E
Eric_Hyom
Guest
I would imagine if couples remained faithful, infections would greatly reduce in the heterosexual relationships. More reasons to promote faithful marriages before God.
- Status
F
frobert
Guest
Where did you get the idea that the desire to participate in same sex contact spreads disease is an undeniable fact? Irresponsible sex gay or straight is harmful. Men who indulge in risky sex with multiple partners spreads disease. Gay civil marriage does not spread disease, it is a contract between two adults. If spouses are monogamous then there is no external sex.
The topic is on same sex marriage. You continually state CDC stats on HIV and continually fail to make any connection between the CDC stats and same sex marriage. The only connection you have made between same sex marriage and CDC stats is with you own bias towards gays. You have no problem asking the state to discriminate against over 19 million people because a small percentage, less than 1/2 of 1 percent, are HIV positive. I can see your ilk in court “but but but your honor the CDC stats, the CDC stats.”
If you want to do something about the spread of HIV support harm reduction programs which 3rd world countries like Uganda have proven effective. Complaining about HIV does zero to prevent HIV infections but the attitude against effective programs insures innocent people will be infected with HIV. Irresponsible sex is immoral as is the conservative attitude that cuts funding and prevents the implementation of proven cost effective educational programs that save lives.
Learn how to read statistics. The number of new HIV infections has been stable for several years. The overall percentage of gay HIV actually diminishes each year because the population increases while the number of infections remains stable.
F
frobert
Guest
Your argument is illogical because you can not make a logical connection between gays in a committed relationship and HIV infections.
Do you think it is logical that multitudes of committed gay couples cheat on each other and have sex with multiple other men? If you do you need to look up what committed means. I am not implying that there is no cheating in gay relationships. It is likely that the percentages of cheating about on a par with those of straight marriages.
Gay marriage is recent, only months old in many states. You seem to have set a high bar for same sex marriage. Do you think it should be better or about the same as straight marriage.
B
BrassAnkles
Guest
My fellow Catholic and Christians the day we stand by and allow civil unions to be anything other than between a man and a women is the day our blessings diminish by a great deal, worse is if we actually approve of it. God didn’t send us into the world to do what the world would have us, but what the Creator would.
Therefore, don’t give into the secularists one inch. Understand the separation of church and state does not mean an atheist state that resist God by every means, but rather a republic based on Christian values, albeit non denominational Christian.
Turning our back on God while giving in to the atheists trying to undermine our faith little by little will have tragic consequences. Stand strong and be counted, there is nothing ashamed with declaring the US was founded on Christian principles, not secular ones.
Therefore, don’t give into the secularists one inch. Understand the separation of church and state does not mean an atheist state that resist God by every means, but rather a republic based on Christian values, albeit non denominational Christian.
Turning our back on God while giving in to the atheists trying to undermine our faith little by little will have tragic consequences. Stand strong and be counted, there is nothing ashamed with declaring the US was founded on Christian principles, not secular ones.
E
edwest2
Guest
From George Washington’s Farewell Address - 1796
“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”
Best,
Ed
“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”
Best,
Ed
T
ThinkingSapien
Guest
Some states here in the USA tried it with civil unions. But these were not recognize when one traveled to a different state and there were court cases in which someone discovered that s/he didn’t have some right or another because a civil union wasn’t marriage. So now I think the goal is immutably set on marriage.We tried this (sort of) in the UK with ‘civil unions’ and it satisfied neither side. Every time a same sex couple went to the registrar and had to have a ‘civil union’ rather than a ‘marriage’ they felt (justifiably IMO) that it was a State-sponsored slap in their faces, and conservative christian registrars still objected to registering civil unions because it was obvious to them that this was same sex marriage under a different name.
T
ThinkingSapien
Guest
Sounds like a great supporting argument for monogamous behaviour. I’m not sure how it’s an argument against same sex marriages.
