Why do straights hate gays?

[spurssheriff]

Why do straights hate gays?
An 72-year-old gay activist isn't hopeful about the future.
March 20, 2007

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/...wed-splashpage


DEAR STRAIGHT PEOPLE,

Why do you hate gay people so much?

Gays are hated. Prove me wrong. Your top general just called us immoral. Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, is in charge of an estimated 65,000 gay and lesbian troops, some fighting for our country in Iraq. A right-wing political commentator, Ann Coulter, gets away with calling a straight presidential candidate a ******. Even Garrison Keillor, of all people, is making really tacky jokes about gay parents in his column. This, I guess, does not qualify as hate except that it is so distasteful and dumb, often a first step on the way to hate. Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama tried to duck the questions that Pace's bigotry raised, confirming what gay people know: that there is not one candidate running for public office anywhere who dares to come right out, unequivocally, and say decent, supportive things about us.

Gays should not vote for any of them. There is not a candidate or major public figure who would not sell gays down the river. We have seen this time after time, even from supposedly progressive politicians such as President Clinton with his "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays in the military and his support of the hideous Defense of Marriage Act. Of course, it's possible that being shunned by gays will make politicians more popular, but at least we will have our self-respect. To vote for them is to collude with them in their utter disdain for us.

Don't any of you wonder why heterosexuals treat gays so brutally year after year after year, as your people take away our manhood, our womanhood, our personhood? Why, even as we die you don't leave us alone. What we can leave our surviving lovers is taxed far more punitively than what you leave your (legal) surviving spouses. Why do you do this? My lover will be unable to afford to live in the house we have made for each other over our lifetime together. This does not happen to you. Taxation without representation is what led to the Revolutionary War. Gay people have paid all the taxes you have. But you have equality, and we don't.

And there's no sign that this situation will change anytime soon. President Bush will leave a legacy of hate for us that will take many decades to cleanse. He has packed virtually every court and every civil service position in the land with people who don't like us. So, even with the most tolerant of new presidents, gays will be unable to break free from this yoke of hate. Courts rule against gays with hateful regularity. And of course the Supreme Court is not going to give us our equality, and in the end, it is from the Supreme Court that such equality must come. If all of this is not hate, I do not know what hate is.

Our feeble gay movement confines most of its demands to marriage. But political candidates are not talking about � and we are not demanding that they talk about � equality. My lover and I don't want to get married just yet, but we sure want to be equal.

You must know that gays get beaten up all the time, all over the world. If someone beats you up because of who you are � your race or ethnic origin � that is considered a hate crime. But in most states, gays are not included in hate crime measures, and Congress has refused to include us in a federal act.

Homosexuality is a punishable crime in a zillion countries, as is any activism on behalf of it. Punishable means prison. Punishable means death. The U.S. government refused our requests that it protest after gay teenagers were hanged in Iran, but it protests many other foreign cruelties. Who cares if a ****** dies? Parts of the Episcopal Church in the U.S. are joining with the Nigerian archbishop, who believes gays should be put in prison. Episcopalians! Whoever thought we'd have to worry about Episcopalians?

Well, whoever thought we'd have to worry about Florida? A young gay man was just killed in Florida because of his sexual orientation. I get reports of gays slain in our country every week. Few of them make news. Fewer are prosecuted. Do you consider it acceptable that 20,000 Christian youths make an annual pilgrimage to San Francisco to pray for gay souls? This is not free speech. This is another version of hate. It is all one world of gay-hate. It always was.

Gays do not realize that the more we become visible, the more we come out of the closet, the more we are hated. Don't those of you straights who claim not to hate us have a responsibility to denounce the hate? Why is it socially acceptable to joke about "girlie men" or to discriminate against us legally with "constitutional" amendments banning gay marriage? Because we cannot marry, we can pass on only a fraction of our estates, we do not have equal parenting rights and we cannot live with a foreigner we love who does not have government permission to stay in this country. These are the equal protections that the Bill of Rights proclaims for all?

Why do you hate us so much that you will not permit us to legally love? I am almost 72, and I have been hated all my life, and I don't see much change coming.

I think your hate is evil.

