Do some people don't support gay right it's because they think gay only want sex, not real love or healthy relationship?

Avatar image for ccthor
CCThor

2500

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Poll Do some people don't support gay right it's because they think gay only want sex, not real love or healthy relationship? (18 votes)

Yes, and it's] me. 22%
Yes, definite some people think that way, but it's not true. 33%
No, that's not their true thought, they just want look down on gay people and this is a false reason for hiding their racism thought. 17%
Other thought. 28%
 • 
Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

2515

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Being in love is not the problem.

Having sex is simply wrong.

Avatar image for ccthor
CCThor

2500

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Being in love is not the problem.

Having sex is simply wrong.

How?

Avatar image for avenging_x_bolt
Avenging-X-Bolt

18540

Forum Posts

15780

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 140

Some people feel that way for sure.

Avatar image for ccthor
CCThor

2500

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for avenging_x_bolt
Avenging-X-Bolt

18540

Forum Posts

15780

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 140

@ccthor: I am not. There was a time in my life where I might've believed in that but that time has passed.

I believe that some just want sex but others just want love and most want both. Just like straight people.

Avatar image for marvelanddcfan24
MarvelandDCfan24

9079

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I'm indifferent I dont give two shits about gay people let them do what they want maybe we wouldn't hear about their annoying pandering

Avatar image for mimisalome
mimisalome

6899

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The back door orifice is not meant for copulation... therefore its not healthy

Avatar image for jgames
Jgames

8886

Forum Posts

313

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

Yeah there are some random weirdos like those, mostly religious people who have the bible up their ass. Not to say is bad to be religious, but just find some of them hilariously and depressingly bizzare with some of their alien like thinking. Oh man and a woman having sex is only for making kids, gay people cannot have kids, so they only have sex because they enjoy it. Straight people have it because they want to make kids, like wtf. There other such stupid, one minded thinking that just leave baffle on how people think. Especially those people who think pedophilia and being gay is at the same level, just sigh.

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

2515

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for socajunkie
socajunkie

14574

Forum Posts

2457

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#10 socajunkie  Moderator

Haven’t heard that one before.

Avatar image for deactivated-5e09a6b06793e
deactivated-5e09a6b06793e

1114

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jgames said:

Yeah there are some random weirdos like those, mostly religious people who have the bible up their ass. Not to say is bad to be religious, but just find some of them hilariously and depressingly bizzare with some of their alien like thinking. Oh man and a woman having sex is only for making kids, gay people cannot have kids, so they only have sex because they enjoy it. Straight people have it because they want to make kids, like wtf. There other such stupid, one minded thinking that just leave baffle on how people think. Especially those people who think pedophilia and being gay is at the same level, just sigh.

The funny thing is, homosexual behavior occurs in nature all the time. God must have wanted it that way, right?

Avatar image for mimisalome
mimisalome

6899

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12  Edited By mimisalome

@benjamin_poindexter said:
@jgames said:

Yeah there are some random weirdos like those, mostly religious people who have the bible up their ass. Not to say is bad to be religious, but just find some of them hilariously and depressingly bizzare with some of their alien like thinking. Oh man and a woman having sex is only for making kids, gay people cannot have kids, so they only have sex because they enjoy it. Straight people have it because they want to make kids, like wtf. There other such stupid, one minded thinking that just leave baffle on how people think. Especially those people who think pedophilia and being gay is at the same level, just sigh.

The funny thing is, homosexual behavior occurs in nature all the time. God must have wanted it that way, right?

Nah.. homosexuality is a statistical minority, it is not the biological norm.

So the "it occurs all the time" statement is pretty misleading.

Though it is as "natural" as any other abberant behavior or preferences, meaning there is nothing "supernatural" about homosexual, it can be explained by a physical phenomena.

Avatar image for abstractraze
AbstractRaze

4658

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13  Edited By AbstractRaze

Well, it's statistically proven that Same-sex relationships are less stable than straight relationships, it's as well statistically proven that a great percentage of the gay population even if it's a great minority, are carriers of venereal diseases such as AIDS, etc...

So, in short, yes, their emotional boundaries to their partners are unstable, the reason why they advocate promiscuity and it's because there is no real complementary foundation in their relationships, they are also less propense to think about the youth but rather about themselves. Whenever they have access to adopt a child which is luckily very rare, their children can't build-up any real attachment whether to a man or to a woman, most of those kids grow up detached and confused, those lowering their integration skills into the society which is straight by default.