BTW:The two communities are not sexually isolated from each other.Oh here is a new one…Straight people are responsible for the spread of disease in the gay community…
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
It IS a great argument for monogamous behavior. Unfortunately studies show that promiscuity among gays remain at a much higher level than heterosexuals.Gays involved in “committed relationships” still seem to “cruise”. So lacking further studies or a notable decrease in the rate of new cases of STDs among gays…homosexual behavior overall spreads disease. When the state recognizes same sex relationships as a marriage it is legitimizing and promoting a dangerous sexual behavior.
That is very true and all the more concern for society as a whole. We know that the spread of STDs within the gay communities is at epidemic levels. We know that bisexuals move freely between both communities. Therefore posing a public health threat to society as a whole.
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
I didn’t say that. Notice the ( ). I just inserted the definition of homosexuality so we could continue an intelligent discussion.
Your grasp of the obvious is remarkable.
Keep in mind, however that there is more “irresponsible” sex per capita among gays.
Frankly I consider same-sex-sexual-conduct to be the ultimate form of irresponsible sex.
IF, big IF gays honor their contract. We know that gay men are more promiscuous than heterosexuals, married or single and so far there is no evidence that gay couples remain monogamous married or not.
YOU…learn how to read.
You don’t seem to notice that I am NOT referencing HIV. I am referencing STDs Sexually Transmitted Diseases. That includes not only HIV but many other diseases. Chlamydia, Gonorrhea, Syphilis etc. All spreading at epidemic levels within the gay community.
If you want to do something about the spread of disease, join me and help me convince your friends Stan and Bill to forget about each other and find girlfriends.
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
If you can guarantee that a gay person in a committed relationship will not contract HIV…then you can say my argument is illogical.
Studies show that gay men in committed relationships still maintain other relationships.
Per capita they are far above par with heterosexuals.
First of all, Gay marriage is civil. There is no religious or spiritual basis to it. Gay Catholics cannot marry. If they could, They would maintain a higher level of commitment…but that is impossible.
A gay marriage consists of two guys/gals with no means of consummating the marriage. In most states that recognize gay marriage it means the marriage can be annulled without divorce proceedings. Gay couples, knowing this, show little real commitment by marrying.
E
edwest2
Guest
D
DrTaffy
Guest
Sure there is. For example Mortality Among Men and Women in Same-Sex Marriage: A National Cohort Study of 8333 Danes, Morten Frisch, MD, PhD, DSc(Med) and Henrik Brønnum-Hansen, MSc.
What does not exist is evidence to back up your assertion that same sex marriage spreads disease.
In any case it is common sense. Encouraging couples, gay or straight, to form stable relationships is good for society, in part because of reducing risky sexual behaviour.
Noone said they did. I just pointed out that it is irrelevant whether the behaviour is homosexual or heterosexual. Reading ‘Gay Times’ or dancing to Katy Perry or singing in the London Gay Men’s Chorus does not spread disease. Promiscuous sex, gay or straight, does, but of course you cannot say that as you would look like a right muppet if you argued that ‘promiscuous sex’ spreads disease and therefore we should discourage gays (but only gays) from forming stable relationships. :ehh:
As an analogy, it would be technically true to say that interracial sex spreads disease, but if I stated that and used it to argue that interracial marriages should be banned, you would justifiably label me as a horrible racist. The fact that the sex is interracial is irrelevant.
Sure, gay men, at least, have a problem with promiscuity, but that is precisely the problem being addressed by recognising their marriages.
No, not straight people, just those who oppress homosexuals or oppose same sex marriage. You do not represent anything like all heterosexuals, most of whom support gay marriage and find your views, let alone those of someone like Fred Phelps, utterly disgusting.Oh here is a new one…Straight people are responsible for the spread of disease in the gay community…
Likewise, cases such as George Rekers or Keith O’Brien show that often those most vocally opposed to homosexuals are themselves closeted homosexuals.
None so blind as those who will not see.
Even if you are talking only about the western world, you can hardly be unaware of cases such as the Philadelphia Gay bashing, by a group associated with the local Catholic school at that! So yes, even here, gays are still oppressed.