What do we do to you that is so awful? Why do you feel compelled to come after us with such frightful energy? Does this somehow make you feel safer and legitimate? What possible harm comes to you if we marry, or are taxed just like you, or are protected from assault by laws that say it is morally wrong to assault people out of hatred? The reasons always offered are religious ones, but certainly they are not based on the love all religions proclaim.

And even if your objections to gays are religious, why do you have to legislate them so hatefully? Make no mistake: Forbidding gay people to love or marry is based on hate, pure and simple.

You may say you don't hate us, but the people you vote for do, so what's the difference? Our own country's democratic process declares us to be unequal. Which means, in a democracy, that our enemy is you. You treat us like crumbs. You hate us. And sadly, we let you.

[kyleo]

Before this gets ugly (ane I'm sure it will), here's my too simplistic answer to his question.

From wikipedia, entry "Denial of Death," by Becker:

The main theme of The Denial of Death is that most human activity ultimately concerns the denial of one's mortality. The full realization of one's own mortality is unbearable, absolutely terrifying and horrific. Since man has a dualistic nature consisting of a physical self and a spiritual self, man is able to transcend the problem of mortality through the concept of heroism, a concept involving his spiritual half. By being heroic, man feels he has meaning, a purpose, something that will never die, compared to his body that will die someday. One can be a hero to the eye of God, to the State, to the eyes of his peers, to his family, etc

Another aspect of this "denial" is the necessity of condemning what is foreign or unnatural, as seen in xenophobia or homophobia. It affirms our system of beliefs, and allows us to further the denial. So why do we hate? As usual, it's because we're afraid of what we don't understand.

[Jason R]

Originally Posted by kyleo

Before this gets ugly (ane I'm sure it will), here's my too simplistic answer to his question.

From wikipedia, entry "Denial of Death," by Becker:


Another aspect of this "denial" is the necessity of condemning what is foreign or unnatural, as seen in xenophobia or homophobia. It affirms our system of beliefs, and allows us to further the denial. So why do we hate? As usual, it's because we're afraid of what we don't understand.

Rejection of something does not equal hate. Some do, some don't.

[kyleo]

Originally Posted by Jason R

Rejection of something does not equal hate. Some do, some don't.

The author's argument is that denial of rights is implicitly tantamount to hate. Guess it depends on which side of the line you stand.

[Jason R]

There are a number of things I can think of that make that concluion erroneous.

[kyleo]

Originally Posted by Jason R

There are a number of things I can think of that make that concluion erroneous.

It's the foundation of the argument here, so fire away. Or you could just say you're right and not support it.

This is what the guy's talking about:

Because we cannot marry, we can pass on only a fraction of our estates, we do not have equal parenting rights and we cannot live with a foreigner we love who does not have government permission to stay in this country. These are the equal protections that the Bill of Rights proclaims for all?

It's not only about marriage, but the protections afforded therein. And that these protections are taken away by Constitutional amendments, robbing them of these rights in the very document they're supposedly granted in. I find it a compelling argument.

[PHANTOM21]

i wouldnt say i hate gays but they do suck.



putut tishhh

[Jason R]

Yeah hate is a strong word. Denial of rights is nothing unusual in history and not an example of hatred. I don't hate gays even though I feel marriage should be a man-woman institution. But there are a lot of feelings I have about the way society should be set up, and if every one of those meant I had hatred then that'd be seen as a rather ridiculous accusation.

[kyleo]

Originally Posted by Jason R

Yeah hate is a strong word. Denial of rights is nothing unusual in history and not an example of hatred. I don't hate gays even though I feel marriage should be a man-woman institution. But there are a lot of feelings I have about the way society should be set up, and if every one of those meant I had hatred then that'd be seen as a rather ridiculous accusation.

What I think his argument misses is that indifference or apathy can be worse than hate, because it fosters hate and makes it acceptable in less discernible forms.

[micah76]

Originally Posted by kyleo

What I think his argument misses is that indifference or apathy can be worse than hate, because it fosters hate and makes it acceptable in less discernible forms.

Great insight. That really should have been the topic of his paper. I think MOST people probably do not hate gays per se. But they allow discrimination andeven hateful acts to be committed and then rationalize it with religion.

