-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
This is Why Homosexuality is Wrong. . .
- Thread starter MrrrrrNiceGuy
- Start date
I posted them because they are true, and reality. So far all you really are doing is kicking up dust. I don't see anything meaty in your posts besides "You're mean" for making you guys look at reality. And come on dude, only about a third of them were about HIV. What about the ones about the high level of promiscuity, and the increase over the years of unprotected sex among them?
You have the citations. Go for it.
Upvote
0
KomissarSteve
Basileus
Indeed. You're responsible for your own argument, KC, not anyone else.
Upvote
0
It's your challenge. You are responsible for it. Unless you can prove the statistics faulty they stand untouched. That's the nature of debate. I presented my stats complete with citations. If you want to somehow claim they are bogus it is up to you to prove it.
Upvote
0
IzzyPop
I wear my sunglasses at night...
I'm confused. The source for your statistics has been shown to be biased, but it is not your responsibility to find a more reputable source? The onus falls upon others to prove them false even though the source is discredited? How is that debating? It sounds more like sticking your fingers in your ears and saying 'La-la-la-la' while the other side is talking.
Upvote
0
TheManeki
Christian Humanist
I wish you would read my comments better, so I don't have to keep repeating myself. 
Your quotes from the survey of married heterosexuals are too brief to be useful. I am asking a valid question -- How did those conducting the survey factor in people lying? -- which you can presumably answer, since you have that reference in front of you. Your failure to answer leads one to suspect that they did not factor in this source of error, which hurts their conclusions and your case. You're only hurting yourself by refusing to reply.
If you don't want to do that, fine by me. Common sense would dictate that premarital sex would be a better statistic for comparison than extramarital sex (considering homosexual marriages are hard to come by), so I invited you to dig some of them out of your sizable library. And when you do, be sure to remember to also quote the parts where the researchers factor in lying.
Your quotes from the survey of married heterosexuals are too brief to be useful. I am asking a valid question -- How did those conducting the survey factor in people lying? -- which you can presumably answer, since you have that reference in front of you. Your failure to answer leads one to suspect that they did not factor in this source of error, which hurts their conclusions and your case. You're only hurting yourself by refusing to reply.
If you don't want to do that, fine by me. Common sense would dictate that premarital sex would be a better statistic for comparison than extramarital sex (considering homosexual marriages are hard to come by), so I invited you to dig some of them out of your sizable library. And when you do, be sure to remember to also quote the parts where the researchers factor in lying.
Upvote
0
I went back to find the statistics posted by Karatecowboy, and his post looks like plagiarism to me, since I see no source citation. Did I miss a source citation for this material?
You can't plagiarize. You need to provide attribution in the form of a formal citation or a link to the original source.
Also, folks, look at the dates on the Bell and Weinberg study (1978) and the Weinberg and Hammersmith study (1981). Studies from nearly 30 years ago? How relevant to today is that?
Upvote
0
Oh, to clarify, there are plenty of source citations within the text that Karatecowboy posted, but I see no source citation for the text itself. And I doubt Karatecowboy wrote any of this; it sounds like he simply cut and pasted it from a source without attribution. That is plagiarism.
Upvote
0
I saw no proof of biased sources, so I am not sure what you are talking about.
You know, reading your posts, it seems that even if I went through all that . . . if there were no part where they "adjusted for lies" you would simply wave your hand and say "they could be lying". Or "it might have changed" or something like that. Your mind is shut, you refuse to change your opinion, and nothing could convince you. It's the old saying "you can't reason someone out of a position that they weren't reasoned into".I wish you would read my comments better, so I don't have to keep repeating myself.
Your quotes from the survey of married heterosexuals are too brief to be useful. I am asking a valid question -- How did those conducting the survey factor in people lying? -- which you can presumably answer, since you have that reference in front of you. Your failure to answer leads one to suspect that they did not factor in this source of error, which hurts their conclusions and your case. You're only hurting yourself by refusing to reply.
If you don't want to do that, fine by me. Common sense would dictate that premarital sex would be a better statistic for comparison than extramarital sex (considering homosexual marriages are hard to come by), so I invited you to dig some of them out of your sizable library. And when you do, be sure to remember to also quote the parts where the researchers factor in lying.
First, shame on you for the last paragraph. Your name is Ohioprof, but I wonder what field, because any good scientist knows that research does not simply "go bad" like old bread in the pantry. I do not even have a master's degree, and I know that.
Second, some of it is copied and pasted, and yes I can do that, because I just did. You are applying all these arbitrary writing standards to an informal forum debate. Look at your own posts with its several grammatical and spelling errors. Until you hold yourself to basic grammatical writing rules I suggest you stop pointing the finger, because you have three pointing back at you.
All you guys are trying to do is exhaust me by raising red herrings, changing the subject, and sending me on a wild goose hunt. I'd like to convince you of the truth, but your minds are closed to it.
Upvote
0
TheManeki
Christian Humanist
Bingo! If it were a meaningful survey, it would have attempted to limit and calculate any bias caused by respondents lying. If it were not a meaningful survey, they would have not done so. So make sure you do a good job choosing articles to share; you'll hurt your argument by sharing poor ones.
I'm just going to quote this part, because the rest appears to be a dodge of the issue. KC, some research does go "bad," like phrenology. Some research is replaced by more sophisticated models. For example, classical mechanics doesn't work on the atomic level, so quantum mechanics was developed. In either case, it is good to bring the most recent research to the table -- especially when discussing homosexuality, because there are more researchers studying the field and more uncloseted homosexuals to study.
Upvote
0
Get over yourself, KC, never did I say that personal experience is more reliable than scientific study; I said that I don't believe your sources are credible, nor will I until you post sources. Beanieboy has already debunked your, urm, research, so you've done what you do best - resorted to name calling.
Oh, and just for the record, I actually know moar liek three-hundred ghey people hurr. You know that gay agenda you're constantly on about? I grew up in the middle of it.
Don't you dare call those of us who aren't lazy propagandists like you Holocaust deniers ever again. Such behavior is the epitome of pathetic.
You lose all credibility when you forsake actual reality in favor of your supposed reality, as you continue to do time and time again.
Guffaw. As I've said earlier, Beanieboy has destroyed your little copypasta argument. As for the "liar, liar" part, I'm going to continue to believe that about you until I see some honesty from you.
Upvote
0
LittleNipper
Contributor
- Mar 9, 2005
- 9,011
- 174
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
JESUS HAS fully agreed with EXACTLY what GOD means by marriage. And since MARRIAGE is described to be only between a man and a woman, that negates any attempt by people calling themselves "christian" from assuming that marriage can be any other sort of committed relationship. AND since sex is not condoned outside of marrage, homosexual (where sexual contact occures) are in error.
AND, I will go one step further. CHRIST blasts the church of Thyatira for their toleration of a woman referred to as Jezebel (who apparently called herself a prophetess) who was misleading that congregation into sexual immorality and eating food sacrificed idols. It may be considered that the vestal virgins were little more than temple prostitutes who engaged in all sort of despicable sexual acts in the name of their gods with regards to the sacrifices they performed. Read Revelations Chapter 2. So people who hide behind cloaks of "Christianity" to its distortion are not to be tolerated unless that congregation cares to be punished by GOD.
Upvote
0
I wish you would read my comments better, so I don't have to keep repeating myself.
Your quotes from the survey of married heterosexuals are too brief to be useful. I am asking a valid question -- How did those conducting the survey factor in people lying? -- which you can presumably answer, since you have that reference in front of you. Your failure to answer leads one to suspect that they did not factor in this source of error, which hurts their conclusions and your case. You're only hurting yourself by refusing to reply.
If you don't want to do that, fine by me. Common sense would dictate that premarital sex would be a better statistic for comparison than extramarital sex (considering homosexual marriages are hard to come by), so I invited you to dig some of them out of your sizable library. And when you do, be sure to remember to also quote the parts where the researchers factor in lying.
For all your posts in this thread, Maneki:
It's overdue.
Upvote
0
LittleNipper
Contributor
- Mar 9, 2005
- 9,011
- 174
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
And the source of your statistics have been shown to be under the control of liberal homosexual supporting organizations. Does the pot only accept it's own rationalizations?
Upvote
0
I am a professor of history, and I teach writing.
Plagiarism is never acceptable, my friend. You need to cite your source. You cannot just cut and paste and insert someone else's words as your own into your text without quotation marks and attribution.
As for the dates of the research, since you are talking about present-day gay people, a study from 1978 is clearly out of date. So is a study from 1981.
Finally, what errors in grammar and spelling of mine have you detected? I will gladly clear them up, but I don't see any.
Upvote
0
LittleNipper
Contributor
- Mar 9, 2005
- 9,011
- 174
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Some would do wise to learn from the historical facts they strive to repeat.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
