How can people say homosexuality doesn't hurt anyone

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic13
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Catholic13 said:
Are you saying that anyone who speaks out against another’s beliefs or way of life is a bigot? 😉

Hypocrite much?:cool:
Click to expand...
Yes, The way you are “speaking out” against homosexuality is quite bigoted to say the least. Not to mention not grounded in any reality. Just re read the things you are saying. Please read them.
 
Ositokc said:
Yes, The way you are “speaking out” against homosexuality is quite bigoted to say the least. Not to mention not grounded in any reality. Just re read the things you are saying. Please read them.
Click to expand...
You are speaking out against Catholicism/Catholic beliefs. By your logic you are also a bigot. 😉 What do you know about that?
 
Catholic13 said:
Who destroyed my argument? Be specific. My argument is a simple one that hasn’t been proven wrong yet. Let me repeat it for the people with a short attention span. Homosexual activity spreads disease.
Click to expand...
You can tell passions run high in argument when claims of bigotry is being thrown about. The next thing is the thread gets shut down.

Catholic13, I think your statement needs qualification to clearly say that promiscuous and risky homosexual activity (anal sex) is a significant factor in the spread of disease, notably AIDS/HIV, which remains associated with sexually active gay males. This does not negate the fact that promiscuity and risky sex practice in the general heterosexual population figure in the spread of STDs.

Someone brought up the fact that while HIV/AIDS is largely a homosexual problem in the U.S. and Western countries, in Africa, it is a heterosexual problem affecting a larger population. Experts believe that the social and molecular epidemiology of the HIV epidemic in higher income countries in the West has had characteristics quite distinct from the situation in the most highly affected regions of sub-Saharan Africa. See here.

There are differences in viral strain and transmission patterns, which is explained here,
Is AIDS in Africa a Distinct Disease?

The fact should not be overlooked however that according to the latest CDC data of said health problem, it is gay and bisexual men, specifically men who have sex with men (MSM) who remain the group most heavily affected by HIV in the United States.

CDC estimates that MSM represent approximately 4 percent of the male population in the United States but male-to-male sex accounted for more than three-fourths (78 percent) of new HIV infections among men in November 2014 and nearly two-thirds (63 percent) of all new infections in 2010 (29,800). White MSM continue to represent the largest number of new HIV infections among MSM (11,200), followed closely by black MSM (10,600) and Hispanic. See here.

Therefore, for a man living in the U.S., having sex with men, the above CDC data would or should be the more meaningful statistic than the higher rate of infection affecting heterosexuals in the African continent.
,
 
InSearchofGrace said:
You can tell passions run high in argument when claims of bigotry is being thrown about. The next thing is the thread gets shut down.

Catholic13, I think your statement needs qualification to clearly say that promiscuous and risky homosexual activity (anal sex) is a significant factor in the spread of disease, notably AIDS/HIV, which remains associated with sexually active gay males. This does not negate the fact that promiscuity and risky sex practice in the general heterosexual population figure in the spread of STDs.

Someone brought up the fact that while HIV/AIDS is largely a homosexual problem in the U.S. and Western countries, in Africa, it is a heterosexual problem affecting a larger population. Experts believe that the social and molecular epidemiology of the HIV epidemic in higher income countries in the West has had characteristics quite distinct from the situation in the most highly affected regions of sub-Saharan Africa. See here.

There are differences in viral strain and transmission patterns, which is explained here,
Is AIDS in Africa a Distinct Disease?

The fact should not be overlooked however that according to the latest CDC data of said health problem, it is gay and bisexual men, specifically men who have sex with men (MSM) who remain the group most heavily affected by HIV in the United States.

CDC estimates that MSM represent approximately 4 percent of the male population in the United States but male-to-male sex accounted for more than three-fourths (78 percent) of new HIV infections among men in November 2014 and nearly two-thirds (63 percent) of all new infections in 2010 (29,800). White MSM continue to represent the largest number of new HIV infections among MSM (11,200), followed closely by black MSM (10,600) and Hispanic. See here.

