What harm do homosexuals actually cause?

What harm is there in feeding your children a glass of sperm? #AtheistLogic #MoralityDenied #FreeWillDenied #JusticeForTheOppressedDenied. #WithoutGodYouDeny!

All these people saying 'none' are being foolish.

On average homosexuals cause about as much harm as heterosexuals, which is a non-zero quantity.

Please, there's no call for heterophobia.

Earthquakes, tornadoes, AIDS, etc.

And, let's not forget the series finales of Dexter and HIMYM.

What harm is there in feeding your children a glass of sperm? #AtheistLogic #MoralityDenied #FreeWillDenied #JusticeForTheOppressedDenied. #WithoutGodYouDeny!

HIV spreads very quickly among gay men. Infact, it used to be called 'gay' something acquired disease and renamed.

Thanks for the link, I see. Wow..I never knew the HIV rate among homosexual males was so high in the UK. Why is it like that? Surely they know about safe sex etc, its as if the rate is continually increasing.

Or 'Marry The Night', 'Judas', 'Russian Roulette', 'Rockstar 101', 'Give Me All Your Luvin''.

And Nazism, Fascism, catholicism. The death of Freddie Mercury.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/nov/29/uk-gay-men-test-positive-hiv-record-numbers

"One in 20 gay men and men who occasionally have sex with men are HIV positive in the UK – and in London, the ratio is as high as one in 12."

Considering other reasons they don't let you give blood, like going to dangerous countries, this is definitely reason enough to not give it. Science, not prejudice.

That's exactly what I was thinking. Its very stupid, because heterosexual people that engage in anal sex still have the same risks of contracting HIV and STDs. Even though the ban was lifted in 2011, MSM people still have to wait a year.. all the "donate blood" advertisements are very misleading they say everyone can donate blood at anytime they never specify that in their campaigns.

I'm really not an expert on this, but I think it's traditionally been justified on the basis of risk/consequences.

Whilst it is true that all blood is tested, those tests aren't 100% effective. It's better to turn away a few "clear" LGBTQ men than to have someone who's HIV positive donate and their sample to have a false negative result (i.e. the virus is undetected). If this were to happen, a recipient of a blood transfusion could be infected with HIV - and whilst progress has been made in the fight against HIV/AIDS, it's still preferable not to have it.

Of course, all of this relies on the assumption that the HIV rate is significantly higher in the MSM community. I have no idea whether this is the case. This whole area is pretty controversial.

I'm really not an expert on this, but I think it's traditionally been justified on the basis of risk/consequences.

Whilst it is true that all blood is tested, those tests aren't 100% effective. It's better to turn away a few "clear" LGBTQ men than to have someone who's HIV positive donate and their sample to have a false negative result (i.e. the virus is undetected). If this were to happen, a recipient of a blood transfusion could be infected with HIV - and whilst progress has been made in the fight against HIV/AIDS, it's still preferable not to have it.

Of course, all of this relies on the assumption that the HIV rate is significantly higher in the MSM community. I have no idea whether this is the case. This whole area is pretty controversial.

I agree with this, but I can also understand why homosexuality would have been discouraged in biblical times. Back then, I'm guessing the population was still relatively small and needed to grow, and so same sex relations would have conflicted with the need for everyone to breed as much as possible. But now we obviously have the opposite problem of overpopulation, therefore I see homosexuality as a benign thing in modern times and homophobia as rather pointless as we have other bigger things to worry about in this world.

A large homosexual population can be partly responsible for less babies being born and therefore a society in which a large elderly population has to be financed by a smaller workforce.

Statistics say that this is the case, and these statistics are based on the members of the population who have been diagnosed with HIV. Of course there are people who remain undiagnosed, but a quick google about the stats shows that a significant proportion of those infected are indeed gay men.

Some people might call it propoganda or scare-mongering, but everyone - gay or straight - should be aware of the risks and how to prevent them. Practise safe sex and the stats don't really matter.

Only in the sense that a homosexual person and a heterosexual person receiving anal sex from a (in this argument he'd have to be bisexual) man with HIV would each have just as much chance of contracting the virus from him.

It is still a fact that HIV has a significantly higher prevalence in the gay community than in the straight community.