Originally posted by: Genesys
Originally posted by: Nebor
Originally posted by: Genesys
Wow, just wow
If you can't tell that's slanted, then you must be slanted yourself. I mean, every single one of those arguments could be made towards men and women being together. How ridiculous...
Besides, that has nothing to do with the right to get married. Sluts get married all the time.
let me guess, its slanted because it actually takes a hard line against homosexuality and homosexuals? its slanted because its not 'open minded'? and go ahead with your silly argument, you wont get very far.
and yes, it has everything to do with marriage. why do sluts get married? money, medical benefits, insurance, tax breaks, etc... why do homosexuals want to get married? dont delude yourself and say "why, because they love each other" its for exactly the same reasons the sluts do it.
This article is rediculous because it is poorly researched and written, riddled with logical errors, hypocritical and misrepresentitive. Not to mention completely irrelevent to the topic at hand. This "scientific publication" is not even peer reviewed, nor published in an accredited medical or scientific journal.
You got this from the FRC? The fundie Xian fanatics down in the Springs? Well, that begins to explain a lot already....
To begin, just look at the references. Most of them are out of date (70's), not really relevant to the statement being credited, or gathered under questionable methodology. I would immediately question the crediability of any paper that opens with "Throughout history, the major civilizations major religions condemned homosexuality" (mispelled and poorly worded sentance.)
His big thesis, outlined in "Effects on Lifespan," relies on a single paper presentation which used obituary observations as its major source of data (or at least how Dr. Stupid uses it.) It sought to compare age and causes of death in gay vs hetero by merely comparing obituaries listed in a few "gay publications" versus major newspapers. The conclutions (as presented)? "Less than 2% [of gays] survived to old age; were 116 times more apt to be murdered; lesbians died of murder, suicide, or accident--
a rate 487 times higher (!!) than that of white females," and so on. Do these incredible numbers really suggest that there alarming impacts to heath from just being a homosexual, or perhaps there is a flaw in the way the data was gathered or interpreted?
How does one get one's death listed in a "gay" paper? The gay papers may be only listing a distinct set of known gays, or those that died of extraordinary circumstances (like murder, ah ha!) It strikes me that the AIDS vs other CODeath, are very simular. Since this combs obits back to '81, its very possible some of those listed as "other" were really aids-infected but not properly diagnosed. Also, last time I checked, obits in mainstream papers didn't list if a person was gay. Some of these people who lived to a ripe old age could have been gay and never properly included in this study.
Take his whole The Gay Legacy section. Most of what he reports, while coming from crediable sources, has nothing to do with homosexuality. As we all know, AIDS is a huge epidemic in Africa, but no where does he blame the Africans for the "plague that gives every indication of destroying most of them", or imply that health pros should be wary of treating them due to danger of contracting disease.
The rest of what he writes in regard to sexual practices is mostly outdated, overblown ("gays average...106 [to]
1105 different partners/year" (really? 3 diff koks each and every day?
) or completely substituable for some hetero practices. "Gays who practice oral sex verge on consuming raw human blood"; "It is also common when "toys" are employed (
homosexual lingo for objects which are inserted into the rectum--bottles, carrots, even gerbils)" Yeah, no one heard of a d!ldo before those crazy gays, much less thought of using one...
Lastly, under "Compassion," the good old caring Doc says
"Homosexuals are sexually troubled people engaging in dangerous activities. Because we care about them and those tempted to join them, it is important that we neither encourage nor legitimize such a destructive lifestyle." I repress you because I love you. :heart: ..... Retard.
I could go on, but I think this is long enough. This article just reinforces the belief that these anti-gay forces are just paranoid and ignorant bigots using religion or now "science" to justify their hate. By presenting this and giving this merit, I question the same things about you.
If Bushites had their way, the US would look like California. High state taxes, soaring deficits, businesses and jobs leaving, unaffordable living, soaring spending on social programs, entitlements for illegal immigrants and lack of development of sustainable energy resources.
