Homosexuality: Right or Wrong?

[Cynic]

Other then the fact that they go out of their way to make sure people know they are gay.

I know a few gay lads and they certainly don't go out of their way to make sure people know they are gay.

 

I know I don't. I'm not even remotely flamboyant.

[Shinjula]

Re: The statement that Homosexuals have a much lower lifespan than heterosexuals

 

This comes from a study in 1994 by Cameron, Playfair, and Wellum who counted obituaries in various gay community publications and claimed to be able to use them to calculate the average life expectancy for homosexuals.

 

It's an interesting idea but it has some serious flaws. It leaves out large groups of homosexuals (i.e. those who didnt have an obituary) This includes groups such as

 

gay men and lesbians who were not involved in the gay community

gay men and lesbians who were in the closet about their sexual orientation

gay men and lesbians whose loved ones or family didn't want their homosexuality to be known

gay men and lesbians whose loved ones or family simply didn't think of sending an obituary to a gay community newspaper

gay men and lesbians whose loved ones did not write an obituary for some other reason (e.g., they were too grief stricken)

gay men and lesbians who died without leaving anyone to write an obituary for a gay publication (e.g., those whose loved ones and relatives died before them)

.

An accurate estimate of the life span of gay men and lesbians would have to count such people. By restricting their analysis to obituaries in gay newspapers, however, the Cameron group systematically excluded them from the sample.

 

It could be argued that these wouldnt affect the figures much however it can easily be seen that they actually did.

 

In their obituary study, the Cameron group claimed that the average lesbian life-span is similar to that of gay men who do not have AIDS ("under 50 years" versus "mid-40s," respectively). But if this is true, and if obituaries are indeed a valid source for this type of data, the ratio of gay male obituaries to lesbian obituaries should be about the same as the ratio of gay men to lesbians in the population.

 

From their survey data, the Cameron group has claimed to know the number of gay men and lesbians in the population. If we believed their numbers, we would set the ratio of gay men-to-lesbians at about 1.6-to-1 (or approximately 2.6-to-1 if bisexuals are omitted).

 

But the ratio of gay male-to-lesbian obituaries in the Cameron group's study is quite different – approximately 6-to-1 if AIDS and violent deaths are excluded, 32-to-1 if they are included.

 

Thus, at least one data set has to be wrong. Either the obituaries data do not include a representative sample of lesbians, or the Cameron group's population estimates based on their survey data are invalid.

 

An observer with training in research methodology would most likely conclude that both sets of data are fatally flawed.

 

 

 

Oh and it turned out it was funded by the Family Research Institute, the conservative Christian Colorado Springs-based think tank that proclaims as its "one overriding mission: to generate empirical research on issues that threaten the traditional family, particularly homosexuality, AIDS, sexual social policy, and drug abuse." Dr. Cameron serves as chairman of FRI.

 

 

 

Personally what I think has happened to the data is simply that before the eighties it was uncommon to be out of the closet whereas those of us who grew up after the stonewall riots were increasingly happier coming out of the closet. That would mean there are a lot more out younger gay men than out older gay men (which I think is fairly accurate from what I've seen from the scene).

 

Which would mean on any given day whilst there may be a normal distribution of deaths, it would be skewed towards the younger generation when it comes to them being given an orbit in a gay newspaper.

[krimi]

Isn't it so strange that people can make judgments about a group based on one simple case or encounter that hardly represents the group as a whole? But since we are all guilty of it at one point or another, we humans are pretty bad aren't we?

[deathdrow]

My friend told me he was gay this morning. I wasn't too surprised, but it made me feel kind of special that he trusts me enough to tell me.

[warri0r45]

Isn't it so strange that people can make judgments about a group based on one simple case or encounter that hardly represents the group as a whole? But since we are all guilty of it at one point or another, we humans are pretty bad aren't we?

 

Indeed, humans are very poor when it comes to understanding statistics and the truths it can reveal (or rather the false conclusions it can point out). I encourage everyone to learn a little about statistics and how scientific conclusions are validated with statistics. It's a great tool to use in pointing out and dismissing crappy conclusions.

