This is for the 'choicers' - those who believe it is a choice whom we are attracted to - is it merely the homosexual whom must have "chosen' this attraction - that heterosexuality is 'normal' and the way one is born, and gays have been lead astray? Or is it that both are innate? Or both/all sexualities are chosen? This is a place you may answer freely - I will not deny anything that is within the bounds of the rules (and...isn't calling for abuse, assault or murder of another etc). NO NAME CALLING however.
sort by best latest
should we judge people who rape and murder? i know this is a different subject than the sexuality question, im not equating the 2. i just think its funny when people say not to judge , when the statement itself makes a judgment against others.
it is no ones business to a point. i know if my kid or a friend were gay, i would be worried about the risk factors involved. Would i be wrong for worrying about that?
If your child was straight would you be worried abut the risk factors? My point is we should be worried about the risk factors concerning any sexuality, both gay and straight. You would be worried because they are gay and that is wrong.
U may worry about anything you desire, but your concerns should never be the deciding factor in someone else happiness. You do not have that right to decide.
i think youre thinking i hate gay people or something. my daughter is a member of gay, strait alliance. there are just risk factors involved. dont take my word for it. look it up.
the risk factors come from those who would discriminate, torment and kill the gay community. Otherwise there are no greater risks to gays than there are to straights.
Christiananrkist - can you be more specific as to what risk factors you speak of? If it is STI related - it is riskier to think one is not at risk if one is not gay, as all are at risk if not careful. If this is not what concerns you - please explain
men are at higher risk of getting HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, anal cancer, gonorrhea, gastrointestinal infections and developing anal fissures, and anal prolapse, women are at higher risk of bacterial infections and ovarian cancer.
CK: Ur statistics have no basis in facts. These R personal opinions at best. Ur assumption is that gay people have more unprotected sex than straights? None of the diseases U mentioned R more prevalent in any group who doesn't use protection.
STD's are high risks in both groups with several partners. which is why i support monogamy in both. all others come from sodomy and inserting foreign objects. i would recommend against these in both groups. none of these are opinion or new findings.
CK: Ur comments surely R opinions if they suggest that these problems R more prevalent in any particular group. Most gays enjoy a longer monogamous relationship that straights. Ur views R from the 60's mentality. PS:sodomy is not confined 2 gays.
i didnt say anything was confined to gays. i said i dont recommend in both groups. its more prevalent in same sex couples though. how is it not? having longer relationships is irrelevant to the issue, even if you could prove such a fact.
CK: wrong again. How do you make the judgment that it is more prevalent in same sex couples? There is no known evidence of this. It is an argument that those who oppose use to justify their beliefs.
sodomy causes physical harm. look it up. gay men participate in this more than hetero. true or false? i'm not making judgement .as i have said i dont hate gay people. the risks i pointed out can be verified. look it up.
CK: wrong again.Sodomy causes no permanent harm.Violence causes injury.It is no more prevalent in same sex than in hetero couples.What is ur source of info?Perhaps U should write a hub on it, since U have O published & seem so informed on subject
permanent? interesting word you chose. attacking the person not the argument. me not writing a hub is irrelevant. if you cant refute the acts i mentioned dont cause the harm i mentioned, then there is nothing left to say.
CK:interesting comments.Ur asking ME 2 prove something that U said?U got it backwards.Permanent as opposed 2 temporary is ur argument?U say things as if they R truth, & get angry when called on it.Ur judgmental arguments R superfluous 2 the point
im not angry. . im not blind to the facts, worried about being PC, or being popular. i hope my comments will at least make others take some precautions. im not asking you to prove, but to disprove. "youre judgmental" "thats opinion" are not arguments
CK:Ur right,it's hard 2 argue/debate any issue when statements R randomly made as fact.Even if someone experiences what they state as fact is not a blanket truth-ex:saying 'all cats have fleas' is not fact or debatable.Opinions R in same category
what is random about what it said? I did not give a "when did you stop beating your wife" kind of argument. I gave a cause and effect argument. not difficult to do research on. you obviously have not done so. im done. this is going nowhere
CK: U make statements that others must disprove? Backwards. U make statements U prove them or keep them to yourself.
Christian - Sources please? Those most at risk of HIV/AIDs are those who feel it will not happen to them so don't use protection. Bacterial infections such as BV are not STIs, and Ovarian cancer is not linked to sexuality. Anal sex is hetero as well.
i dont blame you for most likely not reading the long list of nonsense from me and D. i have stated all that already and agree. my argument is against sodomy and inserting foreign objects, causing problems. CDC.GOV, CANCER.ORG has good info.
CK, there is no use arguing with them because they have already labeled you as a hatemonger and written your facts off as rubbish because of your label.
MK:Ur comments R partial true.Hate monger is the wrong term. Misinformed & refusing 2 educate 1's self is the main problem in our society. Making judgments not based on reality is not truth, it is opinion based on misinformation.
In ALL arguments, there are always "facts" to prove one's subjective point of view. It just depends on what one WANTS to believe.