[kyleo]

Originally Posted by Blake

I don't think people in general are apathetic or indifferent when it comes to hateful or violent acts.

That's a real stretch to say that being indifferent or apathetic towards homosexuality can foster hateful acts......

I strongly disagree. Let's say, as happens numerous times on this forum, someone implies that the other team are a bunch of *******. Go and look in the main forum and you'll find some examples. Not calling them out, because it's fairly commonplace. It's acceptable. And that type of indifference or apathy towards the rights and feelings of others allows people with hate in their hearts to foster ill will, it makes it socially acceptable, until it's manifested violently. It's cultural, it's deeply ingrained in this country, and you will find it is not unlike the literary "other," the non-conforming character that challenges social core beliefs. In order to sustain and verify our cultural beliefs, that "other" must be either negated or destroyed. And so it is with Becker's "Denial of Death."

[SAScrub]

Originally Posted by kyleo

I strongly disagree. Let's say, as happens numerous times on this forum, someone implies that the other team are a bunch of *******. Go and look in the main forum and you'll find some examples. Not calling them out, because it's fairly commonplace. It's acceptable. And that type of indifference or apathy towards the rights and feelings of others allows people with hate in their hearts to foster ill will, it makes it socially acceptable, until it's manifested violently. It's cultural, it's deeply ingrained in this country, and you will find it is not unlike the literary "other," the non-conforming character that challenges social core beliefs. In order to sustain and verify our cultural beliefs, that "other" must be either negated or destroyed. And so it is with Becker's "Denial of Death."

That's the gayest thing I've ever heard.

[kyleo]

Originally Posted by SAScrub

That's the gayest thing I've ever heard.

Well, if it's going to turn into that, we should just go ahead and move it to headlines or lock it.

[SAScrub]

Originally Posted by kyleo

Well, if it's going to turn into that, we should just go ahead and move it to headlines or lock it.

[sarcasm]That's the gayest thing I've ever heard.[/sarcasm]

[kyleo]

Originally Posted by SAScrub

[sarcasm]That's the gayest thing I've ever heard.[/sarcasm]

It's fine, I was being pretentious anyway. Not enough to do at work

[kyleo]

Originally Posted by Blake

wow........be sure to let me know when violence becomes socially acceptable

My point is this cycle does not begin and end at the act of violence.

[ATH]

...in charge of an estimated 65,000 gay and lesbian troops

What is that stat based on? I'm pretty sure I work with a gay troop, but I can't ask him of course. Still, I think that estimate is pretty liberal.

This is like asking why black people hate white people or visa versa. It's simply not true that all, or even a majority of straights hate gays. I can disagree with your actions without hating you. I can believe in the sanctity of marraige without hating those who wish to violate it. And just as the thousands of teens who march to San Francisco, I can pray for you because I love you, not because I hate you. Sounds like an old bitter individual who lived through hard times and can't find the answers they're looking for, so they turned to what made them feel like a crusader instead of just dealing with lifes problems.

[micah76]

Originally Posted by Blake

wow........be sure to let me know when violence becomes socially acceptable

The runup to the war in Iraq. The ability to link Al-Qaida and Iraq simply because they are both Muslim. This directly led to the administration being able to send our young men and women to war.

[kyleo]

Originally Posted by Blake

wow part II.....

I think "because they are Muslim" is the least of reasons why we went to war in Iraq......

oil seems to come to mind......

This is another aspect of "Denial of Death" - utilizing xenophobia to influence sociological perception of our "enemies." People were willing to bomb anything in that part of the world in order to make sure our interests were secure, even if it meant fitting intelligence and policy to our needs. There was a lot of fear-mongering, in pursuit of goals like oil and a stronger hand in the region.

Originally Posted by Blake

no, but to say that people need to get off the fence and pick a side, even if it's hate is a bit far fetched to me.

sure, there are a few who are apathetic and indifferent when they see a hate act occur against gays, but I think that our society in general is not indifferent or apathetic towards hate crimes or violence.

If someone is getting beat up, I don't think people in general care who they are or what they do in the bedroom......they'll try to help them

I agree, and I'm thankful we're that far along in most parts.

