Replies

Wow, that is a lot of information! But, you must have made up all that stuff, cuz I never heard about it on the news, or any tv show. It must just be right wing Christian fanatic talk.

Well, you weren't far off. Most of that information was created by groups concerned with demonizing homosexuals. They might call themselves "Christian", but their objectives have nothing to do with the spirit of Christ's teachings. Their sampling techniques are a joke. Polling 16 obituaries to find the average age of death of homosexuals???

If you want to believe something, you will. These studies are for the emotional, Romantic, feeling, intuitive types. They're on a par with Danielle Steele and pop psychology.

This stuff might make for lurid reading if that's your bag, but any scientific mathematician, sociologist or psychologist wouldn't give it the time of day.

Being deluded can feel good, I understand.

Belial,

As you can see, I'm engaged in a conversation about that research. I would like to ask you something. The only substantial objection you stated was this:

"Their sampling techniques are a joke. Polling 16 obituaries to find the average age of death of homosexuals???"

From the research it says this: "Obituaries numbering 6,516 from 16 U.S. homosexual journals over the past 12 years were compared to a large sample of obituaries from regular newspapers.23"

It appears to me that you misinterpreted 16 -journals- to mean 16 homosexuals, but apparently the real number is 6,516, which is indeed a pretty large sample. Was this just a misinterpretation on your part, or are you aware of something I'm not from reading this information?

Are there any other specific facts you're questioning in it? Other than the alarmism about oral sex (which I -do- still find discouraging), it does seem reasonably well sourced. SOME of it's conclusions I've seen before from pretty solid sources, so I don't think it's all phony. Basically, I'm interested to see if it really is debunkable or not, and since you seem interested in debunking it, have a go, I'll give it a fair reading. Your one attempt so far though doesn't seem accurate.

Happy2BMe,

If you have any contacts with the source you are quoting, I would seriously consider suggesting moving the one substantial note in the oral sex paragraph into the part about fecal sex, as a parenthesis citation which points out that oral sex that -follows- sodomy and thus involves ingesting feces, is indeed just as dangerous as what they describe as fecal sex.

Qwinn