RonPaulalways wrote: Promiscuity, especially among homosexual males, carries with it very high risk factors. It can be reduced, but less promiscuity is better than more, all other things being equal.
It does, and I agree less promiscuity, at least for me and you and everyone else who agrees is better, but for others that's not the case. It is a very risky behaviour, though do you not agree that the only way to discourage promoscuity is to attack it directly?
[]Though I don't disagree with teaching them as you say, also the ugly side of the coin, it isn't always that bad. As for homosexual behaviour, I was talking about homosexuality in general, and not the sex part. Even liking the same sex.[]
The normalizaton of same sex sexual attraction could conceivably make it more likely for someone to engage in homosexual behavior, which is strongly correlated with promiscuity, health problems, etc.
You may be right, though it's hard to imagine how it would increase the numbers of those who are homosexual. As for trads and kids thinking what they are doing is cool, well that's different and that needs to stop.
Also, what is normal is completely subject to personal and cultural bias. As for normalization of same sex attraction, it's going to exist either way, so don't get why homosexual behavior increasing is a problem, nor how making it look bad is going to help it any. Though if you look at it objectively, people would see that they need to get tested regularly from STD's and avoid promiscuity at all costs. Even if it costs someone a break up or a divorce.
Would you agree that same sex sexual attraction is natural?
Do you agree that the problem you have with homosexual behavior is the common trend of promiscuity?
[]Being black isn't a behavior that can be chosen. Homosexual activity is a behavior.
Heterosexual activity is also a behavior, but like being african american, the homosexuality (the subject of this discussion) is neither a behavior nor something that is chosen.[/]
Heterosexual activity doesn't carry with it a heightened risk for STD transmission.
Though as I was saying, there is one in the african american community. The same STD that's common in the homosexuality one.
Do you agree that homosexuality itself does not cause STD's nor does homosexual behavior?
Any way, homosexuality implies homosexual behavior, so it is a behavior. It's not like a curriculum that teaches children about homosexuality will talk solely about the sexual attraction a homosexual feels. It will also talk about homosexual sexual relationships/behavior.
Okay so I will call your heterosexual behavior heterosexuality behavior because it isn't any different.
I was simply saying that there is more to it than just what they do to eachother, it's also neurological and chemical and other things heterosexuality is.
[]I know what you are saying, and I don't disagree with you about that. If you are going to teach them, tell them the whole truth. Of course. []
Good to hear you agree 
You do know though that homosexuality is most likely caused by the brain being formed wrong in a certain area? That is in fact the way they are born. There was a certain area of a homosexual man's brain that resembled a woman's instead of a man's. So it is probably a neurological condition, that is why I highly doubt that it is a learned behavior. Just to give a reason for my doubt. Though I am not homosexual nor was attracted to a dude so I would never know.
Hot Choco:
Voting for Ron Paul because you want a libertarian president is like buying a bucket full of water because you want the ocean.
No, it means you are voting for what you want. Unlike the democrat and republican party, the libertarian party and other libertarians are for the most part for the same thing. Take Ron Paul for example, he's not your average republican, as he is a libertarian. I'd vote Ron paul as he is a libertarian anyday.
Thanks for that classically homophobic line. And also the Mormon study that is sooooo, ya know, balanced. /sarcasm What a joke.
Do you even know how to do basic research? For one, your source uses studies from Narth whose mission is :
What he stated was true grypo, though not really him being homophobic, he is just talking about risks. It says more about promiscuity in that community than it does homosexuality itself.
So please, anyone who wants the truth, please do not use RPA's BS or his BS stats or his BS "studies". Thank you.
I could probably say the same thing about your studies but 1) you didn't post any and 2) I don't just make baseless statements to talk down another person's positions. I instead try to understand it and work from there.
O and by the way, beyond a site that was done by catholics, nothing was done by mormons that he posted.
Unless mormons and catholics are conspiring.
If you do what I'm suggesting, which is to teach kids to wait until marriage (and including same-sex marriage) then the gay kids will grow up and:
a) wait until marriage
RonPaulAlways, "Abstinence education has never worked. In any case, you're missing the point that homosexual promiscuity is far more unhealthy/dangerous than heterosexual promiscuity, and evidence suggests that homosexuality has a tendency to lead to promiscuity. Homosexuality itself should be dissuaded. "
QFT!!!
