So, recruit me

[Kerwin]

Considering you pretend to not even know what sexual orientation is I think it interesting that you are now claiming to have extensive scientific knowledge on the subject.

Hardly extensive, but enough to know what is going on as I do some research and pay attention. Even then my information is a few months out of date and just what researchers allow to filter down to the common people.

Just to cite a few of the many studies

The example that had 8 participants was just lousy science practices since 8 is an insufficient group size. The other two sound promising though.

I looked up a study Ann Duecy Norman, Melissa J. Perry, L. Yvonne Stevenson, Jeffrey A. Kelly, and Roger A. Roffman were part of and it said:.

Women who have sex with women are a relatively hidden group that has been overlooked in most AIDS research and prevention efforts, primarily because the efficiency of HIV transmission between female partners is believed to be low. Although data are scant, it is commonly assumed that members of this population are not at high risk for HIV infection.

And yet it is adult women who contracted HIV through heterosexual intercourse that make up the majority of all known cases of HIV/AIDS

Actually gays make up less than 5% of the population and close to and at times more that 50% of the individuals with HIV/Aids in the U.S. Who is international in scope and thus covers Africa which has different strains (wd?) of HIV/Aids which thankfully do not seem to spread in the U.S. Here is CDC states about it. You will find Blacks are more likely than Whites to contact HIV/Aids which is probably partially because some Whites have a mutation that makes them pretty much immune

t is interesting how you make outrageous claims yet never offer any proof of them, but still demand proof for basic information.

I used to present evidence but learned over time most people on forums are fanatics and those who are not will do their own research and reach their own conclusions.

 

[Kerwin]

And not just HIV and other STDs either, sexual mechanical trauma (tearing, strains, breaks, et al) are virtually unknown amongst lesbian populations.

I'm all for the "risk of injury-illness=God's disaproval". It proves that lesbians are the chosen people.

It may be true that lesbians are less likely to contact STD's but they seem to find other ways to harm themselves according to this study.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

It may be true that lesbians are less likely to contact STD's but they seem to find other ways to harm themselves according to this study.

I read the study you provided, it doesn't appear to say what you said it says.

 

[darkshadow]

Name 3 who aren't closeted homosexuals?

Jesus and John the apostle
Men in combat who have thrown themselves on live grenades to save there fellow men's lives.
My wife and her best friend, have a special bond to where they live 5 hours away and yet can tell when the other is having problems.
Do you want more?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Jesus and John the apostle
Men in combat who have thrown themselves on live grenades to save there fellow men's lives.
My wife and her best friend, have a special bond to where they live 5 hours away and yet can tell when the other is having problems.
Do you want more?

Yep. How about any three who actually meet the suggested criteria...

and allow me to ask again...

Name three men, ANY three men, who loved other men more than their wives, who were not closeted homosexual homosexual. Candidates need to be married to be applicable, obviously.

And its a pretty sad world where men would throw themselves on a grenade to save their Army buddies but not their wives.

 

[darkshadow]

I have seen no proof that sexual orientation even exists so how can you lie about it? As far as I can determine it is just a fraud like telling an alcoholic they can not resist alcohol so go out and party.

There are tons of proof of sexual orientation. First lets look the definition:

sexual orientation n. The direction of one's sexual interest toward members of the same, opposite, or both sexes. - The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003.


Second here are a few studies:
1. Case Studies on Sexual Orientation and Gender Expression in Social Work Practice - by Lori Messinger (Editor), Deana D. Marrowhttp://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/s...e=ss&index=books&field-author=Deana F. Morrow (Editor).
2. Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality - American Psychological Association
3. Many homosexual men appear to inherit a gene from their mothers that influences sexual orientation, a National Cancer Institute researcher. - author Dean Hamer, chief of the cancer institute's Section on Gene Structure and Regulation.

There are many more, showing that sexual orientation is a truth, that has had significant studies.

