The threat of homosexuality

[Condunum]

The accusation of false equivalence still holds though. Sexual orientations which are classified as disorders are entirely different from those which are not. Besides, I could also throw out an accusation that the OP committed the slippery slope fallacy.

Proof of that? They can all be considered disorders.

If I remeber correctly, it's not a disorder in the commonly known social sense (a harmful character trait) until it's active. So, a pedophile suffers from no "disorder" until he exhibits behavior harmful to himself or others.

Paraphalia is very complicated.

[Cromarty]

The Bible talks A LOT about homosexuality.

It really doesn't. Possibly two or three clear cut mentions, maybe a dozen more potential.

Not that that takes away from your point, but still.

[Republic Of Hell]

Please do not walk on the ice, you may slip down the slope.

[Raeyh]

Erm, I think you failed to read the article's introduction.

OK. So the false equivalence lies in the consequences of allowing individuals to act out their desires. In the case of homosexuality there has not been established any sort of societal harm caused by the act of being a sexually-active homosexual. There is demonstrable harm done whenever a pedophile, a zoophile, or a necrophiliac engages in sex with the target of their interest.

Is a corpse really harmed? It's a corpse, the guy is already dead. The only ones harmed are the immediate family, who would disapprove, which could be said the same for homosexuality and other things.

[Risottia]

Erm, I think you failed to read the article's introduction.

OK. So the false equivalence lies in the consequences of allowing individuals to act out their desires. In the case of homosexuality there has not been established any sort of societal harm caused by the act of being a sexually-active homosexual.

Exactly!
And we're quite sure there's no PERSONAL harm, either.

There is demonstrable harm done whenever a pedophile, a zoophile, or a necrophiliac engages in sex with the target of their interest.

Pedophile, yes.
Zoophile, erm... not necessarily. And in the case of non-consensual sex enforced on an animal, it would not be considered by the law as a damage to a person.
Necrophile, not necessarily. Most of the times, though, it would be shocking for the late one's relatives.

[Condunum]

The Bible talks A LOT about homosexuality.

It really doesn't. Possibly two or three clear cut mentions, maybe a dozen more potential.

Not that that takes away from your point, but still.

Here he comes, to save the day!

[The Neo Soviet Empire]

Briefly granting the OP's premise (which is not recommended), what does he intend to do about it?

Homosexual "treatment" programs have been demonstrably proven not to work.

[Socialdemokraterne]

OK. So the false equivalence lies in the consequences of allowing individuals to act out their desires. In the case of homosexuality there has not been established any sort of societal harm caused by the act of being a sexually-active homosexual. There is demonstrable harm done whenever a pedophile, a zoophile, or a necrophiliac engages in sex with the target of their interest.

Is a corpse really harmed? It's a corpse, the guy is already dead. The only ones harmed are the immediate family, who would disapprove, which could be said the same for homosexuality and other things.

Can a corpse consent to sex? Can a living homosexual?

[Condunum]

OK. So the false equivalence lies in the consequences of allowing individuals to act out their desires. In the case of homosexuality there has not been established any sort of societal harm caused by the act of being a sexually-active homosexual.

Exactly!
And we're quite sure there's no PERSONAL harm, either.

*ahem* trust me, there is some personal harm that comes from being a sexually-active homosexual male.
Speaking from experience, here.

[Upper and Lower Karsteinia]

Troll troll troll troll OP.

[Nazi States of Europe]

Troll troll troll troll OP.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=201348

[Raeyh]

Is a corpse really harmed? It's a corpse, the guy is already dead. The only ones harmed are the immediate family, who would disapprove, which could be said the same for homosexuality and other things.

Can a corpse consent to sex? Can a living homosexual?

Of course not, but neither can an artificial vagina. If you are dead your body is now simply an object instead of a person.

[Phocidaea]

Troll troll troll troll OP.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=201348

This thread is a perfect example of how the admins must have been out of their minds when they created that rule.

There are legitimate times and subjects where calling troll is beneficial. An across-the-board ban on it can only encourage troll behavior, since no one can call them out on it.

[Raeyh]

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=201348

This thread is a perfect example of how the admins must have been out of their minds when they created that rule.

There are legitimate times and subjects where calling troll is beneficial. An across-the-board ban on it can only encourage troll behavior, since no one can call them out on it.

That's what this board is for: viewforum.php?f=16

[Yumyumsuppertime]

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=201348

This thread is a perfect example of how the admins must have been out of their minds when they created that rule.

