It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by DavidWillts
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by DavidWillts
Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by DavidWillts
I thought AIDS did that
Really? How?
AIDS is more prevalent in homosexuals thus stigmatizing it by placing in the same high risk group as IV drug users and prostitutes.
Actually that is not true.
Two new books just came out on the history of AIDS. You should read them.
I like modern statistics over history books on subjects such as these. The "history" of AIDS does not change the fact that the high risk groups for aids are prostitutes, IV drug users and homosexuals
Today, AIDS continues to directly affect thousands of gay and bisexual men and injecting drug users every year, but it has also become a serious problem among Black Americans and, more recently, among the Hispanic/Latino population. However, it is not necessarily individual behaviour, but rather a person's sexual network which determines an individual's HIV risk in America. Therefore, black males are much more likely to be infected because of the high prevalence in this community and a tendency to choose racially similar partners as opposed to simply high-risk behaviour.
Wealth status also determines the likelihood of HIV infection in America. A study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in 2010 showed that in America's poorest urban neighbourhoods HIV prevalence was 2.1 percent among heterosexuals, or more than 4 times the national average.8 Race or ethnicity did not account for any significant differences within the high-poverty groups studied. Rather, higher HIV risk within poor urban areas was attributed to, among other factors, high HIV prevalence, limited access to health care and other basic services, and high rates of substance abuse and incarceration. Socioeconomic status and HIV prevalence are also linked among men who have sex with men.www.avert.org...
Talking around a direct question is not answering it.
Human's can choose to have or not have sex.
AIDS is more prevalent in homosexuals thus stigmatizing it by placing in the same high risk group as IV drug users and prostitutes.
Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by Annee
Talking around a direct question is not answering it.
I answered the question. Every child born is a potential saviour of the world. If that seems a stretch to you, every child is at least a potential net benefactor.
In fact, we don't need to go nearly as far as this to find rational motives for having children. In the emirate of Abu Dhabi, as in many other countries, the parents of a newborn child receive cash gratuities and other incentives for bringing a new citizen into the world. Even advanced western countries offer child-support benefits, tax rebates, etc. These are all highly rational, economic benefits derived from having children.
Children are also economic assets in other ways; they can be sent out to work, or left to do the housework while an older family member works. Sons earn dowries at marriage. And in poor countries where social-security networks are faulty or nonexistent, children are still insurance for a parents' old age. I could go on in this vein for some time. However, my main point was that childbearing is not rational behaviour in the usual sense of the word; it is an instinctive process, thus hostile to rationality almost by definition.
Human's can choose to have or not have sex.
They can also choose where to put their apostrophes, but that doesn't mean – as we see here – that they are always able to make the rational choice.
The multiplicity of unexamined assumptions in this statement invalidates it.
Yes - behavior is the major factor in spreading AIDS. I'll have to look up word statistics - - because I'm pretty sure there is more AIDS among heteros globally then gays.
Originally posted by DeReK DaRkLy
reply to post by Starchild23
You're saying that survival through reproduction is a more important aspect of life in a world where overpopulation is a legit problem, rather than loving everyone no matter what form it takes?
Exactly... How can the OP possibly be concerned about human extinction?
Seems like inbreeding would be a problem way before extinction!
This is why ATS should implement a "negative" rating system as well as positive, so threads like this can quickly fall into the waste bin... no stars for this thread, just a moon!
Originally posted by DavidWillts
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by DavidWillts
Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by DavidWillts
I thought AIDS did that
Really? How?
AIDS is more prevalent in homosexuals thus stigmatizing it by placing in the same high risk group as IV drug users and prostitutes.
Actually that is not true.
Two new books just came out on the history of AIDS. You should read them.
I like modern statistics over history books on subjects such as these. The "history" of AIDS does not change the fact that the high risk groups for aids are prostitutes, IV drug users and homosexuals.edit on 16-4-2012 by DavidWillts because: (no reason given)
Yeah...go take your illogical and prejudiced arguments outside.
Originally posted by DavidWillts
reply to post by Starchild23
Yeah...go take your illogical and prejudiced arguments outside.
Facts are not illogical or prejudiced.
Last year, I knew a 13 year old who was several weeks pregnant, but lost the kid. She went out partying to celebrate.
These are heterosexuals, being promiscuous and uncaring with their HETEROSEXUALITY before they're even in high school. You wanna call facts? Try that.
Originally posted by DavidWillts
reply to post by Starchild23
Last year, I knew a 13 year old who was several weeks pregnant, but lost the kid. She went out partying to celebrate.
You party with 13 year old pregnant girls???
These are heterosexuals, being promiscuous and uncaring with their HETEROSEXUALITY before they're even in high school. You wanna call facts? Try that.
I have no idea what your knowledge of the sex lives of underage girls has to do with homosexuality and AIDS.
Originally posted by DavidWillts
reply to post by Annee
Yes - behavior is the major factor in spreading AIDS. I'll have to look up word statistics - - because I'm pretty sure there is more AIDS among heteros globally then gays.
First it's "not true" but then its "yes", make up your mind.
None of that is an unselfish reason to bring another child into this world
Originally posted by Astyanax
Every child born is a potential saviour of the world. If that seems a stretch to you, every child is at least a potential net benefactor.
Originally posted by Astyanax
Ultimately, it is not we who are in control of our reproductive urges, but our genes.
Originally posted by kaylaluv
Originally posted by DavidWillts
Romans 1:26-27
King James Version (KJV)
26For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Lesbians are a no no too. I really wish people would stop trying to say that the bible somehow condones homosexuality. Nothing is taken out of context, it is really clear on the subject.
I really wish people would stop cherry-picking what they pay attention to in the Bible, and what they ignore.
If you are going to use the Bible to judge others, then you must live EXACTLY as it says in the Bible - otherwise you are a hypocrite.
Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
The only issue is when the same gender indulges in private intimacy such as the act of reproduction, which cannot be done. And that is the only issue religion has with homosexuality.