Dumb****s who compare Homosexuality to Pedophilia or Bestiality.

[Bad Dragonite]

[quote="SD]What we're largely discussing now isn't a true form of pedophilia; if the minor consents and it is an equal relationship"]

I hate to only reply to this one sentence in this post, but technically what we're discussing is either by definition pedophilia or hebephilia (what you actually described about your first boyfriend) and possibly a little bit of ephebophilia. Even if the child consents, these still occur with the adult, so we technically are speaking about the real stuff.

Also, just for kicks.

[quote=" SD]don't be crazy about this. You are so wrong about these supposed "]

[quote=" reply to above quote]Try and break out of your closemindedness and the lies you've heard (or concluded for yourself) and actually find the truth of this"]

:p

Srsly tho. Those have been shown in some cases to cause someone to become a homosexual even if not the main cause, they can be a contributing factor. (I must now look into this.) And as unproven as IRHP's argument that they are real causes may be, your argument is essentially you saying, "Nuh-uh" and then calling him names like, "bigot" as well as acting as if he were just some crazy for thinking of something that is entirely possible but breaks your mold of thought.
-----
[quote=" IAN]I can think of a lot of famous gays/lesbians who were raised by heterosexual parents and not molested as children. Unless you can prove that anywhere near a majority of gays/lesbians are raised by homosexual parents or molested"]

I believe this is why he said, "are likely influenced by various outside factors, or by being molested. " Though technically molestation fits the category of "various outside factors" unless they were molested by the parents.

[Valigarmander]

Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation

To save you the trouble of reading through this whole thing:

There are no empirical studies or peer-reviewed research that support theories attributing same-sex sexual orientation to family dysfunction or trauma (Bell et al., 1981; Bene, 1965; Freund & Blanchard, 1983; Freund & Pinkava, 1961; Hooker, 1969; McCord et al., 1962; D. K. Peters & Cantrell, 1991; Siegelman, 1974, 1981; Townes et al., 1976).

I've heard the things IRHP was talking about having been discredited a long time ago, but I figured I'd find you a source.

[Deepfake]

My homosexual friend grew up in pretty much the exact same environment as his straight brother. There wasn't some extra factor that made him gay, unless being a younger brother does that.

Not seeing the logic in that at all, just sounds like the repetitive stuff people usually say to justify their outlook. It specifically looks like you haven't got any background in psychology, but you're trying to point to it as some sort of huge unknown frontier that's never been observed.

[I REALLY HATE POKEMON!]

I will be sure to hand page 54 to that kid next time I see him, Val,even though it only says that there is no support for the idea that homosexual couples traumatize, not that studies have been conducted with conclusive results stating the opposite.


AI, Not that I believe this since it would suggest that homosexuality is naturally occuring in humans, but I actually recall picking up a piece of information stating a link between younger siblings and homosexuality. Not making an argument here, you just reminded me of what I had heard.

[Deepfake]

You realize that, beside your off-hand information coming through an equally bigoted source, the only thing you know about this guy is that his parents were potentially lesbians and that you found it uneasy to be around him? If gay children can come from straight couples, like you acknowledge, and if gays are somehow damaged straight children; it's just as likely caused by bad parenting exclusively from those parents. To then make a leap and somehow suggest that all gays are poor parents, especially based on your one assumption, is irrational.

If a straight couple could have a child unfairly affected due to outside influence, a lesbian couple could just as easily have a child unfairly affected due to outside influence.

What you are doing is projecting your bias: A straight couple's awkward child is so, because something else awful happened to that child. A lesbian couple's awkward child is so, because the parents are lesbians.

A similar scenario: A white driver cuts you off and tailgates the person in front of you, you call him a jackass. An Asian driver cuts you off, and you think "Another ****ty Asian driver, why are Asians such bad drivers?"

[I am nobody]

I don't remember saying anything about a majority.

Gays arising from straight families are likely influenced by various outside factors, or by being molested. Normal, ideal circumstances would be unlikely to yield a high ratio of homosexuals.

You do not say something is likely unless you believe it is true either most frequently or at least somewhere near a majority of the time.

Maybe this theory would be more plausible (assuming I did not believe that homosexuality is a natural occurrence) if you provided some examples of "various outside factors".

[Calamity Panfan]

The post about "various outside factors" and being molested made me think that IRHP is saying that it's possible to catch the gay.

IT'S AN EPIDEMIC

[Apiary Tazy]

And now I got lost. >_>


I'll just say that no study is really ever 100% true. There are just as many people who can reach a decision by hastily asking 10 people in a church 1 question, as there are people who can ask about 300 people around the world 20 questions. The difference is really just trying to find which study is either right and uses the numbers to prove their point, or wrong and skewing the numbers to make them look right.

Just saying.

[Bad Dragonite]

I can't believe I didn't mention this yet, but the most obvious reason that homosexuality can be compared to bestiality/pedophilia, is the fact that all three of these are sexually involved acts/ thoughts/ desires/ whatever, that completely go against nature.

I mean logically, you can conclude that since they all involve sexual intercourse in some way with something that would involve no actual reproduction, that they could be compared to each other.

I mean, even any anti-religious guy would tell you that if everybody decided one day to indulge in homosexual relationships and give up entirely on straight relationships that the human race would go extinct from lack of reproduction. That's just a given.

