The Student Room Group

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

How can people think homosexuality is a choice?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 520
Original post by olihax
I just sat and read that.

You do know that that whole argument is one sided, and based on biased evidence?

There is no valid proof ( Notice the word Valid ) that same sex parents are less loving, less able to raise a child, less able to teach moral values ( Modern and correct ones ) and less able to provide a stable home. Who cares if less children are born there are too many of us on the planet anyway with our current destructive way of life, there are also plenty of children who need homes and would benefit from a stable environment.

I think you need to step back and take a look at the harm you can do with your opinions. Gay sex harms people no more than straight sex, to clarify, anyone can carry an STI, anyone can choose to not wear a condom and back to another of my points the AIDS epidemic in Africa clearly proves this.


Yeah, only because you don't agree with it. I just don't think it's a good idea. Anyway, the point is moot because unfortunately most places allow gay adoption.

The figures speak for themselves. People with HIV are more likely to be gay. It's a fact. I'm sorry if the facts offend you.
Reply 521
Original post by DYKWIA




I think they cover it, like cancer, if you have certain extensions of your cover. I don't really know the details tbh. And what about those gay people who don't work and rely on state insurance instead?


What about those Straight people who dont work and rely on state insurance?
By the same logic you should just ban all sex there are more straight people with HIV than Gay people with HIV.
Reply 522
Original post by olihax
What about those Straight people who dont work and rely on state insurance?
By the same logic you should just ban all sex there are more straight people with HIV than Gay people with HIV.


I'm not saying gays shouldn't be treated, but they are high risk.

Not when you fact that gay people make up a very small percentage of the population. Also, at least in the US NEW HIV infections are actually higher for gay men.
Reply 523
Original post by DYKWIA


Not when you fact that gay people make up a very small percentage of the population.


That makes my point even more clear. If they are a very small percentage then i dont see how they "Harm" society.
Reply 524
Original post by DYKWIA
...
I'm not HIV negative. I don't have HIV :s-smilie:

I never said people with HIV shouldn't have the same rights, but gay men spread HIV more than others. It is something that needs to be taken into account.

.....


Worldwide AIDS statistics, from http://www.avert.org/worldstats.htm (then scroll down to the table)
Sub-Saharan Africa 22.9 million
North America 1.3 million
South and South-East Asia 4 million
Western & Central Europe 840,000

This is for the end of 2010.

As olihax said "Sex without a condom spreads STI's, not Gay males,".

I'd expand on that and say bigotry and intolerance certainly help spread it, by making it difficult for some groups to access condoms and healthcare services, but the Pope and the whole Catholic church infrastructure has to take the blame for HIV in Africa and some other places. They have decreed that condoms should not be used - which is the most stupid thing ever to do when faces with a disease which will be fatal in Africa. The number of cases of HIV in Africa is truly staggering, at 22.9million of 34million, it makes up nearly 68% of all cases across the entire planet.

This is a crisis which is frankly impossible to now control, and all because the Catholic church made a decision on the use of condoms which went against all medical science and reasoning, and doomed tens of millions to their deaths. That is where you should be directing your ire. There is a lot to be done in educating people everywhere, in the US and UK, and it isn't helped by states cutting HIV prevention programmes - as they have in some places. You will never be able to control when two people have sex, not ever, but you can help by providing HIV prevention programmes, education programmes, and stopping discrimination - because that can also lead to people engaging in less safe sex (it's what people do when they have low self-esteem, which is the result of discrimination). Equal marriage is also very important - it helps foster and maintain monogamous relationships. If it helps foster and maintain these for heterosexual couples (one of the points some claim for marriage) why wouldn't it do the same for gay couples?
Reply 525
What? Please don't pretend you understand anything mathematical.

Are you saying that >50% of Texas agrees gay marriage should be legalized? In your state, where you've got a strong foothold and have successfully scared away opposition I'm sure acceptance of gay marriage is >50%.

Which means that your comment on states is irrelevant.


Clearly I wouldn't be able to get NY to reverse their decision to allow gay marriage.

No... Backwards causation is logically impossible. What on earth are you talking about?


Backwards causation is just causation. low taxes ==> greater prosperity.

You aren't 'morally justified'. I'm sorry. Suppose our society supported slavery, would you support our society then? Morality is exclusive of social norms.


No, because slavery is wrong, it is unnecessary oppression of a group of people.

You've got to be kidding. You try to base an entire viewpoint off of arguing that HIV is somehow relevant and you don't even know anything about HIV? Oh dear God, you really are completely ignorant in all of this.


I'm sorry I didn't understand a technical term related to hiv and aids.

What about those straight people who don't work and rely on state insurance instead?


see my prev post.

