Top 10 Reasons Gay Marriage is Wrong

[papasmerf]

acutus if I wore a condom could we have anal sex?

Cross that question off my list

 

[LancsLad]

Whip it out Lad.

(Actually not gay but cool with everyone who's cool with everyone.)

I know that. Just winding people up for fun, just that kind of day. I've also hit the bagel post.

 

[acutus]

Here we go...Let's have a little truth to set you free:

The most recent presentation on the origin of HIV was presented at the 6th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunitistic Infections (Chicago, January 1999). At that conference, research was presented that suggested that HIV had "crossed over" into the human population from a particular species of chimpanzee, probably through blood contact that occurred during hunting and field dressing of the animals. The CDC states that the findings presented at this conference provide the strongest evidence to date that HIV-1 originated in non-human primates. The research findings were featured in the February 4,1999 issue of the journal, Nature.

We know that the virus has existed in the United States, Haiti and Africa since at least 1977-1978. In 1979, rare types of pneumonia, cancer and other illnesses were being reported by doctors in Los Angeles and New York. The common thread was that these conditions were not usually found in persons with healthy immune systems.

Quoted directly from:
http://www.aids.org/info/hiv-where-from.html

By the end of 2005, women accounted for nearly half of all people living with AIDS worldwide, and represent almost 60% of infections in sub-Saharan Africa. The impact of HIV on women is also growing in Eastern Europe, Central Asia and South and South-East Asia. Moreover, young women are several times more likely than young men to contract the disease through heterosexual contact. Worldwide, 62% of infected young people are girls, and that number soars to 77% in sub-Saharan Africa. A woman's vulnerability to the virus is attributable not only to biological differences, but also to deeply entrenched socio-economic inequalities that further compound her risk.

http://globalhealth.org/view_top.php3?id=227

Moral=Illegal???

Thank you for your reply, Ms. Madison Doll. If possible, please provide at least two other sources that corroborates the one dated reference used in your rebuttal. I would suggest you begin your search within a recognized academic Medical or Biological source. Sincerely, Jon .

 

[bobistheowl]

An interesting link about the origins of AIDS:

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a6339a664b5.htm

 

[acutus]

Man when we chatted at the party in December I had no idea that you were so conservative, you sure didn't seem conservative about MPs!

The way I see the debate about same-sex marriage is simple, and no doubt I'm reiterating what others here have said:

One group of people wants to be free so that its members can go about their lives equally with all others in society while doing no harm to others, and part of that equality includes calling their unions marriages and having them legally recognized.

The other group of people, who generally have no contact with the first group, wishes to control aspects of other people's lives because of their often deeply-held personal beliefs. This group is not being forced to do anything other than accept the differences of others.

How to resolve? The group which wants to control others should go fuck off. They can go live in Iran as far as I'm concerned, the attitude is just like the mullahs. There, that was easy!

John, sincerely - If you don't like homosexuality, just leave it at that.

I like that you have made various logical arguments to support your moral values, because that makes the supposed foundations of your values easily open to attack:

For example

1. AIDS has affected gays more than non-gays, which to you proves being gay is wrong. Where to start? This is the dumbest, "you have a disease because god thinks you've been bad" argument. AIDS affects gays disproportionately because of the wau the virus is transmitted. If more people who take the TTC get the flu than people who drive, does that make transit immoral?

2. No physiological/morphological/whatever basis in nature for homosexuality. Well then, why is homosexuality so persistent? It's pretty clear that same-sex unions have been with us throughout history. If it wasn't around in biblical times, they woldn't have forbidden it... Also there are numerous examples in nature of same-sex parterships, whether for pleasure of otherwise, but of course that has nothing to do with humans nor should it condition our moral choices.