I agree with you. which is partially why I stopped responding to d.william. I know im labeled as such. like I stated earlier though, im not looking to be PC. we live in a culture where certain topic are off limits to criticism, but truth matters
Firstly, I'm an experienced RN, I meant articles, not generic websites. Secondly u specifically mention of gay people in relation to risks in yr 1st comment. The info you provide goes for ALL having sex. Monogamy is not exclusive to heteros.
did i say monogomy is exclusive to hetero? U should read fully. what i mentioned is unsafe for ALL. but gays do it more often. like sodo. is that not the primary sex method of gay men? types of acceptable articles? why are cdc.gov & cancer.org n
Assuming that one act is the primary sex method for any group is un-educated. It would b like assuming missionary is the primary method 4 ALL straight people. Articles - link to actual peer-reviewed article statements of fact are from (peer-reviewed
a better example would be strait couples primary method is vaginal intercourse. and yes it is. men do not have vagina's which is why sodomy. what is uneducated about that? center for disease control should have p2p articles. look for yourself.
YOU make the statement of 'fact' - YOU provide the link to the article/s where this fact is made. It is not MY job to prove YOUR statement - it is yours. So, without proof - you merely have opinion - which u r entitled to - but it's still not fact
opinion - a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
fact - something SAID to be true or SUPPOSED to have happened
taken from dictionary.com
if you dont want to check my sources, why did you ask? i think i have been clear why i believe what i do.
Provide me a link to an ACTUAL article (not the websites hmpg), + I will read it. I'm not trolling the internet to prove YOUR statement - thats your job. If it exists + you've read it - then U should know where it is, and be able to give a URL.
the other links wont fit. dang character limit. these are just 2 of many. this should at least inspire you to do your own research.
Thanks. However, research is not the problem - the onus was on YOU, not me, to prove your statements. I have the proof of my own statements should I need to provide it, because it is my statement, therefore my job to prove. Get it?
Your answer just made a religious nut's brain implode. Good work.
Yours is the most appropriate answer, as the human race is evolving towards androgyny.It is the only solution 2 combat the population explosion, the diehard haters will have a long road of confusion in their heads in order 2 grasp this concept.
lol. you never fail to have a good comment
this is the most ignorant statement i have seen in a long time. Ur opinion has no bearing on the lives & happiness of others, thank god. THIS is the definition of judging others. & yes, i am judging U for judging others.
Sex is a temptation not "sexuality. saying that sexuality is a temptation is contradicting your own arguments about "attraction not being a choice.
what exactly about what is said is ignorant? you may be judging me for judging other, which is kinda funny that you admit it and see nothing wrong with. what is judgmental about my statement.? what part of what i said is wrong?
Most everything in life has risk and reward. Even if homosexual activity has greater risk (which I am skeptical of), it in no way comes close to surpassing the reward of love, friendship, sex, and intimacy.
i see your point. i think my point is still valid in light of this though.
youre right about risk and reward. love and friendship is a great part of life. i dont believe sex and intimacy has to follow however.
My apologies 2 Jlpark for my neg comments. They R a bit harsh. It is difficult 2 contain them when comments R made by those who have no knowledge of what they speak other than what they get from their pastors. God makes no mistakes in nature.
1st u apologize 4 a negtve stmnt, which afterwards u follow w/ another negtve stmnt. Then u make an assumption that others who don't agree w/ u only get their info from their preachers, assuming they can't think 4 themselves. talk about lackng facts
Risk factors u speak of anal and inserting objects: Men + women practice masturbatory acts involving insertion - be they straight or gay - therefore the risks u mention would not be confined to gay, straight or non-monogamous groups, would they?
you keep insuating that i dont think strait people do these things, which i never said. my point is thta gay people are involved in these things more, due to the fact their parts dont connect properly. is sodo &/or insert. of objects harmful?
If you use the appropriate protection and/or cleanliness, and is COMPLETELY consentual - then, inherently, no, they are not. Rape in any form - anal, insertion of objects also - is harmful - physically, emotionally etc. Again - sex is risky.
thank you for actually giving some reasons for your disagreement. cleanliness and protection would not prevent everything i mentioned however. certain body parts are meant for certain uses. consensual sex between M/W is not risky unless one strays.
Assuming that one has NEVER been with another, ever - then you are correct. But, when 1 sleeps with another they R also sleeping with those that person has slept with in a way. Unprotected consensual sex is risky. AGAIN -acts u speak of not just gays
yep, and AGAIN, i never said was. consensual, monogamous sex between m/w through natural method, ie: vaginal intercourse is risk free. you agreed. sodomy and other methods (not style ie: missionary) do involve risks and are higher among homosexuals.
You are incorrect - consen. mono unprotect sex M/W would ONLY be safe if they were both virgins. If u have had sex prior to current mono relationship - nope. Still risk for HPV, undetected HIV/Hep, HSV, Chlam, Gono, Syphilis. Regardless of sexuality