You're missing the point... It's morally wrong to not supply healthcare to these people. Period. End of story. This isn't a contentious point. Whether or not they're gay doesn't matter.


I don't believe healthcare is a right. I think people should work for it if they can.
Reply 526
Original post by DYKWIA
What? Please don't pretend you understand anything mathematical.



Backwards causation is just causation. low taxes ==> greater prosperity.




His maths is sound. 50% of a population is 50% of a population...................

Low taxes does not always cause greater prosperity especially if your government cannot function below a certain tax threshold. That much is obvious.
Original post by Miracle Day
I just had a heated argument with some guy, and my frustration is what angered me to write this. He told me, for accepting gays and being cool with them, and treating them as I would anyone else I'm not a proper Christian - infact probably not one at all - because the Bible condemns them. He says we should all use Jesus as a model human.

I tell him about Lady Gaga born this way and he was adamant people aren't born gay, but they're brought up fooled.

I then ask how homosexuality can be a choice, when homophobic areas have higher suicide rates and by his logic surely they could just change back to being straight if it was a choice. He then says he wishes more homosexuals would commit suicide, and that homosexuals don't think they can turn straight.

So I tell him, Jesus tells us to love all.. so saying that is going against Christianity etc. Then he quotes Sodomy and Gamora.

He's obviously not just a closed minded pre-teen.. he knows his stuff. I just can't comprehend how people can believe it.

If any of you believe it's a choice.. help me out and tell me why please.

Edit: I'm just so angry right now.. sorry.. someone restore my faith in humanity


Quite agree. If it helps, tell this guy that Sodom and Gamora was destroyed not for containing gay people, it was the fact that the majority of the people in the city tried to rape a couple of angels ('bring them out so that we may know them') that caused the fire and brimstone.

Also, although obviously in some places the Bible says different things, the main message seems to be an acknowledgement that it is not a choice and that means that it is not their fault! Paul suggests that God meant for them to lead purely spiritual lives, in chastity, so you could even argue that God favours the homosexual!

And I agree with you, we are all human, we are 'all one in Jesus Christ'.
Reply 528


About the Author

Peter Sprigg is Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at Family Re-
search Council in Washington, D. C. He is the author of Outrage:
How Gay Activists and Liberal Judges are Trashing Democracy to
Redefine Marriage and co-author of Getting It Straight: What the
Research Shows about Homosexuality.


Lol.
Reply 529
Original post by CJKay
About the Author



Lol.


Thats DYKWIA's unbiased and valid evidence.
how can people think down syndrome is a choice?
Reply 531
Original post by DYKWIA
It is one way to avoid the problem, yes. No, it's not the victims fault, unless they were asking for it.


Asking for it? Dare I ask what you mean by that?
Reply 532
Homosexuality IS a choice. It is a choice, but addictive because it is influenced by your own emotions. It's similar addiction to cigarettes, you can not stop it without some help or some strong will.
Reply 533
Original post by DYKWIA
Oh, I'm living in my own 'bubble' am I? Don't make stuff up. What I reject your version of the truth and it has nothing to do with me holding contradictory views. Yes, I have my personal views on the matter, and my views on how society should handle the matter. As I've said, I don't want to take away gay rights, except where they cause harm.

The same values that our country was founded on and that we should fight to protect.

When you print more money, it devalues the current money, because suddenly more money represents the exact same wealth.

No, I said OUR society. All of us. My values and opinions aren't better than yours, it's just that IMO my views help society more than yours. A lot of people also agree with my views.

If it leads to more gay people and if it leads to more homosexual relationships it might well cause the incidences of HIV to increase.

I don't agree with you, I think you can be against many gay 'rights' without being homophobic. Besides, most states in the US have bans on gay marriage and many presidential candidates are against gay marriage, but you wouldn't say that our country is homophobic would you?

You have no issue with restricting the rights of other minorities if they are deemed to harm society, though. I feel the same, except I feel gay marriage should stay banned too. I have consistent beliefs.

But I don't let that influence what society should do. I believe gay marriage should be banned for two men or two women.

I wasn't trying to use her as a justification, and in fact it seems to have made things worse, because now you all think I hate gays and I hate them because of her. this isn't true.

I don't think PDA's should be banned (i have no right to), I just don't like them and I still think they have the potential to cause harm, especially if I was raising kids and didn't want them seeing it.

Yet you believe that my views could harm children. You have no problem imposing your views on other kids, but you do have an issue with people against gay marriage wanting to protect their kids.

It is one way to avoid the problem, yes. No, it's not the victims fault, unless they were asking for it.

I believe my views are reasonable and I believe I am protecting the rights of the majority and preserving our great society and country.
EDIT: Thank you for the pos rep, I'm glad someone shares my views.


