Visit the Archives for U.S. Politics Online -- U.S. Politics Online . net
In have no idea if it's too low; one, limited bit of data from one, limited population cannot be extrapolated onto an entire, worldwide group.
Do you think 50% is too low? The stats were printed in an article written by a doctor. He's a homosexual.What is that relevant to?
What do you think of licking someone's anus? Is it a practice we should warn people against? Or should we let people remain ignorant of the risks?The only psychological aspect I can see here is that, since you continually bring it up, it seems to turn you on.
What about the psychological aspect? What does it say about a person who is aroused by putting their tongue in another person's anus? What does it say about a person who would let someone else put their tongue in their anus? Don't they care about that person's health?
LJ2 is intentionally, and continually, ignoring the fact that heterosexuals engage in anal sex. Doing so will dismantle his argument.
This, of course, isn't surprising, but laughing at anyone long enough gets boring...
GEEZ, why does anyone care what anyone else does in the bedroom.
Anyone have any stats on who masterbates more, gay men? straight men? gay women? straight women? Frustrated gay men? Frustrated married women? I'm sure that would add to the conversation. After all, gay men may beat it more therefore are more perverted, however gay women may tickle it less therefore should be allowed to marry. I say we need a perversion index, say 1-20 and you have to have it branded to your head, only those with an index lower than 8 will be allowed to marry. Would that work for everyone?
The Country give to the heterosexual the benefits in marriage and the return to the country a continuing line of children.
The Country gives to the homosexual the benefits in marriage and they return to the country nothing.
Yes, you could say that my logic is incorrect because gays can adopt, but I am not talking about two people who want to have a child together as they need no incentive. I am talking about the mistakes that heterosexual have in having children they did not plan for. It is for the mistakes that couples need incentive to work together and takes care of their children instead of the child ending up without knowing his father or mother.
My friend and his wife allow for another woman to enter their bedroom on occasion. He is hetero but she likes women as well as men (damn lucky guy if you ask me). Should their marriage be nullified because of this?
I keep getting badgered about heterosexual sex. They do this and they do that, so what about it? The questioners have their logic inside out.
Sexual practices aren't the reason homosexuals are wrong. They're wrong because they are incompatible by nature. Science, anatomy and physiology, are proof of their incompatibility. Sexual practice is further evidence of their incompatibility.
The allegience to homosexuality is profoundly ignorant. Even when a doctor, himself a homosexual, reveals the health risks homosexuals face when they put their tongues in each others butt holes, the ignorant apologists refuse to acknowledge that it's just plain dirty. It reveals that the apologists are not interested in protecting the homosexual men's health, but in protecting their reputation.
Flying in jet airliners goes against nature. Open heart surgery goes against nature. Wearing eyeglasses goes against nature. Firearms go against nature. Your attempts to legitimize your 'arguments' by citing anatomy and physiology against homos while disregarding them when it comes to heteros is patently intellectually dishonest.
Sexual practices aren't the reason homosexuals are wrong. They're wrong because they are incompatible by nature. Science, anatomy and physiology, are proof of their incompatibility. Sexual practice is further evidence of their incompatibility.No one here has any allegiance to homosexuality. No one here is 'apologizing' for homosexuality. It's quite clearly in your imagination, but it's nowhere to be found in this thread.
The allegience to homosexuality is profoundly ignorant.You appear obsessed with men's tongues in other mens' buttholes. It may be effecting your perception.
Even when a doctor, himself a homosexual, reveals the health risks homosexuals face when they put their tongues in each others butt holes, the ignorant apologists refuse to acknowledge that it's just plain dirty. It reveals that the apologists are not interested in protecting the homosexual men's health, but in protecting their reputation.
To suggest that one day our society should accept a dangerous and wrong activity, even celebrate it should be laughed at.
Yet, today this is what we're seeing.
"Homosexuality" is, by its very nature an act of being "turned on" by the wrong thing. The fact that something is wrong and dangerous is well known to attract some people to engage in it. We know it's wrong, we know it's dangerous but we do it because its wrongness "feels good" to us. Itís no secret that, often with human sexual issues, the largest factor of it feeling good to us is the fact that it's so obviously wrong. Wrong, even evil can be a turn on. Often it is.
Celebrating and promoting obviously wrong and dangerous behaviors cannot and will not precipitate good results. "Gay marriage" is a celebration of a dangerous sexual practice and is an oxymoron whether some America citizens, politicians, or judges think otherwise or not. The truth doesn't change just because confusion becomes prevalent.
"Sexual practices more common in gay and bi men facilitate fecal-oral spread of the infection," is how the researcher put it.
Fecal-oral is the clinical way of saying crap-mouth. Poop does not belong in your mouth.
Last edited by Prago; 02-18-2010 at 02:53 AM.