Therefore, for a man living in the U.S., having sex with men, the above CDC data would or should be the more meaningful statistic than the higher rate of infection affecting heterosexuals in the African continent.
,
Click to expand...
Once again this does not matter, as promiscuous and risky heterosexual sex can and does do the same thing. So to go back to the very intelligent and first response:

"Well…because it’s not homosexuality that spreads diseases.
It’s sex.
Heterosexuality can spread diseases, too.

So it’s not homosexuality, as you say, that “hurts” people.

You are incorrect to say that “any type of sexual activity outside a committed marriage causes harm by spreading disease”.
This is not the case.

And actually, some could turn your question around and ask:
How can people say that condoms hurt anyone, when they prevent disease from spreading in society?"

This thread should indeed be locked, it is based on a completely absurd premise.
 
Ositokc said:
Once again this does not matter, as promiscuous and risky heterosexual sex can and does do the same thing. So to go back to the very intelligent and first response:

"Well…because it’s not homosexuality that spreads diseases.
It’s sex.
Heterosexuality can spread diseases, too.

So it’s not homosexuality, as you say, that “hurts” people.

You are incorrect to say that “any type of sexual activity outside a committed marriage causes harm by spreading disease”.
This is not the case.

And actually, some could turn your question around and ask:
How can people say that condoms hurt anyone, when they prevent disease from spreading in society?"

This thread should indeed be locked, it is based on a completely absurd premise.
Click to expand...
And the same things have been said over and over. It’s like beating a dead horse.
 
Catholic13 said:
Who destroyed my argument? Be specific. My argument is a simple one that hasn’t been proven wrong yet. Let me repeat it for the people with a short attention span. Homosexual activity spreads disease.
Click to expand...
Posts #81 and #95 explain the weakness of your argument.
 
oldcatholicguy said:
Don’t homosexual women who just have sex with other homosexual women have like the lowest rate of STDs?
Click to expand...
Quite likely I should think. Of course it is not I that makes any argument (on disease grounds) against homosexual relations. That would be Catholic13.
 
KendraDZ1902 said:
And the same things have been said over and over. It’s like beating a dead horse.
Click to expand...
Do you understand that I’m **not **saying “homosexual relationships are the only relationships in existence that cause harm to society because of the high number of AIDS cases among gays”

I’m **not **making this argument. So why you keep saying “heterosexual relationships cause disease too” is beyond me. Because it is irrelevant to my argument and it does nothing to refute it. You’re arguing against something I never said. I can’t make this any clearer.
 
Ositokc said:
Once again this does not matter, as promiscuous and risky heterosexual sex can and does do the same thing. .
Click to expand...
Strawman argument.

"Well…because it’s not homosexuality that spreads diseases.
It’s sex.
Heterosexuality can spread diseases, too.

Strawman argument.

You are incorrect to say that “any type of sexual activity outside a committed marriage causes harm by spreading disease”.
This is not the case.

I never said 100%. It’s also irrelevant to my point.

And actually, some could turn your question around and ask:
How can people say that condoms hurt anyone, when they prevent disease from spreading in society?"

Yes, they could but it’s irrelevant.

This thread should indeed be locked, it is based on a completely absurd premise

The truth about homosexual activity is a very ugly thing but this discussion is not absurd just because you don’t like the truth being revealed.
 
Rau said:
Indeed, I guess you just didn’t realise how weak it was!

I do agree it is very simple. 😉
Click to expand...
I never said it was weak. While gays continue being promiscuous it makes my argument all the stronger. Anyone who supports gay marriage is supporting the spread of disease.
 
Catholic13 said:
Strawman argument.

"Well…because it’s not homosexuality that spreads diseases.
It’s sex.
Heterosexuality can spread diseases, too.

Strawman argument.
Click to expand...
Strawman argument or not, it is true and refutes your argument about “homosexual acts” causing disease.
Catholic13 said:
You are incorrect to say that “any type of sexual activity outside a committed marriage causes harm by spreading disease”.
This is not the case.