PS:

For the simple fact they lack a stable capability to bond to a partner, because they can't form a family by themselves unless they resort to scientific manipulation which won't anyway fill the inevitable void that they can't naturally do that, the only way to bound is through sex and pleasure, which isn't strong enough to provide a deeper meaning to complementary bond to a partner in the long run.

PS:

In many cases, love can overcome many obstacles I already mentioned, but the thing is why do you love your partner? is sex and pleasure enough to keep this love? is everything limited by sex a, carnal pleasure and dialogue? what comes after?

PS:

Forming a family is not the main goal of anyone, but from most people, because most people have goals and they know that they will die someday, and everything what they did, their ideals, traditions and experience will vanish once they die, but if they have children, they have the possibility to pass all their good experiences and achievements, whether intellectual or materialistic attributes, therefore, their lives obtain a meaning or a purpose, because they know that a part of them will live after their death, because of contribution.

Leaving your seeds, a pattern among most basic living beings, such as plants.

Avatar image for richubs
Richubs

8847

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

There's so much going on here

Avatar image for ccthor
CCThor

2500

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for abstractraze
AbstractRaze

4658

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17  Edited By AbstractRaze

@ccthor said:

@abstractraze:

Any research source?

Well, anyone knows that a big percentage of homosexual population, carry venereal diseases, won't lose my time on it, besides, it truly reflects that same-sex relationships have an inferior longevity.

Now, in the following articles, the psychologists who wrote the articles, try to appease their observations by highlighting the discriminatory issues, but I don't expect anything else, their centers are mainly financed or supported by Neo-Liberals or leftist backgrounded institutions, they highlight the most discriminatory circumstances first, make up your mind and hit your own conclusions, GL.

PS:

Another thing, to collect data is very difficult for the same fact that Homosexuals are a minority and both sides, either hetero or homo, don't offer their data that easily, but when it comes to venereal diseases, either hetero or homo, they're forced to go to the hospital and there is when their data is imminently exposed, not directly but indirectly.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5095690/

Explanations for Relationship

Stability Same-sex couples may experience lower levels of relationship stability because of incomplete institutionalization, minority stress, relationship investments, and couple homogamy. The incomplete institutionalization (Cherlin 1978) and minority stress (Meyer 1995) perspectives on intimate relationships argue that same-sex relationships may be more unstable because of weaker social support and a lack of institutionalization of same-sex relationships. Based on an incomplete institutionalization perspective, we expect greater instability among same-sex than different-sex couples. This hypothesis builds on the incomplete institutionalization framework that Cherlin (1978) introduced to understand stepfamilies and that Nock (1995) extended to study cohabitation. It is well known that cohabiting couples do no not enjoy the same stability as married couples, in part because of the lack of legal and social support. Further, selection processes are operating, with disadvantaged couples less often having sufficient economic resources to marry. Couples may experience stress and conflict as they navigate roles and relationships that lack shared norms and expectations. In addition, consistent with a minority stress approach, same-sex couples may face barriers due to discrimination and challenges to establishing and maintaining high-quality relationships in some communities (Mohr and Daley 2008; Otis et al. 2006). Cohabiting with a member of the same sex may generate stress because it represents a public presentation of a gay or lesbian individual with their partner.

Lower levels of stability may be observed among same-sex couples partly because of sociodemographic indicators, the presence of children, and couple homogamy in terms of age, race, and education. First, children represent a relationship-specific investment that acts as a barrier to dissolution (Levinger 1965), and children tend to deter separation (Brines and Joyner 1999; Kurdek 1998). Yet, relationship-specific capital, including children, is lower among same-sex cohabiting couples (Payne 2014). Further, children in same-sex families are typically the product of a prior different-sex relationship (Goldberg et al. 2014), meaning the same-sex family is akin to a stepfamily. Stepfamily relationships are associated with considerable relationship stress that can undermine relationship stability. Second, homogamy is associated with greater stability among different-sex couples (Bratter and King 2008; Phillips and Sweeney 2006; Teachman 2002). Prior work indicates that homogamy (age, race/ethnicity, education) is lower among same-sex than different-sex couples (Rosenfeld and Kim 2005; Schwartz and Graf 2009).