[mlclm]

Isn't it so strange that people can make judgments about a group based on one simple case or encounter that hardly represents the group as a whole? But since we are all guilty of it at one point or another, we humans are pretty bad aren't we?

 

Indeed, humans are very poor when it comes to understanding statistics and the truths it can reveal (or rather the false conclusions it can point out). I encourage everyone to learn a little about statistics and how scientific conclusions are validated with statistics. It's a great tool to use in pointing out and dismissing crappy conclusions.

This. I used to think correlation implied causation, but then I took a statistics class. I'm not sure if it helped, though.

 

Also, deathdrow, you're an awesome friend. :thumbup:

[Arcantica]

Jagex must not mind as they have an openly gay mod working for them. Apparently the other mods call him the princess lol.

 

 

 

I've never had to deal with discrimination much, I wouldn't say I'm in the closet but I don't go around screaming it either.

[VEGHATERMEATLOVER]

If we say we are against gays we'll be banned for homophobia, so people can blindly support gays but can't blindly not support them

 

mod comment?

[Rainy_Day]

If we say we are against gays we'll be banned for homophobia, so people can blindly support gays but can't blindly not support them

 

mod comment?

You're allowed to argue your opinion, but so long as it makes no derogatory comments towards homosexuals. If anything said is rude, inappropriate, or in ill taste, then you're likely to have one of us warning you.

[VEGHATERMEATLOVER]

If we say we are against gays we'll be banned for homophobia, so people can blindly support gays but can't blindly not support them

 

mod comment?

You're allowed to argue your opinion, but so long as it makes no derogatory comments towards homosexuals. If anything said is rude, inappropriate, or in ill taste, then you're likely to have one of us warning you.

Oh ok, but ussualy in a thread you should be allowed to make derogatry comments. For example if I start a thread named "Judaism: right or wrong?" (actully can I start that thread) nearly every post against will be argued against and anything for will be fine.

 

I'm just saying; it's a one sided argument.

[mlclm]

Oh ok, but ussualy in a thread you should be allowed to make derogatry comments. For example if I start a thread named "Judaism: right or wrong?" (actully can I start that thread) nearly every post against will be argued against and anything for will be fine.

 

I'm just saying; it's a one sided argument.

... Not really. There's a difference between saying "I believe homosexuality is right/wrong because of X" and "[bleep]s should die." The occasional rage in this thread is because of arguments against someone using a completely idiotic reasoning.

[meol]

It's funny how exactly the same question comes up in religion and sport threads. There's a huge difference between debating something and making derogatory comments. We still have managed to hold civil discussions on heated topics like those, and I'm pretty sure homosexuality doesn't have to be the exception.

 

If your opinion is against the consensus, then you'll need to have sounder arguments and a better logic, that's all.

[Alg]

It's funny how exactly the same question comes up in religion and sport threads. There's a huge difference between debating something and making derogatory comments. We still have managed to hold civil discussions on heated topics like those, and I'm pretty sure homosexuality doesn't have to be the exception.

 

If your opinion is against the consensus, then you'll need to have sounder arguments and a better logic, that's all.

Or just deal with being different than the rest of the group. It's not a bad thing.

[meol]

But that's not fun at all. ;) What would be of OT if we all agreed to disagree from the very beginning? Plus, your beliefs can only really grow when challenged.

 

-And the new smileys suck.

[Zierro]

Plus, your beliefs can only really grow when challenged.

 

Or crumble terribly.

 

-And the new smileys suck.

 

No, the older ones do. What be your rebuttal to that? :)

[Alg]

Plus, your beliefs can only really grow when challenged.

 

Or crumble terribly.

But then you get to rebuild them :mrgreen:

 

As for the smileys...

:twss:

[warri0r45]

If we say we are against gays we'll be banned for homophobia, so people can blindly support gays but can't blindly not support them

 

mod comment?

You're allowed to argue your opinion, but so long as it makes no derogatory comments towards homosexuals. If anything said is rude, inappropriate, or in ill taste, then you're likely to have one of us warning you.

