dk

Hi Bill Snedden
Let me ask you a question before responding. If the free and willful acts of gay men destroy the lives of millions of people and cost billions in public funds, if such acts have no ethical relevancy, ok, now my question is… Why should people concern themselves with ethics?

I agree ethics pertains to a person’s free actions, and has nothing to do with a person’s identity. The confusion stems from the question. “Is homosexuality unethical?”. The correct question is, “Is it ethical to stick one’s penis up a consenting male partners anus?” Mokeybot, ul30 and winsonjen inextricably associated an incidence of MSM with the identity of gays. The Gay Rights Movement makes the same mistake, and so do many ethical pluralists.

Monkeybot asked, "Why on earth is it of any relevance to me what these (consenting adults) do behind closed doors??"
paul30 says, "As long as it's between consenting adults, homosexuality is not only ethical but EXTREMELY ethical. "
winstonjen declares, "Right. And even if they do injure themselves or contract STDs, it's not my business - the risks are theirs to deal with."

My previous post addressed why the public has an interest in Gay Culture, Gay Rights Movement and incidence of MSM. There are many other reasons, but deadly contagious diseases are the most immediate and obvious. Obviously it is unethical to knowingly act to put another person’s life in grave danger, it is ethical to avoid acts that put others in danger.

So…

1. Males who have Sex with Males (MSM) are essentially homosexual
2. Incidence of MSM kills, exposes and spreads a deadly epidemic across the US
3. the epidemic poses a threat to the whole nation, costs irreplacable resources... human and capital resources.

So the question, “Should a person be homosexual”, isn’t really an ethical question at all, unless being homosexual implies some essential and distinct property, like above.

1. If we modify 1. above: Homosexuals are people with a sexual problem (fetish).

The confusion and ethical dilemma disappears. An incidence of MSM is unethical because of the epidemic of deadly stds. Anyone that promotes MSM commits an unethical act for pedagogical reasons.

yguy

No. If you cannot see that bestiality is wrong a priori, we have no common ground on which to continue the discussion.

yguy

Why would I think that? Why would I not rather suspect they would be even more demanding?

You betcha, and I'm one of 'em.

Fr.Andrew

(Fr Andrew): What reason is there to suspect that they would?

Fr.Andrew

(dk): The confusion stems from the question. “Is homosexuality unethical?”. The correct question is, “Is it ethical to stick one’s penis up a consenting male partners anus?”

(Fr Andrew): This paraphrase demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of homosexuality that appears to have clouded your judgement. Homosexuality is much more involved than simply sticking one's penis up the anus of one's partner.
Really...you're quite naive.

mecca777

Hah! The ol' bait-and-switch. This was the ballsiest strawman play I've ever seen, and deserves to be preserved for future generations as a golden example of warped debate! :notworthy

winstonjen

Why would we need common ground when it is clear that we are on opposing sides in this debate and disagree with each other extensively?

tabs

Not only that someone forgot to mention that homosexuality also happens to affect women.

dk

That's an interesting comment, and broadly illustrates how misinformed most people are about homosexuality.

• First: I'm not sure homophobia extends to lesbians, and I knew a group of lesbians that appeared to despised effeminate men and women equally.
• Second: Any person that broadly employs derogatory labels to demean “other” groups becomes a bigot.
• Third: Homophobe has no special medical, social or psychological quality and fits nicely into a group of derogatory pseudo scientific pseudonyms crassly employed to dehumanize others e.g. moron, imbecile, senile and homophobe.
• Fourth: In many biblical instances God favored effeminate men over masculine men, most notably Jacob and Esau, but also in Cain and Able and even David and Saul.
• Fifth: One of the most prosperous groups of derogatory slurs is directed at masculine men… heyseed, bumpkin, clodhopper, hick, hillbilly, jake, rube, yokel,,,

While your post registers little intellectual discernment it does show the limitations of scientific dogmatism

trillian

dk,

I am interested about how you see the affect of ethical choices in the Netherlands. They have decided there is nothing wrong with men having sex with other men.

They have no sodomy laws, approve gay marriage, and gay adoption. They've approved of gays in the military for at least the last 50 years. You can be "all kinds of gay" there! Any sex you want (except children) is permitted. You can smoke a joint while you do it too.

Yet gay men in the US are 6x more likely to have AIDS than gay men in the Netherlands.

Please tell me where the Dutch people have suffered from embracing the gays? Where are the horrible consequences to their society that you talk about?

trillian