Well I don't have any more time to assail your weak arguments but, shit, if you're such a nice guy, why can't you just

-- live and let live
-- stay out of threads that are just meant to wish people a happy pride week
-- or just wish our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters a happy pride week

Sincerely - Dd

Thank you for your reply, Mr. DATY Dude. The fundamental diference in perspective here, is that Homosexual behaviour causes harm to all of us now, and the forseeable future, by causing and spreading a deadly, infectious, incurabe and completely preventable disease. Paedophiles may also wish to be 'free' to live their lives 'equally' as others; but that premise is an unreasonable one since paedophillia also causes great harm to Society as well. We would not, nor should we recognize a so called 'marriage' between an adult and a eight year old child. As far as 'controlling' other people's behaviour...Yes, that is appropriate if and when that behaviour is clearly harmfull to that individual and to people in that individual's community. This is why we have Laws against drinking and driving; intravenous drug use, smoking in public places, and so on and so forth. With regard to your inference that I should remain silent with a dissenting point of view on this issue; I would ask you to please note that I have not asked others to remain silent in their support of Homosexual behaviour. Let everyone speak, so that we can all decide for ourselves what is True and false, and right and wrong. You may be able to also note the vehement invective directed at me, in place of calm objective discussion on this issue. Sincerely, Jon .

 

[acutus]

An interesting link about the origins of AIDS:

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a6339a664b5.htm

Interesting perhaps, Mr. Bobistheow; however Mr. Hopper is a non-scientist with a 'hypothesis', only. Sincerely, Jon .

 

[LancsLad]

Madison I have to jump in here, In terms of its effects on the world, Aids has been nothing like the big scourge of the 20th century, the 1918-19 influenza. It killed literally millions in post war Europe and many this side of the Atlantic. Since the majority of aids related deaths are in Africa they have been of little consequence to the developed world, whereas Influenza struck at western Europe .

 

[acutus]

NO problem, here you go: These examples were published on the Center for Disease Control and Prevent site.

For many years scientists theorized as to the origins of HIV and how it appeared in the human population, most believing that HIV originated in other primates. Then in 1999, an international team of researchers reported that they had discovered the origins of HIV-1, the predominant strain of HIV in the developed world. A subspecies of chimpanzees native to west equatorial Africa had been identified as the original source of the virus. The researchers believe that HIV-1 was introduced into the human population when hunters became exposed to infected blood.

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pubs/faq/faq3.htm

Of all the infectious diseases first recognized in the 20th century, AIDS has had not only the most profound effect on human illness and death, it ended the developed world's complacency about infectious diseases. Caused by HIV, AIDS is, as far as we know, always fatal, even with effective therapy. Within the past 50 to 100 years, HIV went from being maintained primarily, if not exclusively, in sooty mangebeys (HIV-2) and chimpanzees (HIV-1) (1-3) to being the etiologic agent of a worldwide pandemic. AIDS was not recognized as a specific disease until 1980, and HIV was not identified as the etiologic agent until 1983. Nevertheless, an estimated 16 million persons have died from AIDS worldwide with 50 million currently infected with HIV.

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol7no3_supp/levin.htm

Nice try, Ms. Madison Doll; but showing that there may be related HIV type strains present in some groups of wild primates does not prove that the origin of the Human AIDS virus comes from that source. Sincerely, Jon .

 

[papasmerf]

Please then give me at least 2 medical journal/goverment website sources that show that the HIV virus originated in homosexual males.

Maybe you can give 2 that shows it did not

 

[acutus]

Lol...

Please then give me at least 2 medical journal/goverment website sources that show that the HIV virus originated in homosexual males.

Why not simply answer my question to you, Ms. Madison Doll? In the meantime, why not ask your Family Doctor about the results of a man being sexually penetrated anally by another man? Why not ask this same question of someone in the Homosexual community, while you're at it? Sincerely, Jon .

 

[acutus]

Lol...

Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 35294, USA.

