• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

California gay marriage ban overturned: report

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just face it, your gang doens't wan to admit that homosexuals as a group present a negative effect on society by the parcticing of their sexuality, or, one could put it this way, they certainly do not benefit society by being the, by far, largest group that contracts HIV among the population. To do so would invalidate CC's entire claim that society wieghs benefits as a prerequist to marriage. LOL

That's it and that's all...


Tim-
 
Last edited:
By the way CC I notice you haven't developed an argument for my response to your 4/4/2009 post? Why?


Tim-
 
Hicup said:
Just face it, your gang doens't wan to admit that homosexuals as a group present a negative effect on society by the parcticing of their sexuality, or, one could put it this way, they certainly do not benefit society by being the, by far, largest group that contracts HIV among the population. To do so would invalidate CC's entire claim that society wieghs benefits as a prerequist to marriage. LOL

That's it and that's all...


Tim-
Click to expand...

Continued invalidity with correlation and not causation. But let's see some honesty, Hicup. You have refused to answer this question: Do certain behaviors cause HIV? You challenged me on saying you lied, and saying that you did not understand the issue. Let's see if I'm right.
 
Hicup said:
By the way CC I notice you haven't developed an argument for my response to your 4/4/2009 post? Why?


Tim-
Click to expand...

Because I've been busy with this. Don't worry... I'll get to it.
 
Hicup said:
CC -

I don't know what causes HIV? Do you? However it is TRUE that homosexuals contract HIV more than any other group.


Tim-
Click to expand...

From WebMD

How Do People Get HIV?
A person gets HIV when an infected person's body fluids (blood, semen, fluids from the vagina or breast milk) enter his or her bloodstream. The virus can enter the blood through linings in the mouth, anus, or sex organs (the penis and vagina), or through broken skin.

Both men and women can spread HIV. A person with HIV can feel okay and still give the virus to others. Pregnant women with HIV also can give the virus to their babies.
 
Hicup said:
CC -

I don't know, and I suspect neither do you.

Tim-
Click to expand...

Read Your Star's post. Here's my question, again: Do certain behaviors cause HIV? You claim to be honest. Let's see it.
 
Your Star said:
From WebMD

How Do People Get HIV?
A person gets HIV when an infected person's body fluids (blood, semen, fluids from the vagina or breast milk) enter his or her bloodstream. The virus can enter the blood through linings in the mouth, anus, or sex organs (the penis and vagina), or through broken skin.

Both men and women can spread HIV. A person with HIV can feel okay and still give the virus to others. Pregnant women with HIV also can give the virus to their babies.
Click to expand...

So? So what? You think I didn't know this? How does it invalidate my claim?

Tim-
 
Hicup said:
So? So what? You think I didn't know this? How does it invalidate my claim?

Tim-
Click to expand...

That you don't know what behaviors cause HIV? It demonstrates that you either know nothing about the issue or that you are lying. This is very basic information.
 
Hicup said:
So? So what? You think I didn't know this? How does it invalidate my claim?

Tim-
Click to expand...

You said you didn't know it. You asked what caused HIV, I answered.
 
Hicup said:
CC -

I don't know, and I suspect neither do you.

Tim-
Click to expand...

AIDS is not caused by actions. It is caused by the HIV virus getting into the bloodstream. Certain actions are more likely to cause that to happen.
 
AIDS is just a consequence of HIV, after so many T cells have been compromised that your body can no longer create an adequate defense against the world of microbes. When you have late stage cancer, you can also have AIDS; same with leukemia. It just means a severe immune deficiency; though I admit, the term AIDS has become synonymous with the HIV virus.
 
Hicup said:
CC -

I don't know what causes HIV? Do you? However it is TRUE that homosexuals contract HIV more than any other group.


Tim-
Click to expand...

The leading cause of the transmission of HIV is anal sex, due to the ease by which tears and fissures occur in anal tissue. As such, men who have sex with men, represent the group with the highest risk of acquiring HIV, namely due to their likelihood in engaging in the behavior of anal sex. For the record, not all gay men engage in anal sex. Also, lesbians do not engage in anal sex and represent one of the lowest risk groups for HIV. The argument that "homosexuals" are at the greatest risk for HIV is thus ignorant, because anyone who engages in anal sex is at significant risk.

Furthermore, the risk for transmission of HIV is significantly reduced if condoms are used, and it is therefore the behavior of unprotected anal sex that is most likely to spread HIV.

Not that it matters to you, since you are trying to make a political argument rather than a scientific one, but one's sexual orientation has little to do with their likelihood of contracting HIV. It is the sexual behaviors that people choose to engage in that increases their likelihood of contracting the disease.
 
Last edited:
CriticalThought said:
The leading cause of the transmission of HIV is anal sex, due to the ease by which tears and fissures occur in anal tissue. As such, men who have sex with men, represent the group with the highest risk of acquiring HIV, namely due to their likelihood in engaging in the behavior of anal sex. For the record, not all gay men engage in anal sex. Also, lesbians do not engage in anal sex and represent one of the lowest risk groups for HIV. The argument that "homosexuals" are at the greatest risk for HIV is thus ignorant, because anyone who engages in anal sex is at significant risk.

Furthermore, the risk for transmission of HIV is significantly reduced if condoms are used, and it is therefore the behavior of unprotected anal sex that is most likely to spread HIV.

Not that it matters to you, since you are trying to make a political argument rather than a scientific one, but one's sexual orientation has little to do with their likelihood of contracting HIV. It is the sexual behaviors that people choose to engage in that increases their likelihood of contracting the disease.
Click to expand...

