The TRUTH Behind Homosexuality and Mental Illness

[dmp]

ok i'll bite...how exactly are they killing each other?

Shorter lifespan, increase chance of injury or death from a domestic issue...tons of ways. Not to mention the damage they are doing to their emotional health..eek...

 

[dilloduck]

I do both. If it weren't for Joz, I'd probably consume a suicidal diet, as well. But, I do not ask society to legitimize my behaviors, nor do I seek special rights solely because of them.

I think there actually is a constitutional amendment that condones your behavior

 

[musicman]

not saying i agree or disagree just asking....how is it harmful and dangerous to you?

Homosexuals, acting as a group, guaranteed the spread of AIDS with their refusal to accept the sensible suggestion that the 4000 or so early sufferers submit to quarantine. That would have made homosexuals LOOK bad, you see. They have demonstrated that they are more concerned with the public's perception of THEM than they are the public's safety. Had common sense prevailed in the '80s, "What is AIDS" would be a question on "Jeopardy" today. It is not. It's something I have to think about, and worry about.

Moreover, I am a father and a grandfather. Although homosexuals comprise only 1-3% of the population, they commit 20-40% of child molestations. You'd better BELIEVE that's something I think about!

 

[musicman]

wha? Taking accountability for your actions??? You NEED special rights, Bro...
..b-b-b-because you were BORN with the urge to smoke, right?

I mean - the urge is there, therefore it MUST be a biological issue. After-all, who would CHOOSE to smoke, what with the hardships smokers face...I mean, yeah -

:clap1: :rotflmao:

 

[musicman]

I think there actually is a constitutional amendment that condones your behavior

OK - I'm game...

 

[OCA]

The argument could be made two men being intimate, sexually, ARE killing eachother.

That argument is made everyday.

 

[dilloduck]

OK - I'm game...

repealed prohibition?

 

[musicman]

repealed prohibition?

That's a bit of a reach, ain't it, bro?

 

[dilloduck]

wha? Taking accountability for your actions??? You NEED special rights, Bro...
..b-b-b-because you were BORN with the urge to smoke, right?

I mean - the urge is there, therefore it MUST be a biological issue. After-all, who would CHOOSE to smoke, what with the hardships smokers face...I mean, yeah -

check your science--genetic predisposition to addictive behavior has been proven.

 

[dilloduck]

That's a bit of a reach, ain't it, bro?

not hardly----a constitutional amendment PROTECTS your right to do things that harm yourself and others !!!!!-----WHY? cause govt is addicted to addicts money!

 

[dmp]

check your science--genetic predisposition to addictive behavior has been proven.

That's not the point - what I'm saying is nobody who's daddy was an alcoholic is 'predestined' to become such. Nobody's genes controll how much they over-eat, over-drink, or yeah, even over-sex.

 

[musicman]

not hardly----a constitutional amendment PROTECTS your right to do things that harm yourself and others !!!!!-----WHY? cause govt is addicted to addicts money!

I was not granted a constitutional right to drink; a piece of bad law was repealed, that's all.

 

[dilloduck]

That's not the point - what I'm saying is nobody who's daddy was an alcoholic is 'predestined' to become such. Nobody's genes controll how much they over-eat, over-drink, or yeah, even over-sex.

they most certainly determine how much effort you will have to exert to avoid damaging yourself with destructive behavior.

 

[JayW]

The argument could be made two men being intimate, sexually, ARE killing eachother.

how?

 

[dilloduck]

I was not granted a constitutional right to drink; a piece of bad law was repealed, that's all.

so the constitution forbids anyone from taking away you right to drink

 

[dmp]

they most certainly determine how much effort you will have to exert to avoid damaging yourself with destructive behavior.

I wouldn't argue against that statement. It's easier for my wife to avoid over-eating, than it is for me.

 

[musicman]

so the constitution forbids anyone from taking away you right to drink

The Constitution is restored to its pre-Volstead Act condition; it's none of the Federal Government's business one way or the other.

 

[dilloduck]

I wouldn't argue against that statement. It's easier for my wife to avoid over-eating, than it is for me.

Some alcoholics choose to use the disease model of alcoholism to stay drunk-- some fat people use the genetics model to continue over eating--may be some gays use the "born that way" model to continue to be gay.

 

[007]

Some alcoholics choose to use the disease model of alcoholism to stay drunk-- some fat people use the genetics model to continue over eating--may be some gays use the "born that way" model to continue to be gay.

I'd say "granted" dillo, because science has proven alcoholics have little to no control over how much they drink. There's scientific proof. And if I'm not mistaken, there's some proof that the some people metabolize and store the food they eat differently, so as some people can eat anything and not get fat, when another eats a peanut and gains three pounds.

Thing with queers though is, there just isn't any PROOF they were born that way. For all intents and purposes, at this point in time, all being queer boils down is, two men that "choose" to engage in sex with one another, simple because "they wanted to".

 

[dmp]

Some alcoholics choose to use the disease model of alcoholism to stay drunk-- some fat people use the genetics model to continue over eating--may be some gays use the "born that way" model to continue to be gay.

That I don't agree with - I think homosexual urges aren't passed-on; I'm just saying people have different levels of resistance to their urges.