Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Kagom said:Actually, I haven't confused my urges. I have never possessed a sexual attraction to females and have to males.
It seems to me that the only person in need of restoration from any deadly addictions are people addicted to lying, alcohol, drugs, and other things that actively and passively destroy the body and harm other people. Homosexuality is a sexual orientation that isn't deadly in and of itself. Only people can make something deadly and they do with sexuality, religion, politics, etc.
There is a difference between being gay and smoking cigarettes. I don't feel I should have to explain that.dmp said:I bet you are about 60 years old and used to work for Cigarette companies...you sound JUST like them in the 80s.
"Cig's aren't addictive! There's NO un-biased link between Cigs and Cancer! C'mon! Tobacco is NATURAL - and not deadly..."
:-/
I love you man, but I'm tellin' you, you're taking years off your life and putting yourself in the path of a speeding train. It's not to late to get off the tracks.
Also, I like this definition of Fetish I found: Fetish - A condition in which arousal and/or sexual gratification is attained through inanimate objects (shoes, pantyhose) or non-sexual body parts (feet, hair). Is considered a problem when the object is needed in order to obtain arousal or gratification and the individual can not complete a sexual act without this object present.Kagom said:I deny lies and falseness and I stick to truth. All you are doing is supporting a lie that you (and others) strongly stick to.
Sexual orientation refers to the sex, sexes, gender or genders, to which a person is attracted and which form the focus of a person's amorous or erotic desires, fantasies, and spontaneous feelings. The alternative terms sexual preference and sexual inclination have similar meanings. [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation ]
versus
Fetish...per the Meriam-Webster Dictionary:an object of unreasoning devotion or concern...an object whos real or fantasied presence is psychologically necessary for sexual gratification...to believe in;devotion to,or pathological attachment to fetishes...
There is a difference between the two and you only don't wish to acknowledge that. Also, did you feel a need to perhaps cut some things out and to also throw in commentary with the definition?
Kagom said:There is a difference between being gay and smoking cigarettes. I don't feel I should have to explain that.
Homosexuality doesn't kill people. Not by itself. The same goes for heterosexuality and bisexuality. The orientations themselves do not kill, the people do. People who are stupid and uneducated about their sexuality adn how sex works and the sort.
I am telling you that I won't be dying any time soon nor for a very long while. You truly only have biased sources and beliefs on this issue. It's a much different ballpark than cigarettes were.
Life full of homosexual contact will not remove years from your life. It does that just as much as heterosexual contact does.dmp said:Your excuses for your behaviour are the same.
RIGHT - People's BEHAVIOUR is what kills them. Living a life full of homosexual contact/amusement/time-killing will abosoLUTELY remove years from your life.
It's stupid because ANY source I give you which doesn't agree with what you've already made up your mind on, will be brushed aside as 'biased'.
Kagom said:Life full of homosexual contact will not remove years from your life. It does that just as much as heterosexual contact does.
No, because most sources you DO give ARE biased. In your mind they aren't, but when they are examined, they ARE biased. If you can give me non-uberbiased material, I'll agree with you.
November 11, 2005 - The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has issued a warning about an alarming increase in the spread of syphilis nationwide and attributes most of the growth to gay sexual activities.
Dr. Ronald O. Valdiserri, acting director of the CDC's National Center for HIV, STD and TB Prevention says both syphilis and gonorrhea are both "a significant and ongoing threat to millions of Americans." The cost to the health care system is $13 billion a year.
Between 2000 and 2004, the rate of syphilis infection rose by 29% to a total of 7,980 cases, with most involving gay males. Sixty-four percent of the syphilis cases involved gays, compared to 5% in 1999. The use of crystal meth by gays is helping fuel the epidemic of syphilis nationwide.
In addition, there is evidence that antibiotic resistance among gay males is 23.8%, eight times the rate for heterosexual males.
Narth is a biased...nay...an ungodly biased source full of misinformation and unproper research.dmp said:See? that's just crazy talk. Are you seriously unable to look at your lifestyle choices objectively?
(sigh)...
Spend 15 minutes on google my friend..
another...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11204417/
I believe you will whine and bitch and cry about the site this artical is posted on, but the article cites sources which are independant.
http://www.narth.com/docs/consequences.html#_edn3
Kagom said:Narth is a biased...nay...an ungodly biased source full of misinformation and unproper research.