However I was talking about oppression such as practised in Russia, Nigeria or Uganda. Again, one of the principle architects of the oppression in Uganda is Simon Lokodo, an ordained Catholic Priest famous for defending ‘corrective rape’ of lesbians to Stephen Fry.
Clearly if marriage, or even cohabiting, will lead to arrest or brutal beatings, then a secretive, and therefore probably promiscuous, sex life is more likely.
C
Catholic13
Guest
Likewise, cases such as George Rekers or Keith O’Brien show that often those most vocally opposed to homosexuals are themselves closeted homosexuals
Gay supporters everywhere use that same line.
It’s ridiculous to suggest that one must be what they oppose.
We oppose homosexuality because God says it’s wrong. It’s also perverse and depraved. There’s no disputing this.
Gay supporters everywhere use that same line.
It’s ridiculous to suggest that one must be what they oppose. We oppose homosexuality because God says it’s wrong. It’s also perverse and depraved. There’s no disputing this.
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
D
DrTaffy
Guest
Likewise, cases such as George Rekers or Keith O’Brien show that often those most vocally opposed to homosexuals are themselves closeted homosexuals
Gay supporters everywhere use that same line.
Zoltan was the one who implied that only heterosexuals, and all heterosexuals, oppose same sex marriage. I am just pointing out that this is not true.
How on earth do you construe me pointing out that two vocal anti-gay lobbyist were themselves gay as suggesting that “one must be what they oppose.
”??
C
Catholic13
Guest
So you admit that **“often those most vocally opposed to homosexuals are themselves closeted homosexuals” **is not true then?
D
DrTaffy
Guest
So in the first few years there is an increased mortality. This is a well known effect of people who know they are about to die choosing to get married as a direct result - like the british author Ian Banks who poignantly asked his long time girlfriend Adele if she would consent to become his widow.
After that the mortality rate drops to that of the general population.
In other words same sex marriages saves lives. You are trying to prevent this.
What part of this confuses you?
Hooray! A break through!
So same sex marriage does not spread disease!
Whether heterosexual or homosexual.
…and you are back to fantasy land.
What evidence do you have that ‘gay marriage’ necessarily involves a ‘deviant sexual behavior’ that spreads disease?
Why would a Danish study be less reliable? And none of your posts have shown that same sex marriage spreads disease - which the Danish study contradicts.
You brought it up, and have repeatedly asserted that it is homosexual behaviour, as opposed to (say) promiscuity regardless of gender, that spreads disease.
So promoting monogamy among gay men reduces disease. Ssimples.
Wildly unsupported and vitriolic assertion.
Ninety-year-old gay couple marries in Iowa after 72 years together
Together nearly 49 years – married at last after civil partnership conversion
And those are just the first two that popped up on Google.
Have you tried not being a homophobe?Yes, I know. It’s very difficult being a homophobe.
As has been pointed out repeatedly, that is a meaningless assertion for any accepted definition of ‘heterosexual’.
As you could deny being Catholic. For that matter, as I have pointed out before, it probably would be possible to detect homosexuality fairly reliably with fMRI.
D
DrTaffy
Guest
What? Are you even reading my posts?
How does pointing out that George Rekers and Keith O’Brien, who vocally opposed homosexuality, were themselves homosexual, add up to admitting that “**“often those most vocally opposed to homosexuals are themselves closeted homosexuals” **is not true then?”
C
Catholic13
Guest
Why don’t you make a definitive statement and tell me exactly what your accusation means.What? Are you even reading my posts?
How does pointing out that George Rekers and Keith O’Brien, who vocally opposed homosexuality, were themselves homosexual, add up to admitting that “**“often those most vocally opposed to homosexuals are themselves closeted homosexuals” **is not true then?”
D
DrTaffy
Guest
I have already done so. You have made two posts with no obvious logical link between what you quoted from me and what you posted apparently in response.
Try this: equating the group ‘those who oppose homosexuality/same sex marriage’ with ‘heterosexuals’ is false. Many of those most vehemently opposed to homosexuality turn out to be gay themselves, and the majority of heterosexuals in the west support gay marriage.
- Status