Freethought & Rationalism Archive

dk · 04-01-2003, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BrotherMan

You are in a state of denial. Gays are their own worse enemy, and misery loves company. For example, almost 50% of the gays segregated themselves into isolated communities in NYC, SFS, and LA.

lisarea · 04-01-2003, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BrotherMan

Despite years of indoctrination, to compare and contrast is erroneous. It is redundant to use both words. By comparing or contrasting words, sentences or ideas one will automatically see how they are similar or even if they are similar at all.

BrotherMan, I used to like you!

Now, I'm going to make it my goal to follow you everywhere you go in order to point out your redundancies and deconstruct your idioms.

To wit:

Quote:

Okay, done now.

Now? As opposed to when else? Were you afraid, maybe, that someone might think that you meant you were done a couple of sentences ago, and a moderator would delete half of your post accordingly?

lisarea · 04-01-2003, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dk
You are in a state of denial. Gays are their own worse enemy, and misery loves company. For example, almost 50% of the gays segregated themselves into isolated communities in NYC, SFS, and LA.

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Cite, please.

You can't actually be serious. Are you really saying that you believe that 50% of homosexuals live in a few isolated neighborhoods in three cities in the US?

Even assuming you mean 50% of the gay people in the US, I'm thinking that, if they're so segregated in these little isolated communities, there can't be all that many of them. And if that's the case, why are you so het up about this tiny minority of the population?

I'm not even going to address the cause and effect aspect of this assertion unless and until you can show a citation for that statistic.

BrotherMan · 04-01-2003, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dk
You are in a state of denial.

Actually, I'm in Delaware.

Quote:

Gays are their own worse enemy, and misery loves company.

No, ignorant, bigotted, slack-jawed yokels are their worst enemy.

Quote:

For example, almost 50% of the gays segregated themselves into isolated communities in NYC, SFS, and LA.

So? Until society accepted them as part of the American landscape the Irish were segregated into communities. So were many other nationalities. That is the most useless statistic I think I've ever seen.

Quote:

Originally posted by lisarea
BrotherMan, I used to like you!

Zuh? I've made a positive (!) impression on someone? Nuts, that means I'm not lurking properly.

Quote:

Now, I'm going to make it my goal to follow you everywhere you go in order to point out your redundancies and deconstruct your idioms.

You're going to have your hands full, then. As niggling as I can be, I know I make mistakes. I see them all the time - especially after I hit [Submit Reply].

Quote:

Were you afraid, maybe, that someone might think that you meant you were done a couple of sentences ago, and a moderator would delete half of your post accordingly?

Why do I get the feeling something like that should have happened in this case...

Philosoft · 04-01-2003, 07:20 PM

dk,

As lisarea and BrotherMan are doing a fine job exposing your misunderstandings about homosexuality, I'd like to merely reiterate what I was looking for originally, which you haven't come close to addressing:

With respect to the "institute" of marriage, what sort of harm would married homosexuals cause married heterosexuals? I'm just talking here about the individuals involved in the respective marriages. I don't need a lecture about the poor public image of the homosexual community or the apparently irresistible draw that homosexuality is to schoolchildren.

Captain Pedantic · 04-02-2003, 04:50 AM

(edited by moderator). This may sound rude to you, but to me it's just the truth. (edited by moderator - and it sounds rude to me too so please keep the ad homs out of your posts)

The reason? (edited by moderator) You are the very reason why gay people might want to live in "isolated communities". You are the reason why people die of not knowing how to prevent AIDS. You expect that gay "culture" being pushed further underground will solve the problem. You plainly don't have any desire to prevent AIDS/HIV - because if you did, you'd be all for teaching kids how to prevent those diseases, and you'd be all for helping gay people become accepted in society so that they didn't commit suicide due to the (edited by moderator) attitudes of people like you (edited by moderator) and so that they didn't feel the need to associate with the "underground" to actually meet people who might be "like them". Which is damn hard when you're young and living somewhere where being gay is considered "odd" at best, and maybe these young kids go with older men and become infected with HIV not because of something about gay people and how horrible they are, but because that's all they have, and those are the only people they know of who feel "like them". And you're the (edited by moderator) who wants to keep it that way.

Yes, I am gay, and thus maybe biased. But to me, the only reason why these young kids are becoming HIV infected is that they don't know any better. And you're the (edited by moderator) that wants to keep them in the dark so this state of affairs can continue. So yes, (edited by moderator), and so are all the other hypocrites who pretend to "care" about young people, when really, they just care about their own power.