I'm aware of some of the higher risks of STDs and STIs. However, I believe that the less protection and awareness people have, the higher the percentage of getting these terrible diseases and the such.
Being smart about sex and the sort will probably not have a negative effect on me. Seeing as how I like to see myself as being educated of the dangers and all, I won't be having years shaved off my life as well as the same for fellow homosexuals I know who are just as educated (and often more than) as I am on sex and they won't be seeing years shaved off. Playing it safe ensures you live longer.
Hobbit said:So do I. She's hot.
dmp said:You are wrong. See, our sexuality isn't defined by who we are attracted to, but what we do about it. A child molester is NOT a child molester until he/she acts on their desires. A Murderer isn't a murderer until they kill. A homosexual is a homosexual when they have sex with members of their gender.
You can show all the definitions you like, I'm still absolutely correct.
MissileMan said:Tell that to the Catholic church. Didn't they just make a rule that even non-practicing homosexuals can't be priests. They seem to be of the opinion that if you think you're homosexual, you are homosexual.
MissileMan said:Tell that to the Catholic church. Didn't they just make a rule that even non-practicing homosexuals can't be priests. They seem to be of the opinion that if you think you're homosexual, you are homosexual.
Kagom said:But going by your logic, does that mean a person is heterosexual until they have sex? Or is a person asexual until they have had sex with some gender?
dmp said:The rule is in place because people with the tendency shouldn't be put in position of temptation.
Is it only if you act on urges, or just if you act? What if you do something homosexual but don't have the deep-rooted urge to do so? Still homo?dmp said:Exactly. You get it, finally. We aren't defined by our urges or inclinations - we're defined by our ACTING on those urges. By choosing to have sex with men, you are homosexual. If you never allow those urges to manifest, you're 'not homosexual'. What you are then is a confused guy who needs somebody to help him find his way. As you've allowed your urges to overcome good sense, you 'are' homosexual, and will need MUCH more restoration to be free from your deadly addictions.
Uhm...no. NARTH is nothing but conservative propaganda bullshit with no actual factual (hehe, it rhymed) evidence other than results that were biased to begin with.dmp said:Did you read the sources listed in the article?
Of COURSE NARTH is biased - they CARE about people and want people to stop killing themselves because of an addiction.
They're in the business of helping people.
They have evaluated the data, and present the data. You're not willing to learn, so you won't.
No, they just need a scapegoat for their own faults in not monitoring and intervening with the pedophilia problem.dilloduck said:Maybe they finally figured out that homosexuals were costing them big bucks and ruining thier "reputation".
You mean, by routing out gay priests? By the way, when many of these cases of abuse occured, the accepted "cure" in the psychiatric field was talk therapy... and so, the Church sent these priests to therapy so you see, they did do something...Kagom said:No, they just need a scapegoat for their own faults in not monitoring and intervening with the pedophilia problem.
Look, as a former Catholic, I know what they are doing. They are looking to gay priests and clergy for scapegoats.KarlMarx said:You mean, by routing out gay priests? By the way, when many of these cases of abuse occured, the accepted "cure" in the psychiatric field was talk therapy... and so, the Church sent these priests to therapy so you see, they did do something...
And oh by the way, once a pedophile always a pedophile... so why doesn't the justice system start dealing with the problem by putting pedophiles in jail for the rest of their lives where they can't molest any more kids?
Back to the Church..., they are also doing something about the pedophile problem... no more gay priests, no gay seminarians, gays need not apply for the priesthood, which is the way it should be... will that solve the problem? No, not entirely, but it will take a big dent out of it...
Of course, you probably don't like that solution... but then I don't like you bashing the Catholic Church....
Kagom said:Look, as a former Catholic, I know what they are doing. They are looking to gay priests and clergy for scapegoats.
Why didn't they report these pedophile priests in the first place and put them behind bars? I don't know, but I wish they had. It's horrible what happened.
I don't think it's going to affect the pedophilia problem, Karl. I honestly don't. Call me crazy, but it's just a gut feeling I have. If we want to deal with the pedophile problem, we need to take up a more serious role when we find these problem priests and we also need to monitor closely what they are doing by having a parent around.
