Homosexuality counter argument

  • Thread starter Thread starter NP151
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
epan said:
Except that HIV has been in human populations for many years. Heterosexual infections far outnumber homosexual infections.
Click to expand...
That is because most of the world is overwhelmingly heterosexual.
It was just like my teacher saying most people on welfare are white (the reason is that the majority of the country is white).

AIDS spread quicker throughout the homosexual population (its first discoveries were in that population). Eventually, second-hand sodomy happened and it spread to the heterosexual population. 30 years does not equal many years, it is n’ery a blip in human history.

Stonewall+sexual revolution+disco=AIDS epidemic
 
Not_Sure said:
That is because most of the world is overwhelmingly heterosexual.
It was just like my teacher saying most people on welfare are white (the reason is that the majority of the country is white).

AIDS spread quicker throughout the homosexual population (its first discoveries were in that population). Eventually, second-hand sodomy happened and it spread to the heterosexual population. 30 years does not equal many years, it is n’ery a blip in human history.

Stonewall+sexual revolution+disco=AIDS epidemic
Click to expand...
Actually, HIV has been infecting humans for more than 60 years, probably for centuries. Your information is years out of date.
 
Not_Sure said:
Well Aids eventually spread to the general population, and not just homosexuals.
People who engage in sodomy may become carriers of a terrible, terrible disease, which often is spread to others who are not practicers of sodomy (through drugs, other sex).

THink of the spread of Aids as second-hand sodomy, except it is more avoidable.
Click to expand...
HIV is the virus, not AIDS.

You can legitimately say haemophiliacs, faithful spouses of unfaithful spouses and children got it second hand, but that’s more or less it.
 
There are plenty of good arguments against gay marriage that don’t involve God or the Bible. The most important of these, though, is that marriage, from a purely civil perspective, is a social contract which bestows certain economic benefits on a couple in return for their contribution to the country in terms of man power. It sounds completely utilitarian and it is. Married couples are assumed to produce new people, which adds to the work force and wealth of the country. Homosexual couples cannot do this. Why should people who are inherently incapable of completing their end of the social contract be given the benefits of those who are?

Our society has made the argument lame, though, as marriage is no longer what it used to be. With the advent of birth control, no fault divorce and the “me” generations, the traditional family is becoming a joke in the West. We’ll pay for it soon enough.

But ultimately, in this case, any argument one makes will fall on deaf ears, as on the basis of secularism, anything can be justified, because “if there is no God, everything is permitted.”
 
To me, the one fairly undeniable big clear and widespread consequence of Gay Liberation has been the epidemic/pandemic of sexually transmitted diseases. Not just HIV. Other ones too, such as Hepatitis C. Research has proven that gay men, especially in the their younger years (say 18-35), have dozens or hundreds of other men each year, often with partners whose name they never even learn, and most of this is sex without condoms. Millions of people have suffered horribly because of this, and billions of dollars has been spent on medical care and research. And NONE of this would have happened if the USA and other nations has not allowed gay sex to become accepted. Gay men are just naturally vastly promiscuous. No denying it.

But, to be “fair,” the USA and other nations allowed unlimited sexual promiscuity among heterosexuals as well, beginning in the 1960s/1970s, and that has had horrible consequences and led to immense suffering for families, children, and individuals.

But the reason, I think, that we have so much trouble convincing others of the immorality of Gay Liberation is that we are don’t seem to be as concerned by the vast sexual promiscuity of heterosexuals.

Thus, it seems to people that we are singling the gays out, just because we are prejudiced against people who aren’t like us, along the lines of whites hating blacks or Mexicans.

Notice how many states pass laws and constitutional amendments against gay marriage, but NEVER even propose laws to forbid shacking up, dating sex, or quick and easy divorce among heterosexuals.

We need to be WHOLE CATHOLICS, not partial Catholics. We need to not let ourselves me manipulated by politicos who just want to get into office for reasons of ambitions for power and/or greed.
 
Self preservation is paramount to any distinct group and homosexuals can not preserve that without the aid of heterosexuals. In the modern age that can be avoided by the availability of children and compliant heterosexuals. But at it’s core homosexuality could not survive if it was held to it’s base instinct.

In addition a particular orifice not designed for penetration is a cause of health problems.
 
Dakota_Roberts said:
I have seen two male animals bond, two male dogs and there were bitches around too so it wasn’t hormones causing them to mount everything. When one got hit by a car and died the other dog stayed by the body until it died.
Click to expand...
… and you are sure the female dogs around were in heat? Estrus in female animals triggers the mating behavior in the males.

Can’t offer an alternative reason why the dog stayed with the supposed partner until it died, other than perhaps it was expecting the other to get up for more domination …

It is unproductive if not ridiculous to impute human attributes and feelings to animals.
Nicolosi has been discredited according to the secular world.
Click to expand...
You mean by the secularists led by the politicized APA and enabling media that wish to see homosexual behavior normalized?
They aren’t arguing that everyone should be gay, they want to be able to marry to force people to recognize their relationships.
Click to expand...
Yeah, we get that. They also want to pave the way to normalized homosexual acts, followed by unimpeded access to kids for adoption, homosexuality being taught as normal in the schools, etc.
 
