"US 'doomed' if creationist president elected: scientists"

[LittleNipper]

the rate of HIV is fairly low among eta: homosexual women from what i understand. I know a lesbian couple and they are such wonderful people. They have two happy children and a beautiful home. One is an ER nurse. the other is a mid-wife that travels to Africa several times a year to lend a helping hand to needy women. I don't know a better couple to be honest. On the flip side, one of my best friends is a born again. She just divorced her abusive alcoholic husband (she has her own problems though) and her kids are caught in the middle. Long story short. the kids from the first couple are in a safer, healthier environment.

Also, and I don't mean to be offensive to the men here, but I suspect high rates of HIV among homosexual men because men in genral tend to be more promiscuous. I know many hetereo men (christians too) that try to tie as many knots on their belts as possible.

I also doubt that Aids rates in Africa are and have been soaring due to homosexuality.

That sounds wonderfu; however, their association had nothing to do with them having children. And it is their social actions that impress you and not what they do in the bedroom or when you are not present. I do believe men tend to want sex, and it is not unusual for men to experiment and substitute to get their jollies. As for Africa, the problem is you have a warm climate with little hygene and an explosion of the sexual revolution that was once the talk of the 60's, coupled with little to no healthcare. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out why there is such a mess there. Multiple sex partners is exactly like having sex with everyone that one's sex partner had sex with, added to everyone each of that partner's partners had sex with....................... NOT HEALTHY, NOT RIGHT, JUST PLAIN STUPID!

 

[Naraoia]

That sounds wonderfu; however, their association had nothing to do with them having children.

So what?

And it is their social actions that impress you and not what they do in the bedroom or when you are not present.

Why should anyone's actions in the bedroom impress her? (Apart from her own significant other's, of course )

And will you please at least comment on this:

Also, and I don't mean to be offensive to the men here, but I suspect high rates of HIV among homosexual men because men in genral tend to be more promiscuous. I know many hetereo men (christians too) that try to tie as many knots on their belts as possible.

I also doubt that Aids rates in Africa are and have been soaring due to homosexuality.

if you brought HIV up in the first place?

 

[LittleNipper]

So what? Why should anyone's actions in the bedroom impress her? (Apart from her own significant other's, of course )

And will you please at least comment on this:
if you brought HIV up in the first place?

So what? If they have the MOTHERING INSTINCTS, THEY SHOULD HAVE MARRIED MEN AND HAD A FAMILY. So, you are saying that needing same sex is a stronger drive than wanting & rearing children? Yet, they seem to want their cake and eat it too, one must suppose.....

 

[LittleNipper]

That sounds wonderfu; however, their association had nothing to do with them having children. And it is their social actions that impress you and not what they do in the bedroom or when you are not present. I do believe men tend to want sex, and it is not unusual for men to experiment and substitute to get their jollies. As for Africa, the problem is you have a warm climate with little hygene and an explosion of the sexual revolution that was once the talk of the 60's, coupled with little to no healthcare. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out why there is such a mess there. Multiple sex partners is exactly like having sex with everyone that one's sex partner had sex with, added to everyone each of that partner's partners had sex with....................... NOT HEALTHY, NOT RIGHT, JUST PLAIN STUPID!

I thought I did?

 

[ranmaonehalf]

I may have to make a short list of countries to emigrate to as a contingency plan.

hey ive been in japan for 3 years now. be coming back right beofre the elections too.

 

[Vene]

So what? If they have the MOTHERING INSTINCTS, THEY SHOULD HAVE MARRIED MEN AND HAD A FAMILY. So, you are saying that needing same sex is a stronger drive than wanting & rearing children? Yet, they seem to want their cake and eat it too, one must suppose.....

That's right, have them live a lie. That way if something makes you uncomfortable then you can just ignore it. Don't worry about their mental well-being, it's obviously not as important as keeping some heterosexuals comfortable in their narrow worldview.

Besides that it a stupid saying, cake is completely useless if you can't eat it. It's not bad to have high expectations, and I hardly see wanting a family with the person you love to be a high expectation.

 

[PsychMJC]

I thought I did?

What is the link between a warm climate and the rate of HIV infection? Sweat?

