Let the comparisons between gay men and goats begin...

[nationalist]

Originally posted by molly bloom

If it's a matter of siding with bonobo chimps who use sex for pleasure, I'll take their company over yours any day.

Have fun with those chimps, man.

[Solly]

"“The probability of violence occurring in a gay couple is double the probability of that in a heterosexual couple,” write the editors of the National Gay & Lesbian Domestic Violence Network newsletter.

The Journal of the American Medical Association reports that “people with same-sex sexual behavior are at greater risk for psychiatric disorders” — including bipolar, obsessive-compulsive, and anxiety disorders, major depression, and substance abuse.

The Medical Institute of Sexual Health reports: “Homosexual men are at significantly increased risk of HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, anal cancer, gonorrhea and gastrointestinal infections as a result of their sexual practices. Women who have sex with women are at significantly increased risk of bacterial vaginosis, breast cancer and ovarian cancer than are heterosexual women.” (Executive Summary, “Health Implications Associated with Homosexuality,” 1999) (NOTE, this makes their expected lifespans shorter)

The Institute reports that “significantly higher percentages of homosexual men and women abuse drugs, alcohol and tobacco than do heterosexuals.”

Associated Press reported last June that a “new study by two University of Southern California sociologists says children with lesbian or gay parents … are probably more likely to explore homosexual activity themselves … (and) grow up to be more open to homoerotic relations.” [emphasis added]

Which means children adopted by adults involved in homosexual behavior face not only secondhand exposure to the risks of such behavior by their “parents,” but are more likely to suffer firsthand by engaging in the same high-risk behavior themselves.

Should children be handed over as trophies to the homosexual “rights” movement — adopting them into households where they’ll face dramatically higher risk of exposure to domestic violence, mental illness, life-threatening disease and premature death? An environment which increases the chances they’ll engage in high-risk homosexual behavior themselves?

[TheStinger]

Originally posted by Boddington's
"“The probability of violence occurring in a gay couple is double the probability of that in a heterosexual couple,” write the editors of the National Gay & Lesbian Domestic Violence Network newsletter.

The Journal of the American Medical Association reports that “people with same-sex sexual behavior are at greater risk for psychiatric disorders” — including bipolar, obsessive-compulsive, and anxiety disorders, major depression, and substance abuse.

The Medical Institute of Sexual Health reports: “Homosexual men are at significantly increased risk of HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, anal cancer, gonorrhea and gastrointestinal infections as a result of their sexual practices. Women who have sex with women are at significantly increased risk of bacterial vaginosis, breast cancer and ovarian cancer than are heterosexual women.” (Executive Summary, “Health Implications Associated with Homosexuality,” 1999) (NOTE, this makes their expected lifespans shorter)

The Institute reports that “significantly higher percentages of homosexual men and women abuse drugs, alcohol and tobacco than do heterosexuals.”

Associated Press reported last June that a “new study by two University of Southern California sociologists says children with lesbian or gay parents … are probably more likely to explore homosexual activity themselves … (and) grow up to be more open to homoerotic relations.” [emphasis added]

Which means children adopted by adults involved in homosexual behavior face not only secondhand exposure to the risks of such behavior by their “parents,” but are more likely to suffer firsthand by engaging in the same high-risk behavior themselves.

Should children be handed over as trophies to the homosexual “rights” movement — adopting them into households where they’ll face dramatically higher risk of exposure to domestic violence, mental illness, life-threatening disease and premature death? An environment which increases the chances they’ll engage in high-risk homosexual behavior themselves?

A decent adoption process should weed out violent couples of any sexual persuasion.

Monogamous couples are very unlikley to contract STD's

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Boddington's
The chances are they are more likely to be screwed up with gay parents. I will find studies.

Will they be those conducted by the Christian Coalition?

I think the case is strong for gay couples being more responsible parents than many straight couples. All a straight couple needs to do to have a kid is get knocked up. No planning or much effort needed. So two schmoes who aren't ready to have kids or want to have them will find themselves thrust into unwilling parenthood. Meanwhile, the hoops gay couples have to go through for adoption ensures that any such couple going through the process will really want the children and will likely be far more responsible and devoted to the kids than the boy and girl who screwed in the back seat of the car and oops! made a baby.

Dan Savage and his partner stopped a teenage girl from getting an abortion and adopted her baby girl after it was born. Would the religious right rather see abortions or gay couples adopting kids? Hmmm, what a moral dilemma for them...