Alternatively, same-sex cohabiting couples may experience greater stability because they are more advantaged in terms of education, income, and homeownership, and they are less likely to be poor or to receive public assistance (Gates 2009; Krivickas 2010; Williams 2012, 2013) than different-sex cohabitors. We expect that after we adjust for socioeconomic factors, any stability advantage for same-sex cohabiting couples relative to different-sex cohabiting couples may diminish.

Supportive state policy contexts provide some protective buffers for same-sex couples. Gays and lesbians who live in states with supportive policies (employment discrimination and bullying laws) targeted at sexual minorities experience lower levels of serious psychological conditions (Hatzenbuehler et al. 2009). Prior to the U.S. Supreme Court decision to legalize marriage for same-sex couples, some state-level policies forbade the recognition of marriages to same-sex couples: a Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The absence of a DOMA in a state did not mean that the state was supportive of marriage to same-sex couples, but rather that the state was not actively against marriages to same-sex couples. Although these policies are not associated with the formation or stability of marriages to different-sex couples at the aggregate level (Dillender 2014; Langbein and Yost 2009), no study has assessed this policy indicator and the stability of same-sex or different-sex cohabiting couples. We introduce policy environment for same-sex couple relationships by including an indicator measuring whether the state of residence is one in which DOMA has been enacted by a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as the union of a woman and a man. Prior to 2008, the initial year of this panel of the SIPP, 26 states had enacted such DOMA policies.1

Same-sex couples in cohabiting relationships may experience more stability than their different-sex counterparts because they do not have a marriage option. Same-sex couples with characteristics that support stability are likely to remain cohabiting if they cannot legally marry. At the time of the initial SIPP data collection in 2008, sporadic rulings supported same-sex marriage, but the only states to consistently allow same-sex marriage were Massachusetts (May 2004) and Connecticut (November 2008). Consequently, at the time of the survey, the primary option available to same-sex couples was cohabitation, not legal marriage. Thus, some same-sex couples in cohabiting relationships may have viewed cohabitation as an alternative form of marriage and experienced high levels of stability.

We contrast the stability of same-sex cohabiting couples and different-sex married couples. From a policy perspective, same-sex couples who largely do not have the option to marry may experience a level of stability on par with that of different-sex married couples. Alternatively, the strong legal and social supports for marriage as well as the minority stress perspective lead us to expect that same-sex cohabiting couples are less stable than different-sex married couples. Married different-sex couples and same-sex couples share similar median earnings, with same-sex couples reporting somewhat higher levels of education than their different-sex married counterparts (Gates 2015; Payne 2011; U.S. Census Bureau 2013). Thus, we expect that accounting for economic resources does not explain the stability difference between same-sex cohabiting and different-sex married couples.

https://thembeforeus.com/study-studies-same-sex-parenting/

No Caption Provided

Are the outcomes for children of gay, lesbian, or bisexual parents in general the same as those for heterosexual parents? That controversial question is discussed here in a detailed review of the social science literature in three parts:

  • (1) stability of same-sex parental relationships,
  • (2) child outcomes, and
  • (3) child outcomes in same-sex adoption.

Relationship instability appears to be higher among gay and lesbian parent couples and may be a key mediating factor influencing outcomes for children. With respect to part 2, while parental self-reports usually present few significant differences, social desirability or self-presentation bias may be a confounding factor. While some researchers have tended to conclude that there are no differences whatsoever in terms of child outcomes as a function of parental sexual orientation, such conclusions appear premature in the light of more recent data in which some different outcomes have been observed in a few studies. Studies conducted within the past 10 years that compared child outcomes for children of same-sex and heterosexual adoptive parents were reviewed. Numerous methodological limitations were identified that make it very difficult to make an accurate assessment of the effect of parental sexual orientation across adoptive families…There remains a need for high-quality research on same-sex families, especially families with gay fathers and with lower income.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

12237

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Gay Homo

Avatar image for deactivated-6663fd5d2edac
deactivated-6663fd5d2edac

3967

Forum Posts

224

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Is this a question or do you intend on hearing people's opinion?

Avatar image for quireguy
QuireGuy

17

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Wow....1st day om this.... site

Personally I don't get why a gay person would care who doesn't support their "rights" and especially the reasons they don't. Sex is awesome perhaps if more people did it there wouldn't be so much worry about other people's sex life :/

besides... everybody's a lil gay

Avatar image for ccthor
CCThor

2500

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for just_sayin
just_sayin

6131

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@ccthor said:

@abstractraze:

Any research source?

