Study Indicates HOMOSEXUAL ACTS Shorten Lifespan

[Bullypulpit]

My opinions are derived from my gay friends that cant hold a relationship to save their life. They all ( the lesbos) had bad experiences with men before deciding they were lesbos and to top it all off they liked to all ( male and female friends) like to flaunt their gayness in my face and most tried to flirt with me.

I never flaunted my desire for the opposite sex in their face AND I never cheated on my boyfriends and used people the way these people did. ( Hence the reason they are all no longer my friends..)

This is how I can easily say that it is NOT about love but about literaly fucking around. In fact many of my friends told me they never wanted to be married and that they weren't just bi-sexual but were tri-sexual meaning they would "try" to fuck just about anything that moved.


And no procreation IS threatening our society. No more kids equals no more society. What part of that DONT you get?

Corollary to that, I've known many straight folks who can't maintain a relationship to save their lives. But what straight couples don't have to deal with, is the pressure imposed by the social stigmata same-gender couples have to face. There is no rational reason supported by proof of harm, to either the individuals involved or society at large, from same-gender couples involved in committed, long-term relationships. Sexual promiscuity, either straight or gay, leads to problems from STD's to partner abuse and a plethora of other social and health related problems.

By actively supporting couples, straight or gay, in forming stable families many of these situations can be eliminated. The form of these families is irrelevant, so long as they are allowed to form the stable, happy, healthy life long relationships that we all want to see families become.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Nice try pulit, but no cigar. That was...

That's just one study. That the most virulent homophobes are the most uncertain regarding their own sexuality is supported by many other studies. You and OCA should get together and explore those deeply supressed feelings.

 

[Shattered]

By actively supporting couples, straight or gay, in forming stable families many of these situations can be eliminated. The form of these families is irrelevant, so long as they are allowed to form the stable, happy, healthy life long relationships that we all want to see families become.

By forming "families", I assume that you're referring to gay couples adopting children? Bad idea. While I'm all for "live & let live...in your own house", do you realize what you would be subjecting those innocent children to? Lifelong ridicule and harrassment from their peers. Lack of acceptance among society...

If you're such a peace loving person, why would you be in favor of something that has the undeniable potential for great harm?

 

[Patriot]

That is because with the gay community it is all about me, me and more me! They happen to be probably the selfish group of humans outside of the hollywood elitist snobs that feel they have the pulse of America.


The bottom line is this. When crybabies want their way they sue for it. How many good loving families or mainstream heartland Americans do you see sueing to NOT HAVE see or deal with the gay "in your face cause it is all about me" bullshit?

 

[007]

That's just one study. That the most virulent homophobes are the most uncertain regarding their own sexuality is supported by many other studies. You and OCA should get together and explore those deeply supressed feelings.

STUDY SHOWS THOSE WHO USE WORD "HOMOPHOBE" TO DEMONIZE ANTI-GAYS HAVE SEVERE IDENTITY CONFLICTS​

We know your personality has betrayed you pulit, your evident lack of character and moral compass is a prime example of someone struggling to find out who they are.

A simple solution: bend over, grab your ears, give a quick jerk, and with any luck your head will pop out of your ass. Look in the mirror. I know you won't like what you see, but that's why you terrorise and demonize those who DO know who and what you are. Quit eating shit and drinking piss for breakfast, and just maybe you too someday will be normal, and LIKE yourself.

 

[Bullypulpit]

STUDY SHOWS THOSE WHO USE WORD "HOMOPHOBE" TO DEMONIZE ANTI-GAYS HAVE SEVERE IDENTITY CONFLICTS​

We know your personality has betrayed you pulit, your evident lack of character and moral compass is a prime example of someone struggling to find out who they are.

A simple solution: bend over, grab your ears, give a quick jerk, and with any luck your head will pop out of your ass. Look in the mirror. I know you won't like what you see, but that's why you terrorise and demonize those who DO know who and what you are. Quit eating shit and drinking piss for breakfast, and just maybe you too someday will be normal, and LIKE yourself.

My moral compass is fine boyo, and I know very well who I am, and I like what I see in the mirror.

As for demonizing folks, it seems to be a case of the pot calling the kettle black. I merely state the facts. You spout religious right wing-nut propaganda. And judging from how virulent and over the top your response is, I musta hit a nerve. Have a nice day .