On the subject of whether homo or hetero couples are better, you should note that both the mother and father have unique parts to play in raising a child.

Here's a link to a study done by the University of Maryland, I suggest you read it.

Fatherhood Study

This study in mind, it's logical to assume that having both a mother and a father would help the child to develop better than two lesbian mothers.

[Microphone_Kirby]

Here's a link to a study done by the University of Maryland, I suggest you read it.

Fatherhood Study

The research team examined 175 three-year-old children from low-income African American families living in Baltimore. Fathers, or father figures, were identified in 73% of the families. A "father figure" was described as a man who was "like" a father and had contact with the child at least monthly. However, the majority of the men, or 72%, had daily contact with their children.

... Extremely flawed study for at least two reasons: Racial bias is present (no other race is apparently represented) and there's no indication of whether or not the 27% are Single (female?) or a Homosexual couple.

Thought of another reason: it's centralized in one city.

[ZeldaGirl]

IRHP and Vgfian, stop quoting psychology when you clearly have never studied it. You're doing it wrong.

[Bad Dragonite]

@ZG: YOU CAN'T TELL US WHAT WE CAN'T QUOTE. IM GONNA TAKE THE HIGH SCHOOL COURSE THIS YEAR THANK YOU VERY MUCH D:<

Actually, you don't know us that well I'd imagine, you have no idea what we do or don't know/study. I find your assumptions slightly insulting, and yet quite humorous.
Plus, you're not adding to the conversation in any way other than attempting to discourage and/or insult the both of us.

@ MK: Fine, I'd suggest this one a WHOLE lot more anyway. It's much more well thought out, but it's much much longer tho. Not usually a problem to me, but people tend to complain about it in these sorts of topics. :/

What Single-Parenting Can Tell Us About Same-Sex Parenting



PS at ZG: (I actually do also plan to read over my sister's former college books as well (esspecially psychology as it has always fascinated me). So I shall learn SOMETHING soon enough. :p )

[Calamity Panfan]

Well since ZG is a psychology major I'm pretty sure she has a pretty decent grasp of who has knowledge on the subject.

[Bad Dragonite]

Yes, that might help, but she still technically can't read our minds, and doesn't know enough about our personal lives to know whether we've studied something or not.

Except for the fact that I admitted I haven't taken it yet...

[Apiary Tazy]

So, by your description, if a child does not have a mother and father, then they will emotionally scarred?

Soooooo, what?

I could make an argument that Christianity is no better than Corrupt Corporations and provide several links to claim my point, but what would that prove?

Like your link (which is from a religious source, and therefore, not very reliable), most of the websites I'd link to would be either athiest website or opinion.

It would also take a few minutes to list every famous or intelligent person raised by Single parents, and famous murderers raised by straight couples, but I'm not sure It'll accomplish anything other than guide the argument towards the sanctity of marriage or something.

I love how you say how something is "logical", when it's just an opinion. :p

[Bad Dragonite]

I could make an argument that Christianity is no better than Corrupt Corporations and provide several links to claim my point, but what would that prove?

Actually, if you read the article without any sort of bias at all you'd notice that even though it is from a religious based source, it is well thought out, heavily detailed, pulls from several other highly credible sources.

(Not even counting the fact that assuming that something from a religious based website is unreliable because it is a religious based site could be interpreted as religious discrimination. :p )

I love how you say how something is "logical", when it's just an opinion.

I don't know what you speak of, please explain.

[Calamity Panfan]

Someone who has been studying piano for years now can see someone go to a recital and hear them play "Mary Had a Little Lamb". Sure, the pianist doesn't know for sure, but he is fairly sure that this is not a classically trained pianist.

[Apiary Tazy]

<_>_<_>_<

63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census)
90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes
85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes (Source: Center for Disease Control)
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, p. 403-26, 1978.)
71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes (Source: National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools.)
75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes (Source: Rainbows for all God`s Children.)
70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Special Report, Sept 198 8)
85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home (Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of Corrections 1992)

You can look at these numbers as hard as you can, but it only speaks of the amount of people who already commited crime, not people with one parent. If it said that "90% of all children from fatherless homes became runaways" (Which is bull, but it's an example, so :p ) then it would hold a lot more weight, granted it wouldn't just be on some crummy religious website but whatever.

It only takes from a pool of criminals, who probably have alot of outside influences, like "his Father is a criminal", or "His father was gunned down by police haphazardly", or "He is friends with a bunch of gangsters" or the very forgettable "He's f**king insane", you know non-parental influences.


Also, all statistics contain lies. This is a fact learned from statistics class. ;)

Also, I'm petaining by your speaking of "It's logical that if everyone was homosexual, the human race would go extinct", because obviously if this happened, Males would evolve to birth babies.

[size=-10]And if you think I'm serious about that last part, I'm not.[/size]

[Bad Dragonite]

If it said that "90% of all children from fatherless homes became runaways"

Re-read your own quote, idiot. It says that 90% of all runaways and homeless came from fatherless families.

As for the rest of your post, I'm not sure if after this first sentence that the rest of it deserves a reply. In other words, I'm tired and don't feel like replying to you at the moment.

[The Spark]

He said "IF IT SAID that, it would hold more weight". Don't call him an idiot just because you didn't read his post correctly.