Replies

Your defense of the de-pathologizing of homosexuality and the "studies" that lead to it are completely negated by the BEHAVIOR of those who sought to do it.

First, I disagree that I'm "defending" the de-pathologizing. I simply commented on historical fact that's missing from the article. Also, those are studies, not "studies".

Secondly, I disagree with the behavior presumption. Edison was a complete a--hole whose behavior often went beyond unacceptable to "should be shot". Same with McArthur. Didn't make them wrong. Behavior has no effect on the math or science of something and I prefer to be above all that.( Matter of fact, most programmers I know behave badly. But again - that's more anecdote and thus not relevant.)

Truth doesn't need these things.

I agree, but we're talking science, not truth. Truth and fact are not the same thing.

Speaking anecdotally (for which there IS often something to be said)

And here you completely lost me. I'm in IT; our motto is "Data is not anecdata." I don't accept my OWN anecdotes as factual, so I'm certainly not going to accept anyone elses. Statistical evidence and proper testing trumps anecdotes any day of the week, every hour of the day.

Every one was on psychotropic drugs, had serious anger issues, and had debilitating problems relating to other people.

And I've worked with homosexuals who weren't on any drugs, were the mildest and calmest people you ever met, and had no problems relating to anybody. And I've known straights who were drugged out, had serious anger issues, and couldn't relate to other people. See? There's anecdotal "evidence" for you. Anecdotes are meaningless. Let's stick with science and fact.

If you want to argue moral turpitude and how it's a sin against God, great. I'll listen to you all day. But let's not confuse personal and religious belief with statistics and double-blind testing.

You are willfully blind. The physical and psychological damage done by homosexual behavior is an open secret to those who are honest enough to examine the data. The CDC and FDA contain a wealth of information relating to the verifiable risks associated with male-to-male homosexual behavior, and other sources document similar hazards, both behavioral and physical, of lesbian activity. The anecdotal observations merely confirm the hard evidence, and blow away the carefully crafted facade of almost "gay supremacy" that the entertainment and news media would have you believe. When was the last time they presented a down-and-out, drugged, disease-ridden homosexual as an example? Instead, it's always the rich elite types with money to treat their disorders into temporary obscurity - ALWAYS.

There is a very good scientific reason that homosexually active men are banned from donating blood and organs. That they demand the "right" to donate is proof of their irrational persecution syndrome. Since when to people who've visited Haiti and the U.K protest for a "right" to donate blood? When do any sane people do so?