wrong. If you discredit their love then eventually you're going to convince them that they are free to neglect their search for it.
Like I said, it has nothing to do with whether or not a homosexual couple is monogamous, and everything to do with the undeniable fact that disease is more easily spread through anal sex...you don't have to have multiple partners to get an STD.Heterosexuals are taught to remain a virgin until they get married. If two people have only had sex with each other then how are they going to spread an STD to each other? It's impossible, because they never would have caught one (unless it's something like fever blisters or whatever).
Why is it such a preposterous notion that homosexuals could be allowed to think the same way about their sexuality? If a person is gay, then why put the pressures on them to be straight? Allow them to know they're gay, have the dignity to remain a virgin until marriage, and then stay with one partner their whole life. It's good enough for heterosexuals to expect from each other.
I also know that in a lot of states before a couple can get married they are required to take blood tests to see if they have an STD. If gays were allowed to marry they could also take these tests prior to marriage. Once married, that would be an incentive to them to be faithful. They would know from marriage that they are both STD free.
You're missing my origional point, which was simply that levitical law did have a basis in human health, and still does as far as homosexual sex is concerned. Monogomous or not, it is an undeniable fact that the lining of the anus is not made for trauma, and tears easily, thus causing the spread of disease much more easily than the lining of the vagina...of course having multiple partners (especially anonymous partners ala swingers) will always raise the risk of STD's, I would never argue otherwise.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
/immature comment