[Jason R]

Although I'm sure some use religion to rationalize brutality against gays, I don't think the majority of churches condone that. The majority of people I have known have had gay friends of one sort or another. It's not like church people are completely alienated from the world at large.

[micah76]

Originally Posted by Jason R

Although I'm sure some use religion to rationalize brutality against gays, I don't think the majority of churches condone that. The majority of people I have known have had gay friends of one sort or another. It's not like church people are completely alienated from the world at large.

I did not mean to imply that all or most religous people condone or engage in hate against ... well anyone really. What I was implying is that most people who practice discrimination or hate crimes against gays will almost always point to the bible for justification.

[bnwhuxley]

Originally Posted by DizzG

There is hate out there for sure but I think a lot of it is feeling uncomfortable.

I work in a pretty small office (about 10 people) and 3 of the main guys here are gay including the owner. I would be lying if it didnt take some getting used too and that had nothing to do with any moral feelings or whatever

Its too far a jump from being uncomfortable to legislating against gays. Tons of people are uncomfortable, but only a small subset (still many people) is driving the legislation. To these people, I just wish they would mind their own business instead of meddling in other peoples' affairs.

It's also too far a jump from legislating against gays to beating them to death. Many people are behind the legislation, but only a much smaller group (not a complete subset) go around beating up people. To these people, the fair thing to do is to charge them for hate crime (since that kind of legislation exists for other groups).

[necron 99]

interesting that none of the ladies here want to get involved in this.

[Matias]

I don�t like gays who act/move/speak like a woman.

[micah76]

Originally Posted by Blake

ohhh.....gosh........this is going from great to epic....

most people? like who?

Are you kidding me? I have heard very few accounts of hate crimes against gays where they didn't invoke biblical scripture. Of course this is just my opinion and you are welcome to challenge it. There are also several religous sites such as the Westboro baptist church. Their website name is quite offensive so I won't post it here. Feel free to look it up.

[PHANTOM21]

i love hot girl on girl action.....does that count?

[kyleo]

Originally Posted by PHANTOM21

i love hot girl on girl action.....does that count?

It does seem like, when society discusses homosexuality, it relates largely to men, and is talked about predominantly by men.

Originally Posted by Blake

what kind of legislation is 'against gays'?

is defining what marriage is considered to be legislation against? Im not so sure

Because we cannot marry, we can pass on only a fraction of our estates, we do not have equal parenting rights and we cannot live with a foreigner we love who does not have government permission to stay in this country.

If politicos take rights away from consenting partners, they legislate against them. This is where the line gets blurred considering homosexual unions.

[PHANTOM21]

Originally Posted by Matias

I don�t like gays who act/move/speak like a woman.

that's why KtD doesnt have many friends

[micah76]

Originally Posted by Blake

what kind of legislation is 'against gays'?

is defining what marriage is considered to be legislation against? Im not so sure

It is if you do not offer them an alternative way to receive the relationship protections under the law that marriage affords.

[Money4Nothing]

I don't hate gays, I have many gay friends. But male gay "physical affection" is gross and I'd rather squash roaches between my fingers than be near that kind of stuff. I don't really like to hang around people that chew tobacco, because I find it disgusting, but I don't mind being around them while they aren't chewing. In the same way, I don't mind being around gay people as long as they shut the hell up about their lifestyle and quit kissing ugly hairy dudes in front of me.

Do you like to be around people who smoke? Drunks? Nose-pickers? Why do you stay out of porno theaters? Because no one likes to hang around people that are whacking it. Its gross. Is that hate? Nah. This stuff isn't necessarily wrong, but its not for everyone, and some of us don't want to be shared with.

$

[elchiv]

Originally Posted by bonnington

I think it's a generalization, not all straight people hate gays. It's stupid.

I was telling money4nothing, the other day, in the BsAs GTG, that here people is very open about "racial" and cultural things, but tends to be homophobic, but there aren't any significant violence against gays. Physical violence I mean. And usually gays aren't discriminated on jobs and things like that. But people, mostly guys tends to make a lot of jokes about them.

I think that the generalization about things is as wrong as hate.

I saw a very similar take to your discription in Peru, Colombia and Chile...jokes but never hate crimes or anything like that.

