Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

What harm do homosexuals actually cause? Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    You would think that the reason so many societies condemn homosexuality is because it causes much more harm than good. Indeed, a large amount of humanity's rules and principles are based on the notion that the actions of individuals should only be limited to prevent harm to others.

    So what harm do homosexuals, and homosexuality as a concept, cause to warrant such condemnation?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I really have no idea, I've always wondered this too. I recently discovered that homosexuals cannot just sign up and give blood, why?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Religious problems and just general idiots.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It all goes down to religion. They go against what God wants.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    They're actually good for the environment as they can't have kids.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    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.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tengentoppa)
    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.
    And yet in over-populated parts of the world a large homosexual population for a period of time would be a blessing.

    Furthermore, homosexuality has always remained at similar levels in civilisations across time; there has never, and probably never will be, a society with such a large homosexual population that it causes the problems you refer to.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xDave-)
    They're actually good for the environment as they can't have kids.
    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.
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by alis-volatpropriis)
    I really have no idea, I've always wondered this too. I recently discovered that homosexuals cannot just sign up and give blood, why?
    It's actually anyone who has sex with MSM (men who have sex with men) - which includes gay men, bisexual men, and also women who have sex with (usually) bisexual men. They're not outright forbidden to donate, provided that the MSM encounter was over a year ago.

    I believe the ban was originally in place due to concerns over the transmission of conditions such as HIV through blood. Here.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    None.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blackacre)
    It's actually anyone who has sex with MSM (men who have sex with men) - which includes gay men, bisexual men, and also women who have sex with (usually) bisexual men. They're not outright forbidden to donate, provided that the MSM encounter was over a year ago.

    I believe the ban was originally in place due to concerns over the transmission of conditions such as HIV through blood. Here.
    Thank you. But surely they test all blood that is donated regardless of the sexuality of the person that donated the blood. So why does it matter?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OP)
    What harm do homosexuals actually cause?
    None.

    (Original post by alis-volatpropriis)
    I really have no idea, I've always wondered this too. I recently discovered that homosexuals cannot just sign up and give blood, why?
    It's to do with increased likelihood of MSM people contracting HIV and other minor STDs. It's a pretty stupid rule though because blood donations go through extensive testing already. If HIV-infected blood was getting through (of which there is no evidence to suggest that this is the case) then it would be a testing problem, not a donation problem.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    None.

    /thread.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CherryCherryBoomBoom)
    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.
    The contradiction to this logic lies in the fact that, generally, Christianity throughout the ages has promoted monogamous marriage. That certainly isn't conducive to growing a population.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DarkWhite)
    None.



    It's to do with increased likelihood of MSM people contracting HIV and other minor STDs. It's a pretty stupid rule though because blood donations go through extensive testing already. If HIV-infected blood was getting through (of which there is no evidence to suggest that this is the case) then it would be a testing problem, not a donation problem.
    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.
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by alis-volatpropriis)
    Thank you. But surely they test all blood that is donated regardless of the sexuality of the person that donated the blood. So why does it matter?
    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.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    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.

    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    None at all, before Christianity it was pretty sociably acceptable in civilised (by western standards) society. And the argument that it's bad for population growth is just ridiculous, are you suggesting that we should get rid of infertile people, and force couples who don't want children to have them anyway? no? thought not. An ageing population is an issue, but once they stop being able to develop antibiotics that actually work it won't be.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alis-volatpropriis)
    I really have no idea, I've always wondered this too. I recently discovered that homosexuals cannot just sign up and give blood, why?
    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...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.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blackacre)
    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 see, it seems as if they are assuming the LGBT community have higher rates of HIV than heterosexuals.
 
 
 
Poll
Which web browser do you use?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.