Dakota_Roberts said:
I have seen two male animals bond, two male dogs and there were bitches around too so it wasn’t hormones causing them to mount everything. When one got hit by a car and died the other dog stayed by the body until it died.
Click to expand...
Many unknowns in your story. Do you know if the dogs you were watching were neutered and spayed? As you likely know, it is estrus in female animals that triggers the mating behavior in the males.

As for the two male dogs bonding, do you mean they were displaying sexual behavior or just socializing? Were they playmates to each other before to begin with?

It is interesting but not useful to impute human attributes and feelings to animals. Although pro-gay advocates are known to do this, looking to the animal kingdom to sell the concept that homosexual beavior is normal because “it happens in nature.” As for the specie you raise in your post, I have never heard, seen, or read about two male dogs or for any other specie for that matter copulate to completion!
Nicolosi has been discredited according to the secular world.
Click to expand...
You mean by the secularists led by the politicized APA and enabling media that wish to see homosexual behavior normalized?
They aren’t arguing that everyone should be gay, they want to be able to marry to force people to recognize their relationships.
Click to expand...
Yeah, we get that. They also want to pave the way to normalized homosexual acts, followed by unimpeded access to kids for adoption, homosexuality being taught as normal in the schools, etc.
,
 
InSearchofGrace said:
Many unknowns in your story. Do you know if the dogs you were watching were neutered and spayed? As you likely know, it is estrus in female animals that triggers the mating behavior in the males.

As for the two male dogs bonding, do you mean they were displaying sexual behavior or just socializing? Were they playmates to each other before to begin with?

It is interesting but not useful to impute human attributes and feelings to animals. Although pro-gay advocates are known to do this, looking to the animal kingdom to sell the concept that homosexual beavior is normal because “it happens in nature.” As for the specie you raise in your post, I have never heard, seen, or read about two male dogs or for any other specie for that matter copulate to completion!

You mean by the secularists led by the politicized APA and enabling media that wish to see homosexual behavior normalized?

Yeah, we get that. They also want to pave the way to normalized homosexual acts, followed by unimpeded access to kids for adoption, homosexuality being taught as normal in the schools, etc.
,
Click to expand...
Not neutered as far as I know and they were engaging in sexual behaviour. I don’t recall them being playmates before the behaviour, I only say them for four years. To this day I am absolutely baffled by the behaviour and I probably forever will.

I didn’t say Nicolosi is wrong, I merely am saying that from secular society’s perspective he has been discredited and so it will be no use to try to use NARTH as a source.

Some do, some don’t care. It tends to be the most annoying vocal minority of any group that gets attention.
 
Not_Sure said:
Well Aids eventually spread to the general population, and not just homosexuals.
People who engage in sodomy may become carriers of a terrible, terrible disease, which often is spread to others who are not practicers of sodomy (through drugs, other sex)…
Click to expand...
I think you need to review the history of HIV. It began in Africa, sometime prior to 1960. Its origin was likely from a similar monkey disease, which may have been transmitted during hunting. Since the disease is overwhelmingly among heterosexuals in Africa, it seems reasonable to assume that was its initial route of transmission.

avert.org/origin-aids-hiv.htm
 
Dakota_Roberts said:
HIV is the virus, not AIDS.

You can legitimately say haemophiliacs, faithful spouses of unfaithful spouses and children got it second hand, but that’s more or less it.
Click to expand...
You must be kidding. It is a worldwide epidemic. Mostly heterosexual.
 
epan said:
You must be kidding. It is a worldwide epidemic. Mostly heterosexual.
Click to expand...
Yes it is a world wide epidemic and on the continent it started it is substantially a heterosexual problem.
 
Dakota_Roberts said:
Yes it is a world wide epidemic and on the continent it started it is substantially a heterosexual problem.
Click to expand...
, and I think it is sheer ignorance to equate disease transmission with moral judgements.

Yes, we all agree that STD’s are transmitted sexually, HIV is one of those vectors. It can be transmitted heterosexually or homosexually. Transmission is related to race and to type of sexual activity.
 
gardenswithkids said:
Health. Address it as a public health concern. Smoking is bad for health-- and so is sodomy.
Click to expand...
Not only do I doubt that sodomy is really all that bad for you, but many heterosexuals engage in the activity too. Bashing sodomy also ignores female hetereosexuals, who are just as guilty as males. It is interesting that so many of the attempts to secularize being against homosexuality include attacks on male homosexuals, but so few on female homosexuals.
For example, have you ever seen on tv or read about 2 male polar bears in the artic or 2 male grizzly bears in the woods fighting to the point of death over another male bear to mate with? Or any 2 male animals of any species mating with each other?
Click to expand...
Homosexuality amongst non-human animals has been observed and documented.

Why can’t we just say it is immoral and leave it as that? Any argument of morality has to eventually break down to either “God is against it”, or for atheists, “it’s just wrong”. Many immoral sexual acts can eventually be justified away if one wishes it, it’s just our current society has yet to embrace them. The way our society is going though, eventually almost all sexual immorality will be embraced. If one wanted to, even incest and bestiality could be argued away.
 
epan said:
, and I think it is sheer ignorance to equate disease transmission with moral judgements.

Yes, we all agree that STD’s are transmitted sexually, HIV is one of those vectors. It can be transmitted heterosexually or homosexually. Transmission is related to race and to type of sexual activity.
Click to expand...
It is spreading quickly in sub-Saharan Africa because of people having multiple partners concurrently.
 
Ask this:
What standard of morality dictates you to be a homosexualist?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top