I can understand this author's feelings. I disagree with a homosexual lifestyle, but no one should be subject to the kind of discrimination he encounters.

[cheesehead4spurs]

Originally Posted by ladyspur

I have no hate for gays and or lesbians. Nothing else to discuss.

Agree. People are people and i don't have any problems with orientation. Working with lesbians has never made me uncomfortable, and there are many gays and lesbians working with my employer. It is a most important tenet of my life that I be non-judgemental and that I accept that people have differing ideas. It causes me great pain to hear people being hurtful to/about others, so I have, for the most part, stopped posting in these threads. To quote:

"Easy to be Hard" from "Hair"

How can people be so heartless?
How can people be so cruel?

[Lucky�]

Originally Posted by necron 99

interesting that none of the ladies here want to get involved in this.

Because I am straight, and I love gay people as much as straight people. Arguing with bigots and those in favor of a theocracy is pointless. Nothing good ever comes from these threads, as strongly as I feel about the topic.

[micah76]

Originally Posted by Blake

I'm wondering what your definition of a hate crime is because I'd love to know exactly how Westboro Baptist church committed a hate crime.

You must have missed when I said hate crimes and discrimination. However the Westboro Baptist church by it's very nature encourages hate crimes. Although I am quite sure they do not outright say it.

Originally Posted by Blake

all those in favor of a theocracy, say "aye"

Nay and I will defend my country against any traitors who wish to subvert the constitution of the United States of America, as will all true patriots.

[kyleo]

Originally Posted by micah76

You must have missed when I said hate crimes and discrimination. However the Westboro Baptist church by it's very nature encourages hate crimes. Although I am quite sure they do not outright say it.



Nay and I will defend my country against any traitors who wish to subvert the constitution of the United States of America, as will all true patriots.

I think he was being sarcastic...which you also might be...it's hard to tell.

I think Lucky's right, this is getting us nowhere.

[micah76]

Originally Posted by Blake

hey, you are right about westboro "baptist" church.......

wikipedia:

"Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) is a controversial U.S. cult headed by Fred Phelps and based in Topeka, Kansas. It runs the websites GodHatesFags.com,[1] GodHatesAmerica.com and others expressing condemnation of homosexuals, Roman Catholics, Muslims, Jews, Swedes, Canadians, Americans, and other groups. The organization is monitored by the Anti-Defamation League,[2] and classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.[3][4] The group has achieved national notoriety in recent years due to its picketing of funeral processions for soldiers killed in combat, which functions as an extension of the Phelps' anti-United States beliefs."

I could be wrong, but I don't think this church is part of the Southern Baptist Conevntion.....

I wonder who they actually like.....

From what I understand they pretty much hate everyone but focus most of their angst at gays and KIA Soldiers funerals.

[StrangeCheez]

Why do straights hate gays?

Because your clothes match... And deep down, I know you all want to have sex with me.

[elchiv]

Originally Posted by Blake

hey, you are right about westboro "baptist" church.......

wikipedia:

"Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) is a controversial U.S. cult headed by Fred Phelps and based in Topeka, Kansas. It runs the websites GodHatesFags.com,[1] GodHatesAmerica.com and others expressing condemnation of homosexuals, Roman Catholics, Muslims, Jews, Swedes, Canadians, Americans, and other groups. The organization is monitored by the Anti-Defamation League,[2] and classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.[3][4] The group has achieved national notoriety in recent years due to its picketing of funeral processions for soldiers killed in combat, which functions as an extension of the Phelps' anti-United States beliefs."

I could be wrong, but I don't think this church is part of the Southern Baptist Conevntion.....

I wonder who they actually like.....

These people are a laughing stock out here. The father has such a bad reputation he has been disbarred and I think he had to make a deal to never apear in court again in MO or KS so that his kids could keep practicing law...it was something to that extent. (They are all lawyers who focus on, creatively enough, the 1st amendment)

[bnwhuxley]

This just in today from Oregon. Now lets judge. Is this guy a hater?

http://www.blueoregon.com/2007/04/rep_dennis_rich.html

Rep. Dennis Richardson (R-Central Point) has some explaining to do. Last week, he sent an email to his supporters and constituents headlined "A Tragic Week in Review", and then opened with this text:

This past week has been like no other. On Monday the world witnessed the tragedy at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia. On Tuesday Oregon witnessed the passage of Domestic Benefits for same-sex couples (HB 2007) and Civil Rights based on sexual orientation.