Ut · 04-02-2003, 05:11 AM

TROLL ALERT!!!

Just to remind you that dk is the one that stated some months ago something to the effect that "anyone who believes premarital sex should remain legal is a nutcake (sic)"

I could print any post of dk in that thread and post it anywhere in Quebec or in Western Europe and every single person reading it would be rolling on the ground laughing.

As everybody knows, Western Europeans and Qu�b�cois are much more open about sex in general and homosexuality in particular and they are more promiscuous than Americans.

Yet they have lower rates of STDs and lower rates of teen pregnancies than Americans.

You know why? Because they engage in RESPONSIBLE sex. Because they have REAL sex education, not abstinence-only (i.e. no) sex education.

Thanks to people like dk, America is ridiculed throughout all the Western world because of her conservative policies about sex.

The following is totally off-topic, but think about it. Is it any wonder that Europeans are so reluctant to let Bush et al. take over Iraq when this Administration is too prudish to have its citizens been told to use condoms against STDs? (Yes, this kind of news reaches Europe)

Ut · 04-02-2003, 05:14 AM

A further warning: the thread I mentioned went over 10 pages.

Ut · 04-02-2003, 05:55 AM

You see, I made a big error in my first post.

I swallowed hook, line and sinker the faulty line of thought that plagues dk. Namely, that living in an open, tolerant society would make one more promiscuous than living in a close-minded, bigot, intolerant society.

The fact is: when you look at the data, British, Canadian, French and Swedish teenagers are less promiscuous than American teenagers despite living in more open societies.

dk, ABSOLUTELY DO NOT READ THE FOLLOWING REPORT, DO NOT CLICK ON THE LINK, DO NOT EVEN DARE HOVER YOUR MOUSE ABOVE IT. It is part of the evil liberal socialist commie educo-mediatico-judicial conspiracy to debase your soul and make you a creature of Satan.

Teenage Sexual and Reproductive Behavior in Developed Countries

I'm going to quote the most relevant sections on this thread. Don't say I didn't warn you. The salvation of your soul will be permanently compromised if you scroll down.

Quote:

Openness and supportive attitudes about sexuality in other countries have not led to greater sexual activity or risktaking.

The U.S. society is highly conflicted about sexuality in general and about expectations for adolescent behavior in particular. Adults in the other countries are less conflicted about both sexuality and teenage sexual activity, at least for older teenagers.

Although a majority of adults in all five countries frown on young people s having sex before age 16, such behavior is more likely to be accepted in Sweden and Canada (where 39% and 25%, respectively, think it is not wrong at all or only sometimes wrong) than it is in the United States and Great Britain (where 13% and 12%, respectively, hold these views). Adults in the other countries are also much more accepting of sex before marriage than are Americans: 84 94% in Canada, Great Britain and Sweden, compared with only 59% in the United States. Although there are no comparable data for France, initiation of intercourse before marriage or cohabitation is the norm there. In spite of these differences in attitudes, similar proportions of young people in all the study countries become sexually active during their adolescence.

[...]

Comprehensive sexuality education, not abstinence promotion, is emphasized in countries with lower teenage pregnancy levels.

In Sweden, France, Great Britain and, usually, Canada, the focus of sexuality education is not abstinence promotion but the provision of comprehensive information about prevention of HIV and other STDs; pregnancy prevention; contraceptives and, often, where to get them; and respect and responsibility within relationships. Sexuality education is mandatory in state or public schools in England and Wales, France and Sweden and is taught in most Canadian schools, although the amount of time given to sexuality education, its content and the extent of teacher training vary among these countries and within them as well. In Sweden, the country with the lowest teenage birthrate, sexuality education has been mandated in schools for almost half a century, which reflects, and promotes, the topic s acceptance as a legitimate and important subject for young people.

Extremely vocal minority groups in the United States pressure school districts not to allow information about contraception to be provided in sexuality education classes, and substantial federal and state funds are directed to promoting abstinence for unmarried people of all ages, particularly for adolescents. Some 35% of the school districts that mandate sexuality education require that abstinence be presented as the only appropriate option outside of marriage for teenagers and that contraception either be presented as ineffective in preventing pregnancy and HIV and other STDs or not be covered at all.

Media is used less in the United States than elsewhere to promote positive sexual behavior.

Young people in all five countries are exposed through television programs, movies, music and advertisements to sexually explicit images and to casual sexual encounters with no consideration for preventing pregnancy or STDs. However, entertainment media and advertising messages about sexuality are seemingly less influential in the other countries than in the United States, because they are balanced by more pragmatic parental and societal attitudes and by nearly universal comprehensive sexuality education.