The human AIDS viruses human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and type 2 (HIV-2) represent cross-species (zoonotic) infections. Although the primate reservoir of HIV-2 has been clearly identified as the sooty mangabey (Cercocebus atys), the origin of HIV-1 remains uncertain. Viruses related to HIV-1 have been isolated from the common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes), but only three such SIVcpz infections have been documented, one of which involved a virus so divergent that it might represent a different primate lentiviral lineage. In a search for the HIV-1 reservoir, we have now sequenced the genome of a new SIVcpzstrain (SIVcpzUS) and have determined, by mitochondrial DNA analysis, the subspecies identity of all known SIVcpz-infected chimpanzees. We find that two chimpanzee subspecies in Africa, the central P. t. troglodytes and the eastern P. t. schweinfurthii, harbour SIVcpz and that their respective viruses form two highly divergent (but subspecies-specific) phylogenetic lineages. All HIV-1 strains known to infect man, including HIV-1 groups M, N and O, are closely related to just one of these SIVcpz lineages, that found in P. t. troglodytes. Moreover, we find that HIV-1 group N is a mosaic of SIVcpzUS- and HIV-1-related sequences, indicating an ancestral recombination event in a chimpanzee host. These results, together with the observation that the natural range of P. t. troglodytes coincides uniquely with areas of HIV-1 group M, N and O endemicity, indicate that P. t. troglodytes is the primary reservoir for HIV-1 and has been the source of at least three independent introductions of SIVcpz into the human population.

Quoting medical references that I'm certain that you, yourself do not understand, does little if anything to bolster your position, Ms. Madison Doll. That there is apparently some non-lethal HIV like viruses in some groups of primates does not 'prove' that those HIV like viruses are the source of the Human AIDS virus. If this so called premise had any merit, then where were all the AIDS cases when the continent of Africa was being explored during the 15th; 16th; 17th; 18th; and 19th centuries? Sincerely, Jon .

 

[DATYdude]

Well you seem to be convinced so there's not much point other than target practice, because it's just so easy since the crux of your argument is that being gay (or lesbian, presumably) leads to the spread of AIDS.

1. Nobody is supporting homosexual behaviour. We don't care to interfere in people's private lives. Why?

2. The harm is in having unprotected sex while knowing that AIDS is out there. Like bbbjs from SPs? Your behaviour should be criminalized (PS it isn't!). Has nothing to do with being gay.

3. Same sex marriage between lesbians. Has nothing to do with AIDS. Still should be illegal?

4. You think homosexuality is as harmful as pedophaelia? Do I need to even mention how stupid the comparison is? Ever heard of the phrase consenting adults?

5. Vehement invective? (25 points for big words!) I just meant that it's inappropriate to make this thread into a "is it OK to be gay?" thread, like its 1952... Besides, aren't we trying to get at the truth?

Sorry Jon, you have not convinced me ONE IOTA.

Please go back to your harm argument and try to convince me how being gay is responsible for AIDS any more than being African is...

Sincerely, you're wrong.

 

[acutus]

Lol...

and do not forget ask the doctor their thought on any unprotected sex

And why not offer an intelligent perspective in this discussion Mr. Eyeofthedragon, instead of cheap shots of 'flags' and what you think are 'witty' retorts? This isn't too much to ask of an individual who fancies himself as some sort of writer...is it? Sincerely, Jon .

 

[acutus]

Lol...

Well you seem to be convinced so there's not much point other than target practice, because it's just so easy since the crux of your argument is that being gay (or lesbian, presumably) leads to the spread of AIDS.

1. Nobody is supporting homosexual behaviour. We don't care to interfere in people's private lives. Why?

2. The harm is in having unprotected sex while knowing that AIDS is out there. Like bbbjs from SPs? Your behaviour should be criminalized (PS it isn't!). Has nothing to do with being gay.

3. Same sex marriage between lesbians. Has nothing to do with AIDS. Still should be illegal?

4. You think homosexuality is as harmful as pedophaelia? Do I need to even mention how stupid the comparison is? Ever heard of the phrase consenting adults?

5. Vehement invective? (25 points for big words!) I just meant that it's inappropriate to make this thread into a "is it OK to be gay?" thread, like its 1952... Besides, aren't we trying to get at the truth?

Sorry Jon, you have not convinced me ONE IOTA.

