Why is it not permissible to criticize homosexuality?
Here’s what gets me — There is a lot of talk in recent years about “safe sex” and criticism of heterosexuals who are promiscuous and spread sexually transmitted diseases. They are spreading diseases and having unplanned pregnancies, and are criticized for doing so. Random heterosexual sexual behavior can have bad consequences.
Why then, can’t we criticize the homosexual behaviors that spread diseases and have bad consequences? Why can’t we talk about certain dangers of homosexual behavior, just as we’re allowed to speak about certain dangers of certain heterosexual behavior?
I think there is a double standard involved, and we’re not supposed to criticize anything related to homosexuality, even if it has to do with dangers to their health. Instead of focusing on risky behaviors, all too often the homosexual community lashes out at people like Ronald Reagan who allegedly didn’t do enough to fight AIDS.
We have lost this battle even while the vast majority agrees with us because we have allowed them to define all the terms and set all the boundaries. We are too weak and too compromised to win even though they are so obviously in error. It’s going to get much worse until God decides He has been patient with us long enough.
The Left claims that Reagan didn’t do “enough” to stop AIDS.
Here we are over 20 years later with more money thrown at this disease than any other and still there is no cure.
How much spending should Reagan have authorized and how would it have stopped the activity of gay drug users having random sex encounters in bath houses?
You are spot on, I have raised this point on many occasions, there is a conspiracy of silence in the media when it comes to educating the population about the health dangers of homosexuality
There are lethal medical consequences of engaging in male homosexual behavior.
These various behaviors cause trauma to the rectum; contribute to the spread of AIDS; increase incidences of oral and anal cancer; and result in serious infections due to the ingestion of fecal matter. Anal intercourse tears the rectal lining of the receptive partner, regardless of whether a condom is worn, and the subsequent contact with their own fecal matter leads to a host of diseases. Other diseases to which active homosexuals are vulnerable can be classified as follows:
Classical sexually transmitted diseases (gonorrhea, infections with Chlamydia trachomatis, syphilis, herpes simplex infections, genital warts, pubic lice, scabies); enteric diseases (infections with Shigella species, Campylobacter jejuni, Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia lamblia, ["gay bowel disease"], Hepatitis A, B, C, D, and cytomegalovirus); trauma (related to and/or resulting in fecal incontinence, hemorroids, anal fissure, foreign bodies lodged in the rectum, rectosigmoid tears, allergic proctitis, penile edema, chemical sinusitis, inhaled nitrite burns, and sexual assault of the male patient); and the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS).
Increased morbidity and mortality is an unavoidable result of male-with-male sex--not to mention the increased rates of alcoholism, drug abuse, depression, suicide and other maladies that so often accompany a homosexual lifestyle.
A 1998 study suggested that a homosexual lifestyle, on the average, shortens one’s lifespan by roughly 20 years. It is more deadly than smoking, alcoholism, or drug addiction.
It is permissible to critize homosexuality. We are still in America; no matter what the alledged thought police say.
A permissible society like ours is losing or has lost the moral high ground from which to criticize homosexual behavior.
Of course those who have not lost their moral compass should still be permitted to speak out.
They just probably won't ever get elected to a national office.
“Why is it not permissible to criticize homosexuality?”
Check out “The Overhauling of Straight America,” available on a number of places on the web. The MassResistance web site at http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/overhauling.htm has highlighted a few interesting parts of the article.