 

[Schroeder]

iwas wondering how rearing children in a same sex relationship and doing it well has anything to do with it being the right way to do it or to live. same sex relationship are wrong becasue it doesnt promote reproduction and causes or i guess i should say CAN cause STD's. I would think any evolutionist would have to agree since they say life is about surviving and keeping the species alive. And living a supposed happy life or even a happy life in same sex relationships doesnt prove it is OK. some people can murder and seem rather happy. Its all just politocal correctness. They can have same sex relationships but i dont want them to tell me its OK just because they are happy. I have just the same right to say its wrong.

 

[Braunwyn]

That sounds wonderfu; however, their association had nothing to do with them having children. And it is their social actions that impress you and not what they do in the bedroom or when you are not present.

You're spot on. I don't care what they do in the privacy of their bedroom, that's not what makes these two ladies excellent parents and amazing human beings.

 

[Braunwyn]

So what? If they have the MOTHERING INSTINCTS, THEY SHOULD HAVE MARRIED MEN AND HAD A FAMILY. So, you are saying that needing same sex is a stronger drive than wanting & rearing children? Yet, they seem to want their cake and eat it too, one must suppose.....

Who are you to say what they should or should not do? I'd really like to know what qualifies you. Especially to people who do not recognize or honor your beliefs.

 

[Parmenio]

Let me go point by point here.

iwas wondering how rearing children in a same sex relationship and doing it well has anything to do with it being the right way to do it or to live.

You see, it comes down to the fact that the government is not here to legislate morality. So it doesn't matter whether or not it is morally right, what matters is if it does harm. So far, there hasn't been anything showing that same sex couples harm anyone.

same sex relationship are wrong becasue it doesnt promote reproduction and causes or i guess i should say CAN cause STD's.

First, you cannot "cause" STDs. Someone already needs to have had an STD for it to be transmitted. This is true also for heterosexual couples and therefor is moot in this particular argument. Second: A marriage without reproductive opportunities is not an invalid marriage. It just isn't. I defy you to say that to an infertile heterosexual couple that must adopt.

I would think any evolutionist would have to agree since they say life is about surviving and keeping the species alive.

This is just ignorant. People who accept the theory of evolution do so knowing that it is amoral. It does not impose any "should" upon anyone or anything. It creates no moral imperative, and so people are free to live as they choose just knowing that they must accept the consequences for their actions.

And living a supposed happy life or even a happy life in same sex relationships doesnt prove it is OK. some people can murder and seem rather happy. Its all just politocal correctness. They can have same sex relationships but i dont want them to tell me its OK just because they are happy.

The GLARING difference is the fact that homosexual couples do no harm to anyone else. Period. Murder, by definition, does harm to others. You see, that is why it is illegal. They are well within their rights to see homosexuality as moral, as, again, morality is not law.

I have just the same right to say its wrong.

You are free to say it is wrong all you like, however, they should be just as free to do as they will while not harming others. Just as you are free to do so within a heterosexual relationship. To my knowledge there is no moral imperative to force everyone to obey the same tenets you believe, only to offer the same gift you have been given freely. Nothing more.

 

[PsychMJC]

And living a supposed happy life or even a happy life in same sex relationships doesnt prove it is OK. some people can murder and seem rather happy.

Comparing a consensual same-sex relationship to MURDER now are we? If the differences between the two need to be pointed out to you then I suppose there is no point in discussing it..

 

[Vene]

iwas wondering how rearing children in a same sex relationship and doing it well has anything to do with it being the right way to do it or to live. same sex relationship are wrong becasue it doesnt promote reproduction and causes or i guess i should say CAN cause STD's. I would think any evolutionist would have to agree since they say life is about surviving and keeping the species alive. And living a supposed happy life or even a happy life in same sex relationships doesnt prove it is OK. some people can murder and seem rather happy. Its all just politocal correctness. They can have same sex relationships but i dont want them to tell me its OK just because they are happy. I have just the same right to say its wrong.

Arguing that relationships are just for reproduction is not just an argument against same sex marriage, it's also against sterile individuals and suggests that after a women reaches menopause then she can't be married anymore. After all, men can have children until we die. And all sex has the innate risk of spreading and STD, that is if one of the participants has an STD. It's quite impossible for one to be spread when neither has the bacteria or virus. And not all evolutionists say that life is just about reproduction, that is like saying that all gravitists think that life is about staying as close to the ground as possible and suggesting that jumping or flying is just wrong. As for comparing sex to murder, here's a hint, as long as the sex is consensual it's fine, murder infringes on another's rights. Consenting sex between two adults (regardless of their biological sex) does not infringe on either participant's rights. And you do have to right to say that it's wrong, just like you have a right to say that women are inferior to men and that black people should go back to Africa. But that doesn't mean that what you are saying is just.