That's right, folks. He equated a vote by the people's representatives in the Legislature to the insane actions of a crazed gunman.


Now, Rep. Richardson isn't just some crackpot backbencher in the GOP caucus. Rather, he's the House Republican Whip - the third-ranking leader of their caucus. Previously, he was the Treasurer of the Oregon Republican Party.


Frankly, Richardson is perfectly welcome to disagree with the equal rights measures that the Oregon House so courageously passed last week -- but to equate the passage of legislation with the mass murder of 32 people?


Unbelievable.


You can contact Rep. Richardson at rep.dennisrichardson@state.or.us or at 503-986-1404.

[SAScrub]

I'm not sure that he equated the two, but he sure left himself open for it to be translated that way.

[necron 99]

Originally Posted by Blake

hey, you are right about westboro "baptist" church.......

wikipedia:

"Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) is a controversial U.S. cult headed by Fred Phelps and based in Topeka, Kansas. It runs the websites GodHatesFags.com,[1] GodHatesAmerica.com and others expressing condemnation of homosexuals, Roman Catholics, Muslims, Jews, Swedes, Canadians, Americans, and other groups. The organization is monitored by the Anti-Defamation League,[2] and classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.[3][4] The group has achieved national notoriety in recent years due to its picketing of funeral processions for soldiers killed in combat, which functions as an extension of the Phelps' anti-United States beliefs."

I could be wrong, but I don't think this church is part of the Southern Baptist Conevntion.....

I wonder who they actually like.....

equal opportunity haters! They hate everyone (maybe even themselves)

[SAScrub]

The reason these conversations usually don't go anywhere is because there simply is not a morally neutral ground. Everybody has a point of view they think is right, and everybody judges at some point or another. The Christians usually get pigeon-holed as the judgmental ones, but everyone else is judging too, aren't they?

But, I will offer some insight as to where I stand on this issue, and why I believe the way I believe. I don't expect you to agree, I'm not putting my beliefs up for debate, but I want you to understand where I come from on this issue.

From a "common good" standpoint, I would ask "What is good for our culture? What is good for our community?" First, homosexuality is an activity that is inherently dangerous and cannot be made healthy. It carries health risks that may be reduced, but cannot be entirely avoided. Additionally, it can also put people at risk who are not engaged in that activity. Since it cannot be made healthy, and it puts others at risk, it seems to make sense that, as a community, we ought not do anything to encourage it. I wouldn't suggest actively discouraging homosexuality, but at the very least, let's not go out of our way to encourage it.

A more internal feeling is this: I don't feel uncomfortable simply because someone is homosexual. I've had several gay friends and co-workers. Some are likeable, some are not. I treat these persons individually. They are human beings that should be treated with respect, should not be bashed or called names, and should be given the same rights that any other citizen has.

Homosexuality is unnatural and immoral. This is not a personal preference, but a personal conviction. If you want reasons why I think so, I'll be glad to give them to you. This is my moral, cognitive conclusion about homosexuality. The way I feel about homosexuals and what I think about homosexuality are two different things. I don't confuse the two, and neither should you. I don't hate gays, all legitmate Christians should not hate any individual, but I do have a personal conviction against the act itself.

[necron 99]

Originally Posted by SAScrub

The reason these conversations usually don't go anywhere is because there simply is not a morally neutral ground. Everybody has a point of view they think is right, and everybody judges at some point or another. The Christians usually get pigeon-holed as the judgmental ones, but everyone else is judging too, aren't they?

But, I will offer some insight as to where I stand on this issue, and why I believe the way I believe. I don't expect you to agree, I'm not putting my beliefs up for debate, but I want you to understand where I come from on this issue.

