What about a psychologist?
Are you not capable of presenting an argument or what is the problem?
The main thrust of this article which is published on a page called "Opinion", and states in capital letters VIEWPOINT--in the title, is to argue against allowing gay-clubs on campus, because apparently any gay-club promotes a "destructive and deadly lifestyle" - homosexual behaviour spreads diseases, an "average" homosexual has 20-100 sexual partners per year.
Which diseases would this be, well, gay men are more likely to contract AIDS, and...wait for it: homos are responsible for 60% of Syphilis cases!
Should parents be alarmed about gay-clubs spreading syphilis then? - hardly,
there were 46.000 cases total in the US in 2008 - 3.8 cases per 100.000 population, lol,
2.180 out of 3.141 US counties reported no case at all.
Those gay-clubs are a real danger!!! :lol:
Other "facts" include that 33% of homos have had minor-adult sex and one in 20 is a child molester.
The author refers to
no specific sources for her claims and figures, but mentions that notorious National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality in passing.
Oh, and did you know that:
"Most studies now agree that the incidence of genetically determined homosexuality is lower than previously estimated, falling somewhere between 2-3 percent."
When did they discover and verify that sexual orientations is genetically determined? lol
I hope you are just trolling and do not actually believe is drivel by this "school psychologist"
I have shown the risks. If they are going to teach about homosexuality then the health risks including depression should be taught also
No, you have not. You have linked to an article which alleges risks based on unsourced figures.
If that was the case would it not be easy to show why it is wrong?
You still fail to understand that it is not everybody else's responsibility to research every claim posted on the web to prove it is not factual or inaccurately presented - it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to scrutinise material before you link to it or parrot the claims.
One way of creating credibility is to use quality sources, or at the very least avoid those which are known to have an agenda and do not reference the claims.
You have failed consistently to show