Use CDC for a source:

In 2014, gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men accounted for 83% of primary and secondary syphilis cases where sex of sex partner was known in the United States.

Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men are 17 times more likely to get anal cancer than heterosexual men.

Men who are HIV-positive are even more likely than those who do not have HIV to get anal cancer.

Also see: https://www.cdc.gov/std/life-stages-populations/stdfact-msm.htm

There are lots of increased health risks from men who have sex with men: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3575167/

Lesbians are at higher risk for mental illness, suicide, depression, domestic violence from a sexual partner, greater risk for HPV, oral cancers, and obesity (https://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/women.htm)

Avatar image for ccthor
CCThor

2500

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@just_sayin:

So you are trying to imply gay is a disease?

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

12237

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@just_sayin:

Are there many divorce stats in yet for homosexual marriages?

Avatar image for just_sayin
just_sayin

6131

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25  Edited By just_sayin

@just_sayin:

Are there many divorce stats in yet for homosexual marriages?

I'd wait a while for accurate statistics from the US. A spike in long term same sex couples married in the last couple of years - both the newness of same-sex marriage and the prior long-term commitment of those who got married will impact the averages for some time. Also, it depends on what country you are talking about.

Avatar image for just_sayin
just_sayin

6131

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@ccthor said:

@just_sayin:

So you are trying to imply gay is a disease?

No. I am saying there are increased health risks associated with certain behaviors commonly found in same-sex relationships. For instance anal sex has certain increased health risks. Gay men typically have more sexual partners than do heterosexual men and higher instances of drug use - all these impact health statistics.

Avatar image for ccthor
CCThor

2500

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27  Edited By CCThor

@just_sayin:

There's also a research states black people have less intelligence than other, do you believe it?

Avatar image for just_sayin
just_sayin

6131

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@ccthor said:

@just_sayin:

There's also a research states black people have less intelligence than other, do you believe it?

I am not aware of the studies you are speaking about. My initial reaction to the idea is that differences in general "intelligence" of racial groups in America are not biological but may reflect disparities in rates of single-parent households. African Americans are statistically more likely to grow up in a single parent household. This impacts several areas such as number of words a child hears a day, likelihood to finish high school, attitudes about academic achievement, poverty, likelihood to be at grade level, truancy rates, etc. All of those would impact perceptions of "intelligence".

A control test would be to see if the "intelligence" of poor rural whites in appalachia are equal to those of African Americans in urban areas. Children in Appalachia share many of the same characteristics for single parent household rates as the African American community.

Avatar image for abstractraze
AbstractRaze

4658

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29  Edited By AbstractRaze

@just_sayin said:
@ccthor said:

@abstractraze:

Any research source?

Use CDC for a source:

In 2014, gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men accounted for 83% of primary and secondary syphilis cases where sex of sex partner was known in the United States.

Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men are 17 times more likely to get anal cancer than heterosexual men.

Men who are HIV-positive are even more likely than those who do not have HIV to get anal cancer.

Also see: https://www.cdc.gov/std/life-stages-populations/stdfact-msm.htm

There are lots of increased health risks from men who have sex with men: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3575167/

Lesbians are at higher risk for mental illness, suicide, depression, domestic violence from a sexual partner, greater risk for HPV, oral cancers, and obesity (https://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/women.htm)

I appreciate your input, but it's widely known, nice sources btw. I usually discussed this topic in other forums 5 years ago, I had multiple resources sites on my favorite list when the LGBT retrograde gender ideology started to propagate, especially when the American government and society submitted under them, those sites highlighted unfavorably things when it comes to this topic, whether socially or health issues, not even legal or illegal prostitution in the West propagate more venereal diseases than the homosexual community.

Leave some homework for the people, who are too conceited to even search for themselves.

When @ccthor confronted you with a controversial question such as "So you are trying to imply gay is a disease?"

Just be direct to the man, and tell him that it's in their nature to be promiscuous when it comes to the majority of the Homosexual population, because they're most likely unable to found a stable relationship, they eventually become quickly tired of their partners, most of them are naturally condemned to such inevitable outcome, their relationships lack depth, it's an uncomfortable truth which has to be swallowed and realized.