Oh ok, but ussualy in a thread you should be allowed to make derogatry comments. For example if I start a thread named "Judaism: right or wrong?" (actully can I start that thread) nearly every post against will be argued against and anything for will be fine.

 

I'm just saying; it's a one sided argument.

 

This is one of the things that really annoys me about internet debates. Invariably someone always has a massive persecution complex because people don't agree with them. Give me one example of someone who has been banned for being against gays.

[Nenga]

If we say we are against gays we'll be banned for homophobia, so people can blindly support gays but can't blindly not support them

 

mod comment?

You're allowed to argue your opinion, but so long as it makes no derogatory comments towards homosexuals. If anything said is rude, inappropriate, or in ill taste, then you're likely to have one of us warning you.

Oh ok, but ussualy in a thread you should be allowed to make derogatry comments. For example if I start a thread named "Judaism: right or wrong?" (actully can I start that thread) nearly every post against will be argued against and anything for will be fine.

 

I'm just saying; it's a one sided argument.

Giving a good argument why someone is wrong, and saying "you're wrong, shut up you stupid <enter slur of choice here>", are two different things.

[krimi]

I don't think you should be making derogatory comments in a reasonable debate regardless of what the debate is about. Last time I checked, derogatory comments and differences in opinion are two different things. Also, I don't see why people have this victim mentality when they are against homosexuality on the internet.

I don't know why hextriplets keeps throwing out diversions; if you're against homosexuality, just state your reasons why with sound reasons. The posters in this thread are much more open to listen to different ideals. Unlike our current society, amirite?

[Nenga]

I don't think you should be making derogatory comments in a reasonable debate regardless of what the debate is about. Last time I checked, derogatory comments and differences in opinion are two different things. Also, I don't see why people have this victim mentality when they are against homosexuality on the internet.

I don't know why hextriplets keeps throwing out diversions; if you're against homosexuality, just state your reasons why with sound reasons. The posters in this thread are much more open to listen to different ideals. Unlike our current society, amirite?

Oh don't mind him, he does that.

[Sy_Accursed]

I personally find some derogatory comments abut gays, usual from straight men, to be quite funny.

 

Eg the whole you take penis therefore you are girly argument.

 

Most girls who have tried anal intercourse will gladly tell you how much it hurts, so surely that anal intercourse is common place for gay men shows we can take pain and therefore (by the archaic concepts homophobes use of a "man") we are probably more manly than them as they'd never take the pain.

 

 

Or there is of course the whole "How do you know you are gay if you've never slept with a woman?"; which is easily counted with "How do you know you are straight if you've never slept with a man?"

[EpicWin]

Nothing wrong with it. Religion can seriously go put itself in fire. Why do we need to base our life on some fictional character and follow a guy's opinion from a book? Seriously, live your life like it is and I don't really care if a person is homosexual or not. Let them be and religion has no right to say whether it's right or wrong.

[Sy_Accursed]

Well the hormones being opposite/wrong leads to developing the wrong organs, traits etc.

 

Hence my people who have sex changes take hormones. Taking the testosterone causes voice to deepen, adams apple to form, periods to finish, stimulates body hair growth and reduces breast tissue.

The oestrogen causes breast tissue growth, raises voice, reduces body hair growth etc.

 

But there's no proof at all of relation to sexuality.

[Alg]

The ironic thing is that I'm heterosexual. I just don't care who people have sex with. It really isn't any of my business, is it? :mrgreen:

I do, however, care when people act offensively towards another group, regardless of who it is, especially if it shows their own hypocrisy.

[Sy_Accursed]

The ironic thing is that I'm heterosexual. I just don't care who people have sex with. It really isn't any of my business, is it? :mrgreen:

I do, however, care when people act offensively towards another group, regardless of who it is, especially if it shows their own hypocrisy.

 

Good man =]

 

And this is the exact view point of most people these days.

 

Pretty much all 100 or so of my high school year group expressed this view to me.

Then all my college friends and uni friends too; heck even random people I've met in clubs or w/e who happen to ask have this view.