Please go back to your harm argument and try to convince me how being gay is responsible for AIDS any more than being African is...

Sincerely, you're wrong.

I've read your post through a couple of times now Mr. DATY Dude, and I'm not clear on what it is that you're trying to communicate...? I would suggest that you slow down a little. If you have one or two points that you'd like to make, then you should focus more carefuly on those points; if only in the interest of clarity. And by the way, I have no interest in trying to 'convince' you of anything. Sincerely, Jon .

 

[godddess_harmonia]

Not just for procreation...

So, acutus, if the only circumstance in which sex is acceptable is to "create life"...what the hell are you doing on an escort review board? You've done a lot of procreating with escorts, have you?
(Oh, watch this turn into another skirmish about BBFS...)

Extremely valid point

 

[acutus]

Lol...

You dont think asking your doctor about any unprotected sex is unitelligent, do you Jon? Can you explain what you mean about cheap shots?

Your 'flag' for your 'buddy'...is not a cheap shot? I'd be happy to take some cheap shots at you Mr. Eyeofthedragon, although I think that this Thread has enough raw emotion in it to satisfy the needs of a enlightened discussion on an 'adult' board, as it is. Sincerely, Jon .

 

[DATYdude]

I was using numbers to make it easier for you.

Also I thought I was more or less focussing, as you were, on the idea that "homosexual behaviour" as you call it (which incidentally, for your argument really only includes sex, not relationships or marriage - lord knows my marriage doesn't have much sex), is harmful to society.

There, this time I used bold.

Now prove it, not by making silly comparisons like pedophelia, drunk driving and second hand smoke.

You might also want to comment on my flu analogy, i.e. that transit as a cause of the spread of flu should be outlawed along with homosexuality.

We're aiming at the truth Jon, you don't have to get defensive. I want the truth as much as you do. Nothing personal intended, sorry if I was insulting, it was your argument that I find stupid.

 

[acutus]

Lol...

Extremely valid point

That the purpose of sex is to create Life is a moot point, Ms. Godddess harmonica, just as the purpose of eating food is to sustain Life. We may be able to discern that eating and drinking can be pleasuable in and of itself, just as we can be aware that sexually intimacy can be pleasurable in its own right, as well. But to eat and eat and eat and eat so that one becomes grossly obese is generally seen, correctly in my view, as not desirable. This same analogy can be made with regard to the Homosexual perspective which apparently views any and all Human sexuality to be 'good' and 'healthy' and 'normal', even though, clearly this is not the case. Sincerely, Jon .(writer's edit: spelling correction: change 'mute' to moot.).

 

[acutus]

I was using numbers to make it easier for you.

Also I thought I was more or less focussing, as you were, on the idea that "homosexual behaviour" as you call it (which incidentally, for your argument really only includes sex, not relationships or marriage - lord knows my marriage doesn't have much sex), is harmful to society.

There, this time I used bold.

Now prove it, not by making silly comparisons like pedophelia, drunk driving and second hand smoke.

You might also want to comment on my flu analogy, i.e. that transit as a cause of the spread of flu should be outlawed along with homosexuality.

We're aiming at the truth Jon, you don't have to get defensive. I want the truth as much as you do. Nothing personal intended, sorry if I was insulting, it was your argument that I find stupid.

If you review my posts on this Thread Mr. DATY dude, then you should be able to understand why I believe Homosexual behaviour is a negative influence on Society. Before you ask me to respond to your analogy, why not first reply to the principle that I cited of laws that attempt to prevent individuals from engaging in behaviour that harms themselves, and more importantly, others around them. Sincerely, Jon .

 

[Morgan Ellis]

Doesn't the rainbow make you happy though?

It makes me happy. Now, let's all have some non-procreatory, sexually degenerate, adulterous intercourse to celebrate. We could even throw in some sodomy, just to mark the week appropriately. Acutus, in the meantime, can pray for all of us non repentent sinners. Me, I can think of better things to be doing while on my knees...

Cheers!

Morgan