 

[Patriot]

I merely state the facts. You spout religious right wing-nut propaganda. And judging from how virulent and over the top your response is, I musta hit a nerve. Have a nice day .

First off who are you to judge Pale Rider? I thought all you so called tolerant left wing nut jobs were into tolerance and not handing out judgements? This makes you a hypocrite.

Then you have the balls to produce an article that has a study done on 64 males and calls it a fact? When you can come to me and give me better than 75% of the male population THEN and only then can you call it fact!

And to top it all off you start to call Pale names which by the left wingers is sacriledge but only when the person calling the name is offending you or your left wing commie bastards. What a two faced hypocrite. I guess your dumb ass forgot to check the very first post Pale posted, which, by the way, started this whole thread, where HE POSTED a finding of fact by the scientific community!


Check your facts before spewing your shit! Or are you gay too?

 

[Mariner]

Whether a study is valid or not does not depend only on "n," the number of subjects. It depends on whether the difference between the experimental and control subjects was large enough to establish "statistical significance." Many scientific studies are completed with very small samples. In fact, investigators are expected to calculate the smallest sample needed to achieve statistical validity, in order not to waste precious research money.

Mariner.

 

[Merlin1047]

That's just one study. That the most virulent homophobes are the most uncertain regarding their own sexuality is supported by many other studies. You and OCA should get together and explore those deeply supressed feelings.

Damn, Bully! You've got to stop talking like that. You're beginning to turn me on, you big stallion you.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Damn, Bully! You've got to stop talking like that. You're beginning to turn me on, you big stallion you.

Oh thtop it, you big silly.

 

[Bullypulpit]

First off who are you to judge Pale Rider? I thought all you so called tolerant left wing nut jobs were into tolerance and not handing out judgements? This makes you a hypocrite.

Then you have the balls to produce an article that has a study done on 64 males and calls it a fact? When you can come to me and give me better than 75% of the male population THEN and only then can you call it fact!

And to top it all off you start to call Pale names which by the left wingers is sacriledge but only when the person calling the name is offending you or your left wing commie bastards. What a two faced hypocrite. I guess your dumb ass forgot to check the very first post Pale posted, which, by the way, started this whole thread, where HE POSTED a finding of fact by the scientific community!


Check your facts before spewing your shit! Or are you gay too?

It's just one of many studies boyo, so don't get yer knickers in a twist. As for Pale, I find his ignorance amusing, especially as he gets so pissed of when he's in the wrong.

 

[007]

It's just one of many studies boyo, so don't get yer knickers in a twist. As for Pale, I find his ignorance amusing, especially as he gets so pissed of when he's in the wrong.

Hey pulit... I know you're a jerked off fucking piss bag. You could walk under a snake and you'd have to reach up to scratch it's belly. You're street trash and talk like a subliminal liberal training tape. You're a laugh, and I respond to you purely for it's entertainment value, which is close to nil, and boredom.

 

[musicman]

I can see a grain of truth in your point--that if the word still has too many meanings to be clear, then we should be careful how we use it.





.

But that wasn't my point at all. "Homophobia" is a senseless, made-up term. Following any common-sense rules regarding the origin of language, it means, "irrational fear of humans". In other words, it means nothing. It is a sham word whose only reason for existing is to manipulate human thought toward a specific sociopolitical outcome. I refuse to be manipulated in this way. If every great book written by every wise man states that the sky is plaid, there will doubtless be those who will remark that the plaid is of lovely hues today. I won't be one of them.

 

[Patriot]

Whether a study is valid or not does not depend only on "n," the number of subjects. It depends on whether the difference between the experimental and control subjects was large enough to establish "statistical significance." Many scientific studies are completed with very small samples. In fact, investigators are expected to calculate the smallest sample needed to achieve statistical validity, in order not to waste precious research money.

Mariner.

So what you are telling me is that you get turned on when watching homo porno? I mean that IS what you you are saying since you agree with that statistic.......

 

[Mariner]

I don't even know what homo porno looks like. But again, your statement wouldn't be an insult except to other homophobes.

You don't just decide to "agree" or not agree with a scientific finding. It's true or it's not true. I have no idea what the inner life of a homophobe is like, or what such a person experiences when viewing porn, gay or straight. But if a statistically valid study shows that such a person is more likely to be turned on by gay porn than a non-homophobe, then it seems to lend some credence to the Freudian notion of "counterphobia," that we often purposefully make ourselves into the opposite of what we fear we actually are. Whether that's actually happening in any particular person is impossible to say. But it certainly would seem worth thinking about for homophobic people, as it may offer them a reason behind the energy they put into their homophobia.