And a mini-rant about political correctness for a moment. Yes, some people take it too far. Nobody has the right to not be offended. However, that was not why it started. It started because there are derogatory terms that are used to describe minority groups. I could list some here, but I don't want to activate the censor. The point was to stop the dehumanization of those groups of people.

 

[LittleNipper]

That's right, have them live a lie. That way if something makes you uncomfortable then you can just ignore it. Don't worry about their mental well-being, it's obviously not as important as keeping some heterosexuals comfortable in their narrow worldview.

Besides that it a stupid saying, cake is completely useless if you can't eat it. It's not bad to have high expectations, and I hardly see wanting a family with the person you love to be a high expectation.

I do worry about their, health, mental, and spiritual well-being. The lie is that people need sex to survive. The lie is that people need sex to be happy. The lie is that diviant behavior patterns do not exist with regard to sex, as long as both parties are agreeable? I see wanting children and living life any which way to suit one's own expectations; as being rather self-centered, egotistical, and without regard for the children one claims that they LOVE.

 

[Vene]

I do worry about their, health, mental, and spiritual well-being. The lie is that people need sex to survive. The lie is that people need sex to be happy. The lie is that diviant behavior patterns do not exist with regard to sex, as long as both parties are agreeable? I see wanting children and living life any which way to suit one's own expectations; as being rather self-centered, egotistical, and without regard for the children one claims that they LOVE.

Then by all means provide some evidence that gay sex is inherently harmful.

 

[LittleNipper]

Let me go point by point here.

You see, it comes down to the fact that the government is not here to legislate morality. So it doesn't matter whether or not it is morally right, what matters is if it does harm. So far, there hasn't been anything showing that same sex couples harm anyone.

First, you cannot "cause" STDs. Someone already needs to have had an STD for it to be transmitted. This is true also for heterosexual couples and therefor is moot in this particular argument. Second: A marriage without reproductive opportunities is not an invalid marriage. It just isn't. I defy you to say that to an infertile heterosexual couple that must adopt.

This is just ignorant. People who accept the theory of evolution do so knowing that it is amoral. It does not impose any "should" upon anyone or anything. It creates no moral imperative, and so people are free to live as they choose just knowing that they must accept the consequences for their actions.

The GLARING difference is the fact that homosexual couples do no harm to anyone else. Period. Murder, by definition, does harm to others. You see, that is why it is illegal. They are well within their rights to see homosexuality as moral, as, again, morality is not law.
You are free to say it is wrong all you like, however, they should be just as free to do as they will while not harming others. Just as you are free to do so within a heterosexual relationship. To my knowledge there is no moral imperative to force everyone to obey the same tenets you believe, only to offer the same gift you have been given freely. Nothing more.

Do they really accept the consequences of their own actions, or do they want approval of others to back their choices up?

 

[Parmenio]

I do worry about their, health, mental, and spiritual well-being. The lie is that people need sex to survive. The lie is that people need sex to be happy. The lie is that diviant behavior patterns do not exist with regard to sex, as long as both parties are agreeable? I see wanting children and living life any which way to suit one's own expectations; as being rather self-centered, egotistical, and without regard for the children one claims that they LOVE.

So two women having sex physically and mentally harms a child? Oook. Let's see some proof for that doozy. Perhaps some gay-rays are emitted when they fornicate that cause brain damage in only the pre-pubescent?

If that's your answer I want credit for discovering gay-rays!

 

[Parmenio]

Do they really accept the consequences of their own actions, or do they want approval of others to back their choices up?

How do they not accept the consequences of their own actions? They don't need your approval, they just want the same rights. Nothing more.

 

[LittleNipper]

Then by all means provide some evidence that gay sex is inherently harmful.

Anal sex is very dangerous to any individual. Oral sex is very dangerous to the oral health of an individual. This is the only types of sex available to homosexuals.

 

[LittleNipper]

So two women having sex physically and mentally harms a child? Oook. Let's see some proof for that doozy. Perhaps some gay-rays are emitted when they fornicate that cause brain damage in only the pre-pubescent?

If that's your answer I want credit for discovering gay-rays!

You sound angry and disturbed. Children need parents and not simply caretakers. They need role models to emulate. Children need to understand what true love is and not see it as sex. Homosexuality does not provide any of that. It is sex for sex sake.