Please, do everybody a favour and stop spouting your 'gay marriage means more gay people which means more HIV argument', it's getting rather embarrassing now, as you have been shown multiple times by various people that it is an illogical argument based in homophobia and ignorance.

Clearly, your definition of harm is different to everyone else's. I see people who take part in domestice violence as causing harm, yet I don't imagine you are advocating for them to lose their rights because they cause harm. Oh, but I'm forgetting you don't care as long as something is private, what a wonderful attitude to take. Please PLEASE get this through your head - gay people do not cause harm, nor are we out to impose ourselves on you. I wouldn't come and dance in front of you, shoving my gayness down your throat, but it's okay for you to do that for your homophobia??

Oh, so homophobia is okay if the person/couple are asking/looking for it? Disregarding your misunderstanding once again that not all homophobia is violent, there is no excuse whatsoever for homophobic behaviour. There is nothing we would do that deserves homophobic behaviour, and even if there was, there is no way we would do it intentionally, because we are not out to get the straights, unlike some people when the roles are reversed.

And what harm would PDA cause to a child? What will actually cause them harm is your narrow-minded and hateful set of opinions, rather than an example of affection/love. Admittedly, there are times when PDAs are not acceptable, but that is depending on time and place not on the sexuality of the couple.

Protecting the rights of the majority are you? I'm sure the 'majority' will be disgusted to find themselves associated with you
Reply 534
Original post by hannahchan
What if you didn't know you were gay?

Say you were born gay and you were a girl.

You never met another girl in your life and continued to not know a girl until you died.

So, you were constantly around boys and such..

would that not alter your perception? and possibly allow yourself to protect sexual or romantic thoughts onto a guy instead of girl.. and thus become 'straight'?
..
I don't know. This whole gay thing is confusing.


No, you wouldn't become straight, it's not possible. You're born gay, so if I had grown up never seeing a girl, I still wouldn't feel attracted to boys and if I attempted a relationship with a boy it wouldn't feel right. You cannot change your sexuality over time, your are born with a sexuality, so circumstances like that would be bl**** unfortunate but wouldn't make a difference.

Original post by olihax
I just sat and read that.

You do know that that whole argument is one sided, and based on biased evidence?

There is no valid proof ( Notice the word Valid ) that same sex parents are less loving, less able to raise a child, less able to teach moral values ( Modern and correct ones ) and less able to provide a stable home. Who cares if less children are born there are too many of us on the planet anyway with our current destructive way of life, there are also plenty of children who need homes and would benefit from a stable environment.

I think you need to step back and take a look at the harm you can do with your opinions. Gay sex harms people no more than straight sex, to clarify, anyone can carry an STI, anyone can choose to not wear a condom and back to another of my points the AIDS epidemic in Africa clearly proves this.


I know, that was a rather entertaining read when I was linked it. Lovely to see the BS reasoning organisations like NOM and FRC base their disgusting homophobia on
Original post by Rtcw
Homosexuality IS a choice. It is a choice, but addictive because it is influenced by your own emotions. It's similar addiction to cigarettes, you can not stop it without some help or some strong will.


Er no, it's more like food, if you don't like it, you wont have it.
Reply 536
Original post by Rtcw
Homosexuality IS a choice. It is a choice, but addictive because it is influenced by your own emotions. It's similar addiction to cigarettes, you can not stop it without some help or some strong will.


Oh wow, comparing homosexuality to something that causes cancer - have we hit the new low?
Reply 537
Indeed, though nothing surprises me about him anymore to be honest...

Aww, thankyou :smile:
Original post by Pride
I don't know about the HIV arguments, but about the homosexuals being allowed to marry argument. You know, I can understand where both sides are coming from with these arguments. Does that make me homophobic? The fact that I think perhaps homosexuals being allowed to marry would be a bad thing? I mean I admit I haven't got a definite opinion, but that's not because I dislike gays. It's because I'm not convinced it's wise to alter the whole concept of marriage. I'm absolutely sure I don't agree with homosexual marriages in churches (or other religious buildings where homosexuality isn't allowed), but homosexual marriage outside religion? well I understand both sides.


Yes, but this is pretty much the only issue he comments on on this website. If that's not obsession I don't know what is...
Original post by Bellissima
i thought you didn't dislike gays just gay marriage? it must be really hard to keep your "i'm not a homophobe, i like gays i just don't like seeing it because it disgusts me and makes me angry" "non homophobic" (cough) mask on all the time.


I like to wonder what people would think if one replaced the words "homophobic" and "gays" with "racist" and "black people" respectively. :wink:

Latest

Trending

Trending