PS:

Alone this image, a gay parade which tells more than enough, they don't care about anyone than rather themselves.

I'm not trying to say they are evil, but just born like that, that doesn't mean one should allow them to do those things in public, they're free to be themselves without crossing the line, they only care about themselves, so be it, they despise children because a homosexual relation doesn't contribute like a heterosexual relation, considering straight people are likely to pass their genetical (better immune system) intellectual and material property to the next generation, those improving the human race, so be it.

No Caption Provided

Avatar image for just_sayin
just_sayin

6131

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@abstractraze: I think the issue of health and morality are two different issues. I was wondering if @ccthor was implying that it is morally wrong to discuss increased health risks associated with the homsexual lifestyle. I don't believe we should become anti-science because of the politics involved.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

12237

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Homosexual Gay Gay Homo Gay

Avatar image for abstractraze
AbstractRaze

4658

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32  Edited By AbstractRaze

@just_sayin said:

@abstractraze: I think the issue of health and morality are two different issues. I was wondering if @ccthor was implying that it is morally wrong to discuss increased health risks associated with the homsexual lifestyle. I don't believe we should become anti-science because of the politics involved.

A lifestyle? When you have statistics proving and revealing that homosexual relationships have lower longevity and in addition, they are more prone to carry venereal diseases, it's because their relationships lack depth, a lifestyle by definition is a trend imposed by the civilization and culture, this doesn't have anything to do with a trend, but they just can't emotionally found a stable attachment to their partners, such frustration leads them to have a transient/passing life those constantly rotating partners, it's not because of the civilization around them, but because it's in their nature.

Humans are way different than the rest of the animal kingdom, we were once apes and terrible ones, at some point we were so physically inferior, we couldn't compete with other apes, we were terrible climbers, that's why we were forced to abandon the trees and the only thing which rescued us from extinction is our intelligence, our ingenuity, and the best way in order to preserve this trait, is to emotionally found trust between our mating partners and inherit our wisdom to the next generation, such as values and social-cultural standards, the next generation inherits the views from both, whether from the mother and the father, and the thing is that a child who grows within a stable family, will always have more advantages, because he will have access to a totally different cognitive perspectives in a deeply trustfully relation, that's why humanity invented marriage as a social norm, in order to artificially stabilize the relation between men and women furthermore.

We know that homosexuality happens in the animal kingdom, but we have one of the most successful insects as a great candidate, the termites, calculative living beings, naturally born as great architects, and it's because the termite queen and the king remain together till the last day of their lives, the interrelation between a female and a male, either instinctively or emotionally, is more calculative than you think, in the tiniest detail, there is a reason, a purpose why things are like they are and why we as a species, did this far, there is a reason why homosexuality is a great minority in the entire animal kingdom too.

Avatar image for godxdarkxopal
GodxDarkxOpal

536

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Lmao ???? I would go hard but the Mods might be too sensitive.

Avatar image for just_sayin
just_sayin

6131

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@just_sayin said:

@abstractraze: I think the issue of health and morality are two different issues. I was wondering if @ccthor was implying that it is morally wrong to discuss increased health risks associated with the homsexual lifestyle. I don't believe we should become anti-science because of the politics involved.

A lifestyle? When you have statistics proving and revealing that homosexual relationships have lower longevity and in addition, they are more prone to carry venereal diseases, it's because their relationships lack depth, a lifestyle by definition is a trend imposed by the civilization and culture, this doesn't have anything to do with a trend, but they just can't emotionally found a stable attachment to their partners, such frustration leads them to have a transient/passing life those constantly rotating partners, it's not because of the civilization around them, but because it's in their nature.

Humans are way different than the rest of the animal kingdom, we were once apes and terrible ones, at some point we were so physically inferior, we couldn't compete with other apes, we were terrible climbers, that's why we were forced to abandon the trees and the only thing which rescued us from extinction is our intelligence, our ingenuity, and the best way in order to preserve this trait, is to emotionally found trust between our mating partners and inherit our wisdom to the next generation, such as values and social-cultural standards, the next generation inherits the views from both, whether from the mother and the father, and the thing is that a child who grows within a stable family, will always have more advantages, because he will have access to a totally different cognitive perspectives in a deeply trustfully relation, that's why humanity invented marriage as a social norm, in order to artificially stabilize the relation between men and women furthermore.