Pregnancy and STD prevention campaigns undertaken in the United States generally have a punitive tone and focus on the negative aspects of teenage childbearing and STDs rather than on promotion of effective contraceptive use. The media have been used more frequently in the other countries for public campaigns to prevent STDs and HIV; the messages are generally positive about sexuality and are more likely to be humorous than judgmental. For example, the Swedish government works closely with youth to publish a frank and informative periodical magazine featuring subjects such as love, identity and sexuality that is widely read and trusted by young people. A government contraceptive campaign in France used television spots to air the message, Contraception: The choice is yours.

Ut · 04-02-2003, 06:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dk
You are in a state of denial.

Nominated for the Pot, Kettle, Black Award.

Quote:

Gays are their own worse enemy

As opposed to the loving friend that is dk.

Quote:

misery loves company. For example, almost 50% of the gays segregated themselves into isolated communities in NYC, SFS, and LA.

So dk, does your 50% number come from a credible source, or are you incredibly skilled at pulling bogus numbers out of your ass?

It should be pointed out that this segregation phenomenon happens much less in more enlightened countries (you know, the ones which have been taken over by a judicio-educo-mediatico-governmental cabal to molest innocent children).

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-01-2003, 07:20 PM	#35
Philosoft Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Southeast of disorder Posts: 6,829	dk, As lisarea and BrotherMan are doing a fine job exposing your misunderstandings about homosexuality, I'd like to merely reiterate what I was looking for originally, which you haven't come close to addressing: With respect to the "institute" of marriage, what sort of harm would married homosexuals cause married heterosexuals? I'm just talking here about the individuals involved in the respective marriages. I don't need a lecture about the poor public image of the homosexual community or the apparently irresistible draw that homosexuality is to schoolchildren.

04-02-2003, 04:50 AM	#36
Captain Pedantic Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: UK. Posts: 588	(edited by moderator). This may sound rude to you, but to me it's just the truth. (edited by moderator - and it sounds rude to me too so please keep the ad homs out of your posts) The reason? (edited by moderator) You are the very reason why gay people might want to live in "isolated communities". You are the reason why people die of not knowing how to prevent AIDS. You expect that gay "culture" being pushed further underground will solve the problem. You plainly don't have any desire to prevent AIDS/HIV - because if you did, you'd be all for teaching kids how to prevent those diseases, and you'd be all for helping gay people become accepted in society so that they didn't commit suicide due to the (edited by moderator) attitudes of people like you (edited by moderator) and so that they didn't feel the need to associate with the "underground" to actually meet people who might be "like them". Which is damn hard when you're young and living somewhere where being gay is considered "odd" at best, and maybe these young kids go with older men and become infected with HIV not because of something about gay people and how horrible they are, but because that's all they have, and those are the only people they know of who feel "like them". And you're the (edited by moderator) who wants to keep it that way. Yes, I am gay, and thus maybe biased. But to me, the only reason why these young kids are becoming HIV infected is that they don't know any better. And you're the (edited by moderator) that wants to keep them in the dark so this state of affairs can continue. So yes, (edited by moderator), and so are all the other hypocrites who pretend to "care" about young people, when really, they just care about their own power.

04-02-2003, 05:11 AM	#37
Ut Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Quebec, Canada Posts: 828	TROLL ALERT!!! Just to remind you that dk is the one that stated some months ago something to the effect that "anyone who believes premarital sex should remain legal is a nutcake (sic)" I could print any post of dk in that thread and post it anywhere in Quebec or in Western Europe and every single person reading it would be rolling on the ground laughing. As everybody knows, Western Europeans and Qu�b�cois are much more open about sex in general and homosexuality in particular and they are more promiscuous than Americans. Yet they have lower rates of STDs and lower rates of teen pregnancies than Americans. You know why? Because they engage in RESPONSIBLE sex. Because they have REAL sex education, not abstinence-only (i.e. no) sex education. Thanks to people like dk, America is ridiculed throughout all the Western world because of her conservative policies about sex. The following is totally off-topic, but think about it. Is it any wonder that Europeans are so reluctant to let Bush et al. take over Iraq when this Administration is too prudish to have its citizens been told to use condoms against STDs? (Yes, this kind of news reaches Europe)

04-02-2003, 05:14 AM	#38
Ut Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Quebec, Canada Posts: 828	A further warning: the thread I mentioned went over 10 pages.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.