As for the word, this stuff about it being made-up doesn't make any sense. All our words are made up, and many of them have very amusing etymologies. They have evolved over time. As long as we agree on our meaning for the word, we're fine. I prefer the non-pejorative meaning of "homophobe," i.e. someone who doesn't like gay people. That's the most common meaning now, not the original meaning of irrational fear of gay people.

Mariner.

 

[OCA]

My moral compass is fine boyo, and I know very well who I am, and I like what I see in the mirror.

As for demonizing folks, it seems to be a case of the pot calling the kettle black. I merely state the facts. You spout religious right wing-nut propaganda. And judging from how virulent and over the top your response is, I musta hit a nerve. Have a nice day .

Lol everytime Bully gets backed in a corner he spouts out "right wing religious nut", ......amazing.

 

[OCA]

I just got a kick out of reading all the posts in the last couple pages, "homophobia"....you've got to be shitting me. Why is it that when one stands up for what is obviously right and has been considered right since the garden of eden the secular left cries foul, says "who are we to judge"? This is the whole problem with America on a variety of issues, we are so afraid to tell somebody or some group that they are wrong because we might hurt their feelings, because of quotes in the bible etc. etc., the end result is a society run amok, social anarchy if you will where anything goes if it makes you feel good....because god forbid if we pass judgement...what a fucking mess in America!

Well homosexual lifestyle choice perversionists looks like the line is being drawn at you people, please reference the votes of 11 states in the last election..the people aren't taking it anymore, they are making a sound and moral judgement, and you know what? It doesn't fucking matter if homosexuality choice doesn't hurt me or it doesn't hurt you its about standing up for what is right, that is what we do here in America.

You know the funny thing about this is the homosexual lifestyle choice perversionists brough all this on themselves, boy did they fuck up in San Francisco and Queerachusets.

 

[musicman]

Mariner:

That you prefer the non-pejorative meaning of the "word", homophobe, only amounts to your saying that the sky is a more subtle plaid. You're falling for it - or you're trying to make others fall for it. It is an insidious, agenda-driven perversion of the English language. It seeks to create a malady, whereby one who does not accept homosexuality as an orientation - no better or worse than any other - is the one with the problem. You're only quibbling over the degree of this invented problem.

I'm not falling for it, and, as OCA pointed out, neither are the majority of Americans. The sky is not plaid. Homophobia is not a word. The attempt to mainstream homosexuality has helped to bring an entire political party crashing down. America has spoken.

 

[nakedemperor]

Mariner:

That you prefer the non-pejorative meaning of the "word", homophobe, only amounts to your saying that the sky is a more subtle plaid. You're falling for it - or you're trying to make others fall for it. It is an insidious, agenda-driven perversion of the English language. It seeks to create a malady, whereby one who does not accept homosexuality as an orientation - no better or worse than any other - is the one with the problem. You're only quibbling over the degree of this invented problem.

I'm not falling for it, and, as OCA pointed out, neither are the majority of Americans. The sky is not plaid. Homophobia is not a word. The attempt to mainstream homosexuality has helped to bring an entire political party crashing down. America has spoken.

As free as you are to abstain from using it, "homphobia" is a word in common use in all regions with a fairly solid definition, as Mariner pointed out, being "one who doesn't like gay peple". This is not a function of the "attempt to mainstream homosexuality", its a response to an emerging phenomenon by a society which uses words to describe things.

 

[musicman]

As free as you are to abstain from using it, "homphobia" is a word in common use in all regions with a fairly solid definition, as Mariner pointed out, being "one who doesn't like gay peple". This is not a function of the "attempt to mainstream homosexuality", its a response to an emerging phenomenon by a society which uses words to describe things.

And, as free as you likewise are to use it, I say, shame on anyone in a position to do so who tries to impart upon this term some sort of official Imprimatur. They are willing participants in an attempt to bastardize the English language for purely political ends. Surely you won't deny that calling someone who is less than accepting of homosexuality "phobic" carries with it a negative connotation. This is by design. It is underhanded. It is intellectually dishonest.
I can disagreee civilly with a person all day long, but when I start hearing sneaky little lies, my respect leaves rapidly - like air rushing out of a blown tire.