There are legitimate times and subjects where calling troll is beneficial. An across-the-board ban on it can only encourage troll behavior, since no one can call them out on it.

Call them out on it in Moderation. That's what it's there for.

[Rocopurr]

The classic STD, pedophilia, and bestiality reasons, cute.

[Neo Art]

Can a corpse consent to sex?

There's a store a few blocks from my house absolutely filled with objects intended to be used for sexual gratification, and I promise you absolutely none of them can consent. I'm not sure the point you're trying to make here.

[New Marcusia]

Without the freedom to satisfy one's needs and to act in order to achieve self-fulfillment, true happiness is impossible. If freedom is not possible because of social and economic conditions, then these conditions must be changed in order to achieve increased happiness and freedom.

[Socialdemokraterne]

Can a corpse consent to sex?

There's a store a few blocks from my house absolutely filled with objects intended to be used for sexual gratification, and I promise you absolutely none of them can consent. I'm not sure the point you're trying to make here.

It's a dead angle. I lost that one. I've been trying to say that homosexuals' sexual orientation isn't harmful. I got dragged into this necrophilia argument by the OP's slippery slope argument.

[Retro Lyra]

[CTALNH]

Now don't get me wrong I am actually pretty liberal although I just so happen to disagree with most liberals on the issue of LGBT rights. I don't believe that homosexuality is a good thing. In fact I believe that the evidence that homosexuality and lesbianism are dangerous to society is overwhelming. HIV/AIDS rates and other STD rates are much higher among the LGBT community than the straight community and LGBT people are much more likely to sexual promiscuous and domestic violence is much higher among same-sex couples. I just don't understand why we should consider homosexuality okay and normal. As for it happening among animals well rape, theft, and murder have been observed among animals so should be consider those to be okay too? I think it is time for people to stand up for the truth and fight against homosexuality and find a cure for it to help the people struggling with it. If we keep on thinking it is okay then we are on a slippery slope to where we would soon be thinking that zoophilia, pedophilia, and heck even necrophilia are okay. In the early 90's in San Fransisco there was an LGBT riot outside a church were the LGBT people performed sexual acts outside the church and even reportedly shouted "give us your children" to the church members and they harassed the church members. Here are a few of my sources.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/Newsroom/msm ... lease.html

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/291357

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entre ... d_RVDocSum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8838474

Ban this homophobe now

[Risottia]

Exactly!
And we're quite sure there's no PERSONAL harm, either.

*ahem* trust me, there is some personal harm that comes from being a sexually-active homosexual male.
Speaking from experience, here.

Being lovesick isn't exactly a worrying personal harm, buster. Grow a skin! Claiming it is would be SOOO gay... oh... wait...

[Nazi States of Europe]

Now don't get me wrong I am actually pretty liberal although I just so happen to disagree with most liberals on the issue of LGBT rights. I don't believe that homosexuality is a good thing. In fact I believe that the evidence that homosexuality and lesbianism are dangerous to society is overwhelming. HIV/AIDS rates and other STD rates are much higher among the LGBT community than the straight community and LGBT people are much more likely to sexual promiscuous and domestic violence is much higher among same-sex couples. I just don't understand why we should consider homosexuality okay and normal. As for it happening among animals well rape, theft, and murder have been observed among animals so should be consider those to be okay too? I think it is time for people to stand up for the truth and fight against homosexuality and find a cure for it to help the people struggling with it. If we keep on thinking it is okay then we are on a slippery slope to where we would soon be thinking that zoophilia, pedophilia, and heck even necrophilia are okay. In the early 90's in San Fransisco there was an LGBT riot outside a church were the LGBT people performed sexual acts outside the church and even reportedly shouted "give us your children" to the church members and they harassed the church members. Here are a few of my sources.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/Newsroom/msm ... lease.html

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/291357

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entre ... d_RVDocSum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8838474

Ban this homophobe now

Why? Just because he has retarded views doesn't warrant a ban.

[Khadgar]

Exactly!
And we're quite sure there's no PERSONAL harm, either.

*ahem* trust me, there is some personal harm that comes from being a sexually-active homosexual male.
Speaking from experience, here.

Okay, assuming your boyfriend isn't hung like a telephone pole there's no personal harm. Bigger is only better in porn stories, in reality it's just uncomfortable.

[Paixao]

So, who thinks the OP got dumped by his boyfriend and for his post-break up rebound he decided he'd be "straight" and go on an anti-gay tirade?

Sounds about right...