I never said 100%. It’s also irrelevant to my point.
Click to expand...
In your OP, you said this. If you disagree, maybe you could show where you got this information from.

And actually, some could turn your question The around and ask:
How can people say that condoms hurt anyone, when they prevent disease from spreading in society?"

Yes, they could but it’s irrelevant.

This thread should indeed be locked, it is based on a completely absurd premise

The truth about homosexual activity is a very ugly thing but this discussion is not absurd just because you don’t like the truth being revealed.

You do know that heterosexual couples can also practice anal sex, right? Therefore, your argument cannot stand up.

Lou
 
Catholic13 said:
I never said it was weak. While gays continue being promiscuous it makes my argument all the stronger. Anyone who supports gay marriage is supporting the spread of disease.
Click to expand...
What a ridiculous statement!! The rate of HIV infection among African Americans is 8 times that of Whites. Do you similarly condemn marriage among African Americans as supporting the spread of disease? I certainly hope not. Ironically, supporting a strong marriage culture among homosexuals and thus promoting more commitment and less promiscuity would cause the rate of HIV and other STDs to go down, not up. Your original question is clearly homophobic and an obvious attempt to equate homosexuality with disease. It is the combination of promiscuity and unsafe sex that cause the spread of STDs, not homosexuality itself.
 
Catholic13 said:
I never said it was weak. While gays continue being promiscuous it makes my argument all the stronger. Anyone who supports gay marriage is supporting the spread of disease.
Click to expand...
But when they get married, they are less promiscuous and less prone to STDs.

Indeed since homosexuality was legalised in the USA, not only has the number of gay ‘Saunas’ more than halved, but they have gone from being very profitable (despite having to operate covertly) to struggling financially (despite being able to advertise freely) - it is oppression of homosexuality which appears to spread STDs.
 
Catholic13 said:
How does the fact that gays excel at promiscuity, AIDS and STDs defeat my argument. My argument is that homosexual activity causes harm which it does. Physical, emotional and spiritual harm.
Click to expand...
Your world view is so rigid that you are unable to accept the fact that regardless or sexual orientation it is irresponsible sexual behavior that causes harm and leads to STDs. I think that this is the type of rigidity that Pope Francis recently referred to. You complain loud and often about irresponsible sexual behavior among a minority of gay men yet offer no remedy.

You harp on HIV infection but do you know that according to the CDC the development of antibiotic resistance in gonorrhea is an urgent public health threat. At some point in time gonorrhea may be impossible to treat. Risk reduction strategies would work just as well with gonorrhea as with HIV.

Promiscuous sex for many people is an addition, I challenge you to go an open sex anonymous meeting. If you do you will likely learn that sexual orientation is not at the root of the physical, emotional or spiritual harm that you speak of.
 
Catholic13 said:
I never said it was weak. While gays continue being promiscuous it makes my argument all the stronger. Anyone who supports gay marriage is supporting the spread of disease.
Click to expand...
Um not really. You see “Gay marriage” becoming the norm among sexually active homosexuals would mean less “sleeping around” with a lot of partners and therefor less spreading of disease.
 
Catholic13 said:
How can people say homosexuality doesn’t hurt anyone, when it does damage to society by spreading disease? :confused: In fact any type of sexual activity outside of committed marriages causes harm by spreading disease. Does anyone have any insight?
Click to expand...
My insight is that your argument is deeply flawed. It is deeply flawed because you incorrectly identify homosexuality as the cause of spreading disease (the effect), when the real cause is sexual activity outside of a committed marriage. Here are some questions you should have asked yourself when forming your argument-
-Do celibate homosexuals and heterosexuals spread STDs? No.
-Do heterosexuals and homosexuals who are sexually active outside of marriage spread STDs? Yes.
-Do heterosexuals who are married and do not cheat spread STDs? No.

It should be rather clear that sexual activity and not sexual orientation is the cause of the effect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top