As a man who is very attracted to women, I can tell you here and now I have a sexual orientation for women. I have a friend whose sexual orientation is towards men. Sexual orientation does not mean your are having sex, but by definition to ware your sexual interests lean towards.
Just because you personally have not experienced something does not mean it does not exist. I have never experienced this thing called a heart attack, does that mean it does not exist? NO, why there is plenty of studies showing heart attacks, and I know people who have experienced them. There are those who have no sexual orientation, in that they are not attracted to anyone, that "love" is not an importance to them. This does not make them right or wrong.

 

[darkshadow]

Yep. How about any three who actually meet the suggested criteria...

and allow me to ask again...

Name three men, ANY three men, who loved other men more than their wives, who were not closeted homosexual homosexual. Candidates need to be married to be applicable, obviously.

And its a pretty sad world where men would throw themselves on a grenade to save their Army buddies but not their wives.

I'm sorry since the post read,

"since there are plenty of men who love one another as brothers and that love is greater than their love for a women and yet they are not homosexuals
​

Name 3 who aren't closeted homosexuals?"

Since the original did not say wives and therefore that being the criteria, I did answer your question. If you are going to add wives to the senerio, that makes it an entirely different question, since a man is to put his wife second only to God. I personally would die, for my wife and children. There is a BIG difference between a man not being into women, and having a close, non-sexual, relationship with another man, and a man having a loving relationship with a wife. Placing wife into the text, since your original was answered, is like trying to compare apples and oranges. Any man who would not put his wife first, would not be a true follower of Christ anyways. How dare you tell someone, that if they are not with a woman and are a man, and would rather be around other men then they are a "closet homosexual". Funny if a heterosexual says someone is "gay", because they act feminem then there being derogative, but when it is turned around and a man does not care to be around women then its okay to label? Sounds a little two sided there to me.

 

[BigBadWlf]

Hardly extensive, but enough to know what is going on as I do some research and pay attention. Even then my information is a few months out of date and just what researchers allow to filter down to the common people.

my original point stands

The example that had 8 participants was just lousy science practices since 8 is an insufficient group size. The other two sound promising though.

8?


The study conducted by Sasse and associate had 324 participants
The Lemp study had 498 participants
And Peterson looked at results from the screenings of 96,000 lesbian blood donors

I looked up a study Ann Duecy Norman, Melissa J. Perry, L. Yvonne Stevenson, Jeffrey A. Kelly, and Roger A. Roffman were part of and it said:.

And what was the conclusion of the study? I notice you didn’t post that…The conclusion was that the small handful of lesbians who were HIV positive contracted the virus through means other than sexual intercourse with another woman.

Actually gays make up less than 5% of the population and close to and at times more that 50% of the individuals with HIV/Aids in the U.S. Who is international in scope and thus covers Africa which has different strains (wd?) of HIV/Aids which thankfully do not seem to spread in the U.S. Here is CDC states about it. You will find Blacks are more likely than Whites to contact HIV/Aids which is probably partially because some Whites have a mutation that makes them pretty much immune

Does the fact that African American’s are significantly more likely to have HIV/AIDS make racism acceptable?






I used to present evidence but learned over time most people on forums are fanatics and those who are not will do their own research and reach their own conclusions.[/quote]


And yet you still make outrageous claims and offer no proof while making demands that other’s do what you are unwilling or unable to do

 

[darkshadow]

Several obvious errors here. First, we do not know how risky sex between females is because there have not been sufficient studies on it. Second, On the other hand there have been sufficient studies on sex between males and it is extremely risky behavior which explains among other things why HIV contagion is so contagious within that community. Third, pregnancy is not a punishment unless you are perhaps a hedonist or a radical population control advocate.


