• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Overcoming same-sex attraction

Agnostic75

Well-Known Member
nekoboy said:
They aren't dead because they are gay. They are dead because of diseases they picked up from whatever sexual activities they participated in.

And the lesson is...............? Well, it is that if you practice safe sex, you are far less likely to get a sexually transmitted disease regardless of your sexual preference. So, are you implying that you are just fine with homosexuals who practice safe sex, and are monogamous?
 
Last edited:

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
would rather be a "bigot" than be a person who murders others spiritually and physically by accepting what they do without speaking up. Very few people know the risks, many people DENY THE RISKS, so I feel morally obligated to bring them up. Besides, homosexuals are more likely to die than smokers or people who overeat.
There are no more risks involved with homosexuality than heterosexuality. What matters is avoiding high-risk sexual behavior (i.e. not using condoms and having multiple partners), as a bacterial or viral infection will not know or care if you are hetero or homo. And to say that being gay kills you quicker is to ignore the fact heart disease is the number one avoidable killer, and tobacco kills more people annually than all other drugs (legal, illegal, and prescription) combined. If homosexuality were more deadly than obesity and tobacco it would have such a high fatality rate that there would literally be none of them left.

That doesn't mean we should put their decision on a pedestal. We have civil unions right now, and there's a reason they are not put on a pedestal.

The Secular Case Against Gay Marriage - The Tech

Read my links, they say more than I can say.
Considering homosexuals are a minority, there is no worry about society not having people left to reproduce. It's also bunk because there are so many unwanted kids, and so many in foster care why is population even a concern, especially since we are over-populated? And of course heterosexual's that are born sterile can still wed. And your article falls short because all societies have had some sort of marriage-ritual, but the exact purposes of this ritual vary. Sometimes it is for procreation, sometimes it's for securing heritage, and sometimes it is for economic reasons. And of course to some cultures marriage consist of two sets of parents entering into a social contract and deciding that for a reason that will benefit them their children shall one day be married. And how one society says whoever gives a girl an appropriate gift at the correct time time is considered married to her (and she can be married multiple times) and can have sex with her, and many societies have had marriage and sex as more than just procreation.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Besides, homosexuals are more likely to die than smokers or people who overeat.
Why not ban overeaters from participating in eating at McDonald's and Burger King, then?
Why not picket to put these cholesterol-factories out of business?
Why not degrade Hershey and Nestle?
Why not go to Wisconsin and open a little whupass on the cheese producers?
Overeaters die from obesity, strokes and heart disease ALL THE TIME.
Aren't you as morally-obligated to see to their well-being, too? Or are you being selective here, simply because obesity isn't mentioned in the Bible? (BTW, FYI: homosexuality isn't specifically mentioned in the Bible -- only sexual subjugation).
 

Banner

Member
Thank you for ignoring the statistics I listed.

So, if you believe I am a bigot for having moral qualms about a lifestyle that results in the deaths of millions of homosexuals, due to disease and abuse in relationships, so be it. I would rather be a bigot than to have the blood of those men and women on my hands, all because I let them destroy themselves without saying a word.

You're welcome. I ignore statistics alot. Because they are so often ********. Or irrelevant, like in this case. I won't even attempt to break yours down because it's obvious that you have made up your mind on the matter.
 

Agnostic75

Well-Known Member
nekoboy said:
They aren't dead because they are gay. They are dead because of diseases they picked up from whatever sexual activities they participated in.


And the lesson is...............? Well, it is that if you practice safe sex, you are far less likely to get a sexually transmitted disease regardless of your sexual preference. So, are you implying that you are just fine with homosexuals who practice safe sex, and are monogamous? If not, then your argument is a red herring, and is religion disguised as science.

redherring.gif
 
Last edited:

MysticSang'ha

Big Squishy Hugger
Premium Member
Statistics can say a lot. As a matter of fact, ballet dancers suffer more often from drug and alcohol abuse, from chronic knee and back injuries, from depression, and from eating disorders than the general population.

What a horrible lifestyle! All that suffering, and for what? The stage? Who cares if it's a life calling for these poor people. We need to speak up about the risks of ballet and how many ballerinas suffer. Ballet should be banned then, right? Right?

Right?
 

connermt

Well-Known Member
Homosexuality is not in anyway a sexual deviation nor paraphilia. It's a perfectly natural orientation.

Why just civil unions? Aren't homosexual citizens full citizens?

Statistics can say a lot. As a matter of fact, ballet dancers suffer more often from drug and alcohol abuse, from chronic knee and back injuries, from depression, and from eating disorders than the general population.

