Posted on 01/14/2006 4:14:10 PM PST by wagglebee
MillerCreek said "How about this: PROVE TO US that there is not a greater occurence of the virus that causes AIDS among male homosexuals, in comparison with that rate of frequency among heterosexuals."
You denied making the claim. Yet in post 270 you said:
Worldwide, the major source of HIV infection is heterosexual sex.There's your link.
Thank you, scripter.
A lot of people "care about" homosexuals and the impact homosexuality behaviors have upon society, even their own neighborhoods.
To write that "who care what (a homosexual) does with his member" is nonsense, since many people do care and it's obvious from just reading today that the issue poses concern to many human beings, worldwide.
Another thing and that is calling someone "a liar" as you have me indicates a great deal of negative EMOTION about someone's statement/s. Why not simply clarify and move on? Your resort and so soon to a total stranger (I think, since I have no idea who you are nor have I ever viewed your comments anywhere else on FR, nor commented to or about them) by applying pejoratives indicates you are responding to some unidentified element here with a greater deal of negative emotion than is appropriate to public, impersonal discussion.
Not once, but repeatedly, you've applied forceful language to attempt to denigrate much of what I've written here, labelling statements as "lies" when they are anything but. You also have no process by which you could possibly establish any moral condition to my comments with any specificity so why the default to "lying" when, in fact, the usual response would be to attempt to clarify some misunderstanding, to provide greater information or ignore.
You, instead, attempt to assign negative characteristics to mere statements here that, actually, are supported by academics, despite the fact that you may not and are not aware of that. In which case, usually, people ask and if denied, move on.
I consider your ongoing "you're a liar" to be not only odd, but to be deceitful in the sense that it reflects your need to denigrate me rather than establish truth, accuracy.
However, it's been established that you've misrepresented and alluded to other rather outrageous distortions and then blamed others when asked to substantiate or explain further.
In which case, there's no discussion here. I and a few others have asked quite specific questions as to some of what you've written and what you do rather than respond to that is paste the comments of others over again and bury your ongoing pejoratives among those.
I've seen your behavior before on the internet and it has always indicated someone who is not concerned with the information being discussed by others but indicates, instead, a need to create disharmony, disorder, confuse and avoid.
Thus, I again write, you are trolling.
A very long work day prevents me pitching in anymore than I have. If you were wondering, you're looking very credible in this discussion.
Why, thanks, scripter. I had more time than usual today to actually confront a certain degree of problems, ha.
Thank you, again, for your comments. Are appreciated.
Agreed
I agree. This thread was posted in news, but it seems that the "heated discussion" with some pro-homosexual FReepers forced it to be moved to "Smoky Backroom." So, I don't know why Jim Robinson's statement about opposing "all forms" of liberalism is being ignored.
Except that if we do, they become a public nuisance. Make them work in bordellos.
I don't have a problem with restricting the practice to red light districts.
It works in Holland, but in America it might be as hard as getting motocycle riders to wear helmuts.
Bump to your excellent observations.
(FR seems to be working now, and I'm playing catchup.)
I stand in awe. Great elucidation of the wormtongue's methods.
I understand there are over 400 different strains of viruses, which cause the common cold. For a moment, let's assume that to be true. This would mean that to find a 'cure' for the common cold, one would need to find a cure which would be successful against 400 viruses. That is a virtual impossibility.
I see homosexuality as being analogous to that.
I don't have my normal links handy. Find Scripter (I think he's on this thread up a ways), click his name, and read the links he's got about former homosexuals. Read their stories, and read what those who have treated thousands of homosexuals have found.
There aren't 4000 causes of homosexuality. It's becoming more and more clear what the causes are, and those who want out of the "gay" life have a good chance, if they hear the truth. If the lie is told that "you were born that way and can't change", then they don't seek the help that is available.
If you want to discuss this issue with me please read my comments more carefully. I said no such thing.
Bottom line is, if we could prove homosexuality was genetic would that make gay marriage more acceptable? I don't think Gay marriage should be legalized. I don't care why gays are gay.
Sorry, 400 causes. I added an extra zero.
Just click on Scripter's name up this thread and look at his links. I just don't have time to get them for you. He's got zillions of articles, arranged by topic, and you can read for hours about the causes of homosexuality. They may be unknown to you, but they are not unknown to others.
LOL.You missed my point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.