Here is a study for you regarding lesbian sex:
According to the Centers for Disease Control, documented cases of female-to-female transmission of HIV appears to be a rare occurrence.
In order for the HIV virus to be spread you must have contact with fluids such as "sexual fluids", or blood. From the CDC web site: "The well documented risk of female-to-male transmission of HIV shows that vaginal secretions and menstrual blood may contain the virus and that mucous membrane (e.g., oral, vaginal) exposure to these secretions has the potential to lead to HIV infection." Heterosexual and homosexual men are more likely to get HIV, leaving out race.

Do you have any real proof to back up your conclusions? I will point out that the human body uses opioids to give us pleasure. There are other hormones that have pleasant and maybe even addictive effect on our bodies. Our brain is not so stupid that it can not associate certain thoughts and behaviors with these feeling of pleasure and knows what to do to get another fix. I have even heard of a study where men have associated the mere name of a beautiful actress with the release of these hormones.

Opioids is not a hormone the body produces and in fact the definition is:
[FONT=Verdana,][SIZE=-1]Opioid = any compound, peptide or otherwise, which, while not containing the fundamental morphine or thebaine structure, possesses some affinity for any, or all, of the opioid receptor subtypes. Common opioids are endorphin, fentanyl and methadone.[/SIZE][/FONT]



I am just not comprehending your point here. Are you saying that one can have sex without sexual attraction? If so then I believe it is easier for a woman to do so than a man. Never the less I do not see how that relates to my point is that you do not throw an anchor to a drowning man and you do not tempt an alcoholic to drink.

Actually it is harder for a woman to have sex without attraction. A woman's body is more reseptive to an emotional attraction then a physical like men. Women have to have, in most cases, a emotional attachment which causes the letting down of the guard. You here of men who have had sex as a game, and keep score. Men are programmed, with a more physical aspect while women are more emotional beings.

 

[HaloHope]

I'm sorry since the post read,

"since there are plenty of men who love one another as brothers and that love is greater than their love for a women and yet they are not homosexuals

​

Name 3 who aren't closeted homosexuals?"

Since the original did not say wives and therefore that being the criteria, I did answer your question. If you are going to add wives to the senerio, that makes it an entirely different question, since a man is to put his wife second only to God. I personally would die, for my wife and children. There is a BIG difference between a man not being into women, and having a close, non-sexual, relationship with another man, and a man having a loving relationship with a wife. Placing wife into the text, since your original was answered, is like trying to compare apples and oranges. Any man who would not put his wife first, would not be a true follower of Christ anyways. How dare you tell someone, that if they are not with a woman and are a man, and would rather be around other men then they are a "closet homosexual". Funny if a heterosexual says someone is "gay", because they act feminem then there being derogative, but when it is turned around and a man does not care to be around women then its okay to label? Sounds a little two sided there to me.

I think the main point I would make on this is that if someone has a closer bond with another human being other than their partner which involves them loving that individual more than their partner, something is up in that relationship. Thats applicable regardless of gender of the parties involved. While I dont at all disagree that God should come first, partner should come second only to God, and it makes sense to me that your best friend/partner should be one in the same person.

 

[darkshadow]

I think the main point I would make on this is that if someone has a closer bond with another human being other than their partner which involves them loving that individual more than their partner, something is up in that relationship. Thats applicable regardless of gender of the parties involved. While I dont at all disagree that God should come first, partner should come second only to God, and it makes sense to me that your best friend/partner should be one in the same person.

I would agree that there would be something odd if they cared more for a friend then there husband or wife, and yes your spouse should be your "best friend", but most people do have a friend of the same sex that they feel they can talk to and is going to understand there problems. Women can talk to other women about problems men don't understand, and vise versa. That does not make them lesbian, it makes them women. I like doing things with buddies that my wife does not like to do, and we have a great time, and yet I can assure you I am not "gay". Except in the proper term of being happy. (Sorry tangent).

I do see your point, that a man who would rather be in the fellowship of men all the time over his wife would be odd, but you must agree with me that a man wanting to be with other men and not a woman, does not label him. It does not mean hes anymore "gay" then he is an elephant, because he likes to eat peanuts.