I agree with most of this post, but one quick correction. I would disagree that lesbians do not engage in anal sex. They are the least likely too, but that doesn't mean that they don't, they certainly can, and do.
 
Your Star said:
I agree with most of this post, but one quick correction. I would disagree that lesbians do not engage in anal sex. They are the least likely too, but that doesn't mean that they don't, they certainly can, and do.
Click to expand...

I find it fascinating that as much as people(well, men) are fascinated by lesbians, they still have such ignorance about them.
 
I'm happy for the gays. They have every right to a be married as far as I'm concerned.

I'd really like to see the government out of the "marriage" business all together. I'm for civil unions for all couples regardless of orientation.
 
Johnny said:
I'm happy for the gays. They have every right to a be married as far as I'm concerned.

I'd really like to see the government out of the "marriage" business all together. I'm for civil unions for all couples regardless of orientation.
Click to expand...
I agree. "Protecting the sanctity of Marriage" seems to be the main object of concern for most of these people who are against Gay marriages or civil unions. A civil union should be the business of the state, whereas if someone wants to be "married" they should go to their church or what have you, and be married there. If a gay couple wanted to marry, they could go to a church that approves of performing gay marriages. I don't see the problem there.
 
CriticalThought said:
The leading cause of the transmission of HIV is anal sex, due to the ease by which tears and fissures occur in anal tissue. As such, men who have sex with men, represent the group with the highest risk of acquiring HIV, namely due to their likelihood in engaging in the behavior of anal sex. For the record, not all gay men engage in anal sex. Also, lesbians do not engage in anal sex and represent one of the lowest risk groups for HIV. The argument that "homosexuals" are at the greatest risk for HIV is thus ignorant, because anyone who engages in anal sex is at significant risk.

Furthermore, the risk for transmission of HIV is significantly reduced if condoms are used, and it is therefore the behavior of unprotected anal sex that is most likely to spread HIV.

Not that it matters to you, since you are trying to make a political argument rather than a scientific one, but one's sexual orientation has little to do with their likelihood of contracting HIV. It is the sexual behaviors that people choose to engage in that increases their likelihood of contracting the disease.
Click to expand...

Since you missed when this was brought up will you at least admit that homosexual sex has a far greater chance of contracting HIV than other groups?

See what you are missing is why this was brought up. CC had the audacious and obsolete argument that a group of people can be denied marriage based on positive or negative contributions to society which was his excuse on how pologamay or other sexual orientations could continue to be banned. That is the reason it was brought up to expose that fallacy.
 
Captain America said:
I am not against gay marriage. I do not have a homophobic bone in my body (no pun intended.) But I must confess, even though I support allowing gays to marry, I do find it a bit uncomfortable to see a judge over ruling the will of the majority on any issue.
Click to expand...

You mean like when the Supreme Court overruled Chicago's very popular gun restrictions that a majority of Chicagoans approved of and was passed by the will of the people in Cook County, Illinois?

Or like the Citizens United ruling which was disapproved of by 81% of Americans?

You're right. I hate it when the Courts rule against the majority of Americans because of that pesky, pesky Constitution.

Wonder if the majority of Americans
 
FilmFestGuy said:
You mean like when the Supreme Court overruled Chicago's very popular gun restrictions that a majority of Chicagoans approved of and was passed by the will of the people in Cook County, Illinois?

Or like the Citizens United ruling which was disapproved of by 81% of Americans?

You're right. I hate it when the Courts rule against the majority of Americans because of that pesky, pesky Constitution.

Wonder if the majority of Americans
Click to expand...

See in order to make your argument work there has to be at least some form of law in the Constution you can base your argument on alternative lifestyle which there isn't. Nice try.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
You claimed this: "Therefore it is reasonable, and in fact completely conclusive that homosexuals, as a group, are a risk factor in contracting HIV, " and then denied that you ever made a causational relationship. In your statement, you identify an orientation, not a behavior, and make a causational relationship. So you lied when you stated that you did not do this. You have refused to admit this, or back off. I pointed it out. If you lie, you'll get called on it. So, either retract, or rebut. If you do neither, than you obviously lied.
Click to expand...
CC - you appear to be utterly ignorant on what a "risk factor" is. A "risk factor" implies no causal relationship whatsoever. It refers simply to a variable that is related to increased risk. The relationship can be causal OR correlational.

That you would accuse someone of "lying" for using a term YOU did not understand is quite simply outrageous.

I'm sure he'd appreciate a public apology.
 
texmaster said:
See in order to make your argument work there has to be at least some form of law in the Constution you can base your argument on alternative lifestyle which there isn't. Nice try.
Click to expand...

I guess you've never heard of 14th Amendment.

Perhaps reading a summary of the courts decision would help get you better informed on the legal issues.

homosexuality/sexual orientation is a hard-wired personality trait -- calling it a 'lifestyle' would be like calling left-handed a 'lifestyle'.

Homophobia = fear-based ignorance and prejudice about and toward homosexuals.
 
texmaster said:
See in order to make your argument work there has to be at least some form of law in the Constution you can base your argument on alternative lifestyle which there isn't. Nice try.
Click to expand...

That's how deluded you are. It's all nicely explained in the judges 136-page ruling. Prop 8 and similar bans violate the Constitution under the 14th Amendment and to discriminate against gays (just as in Romer v. Evans) has no practical relationship to the role of government.

It's very clear unless you are so anti-gay that you can't understand it. Rational beings get it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom