Not born that way

[seafoid]

But the outcome part, in terms of disease and so on can be addressed, the same way as it is in straight people, and educated and responsible gay men DO mind themselves. Facts are facts, and if the risk of disease is higher among homosexual males, I've personally got no problem with sex education addressing that. It can be done without being judgmental or condemnatory. I wouldn't see any point in tiptoeing around an issue for PC reasons or whatever. If, as you say, there is a blatant disregard for health that isn't talked about (not saying I agree with this), then maybe that's partly down to it being used as a stick to beat the gay rights movement with in the first place. But, as I said, such overcompensation helps no one.

As to your last part, I absolutely would see it as a civil rights issue. That problems might exist which need to be addressed doesn't change that.

I challenge though that we're not even addressing the problems and will continue to turn a blind eye to everything that goes on until its too late.  More and more will be accepted, society will slip further and further down the slope.....
Appreciate your comments and willingness to have a civil discussion on it all!

Gay people will never be more than a small minority.
Should you not be more concerned about divorce and the collapse of marriage ?

You'd have to wonder what brings an otherwise intelligent, reasonable poster to write such truly terrible things about a minority group.

Religion can be an awful influence. Here is another example :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menstrual_taboo

[laoislad]

But the outcome part, in terms of disease and so on can be addressed, the same way as it is in straight people, and educated and responsible gay men DO mind themselves. Facts are facts, and if the risk of disease is higher among homosexual males, I've personally got no problem with sex education addressing that. It can be done without being judgmental or condemnatory. I wouldn't see any point in tiptoeing around an issue for PC reasons or whatever. If, as you say, there is a blatant disregard for health that isn't talked about (not saying I agree with this), then maybe that's partly down to it being used as a stick to beat the gay rights movement with in the first place. But, as I said, such overcompensation helps no one.

As to your last part, I absolutely would see it as a civil rights issue. That problems might exist which need to be addressed doesn't change that.

I challenge though that we're not even addressing the problems and will continue to turn a blind eye to everything that goes on until its too late.  More and more will be accepted, society will slip further and further down the slope.....
Appreciate your comments and willingness to have a civil discussion on it all!

Gay people will never be more than a small minority.
Should you not be more concerned about divorce and the collapse of marriage ?

You'd have to wonder what brings an otherwise intelligent, reasonable poster to write such truly terrible things about a minority group.

Brainwashed by religion.

[The Iceman]

if you read the thread it has excluded any religious arguments. we're simply and openly discussing the physical implications, the outcomes, the problems and the rest...its the first time I think i've been able to have a normal conversation on the topic with someone without it resorting to handbags.. J70 is a very reasonable poster!

[Eamonnca1]

If you haven't figured out how reproduction works at this point eamon I suggest you watch some footage of the actual process.

Maybe this rom-com would be ideal to get started - get your hair rollers in, housecoat and slippers on and curl up with a big bag of doritos. It's got Hugh Grant in it so you'll probably find him quite dreamy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine_Months

I didn't think I'd have to spell it out so plainly but it looks like you really are as thick as you're showing yourself to be. I would love to know what you think is the difference between an infertile heterosexual couple and a gay couple. Why is it okay for the former to have children by assisted means but not the latter?

[muppet]

if you read the thread it has excluded any religious arguments. we're simply and openly discussing the physical implications, the outcomes, the problems and the rest...its the first time I think i've been able to have a normal conversation on the topic with someone without it resorting to handbags.. J70 is a very reasonable poster!

He is a very patient poster.

But it is clear his thinking is a million miles from yours.

[No wides]

If you haven't figured out how reproduction works at this point eamon I suggest you watch some footage of the actual process.

Maybe this rom-com would be ideal to get started - get your hair rollers in, housecoat and slippers on and curl up with a big bag of doritos. It's got Hugh Grant in it so you'll probably find him quite dreamy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine_Months

I didn't think I'd have to spell it out so plainly but it looks like you really are as thick as you're showing yourself to be. I would love to know what you think is the difference between an infertile heterosexual couple and a gay couple. Why is it okay for the former to have children by assisted means but not the latter?

Two men can't have assisted means Elton John bought a few. Then used that fact to keep out of the papers he was lubbing himself up with similarly minded individuals to protect them.

[foxcommander]

For the record people with learning disabilities can have children - but don't let facts get in the way of your bullshit.

So can same-sex couples.

Not by themselves

And...Theres a big difference

fixed it for you Eamon sweetie

The difference being... what exactly?