What a horrible lifestyle! All that suffering, and for what? The stage? Who cares if it's a life calling for these poor people. We need to speak up about the risks of ballet and how many ballerinas suffer. Ballet should be banned then, right? Right?

Right?

I would rather ban tap dancers myself. All that tapping just annoys me for some reason....
 

connermt

Well-Known Member
They aren't dead because they are gay. They are dead because of diseases they picked up from whatever sexual activities they participated in. Thank you for ignoring the facts.
On The Unhealthy Homosexual Lifestyle

Unlike most of you, I am citing sources.

So quick to point out something you know nothing about that you said exactly what I thought you would say.
A lifestyle (..."a lifestyle that results in the deaths of millions of homosexuals...") doesn't automatically equate to catching diseases. Thank you for proving my point of the one way bigotted view some of you have against people you know little (or likely nothing) about.

Secondly, why do you care if someone you don't know has (as some like to call it) an unhealthy lifestyle? How does that affect you? Can't mind your own business?

Lastly, based upon the bigotted view pointed out above, straight people catch no diseases based on their lifestyle, yes?
 

connermt

Well-Known Member
Ultimately, as consenting adults, each person has the right to take the matter of their own sexuality in their own hands (no pun intended). This may mean going to some mind melting trap such as described, or becoming happy with oneself and who/what they are.

Who/what a person is is no business of anyone else. You can agree/disagree with it until the cows come home, but if it's not you, and it does no harm to you, it's none of you business.

A straight person walking down the street passes a gay person and neither dies, catches fire, turns inside-out, (etc) simply because the other person has a different sexual orientation.
Citing that FACT, what two (or more) people do with their bodies in the privacy of their own lives that doesn't harm anyone else, there's nothing to consider. Likewise, the lifestyle that one or more people live, that doesn't harm you, is of no immediate concern to you.

Try living and working on your own life and let others do the same.
 

Agnostic75

Well-Known Member
nekoboy said:
They aren't dead because they are gay. They are dead because of diseases they picked up from whatever sexual activities they participated in.


And the lesson is...............? Well, it is that if you practice safe sex, you are far less likely to get a sexually transmitted disease regardless of your sexual preference. So, are you implying that you are just fine with homosexuals who practice safe sex, and are monogamous? If not, then your argument is a red herring, and is religion disguised as science.

redherring.gif
 
Last edited:

connermt

Well-Known Member
And the lesson is...............? Well, it is that if you practice safe sex, you are far less likely to get a sexually transmitted disease regardless of your sexual preference. So, are you implying that you are just fine with homosexuals who practice safe sex, and are monogamous? If not, then your argument is a red herring, and is religion disguised as science.

Religion disguised as science is all the religious have that they can say is actually factual or tactile.
 

connermt

Well-Known Member

Your report was posted in 2005. That's almost 7 years ago. Likely, the data is older than that. It's a good thing thinking and understanding hasn't increased since then.
Beyond all that, it's posted by a conservative organization and we all know conservatived are the most honest people around. There has never been a conservative person caught entertaining the acts they so strongly ditest....

Scanning through the "report" most things listed can be attributred to various degress with heterosexuals as well:
"70% of homosexuals admitting to having sex only one time with over 50% of their partners" - never happens with straight people
"homosexual sexual encounters occur while drunk, high on drugs, or in an orgy setting" - ditto
"25-33% of homosexuals and lesbians are alcoholics" - ditto again
"50% of suicides can be attributed to homosexuals" - which means the other 50% can be attributes to straight people
"33% of homosexuals ADMIT to minor/adult sex" - still less than straight people if straight people are the majority over 20%
And the biggie showing this isn't biased at all:
"59.6% of homosexuals are college graduates. 18.0% of the general population are college graduates (24). Too bad they aren't smart enough to listen to God. "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools" (Romans 1:22)" - I would say their smart enough to know a scam when they see one.

You "stats" are at best, hand picked by a biased organization.

Only an idiot would use such a report as anyting other than a cherry picked pile of BS.
 
Last edited:

waitasec

Veteran Member

unbiased
un·bi·ased adj \ˌən-ˈbī-əst\

Definition of UNBIASED

1
: free from bias; especially : free from all prejudice and favoritism : eminently fair <an unbiased opinion>
2
: having an expected value equal to a population parameter being estimated <an unbiased estimate of the population mean>

Unbiased - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

being willfully intellectually dishonest is being self defeating

:clap

excellent self defeating tactics
 
Top