From a "common good" standpoint, I would ask "What is good for our culture? What is good for our community?" First, homosexuality is an activity that is inherently dangerous and cannot be made healthy. It carries health risks that may be reduced, but cannot be entirely avoided. Additionally, it can also put people at risk who are not engaged in that activity. Since it cannot be made healthy, and it puts others at risk, it seems to make sense that, as a community, we ought not do anything to encourage it. I wouldn't suggest actively discouraging homosexuality, but at the very least, let's not go out of our way to encourage it.

A more internal feeling is this: I don't feel uncomfortable simply because someone is homosexual. I've had several gay friends and co-workers. Some are likeable, some are not. I treat these persons individually. They are human beings that should be treated with respect, should not be bashed or called names, and should be given the same rights that any other citizen has.

Homosexuality is unnatural and immoral. This is not a personal preference, but a personal conviction. If you want reasons why I think so, I'll be glad to give them to you. This is my moral, cognitive conclusion about homosexuality. The way I feel about homosexuals and what I think about homosexuality are two different things. I don't confuse the two, and neither should you. I don't hate gays, all legitmate Christians should not hate any individual, but I do have a personal conviction against the act itself.

very well put

[bnwhuxley]

Originally Posted by Blake

yeah, I'm not sure he was saying, "Monday, students were murdered and equally as bad, legislation was passed on Tuesday to give same sex couple benefits"

I think he was just saying from his point of view it was an all around bad week.

Thats like saying anything could have happened on Tuesday, e.g. somebody sprained an ankle.

I think you are being too charitable.

[rjv]

From a "common good" standpoint, I would ask "What is good for our culture? What is good for our community?" First, homosexuality is an activity that is inherently dangerous and cannot be made healthy. It carries health risks that may be reduced, but cannot be entirely avoided. Additionally, it can also put people at risk who are not engaged in that activity. Since it cannot be made healthy, and it puts others at risk, it seems to make sense that, as a community, we ought not do anything to encourage it. I wouldn't suggest actively discouraging homosexuality, but at the very least, let's not go out of our way to encourage it.

i'm a little confused here. are you saying that there are homosexual specific diseases? or are you referring to some other source that would put a community at risk?

[Money4Nothing]

Those who practice homosexuality are at greater risk of STDs, as well as bacterial infections, than the average heterosexual.

$

[SAScrub]

Originally Posted by rjv

i'm a little confused here. are you saying that there are homosexual specific diseases? or are you referring to some other source that would put a community at risk?

No. There is no such thing as a homosexual disease. However, the methods by which they practice their homosexuality are inherently physically unhealthy.

[rjv]

Those who practice homosexuality are at greater risk of STDs, as well as bacterial infections, than the average heterosexual.

it has nothing to do with the practice of homosexuality. it has to do with promiscuity. generally, in epidemiological studies regarding STD rates, homosexuals do admit to having more partners, but studies are always skewed when it comes to complete information. homosexuals tend to be more honest when patient histories are assembled. Also, much of this depends upon what disease we are dealing with. African-Americans often have higher rates than do gays or whites when is comes to certain STD's. and globally of course, HIV is more prevalant amongst the heterosexual population.

[Money4Nothing]

Originally Posted by rjv

it has nothing to do with the practice of homosexuality. it has to do with promiscuity. generally, in epidemiological studies regarding STD rates homosexuals do admot to having more partners but then again studies are always skewed when it comes to complete information. homosexuals tend to be more honest when patient histories are assembled

Wrong. Anyone who practices sex in that manner, whether heterosexual or homosexual, is at a greater risk of bacterial infection or spread of disease, due to the nature of that part of the body. Promiscuity also plays a part, but to say that the practice has nothing to do with the risk, is totally incorrect.

$

[rjv]

Originally Posted by Money4Nothing

Wrong. Anyone who practices sex in that manner, whether heterosexual or homosexual, is at a greater risk of bacterial infection or spread of disease, due to the nature of that part of the body. Promiscuity also plays a part, but to say that the practice has nothing to do with the risk, is totally incorrect.

$

you are speaking of std's in such a vague tone it is hard to be specific here. there are so many strains, only which a fraction of are even bacterial, (most are viral). as to the source of transmission, it is still mostly bodily fluids that account for the viral load and the viral load is more prevalent in certain fluids dependent upon the disease.