We know that homosexuality happens in the animal kingdom, but we have one of the most successful insects as a great candidate, the termites, calculative living beings, naturally born as great architects, and it's because the termite queen and the king remain together till the last they of their lives, the interrelation between a female and a male, either instinctively or emotionally, is more calculative than you think, in the tiniest detail, there is a reason, a purpose why things are like they are and why we as a species, did this far, there is a reason why homosexuality is a great minority in the entire animal kingdom too.

Sometimes I cringe at how you phrase things. You compared humans to termites?! Yes, studies have shown that homosexuals have a shorter life span (it use to be 20 years less, but that number has probably decreased as HIV treatments have extended life - it's still probably a significant number of years less though due to the increased physical and mental health issues experienced by same-sex persons). Yes, homosexual relationships tend to be more prone to break-ups and less likely to be monogamous - though this has improved ever so slightly in the last decade. If your argument is that homsexuality is a less healthy lifestyle - you proved your point. Morally? That argument depends on who you think decides what is "moral".

Avatar image for abstractraze
AbstractRaze

4658

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35  Edited By AbstractRaze

@just_sayin said:
@abstractraze said:
@just_sayin said:

@abstractraze: I think the issue of health and morality are two different issues. I was wondering if @ccthor was implying that it is morally wrong to discuss increased health risks associated with the homsexual lifestyle. I don't believe we should become anti-science because of the politics involved.

A lifestyle? When you have statistics proving and revealing that homosexual relationships have lower longevity and in addition, they are more prone to carry venereal diseases, it's because their relationships lack depth, a lifestyle by definition is a trend imposed by the civilization and culture, this doesn't have anything to do with a trend, but they just can't emotionally found a stable attachment to their partners, such frustration leads them to have a transient/passing life those constantly rotating partners, it's not because of the civilization around them, but because it's in their nature.

Humans are way different than the rest of the animal kingdom, we were once apes and terrible ones, at some point we were so physically inferior, we couldn't compete with other apes, we were terrible climbers, that's why we were forced to abandon the trees and the only thing which rescued us from extinction is our intelligence, our ingenuity, and the best way in order to preserve this trait, is to emotionally found trust between our mating partners and inherit our wisdom to the next generation, such as values and social-cultural standards, the next generation inherits the views from both, whether from the mother and the father, and the thing is that a child who grows within a stable family, will always have more advantages, because he will have access to a totally different cognitive perspectives in a deeply trustfully relation, that's why humanity invented marriage as a social norm, in order to artificially stabilize the relation between men and women furthermore.

We know that homosexuality happens in the animal kingdom, but we have one of the most successful insects as a great candidate, the termites, calculative living beings, naturally born as great architects, and it's because the termite queen and the king remain together till the last day of their lives, the interrelation between a female and a male, either instinctively or emotionally, is more calculative than you think, in the tiniest detail, there is a reason, a purpose why things are like they are and why we as a species, did this far, there is a reason why homosexuality is a great minority in the entire animal kingdom too.

Sometimes I cringe at how you phrase things. You compared humans to termites?! Yes, studies have shown that homosexuals have a shorter life span (it use to be 20 years less, but that number has probably decreased as HIV treatments have extended life - it's still probably a significant number of years less though due to the increased physical and mental health issues experienced by same-sex persons). Yes, homosexual relationships tend to be more prone to break-ups and less likely to be monogamous - though this has improved ever so slightly in the last decade. If your argument is that homsexuality is a less healthy lifestyle - you proved your point. Morally? That argument depends on who you think decides what is "moral".

My point is that the termite queen and the king, lead a stable relationship based on instincts than rather emotions, their loyalty to each other acrosses beyond humanity's loyalty between their partners, we created ways how to prolonge and solidify our union to our partners, such as marriage, so that the ods to grow up in a stable family for the next generation increases, it's not only a deeper emotional union created by our social coexistence, but a reference of a greater status.

Now if you're talking about the moral issues during the gay parades, yes, morals helped us to not regress, or are you trying to imply that pedophilia is right? such as happens in the Islamic world, where children are forced to marry grown men, our social norms and intelligence is everything we have in order to progress, we were a blatant failure as conventional apes.

PS:

That's the reason why humanity determined when a human is a minor or matured, that's why we created norms in order to establish a product suitable for minors or not.