 

[HaloHope]

I would agree that there would be something odd if they cared more for a friend then there husband or wife, and yes your spouse should be your "best friend", but most people do have a friend of the same sex that they feel they can talk to and is going to understand there problems. Women can talk to other women about problems men don't understand, and vise versa. That does not make them lesbian, it makes them women. I like doing things with buddies that my wife does not like to do, and we have a great time, and yet I can assure you I am not "gay". Except in the proper term of being happy. (Sorry tangent).

I do see your point, that a man who would rather be in the fellowship of men all the time over his wife would be odd, but you must agree with me that a man wanting to be with other men and not a woman, does not label him. It does not mean hes anymore "gay" then he is an elephant, because he likes to eat peanuts.

I actually do agree with you. Theres a big difference between a guy wanting to go sink a few beers with his freinds which is something his wife prefers not to do than him having a sexual attraction to them.

Oddly enough, one of the reasons I actually have a hard time understanding hetrosexuality myself is, I WANT to be able to have a partner that understands me and I have yet to meet any guy I can relate to in any way shape or form if i'm perfectly honest with you. My girlfreind on the other hand I have a LOT in common with, we share the same interests, like doing the same things and obviously i'm attracted to her as well. I could never envision a man being able to fulfill me on all those criteria which I require for a relationship.

 

[darkshadow]

I actually do agree with you. Theres a big difference between a guy wanting to go sink a few beers with his freinds which is something his wife prefers not to do than him having a sexual attraction to them.

Oddly enough, one of the reasons I actually have a hard time understanding hetrosexuality myself is, I WANT to be able to have a partner that understands me and I have yet to meet any guy I can relate to in any way shape or form if i'm perfectly honest with you. My girlfreind on the other hand I have a LOT in common with, we share the same interests, like doing the same things and obviously i'm attracted to her as well. I could never envision a man being able to fulfill me on all those criteria which I require for a relationship.

I am truly glad you have someone you care about so much, it is good to have someone you care about, who you can trust, and who you can share lifes happening with. I also hope you are not offended and if so I apoligize in advance, that I pray that you might someday find a man like that someday. I have a very close friend who is "gay" and I say the same to him, but that does not mean I care for him anyless then I ever have. He is like a brother to me. Heck he was the best man at my wedding, I hurt for him because I believe he is doing wrong with his life, but I do not do not love him anyless. Again I hope my comment has not offended you, and if has I am truley sorry. On a side not I got to comment on my elephant and peanut remark, I thought that was a good one.

 

[HaloHope]

I am truly glad you have someone you care about so much, it is good to have someone you care about, who you can trust, and who you can share lifes happening with. I also hope you are not offended and if so I apoligize in advance, that I pray that you might someday find a man like that someday. I have a very close friend who is "gay" and I say the same to him, but that does not mean I care for him anyless then I ever have. He is like a brother to me. Heck he was the best man at my wedding, I hurt for him because I believe he is doing wrong with his life, but I do not do not love him anyless. Again I hope my comment has not offended you, and if has I am truley sorry. On a side not I got to comment on my elephant and peanut remark, I thought that was a good one.

Well im not offended, but it certainly wont ever happen. Im 100% commited to my partner hopefully for the rest of our lives. Ive never found a guy sexually attractive, ever and I could never sleep with someone who is male.

 

[darkshadow]

Well im not offended, but it certainly wont ever happen. Im 100% commited to my partner hopefully for the rest of our lives. Ive never found a guy sexually attractive, ever and I could never sleep with someone who is male.

That is one of God's gifts for us, freedom of choice. God does not want us to be mindless robots. I believe we are at a point where we can agree to disagree I hope. May God bless.

 

[HaloHope]

That is one of God's gifts for us, freedom of choice. God does not want us to be mindless robots. I believe we are at a point where we can agree to disagree I hope. May God bless.

I believe we can , God Bless you too.