[nationalist]

Originally posted by molly bloom

Perhaps then the 'predisposition to bigotry' gene can be edited out too. And wouldn't the world be a better place?

Maybe people who are "bigots" simply have a larger amygdala (look it up if you don't know what it is). Or perhaps they simply have different beliefs than you. Maybe you are bigoted against people who don't accept that everyone and everything are equal. Whatever, I don't care.

Alan Turing was of course a big gay homosexual- and his 'defective' genius was invaluable in the cracking of the Enigma codes and the development of the Turing Machine test.

I never said that a possible homosexual birth defect had anything to do with intelligence. I think that if Turing would have recieved the proper balance of hormones in the womb he simply would have been a straight genius rather than a gay genius.

The assumption that the main purpose in human life is to reproduce, is a sad reductionist one

Yet if we don't reproduce, there will be no one left to sit and ***** on a computer . Maybe homosexuality is designed to control population, or maybe it has something to do with natural selection. I don't know. However, from a species survival standpoint our main goal in life is to reproduce.

[Solly]

I'd rather see neither. How about the irresponsible girl gives the baby to a straight couple?

[Amadan]

Originally posted by Boddington's The Institute reports that “significantly higher percentages of homosexual men and women abuse drugs, alcohol and tobacco than do heterosexuals.”[/b]

And the reasons for this include being told, quite often by ones own parents, that they would be better off dead.

For the rest, it's like saying that people who take Prozac are more likely to commit suicide, so therefore Prozac causes suidide. Slight confusion of cause and effect.

People who haven't been able to deal with there own internalized homophobia are more likely to engage in self-destructive behavior.

[Boris Godunov]

From the APA:

http://www.apa.org/pi/parent.html

"D. Conclusion

In summary, there is no evidence to suggest that lesbians and gay men are unfit to be parents or that psychosocial development among children of gay men or lesbians is compromised in any respect relative to that among offspring of heterosexual parents. Not a single study has found children of gay or lesbian parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents. Indeed, the evidence to date suggests that home environments provided by gay and lesbian parents are as likely as those provided by heterosexual parents to support and enable children's psychosocial growth."

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Boddington's
I'd rather see neither. How about the irresponsible girl gives the baby to a straight couple?

Straight couples aren't stepping up the plate enough, so in the absence of that, should the baby be aborted or allowed to be adopted by a loving gay couple who wants to have a child?

[Solly]

There are more straight couples than potential adoptees.

[TheStinger]

babies are easy to palce for adoption, it is older children where there is a shortage of adopters

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by nationalist
Yet if we don't reproduce, there will be no one left to sit and ***** on a computer . Maybe homosexuality is designed to control population, or maybe it has something to do with natural selection. I don't know. However, from a species survival standpoint our main goal in life is to reproduce.

Homosexuality, being such a minority of the population, is in no way a threat to the continued reproduction of the human race. There may very well be a biological reason why nature makes homosexual creatures. If that is the case, I see no reason to tamper with nature and sexuality.

[gsmoove23]

I'm still trying to figure out how a lesbian is more likely to get breast or ovarian cancer and I'm nore then a little worried if I keep on pleasuring my girlfriend orally so often she'll get bacterial vaginosis. One things for sure, smokers should not be allowed to have children.

I was too late on this thread to say it first but people have adverse effects from oppression this has been proven in a number of different venues. The adoption selection process would hopefully do its job in weeding out risk parents, both gay and straight. The more open to homo-erotic relations bit, it may very well be true but I don't see this as more of a problem then my teenage daughter experimenting with sex. Information on safe sex will drastically reduce any adverse health effects from sexual experimentation, and hopefully responsibly selected gay parents would be well versed in homo-erotic safe sex techniques.

[Dom Pedro II]

I've argued the chimp factor before... most chimps have sex with both same and opposite sexes. We're more closely related to chimps, so I'm inclined to say that we are a bisexual species by nature. This does not mean that somebody can't live their life without an attraction to the same sex of course, it just means that we're not so easy to define.

I think even IF this is true, it doesn't mean that homosexuals are "mentally ill" it just means that they are mentally different. Women are mentally different from men, and individuals are mentally different from each other.

[Amadan]

Originally posted by Boddington's
There are more straight couples than potential adoptees.

There are not, however, more straight couples willing to adopt. Check with any child welfare agency.