Skip to comments.
Largest, US Sexuality Survey In History Shows Gays Far More Likely To Engage In Criminal Activities
LifeSite ^
| June 13, 2005
Posted on 06/14/2005 8:21:44 AM PDT by NYer
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-90 next last
To: dangus
Oops. Please accept my own retraction! :)
41
posted on
06/14/2005 9:03:54 AM PDT
by
MarineBrat
(We are taxed twice as much by our idleness. -- Benjamin Franklin)
To: GOPJ
I think every smoker in the world would take exception to reference to smoking being as dangerous as homosexuality. It definitely is NOT!
42
posted on
06/14/2005 9:08:41 AM PDT
by
gidget7
(Get GLSEN out of our schools!!!!!!)
To: NYer
In fact, according to the study, homosexuals are over 12% more likely to have been booked for illegal activity than heterosexuals....The data for criminality indicated that 22.8% of homosexuals have been booked for committing a crime, compared to 11% of heterosexuals.
Actually, that means that the incidence of illegal activity among people with SSAD is over 100% greater than us evil "Christer" breeders. I have to say, I 'm shocked. /sarcasm
43
posted on
06/14/2005 9:09:22 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, Hosanna in excelsis!)
To: dangus
Go figure that I'd ever defend homosexuals, but a 12% increase in criminal behavior rates is not impressive. Far, far away from what I would call "far more likely."
Read the whole article. That statistic was misleading. What it said was, the incidence of criminal activity among heterosexuals is 11%. Among homosexuals, it's 22.8%. If the news source in question was a mainstream effete media outlet, they would have run a headline like this:
"Gays twice as likely as straights to commit crimes."
44
posted on
06/14/2005 9:13:03 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, Hosanna in excelsis!)
To: NYer
To: scripter; little jeremiah
ping...
WOW!
[snip] In a press release put out by his institute Cameron alleges that the study was withheld from the general public because of its explosive content.
46
posted on
06/14/2005 9:18:30 AM PDT
by
DirtyHarryY2K
(''Go though life with a Bible in one hand and a Newspaper in the other" -- Billy Graham)
To: NYer
So mo's, ho's and IV drug users had similar rates of arrest to smokers?
Well, I suppose the percentage of smokers might be higher among the lower (and therefore more likely to be arrested) classes.
But if the point of the analysis is to paint mo's, ho's and junkies as being exceptionally bad, to me the presence of smokers in that group kinda blows the whole premise.
To: dangus; biblewonk
"12% more likely" is bad wording. Later in the article, it explains that 11% of heteros were criminals, versus 23% of homosexuals. So its more than 100% more likely. Oh fercryinoutloud. This writer looked at 23% vs. 11% and concluded this means homos are [23 - 11 =] 12% more likely?!!
"Bad wording"? LOL. The writer is an imbecile.
48
posted on
06/14/2005 9:21:38 AM PDT
by
newgeezer
(Pessimists are often right—and are delighted to be proved wrong. --Geo. F. Will)
To: newgeezer
"Bad wording"? LOL. The writer is an imbecile. AAAARRRRGGGG!!!!!
49
posted on
06/14/2005 9:23:15 AM PDT
by
biblewonk
(Yes I think I am a bible worshipper.)
To: dangus
Go figure that I'd ever defend homosexuals, but a 12% increase in criminal behavior rates is not impressive.Actually, it is much worse than that--the author didn't understand his numbers. Rounding, 11% of heteros have been arrested and 23% of homos have been. I assume that's where he gets his 12%. But actually, it's a more than 100% increase in the rate of criminality as the rate more than doubled.
To: DirtyHarryY2K
Verrry interesting. I've very busy right now but will ping the list later.
51
posted on
06/14/2005 9:26:21 AM PDT
by
little jeremiah
(Resisting evil is our duty or we are as responsible as those promoting it.)
To: E. Pluribus Unum
Obviously, it's a case of profiling.
52
posted on
06/14/2005 9:28:14 AM PDT
by
Tanniker Smith
(I didn't know she was a liberal when I married her.)
To: biblewonk
But, but...
It's because the mean old society makes everything gays like to do a criminal act. So if that nasty old society would just change the laws.(sarcasim off)
53
posted on
06/14/2005 9:31:26 AM PDT
by
SouthWall
(Yet the cross-burning still took place, and has caused little interest in the British media.)
To: Millee; NYer
Oh this will go over well.Yup, it's bound to be a big hit with the editorial staff of every major newspaper and every news opinion program in the MSM.
54
posted on
06/14/2005 9:31:29 AM PDT
by
murphE
(These are days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed but his own. --G.K. Chesterton)
To: biblewonk
But, but...
It's because the mean old society makes everything gays like to do a criminal act. So if that nasty old society would just change the laws.(sarcasim off)
55
posted on
06/14/2005 9:31:48 AM PDT
by
SouthWall
(Yet the cross-burning still took place, and has caused little interest in the British media.)
To: Disambiguator
My next door neighbor, 78 years old, with macular degeneration, allowed a gay man working at a neighborhood market to move into her house. The understanding was that he was to help her with paying her bills and be her 'eyes'.
After less than 6 months, she asked him to leave. Last Friday, I discovered after reading her Trust to her, and unknown to her, the attorney, and her ex-room mate were to own her house after her death, 50-50.
Stipulating in that will that the room mate must still be residing in her house, caring for her, and not received gifts from her as well.
She bought him a television set, and a new bed as well as draperies for the room and an entertainment center he took all items with him when he moved out.
When I read her trust to her, she said no one had ever read that in entirety, even when the attorney had her sign the trust, she knew she was signing a trust, and trusted her attorney to look out for her interest.
This woman has 3 children, and relatives from her marriage. Who have all been written out of her trust.
56
posted on
06/14/2005 9:34:35 AM PDT
by
television is just wrong
(http://hehttp://print.google.com/print/doc?articleidisblogs.blogspot.com/ (visit blogs, visit ads).)
To: Labyrinthos
I would like to see the underlying data, particularly the sampling techniques used to sample the people who responded to the survey, as well as the actual questions.What I'd like to know is how they're defining homosexual. Given that homosexual sex is rampant in prisons among otherwise straight men, how would those ex-convicts arrested for another crime be categorized? It could be that all they've discovered is that habitual offenders commit more crimes.
57
posted on
06/14/2005 9:36:36 AM PDT
by
Heyworth
To: NYer
judge Greer and his cohorts would disagree. Do not question judges (sarcasm off)
58
posted on
06/14/2005 9:36:44 AM PDT
by
JudgemAll
(Condemn me, make me naked and kill me, or be silent for ever on my gun ownership and law enforcement)
To: FormerLib
Lol
Good one really did have me rofl.
59
posted on
06/14/2005 9:37:14 AM PDT
by
M1-A2
( "Never offend people with style when you can offend them with substance." --Sam Brown)
To: television is just wrong
Were the attorney and the "market-man" involved with each other? This sounds pretty sordid.
60
posted on
06/14/2005 9:55:42 AM PDT
by
Disambiguator
(Making accusations of racism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-90 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson