Black gays launch ‘marriage equality’ campaign

Well, now isn't this special. Who knows...this marriage thing just might catch on in the African-American community where 70% of babies are illegitimate.

Perhaps the men might have a better chance of hanging onto....their men.

Erm, well, I for one do think that the medical dangers of sodomy are extremely serious and are far too unreported due to the whole political correctness of the situation.

Which is why it rather annoys me to read that whole thing you posted, because it makes SUCH a big deal about the dangers of oral sex. No, I'm not claiming oral sex is entirely and utterly safe, it's not, but the level of danger between oral sex and sodomy (where ACTUAL blood -and- feces intermingle) are light years apart. We're probably talking about a danger difference comparable to crossing a street -with- the light versus driving with a 0.25 blood alcohol level.

By going on in a tirade against oral sex (which if it were true would probably have 90% of the women in the U.S. in hospital beds), it completely delegitimizes all the other arguments. It's frankly not all that different from people who delegitimize all sane discussion about the dangers of drugs by claiming that marijuana is just as dangerous as crack cocaine.

I'm afraid compendiums like that which mix serious issues with such alarmism and exaggeration do serious damage to getting any rational discussion on the subject.

Qwinn

"I'm afraid compendiums like that which mix serious issues with such alarmism and exaggeration do serious damage to getting any rational discussion on the subject."

What I posted was more series than a hurricane of heart attacks on a dying AIDS patient.

Translation for: "I'm afraid compendiums like that which mix serious issues with such alarmism and exaggeration do serious damage to getting any rational discussion on the subject." = I'm PROGAY and there is no amount of evidence against it that will convince me otherwise.

"I'm PROGAY and there is no amount of evidence against it that will convince me otherwise."

Oh Dear Lord. If you had read even 1/100th of my posts on Free Republic, you would realize that calling me "PROGAY" is absolutely absurd. No, I think the homosexual agenda is really doing serious damage to society in countless ways. I'm not a -bigot- against gays, but I think the act of sodomy itself is pretty repulsive, and I think legalizing gay marriage IS very harmful to the institution. So no, you're smoking crack if you think I'm "PRO GAY", and it seems you're just indistinguishable from another knee jerk "You disagree with me so you must be a DU troll" troll.

Look. No one is going to take ANYTHING you say seriously if you start the bloody thing talking about the huge dangers of oral sex. If you read what I said, you'll realize that the only thing I'm defending is what is a very common HETEROSEXUAL act. Far as I know, no, there is no massive epidemic of Hepatitis being transmitted by men to women through oral sex, and to be alarmist about that is to lose all credibility when it comes to the -serious- health risks involved in sodomy (which are actually true be it hetero or homosexual sodomy).

Qwinn

"No one is going to take ANYTHING you say seriously if you start the bloody thing talking about the huge dangers of oral sex."

O.K., eliminate the oral sex part for your purposes.

What about the rest of it?

Otherwise the research seems to be adequate and believable, but I'll let you know what I think in a sec. I want to ask a question of someone else who questioned it in this thread.

Qwinn

Belial,

As you can see, I'm engaged in a conversation about that research. I would like to ask you something. The only substantial objection you stated was this:

"Their sampling techniques are a joke. Polling 16 obituaries to find the average age of death of homosexuals???"

From the research it says this: "Obituaries numbering 6,516 from 16 U.S. homosexual journals over the past 12 years were compared to a large sample of obituaries from regular newspapers.23"

It appears to me that you misinterpreted 16 -journals- to mean 16 homosexuals, but apparently the real number is 6,516, which is indeed a pretty large sample. Was this just a misinterpretation on your part, or are you aware of something I'm not from reading this information?

Are there any other specific facts you're questioning in it? Other than the alarmism about oral sex (which I -do- still find discouraging), it does seem reasonably well sourced. SOME of it's conclusions I've seen before from pretty solid sources, so I don't think it's all phony. Basically, I'm interested to see if it really is debunkable or not, and since you seem interested in debunking it, have a go, I'll give it a fair reading. Your one attempt so far though doesn't seem accurate.

Happy2BMe,

If you have any contacts with the source you are quoting, I would seriously consider suggesting moving the one substantial note in the oral sex paragraph into the part about fecal sex, as a parenthesis citation which points out that oral sex that -follows- sodomy and thus involves ingesting feces, is indeed just as dangerous as what they describe as fecal sex.

Qwinn

mr. devil...you just keep on deceiving and being deceived! The facts are the facts. Didn't you read my post from Dr. Bob? Homosexuality is a very unhealthy lifestyle.