It's also been tried since 1500 BCE when moses made the law on it, and it's failed ever since. Do they think we might need a new strategy after 3,500 years of failure? Also, educating people has worked so well, its really lowered rates, in spite of it not getting rid of promiscuity all together.
Ron Paul is EXTREMELY libertarian. A Ron Paul presidency would be the most revolutionary political change in history. You have no idea how far his policies deviate from the status quo, away from the direction of special-interests/big-government, and towards the direction of limited government.
QFT, and even if he for personal reasons is against something (like gay marriage) he thinks its none of the governments buisness. So he was truly the only candidate truly for allowing it. Though Ron Paul agrees with most libertarians as to why not legalize it, the government shouldn't have been regulating it to begin with.
Grypo, how is this homophobic:
Fewer kids will engage in homosexuality if you tell them the truth about it. If you stop treating it like a forlong conclusion that some people are gay, and talk about it as if it's an unhealthy behavior that weak/troubled people engage in that leads to lifelong problems, that will discourage kids from normalizing/considering it. It will be seen in the same light as incest.
Don't just conclude that some are gay and some are straight, but talk about it in its entirety. That it carries big risks as it does. As it will discourage kids that are impressionable and will start thinking its cool (by the way, it is currently a trend in high school that girls are thinking its cool, I was there 2 years ago and my brother says its the same way still, but worse) and engaging in homosexual behaviour.
As for how it relates to incest. People think negatively about incest for the things that have come to be associated with it. No homophobia, just fact-based conclusions.
The studies I quoted are cited by that paper, they're not done by the same university that did the paper.
They aren't libertarians, and they aren't interested in facts but what sounds good.
They are against both.
Hot Choco wrote:[]Ron Paul is EXTREMELY libertarian. A Ron Paul presidency would be the most revolutionary political change in history. You have no idea how far his policies deviate from the status quo, away from the direction of special-interests/big-government, and towards the direction of limited government.[]
He's a whackjob! He's tried to ban abortion, restrict the supreme court's jurisdiction so same-sex marriage would never be legal, tried to amend the constitution to ban flag burning etc. etc.
No that does not make him a wackjob. It means he is ethical no matter what nor who is involved. Unlike Obama, where you only matter after birth or especially if you are a bank or car company.
[]Kids today are not taught that homosexuals are statistically far more promiscuous and have far lower life expectancy, yet there is a big problem with homosexual promiscuity/health problems, so obviously your approach of lying to kids and idealizing homosexuality has failed.[]
Eh? Don't accuse me of lying. I've said that I think abstience-only education would work.
Abstinence only education is a waste of money on something that has never and potentially will never work.
The poster child of that program is Sarah Palin's daughter, who was taught that kind of education.
[]Fewer kids will engage in homosexuality if you tell them the truth about it. If you stop treating it like a forlong conclusion that some people are gay, and talk about it as if it's an unhealthy behavior that weak/troubled people engage in that leads to lifelong problems, that will discourage kids from normalizing/considering it. It will be seen in the same light as incest.[]
Stop talking rubbish; leave that to the real Ron Paul, he already does a fine job of it. Homosexuality is not a choice; who would chose to be persecuted that much?
He never said it was a choice, he said the behaviors can be when people think that it is okay in school, or as I will reword a little to match a current trend in schools. High school girls pretending to be bi or gay is
not okay.
[]Abstinence ducation has never worked. In any case, you're missing the point that homosexual promiscuity is far more unhealthy/dangerous than heterosexual promiscuity, and evidence suggests that homosexuality has a tendency to lead to promiscuity. Homosexuality itself should be dissuaded. []
Homosexuals have never been taught to wait until same-sex marriage - they've only ever been taught to wait until opposite-sex marriage, which is idiotic. My plan would work.
He was responding to grypo saying that abstenance only would work.
grypo wrote:[] The term homophobia is particularly appropriate for RPA. []
Q4T
QFBA = quoted for baseless accusation
- By litwin
- By wat0n