If you haven't figured out how reproduction works at this point eamon I suggest you watch some footage of the actual process.

Maybe this rom-com would be ideal to get started - get your hair rollers in, housecoat and slippers on and curl up with a big bag of doritos. It's got Hugh Grant in it so you'll probably find him quite dreamy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine_Months

Eamon - point out to me where assisted means was mentioned in the above. You stated same sex couples could have kids just like a couple with learning disabilities. Laws of biology not apply anymore?

[Eamonnca1]

Jesus H Christ this is like talking to a brick wall.

Let's try this again. And I'm going to explain it nice and slowly because it's clear that you're a bit of a simpleton.

People with disabilities can have children.
Infertile couples can have children.
Gay couples can have children.

Why is it less acceptable for gay couples to have children than for any of the other categories? And for that matter, why should it be less acceptable for a gay couple to have children than for a hate-filled, conservative, Fox-news-watching, Breitbart-reading, reality-averse maniac like you to have children?

[foxcommander]

Jesus H Christ this is like talking to a brick wall.

Let's try this again. And I'm going to explain it nice and slowly because it's clear that you're a bit of a simpleton.

People with disabilities can have children.
Infertile couples can have children.
Gay couples can have children.

Why is it less acceptable for gay couples to have children than for any of the other categories? And for that matter, why should it be less acceptable for a gay couple to have children than for a hate-filled, conservative, Fox-news-watching, Breitbart-reading, reality-averse maniac like you to have children?

Eamon - I hate to have to break it down for you but 2 men can't create a baby together no matter how hard they try. I take it that you didn't do science at school.

And you call me a simpleton!! 

Merry Christmas

[Puckoon]

Jesus H Christ this is like talking to a brick wall.

Let's try this again.

Yet you persist.

[michaelg]

here's some stats - take them or leave them:
Promiscuity

    28% of homosexual men had more than 1000 partners:  "Bell and Weinberg reported evidence of widespread sexual compulsion among homosexual men. 83% of the homosexual men surveyed estimated they had had sex with 50 or more partners in their lifetime, 43% estimated they had sex with 500 or more partners; 28% with 1,000 or more partners. Bell and Weinberg p 308." (exodusglobalalliance.org/ishomosexualityhealthyp60.php)
    79% of homosexual men say over half of sex partners are strangers: "The survey showed 79% of the respondents saying that over half of their sexual partners were strangers. Seventy percent said that over half of their sexual partners were people with whom they had sex only once. Bell and Weinberg pp.308-309."  (exodusglobalalliance.org/ishomosexualityhealthyp60.php)
    Modal range for homosexual sex partners 101-500: "In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that "the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101–500." In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than 1000 lifetime sexual partners. Paul Van de Ven et al., "A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men," Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997): 354."  (exodusglobalalliance.org/ishomosexualityhealthyp60.php)
    1978 study, 78% of gay men ad more than 100 partners, 28% more than 1000: "A far-ranging study of homosexual men published in 1978 revealed that 75 percent of self-identified, white, gay men admitted to having sex with more than 100 different males in their lifetime: 15 percent claimed 100-249 sex partners; 17 percent claimed 250-499; 15 percent claimed 500-999; and 28 percent claimed more than 1,000 lifetime male sex partners. By 1984, after the AIDS epidemic had taken hold, homosexual men were reportedly curtailing promiscuity, but not by much. Instead of more than 6 partners per month in 1982, the average non-monogamous respondent in San Francisco reported having about 4 partners per month in 1984." (catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html)
    There is an extremely low rate of sexual fidelity among homosexual men as compared to married heterosexuals.  Among married females 85% reported sexual fidelity. Among married men, 75.5% reported sexual fidelity. Among homosexual males in their current relationship, 4.5% reported sexual fidelity. (Sources:Laumann, The Social Organization of Sexuality, 216; McWhirter and Mattison, The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop (1984): 252-253; Wiederman, "Extramarital Sex," 170.  This is extracted from http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02)

also take a look at the center for disease control as to why we should be worried.  The gay man in the video I posted called HIV the gay cancer nobody talks about:
https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/msm/

you can do more reading on it all yourselves - I'm simply passing on some of my fears and concerns for society if we keep going down the path we are going down.,,,

Most of that research is very old, and either predates or is coincidental with the beginning of the AIDS epidemic. I'm not saying that the figures have or haven't changed, but surely there must be research that's not 30-40 years old? On HIV, clearly education and awareness is something that needs to be addressed, particularly when the risk of catching HIV from a gay man is so much higher than from a straight person and minorities are experiencing higher rates of infection.

But assuming all this is correct, what is it you would have done?

Are gay men your main concern, given the facts regarding promiscuity and HIV?

What exactly is the problem? Is it the homosexuality itself, or the outcome of homosexuality? If its only the outcome, what about lesbians? Would your attitude change is, 20 years from now, in the aftermath of gay marriage legalization and the mainstreaming of gay lifestyles, gay people were trending towards average levels of promiscuity, HIV, divorce etc?

J70 you and some others asked for evidence that the monogamous gay relationship was the exception - I provided some (albeit dated) stats to back up my statements.  I don't think any of us need explanations about the dangers involved here just from a physical perspective... HIV is a killer. There is no cure yet and we're not even talking about it? I said before it's like not being allowed to mention cigarettes in the debate about lung cancer...

I don't know what I would do J70, I don't have answers.  I'm not happy where we are going as a society and my discomfort is causing me to ask questions, pull back on the reins a bit and really think about whats important.  This thread all stemmed from the nature versus nurture question and I think the "nurture" part once a homosexual (man especially) is active is especially dangerous.
I'm not demonizing my cousin or anyone - but I'm calling in to question the behaviour, the promiscuity, the blatant disregard for health perhaps and how nobody talks about any of it even though it's part and parcel of the lifestyle it would seem.

The scenario where your son and his boyfriend show up for Christmas dinner and invite their friend bob. Few drinks later and your son is getting comfy with bob on the sofa but isn't he with Mark? "Ah but thats all ok because they're men, horny men, can't help themselves dear never worry..." I think we explain things away all too easily and are being asked to accept "everything" about homosexuality and continue to champion it as civil rights...

Is this another thinly veiled attempt to associate / link homosexuality with paedophilia?  Otherwise, please explain what you mean in this point.

Why have you not responded to this post?

[Eamonnca1]

Two men can adopt, Fox. What's your point?

[Applesisapples]

I have read with sadness on this thread as some posters vent their own form of vile and discriminatory views on gay people. To compare gay people to paedophiles is more than just wrong. Being gay is not something the majority of gay people would choose to be, which is why many are in the closet and end up with mental health issues, it is not something the majority of parents would nurture and indeed some never accept that their children are gay exacerbating mental health issues. Just look at the furore when someone well known comes out. Nor can you correlate being gay with the promiscuity displayed by some gay men in the 70's and 80's which undoubtedly helped to spread HIV and aids. Christ it is hard enough for two gay men to live together in these more enlightened days than it was then which undoubtedly influenced the attitudes. But don't forget that aids had its origins in the rampant heterosexual promiscuity of some men on the African continent. I'd like to see stats more recent than those quoted on here. Being gay is not a lifestyle choice it is a natural inclination as as heterosexuality. I personally don't like the idea of kissing another man but two men who wish to do so does not threaten me in any way. There aren't any more gay people now compared to the past, thankfully we are becoming more tolerant and accepting...well some are.

[tonto1888]

Interesting thread this although sad to read some people's views on the topic.
I have a few homosexual friends. Most are in committed relationships. One lad but he isnt out all the time riding others.
Is it a lifestyle choice? I dont know why someone would choose to live a life that leads to their being ostracized by many, including family. That leads to discrimination and the clear possibility of being physically assaulted

[michaelg]

I have read with sadness on this thread as some posters vent their own form of vile and discriminatory views on gay people. To compare gay people to paedophiles is more than just wrong. Being gay is not something the majority of gay people would choose to be, which is why many are in the closet and end up with mental health issues, it is not something the majority of parents would nurture and indeed some never accept that their children are gay exacerbating mental health issues. Just look at the furore when someone well known comes out. Nor can you correlate being gay with the promiscuity displayed by some gay men in the 70's and 80's which undoubtedly helped to spread HIV and aids. Christ it is hard enough for two gay men to live together in these more enlightened days than it was then which undoubtedly influenced the attitudes. But don't forget that aids had its origins in the rampant heterosexual promiscuity of some men on the African continent. I'd like to see stats more recent than those quoted on here. Being gay is not a lifestyle choice it is a natural inclination as as heterosexuality. I personally don't like the idea of kissing another man but two men who wish to do so does not threaten me in any way. There aren't any more gay people now compared to the past, thankfully we are becoming more tolerant and accepting...well some are.

Excellent post.