How To Defeat Gay Arguements

Junto Society ^ | 12/14/2002 | Scott Douglas Lively

[Kevin Curry]

I certainly couldn't "choose" to become physically attracted to members of the same sex, could you?

Happens all the time in prison.

[SkyPilot]

The article mentions the homosexual agenda towards children. Having witnessed this first hand, I cannot express to you how tragic it is---and outrageous.

Homosexual activists have targeted children--and no amount of "Spin" can escape it.

It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin.
Luke 17:2

[hove]

Hmmmm...sure are a lot of dudes around here...spending a lot of time thinking about homos. Gotta make ya wonder....

[Kevin Curry]

Gotta make ya wonder....

Really? What does it make you wonder?

[ThinkDifferent]

Homosexual sex does not cause AIDS; sex with an infected partner does. Two uninfected men in a monogamous relationship have exactly as much risk of AIDS as an uninfected man and woman in a monogamous relationship: zero.

[melsec]

Hank,

Well said in post 4. It's pretty obvious to me that, whether your an evolutionist or a creationist, the pooh chute is not an orifice that is meant for shoving things up and will not produce a reproductive outcome.

Mel

[longfellow]

I suggest you all read the PINK SWASTIKA and see what else the gays have given the world. It explains why those SS uniforms were so sharp!

[Dimensio]

I've not read The Pink Swastika, but I've had personal correspondence with one of the authors on a public forum.

Basically, he was full of vitrol and rage, but he could never answer solid rebuttals to his claims. Didn't make a favourable impression.

[Dimensio]

You should know better than to argue with Kevin Curry. He knows everything, he even knows your positions better than you do. That's why he frequently pops up in discussions, tells people what they believe, then never responds to anyone who tells him that he is wrong.

[Archie Bunker on steroids]

I like it...heres another.

What do queers consider hemmoroids?

Speed bumps

[PatrioticAmerican]

"So your response to any argument from a homosexual or a person who is not anti-homosexual is to cut them off and never let them make any statements?"

You sooooo don't get it. But that's OK, all kinds of dumb people make me feel smarter that I really am.

[Dimensio]

You sooooo...

Yes, but you want to put homosexuals into death-camps!

[Dimensio]

Yes?

Do you have an argument with the notion that there might exist a genetically based physiological predisposition toward alcohol dependence?

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

Ahh!!! You've got to love it!!! You are now calling "different" ideas inane and stupid. Sounds like outright intollerance to me! Stop the bigotry! Please stop the hate... (By the way, your response was non-sense and did not make your case that men poking men in the butt is not a genetic pre-disposition vs. genetically "set" that way from birth.).

And no, you never address the CLinton ambassador (and many other men) who have had very normal sex lives with women, not being raped in order for the women to have children with them. These men obviously were sexually attracted to women, had children with them, then **decided** to go off and have sex with men. No, I refuse to believe that they were all raped by their wives (now ex-wives) and their genetics certainly did not change. They made a decision just as thousands of homosexuals make the decision to no longer be homosexual. Or are all of them liars?

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

Two uninfected men in a monogamous relationship have exactly as much risk of AIDS as an uninfected man and woman in a monogamous relationship: zero

Oh... that's why the rate of AIDS is the same between heterosexual people (even promiscious ones) as it is with homosexual men... NOT!!!

The funny thing about all of the pro man-poke-man-in-butt arguments is, like the previous one they put half of the truth in them. Oh, homosexual sex doesn't transfer AIDS. It's the virus that does it. And yes, gunshots in the chest don't cause pain and death. It's the bullet that does it. Therefore feel free to point loaded guns at people's chests and pull the trigger. Your logic is great! I can use it to do/condone anything that I want!

[Dimensio]

You are now calling "different" ideas inane and stupid.

No, I'm calling your total dismissal of genetic explanations for predisposition toward alcoholism inane and stupid. You dismissed it with a wave of incredulity rather than any reasoning.

And no, you never address the CLinton ambassador (and many other men) who have had very normal sex lives with women, not being raped in order for the women to have children with them.

That's because I've not met them and I don't know how they think/were thinking. Maybe they are bisexual. Maybe they were trying to 'play it straight' because they did not want to admit to anyone (even themself) that they were homosexual. Maybe they really did change (either consciously or unconsciously). I don't know, and I don't really care.

[Dimensio]

Uh, so are you saying that two uninfected men in a monogamous relationship will cause AIDS? You seem to be 'refuting' his argument with a complete non-sequitur.

Yes, homosexual men have higher rates of promiscuity. Yes, anal sex is a more 'efficient' means of transmitting a virus. That does not change the fact that two homosexual men who are not infected with any STDs and who are in a monogamous relationshpi are not at any higher risk of AIDS than a man and a woman in a monogamous relationship. His statement isn't false just because you insult it.

[PatrioticAmerican]

"Yes, but you want to put homosexuals into death-camps!"

Yeah, that's what I said. You must be a liberal.

Buh-by little girl. I never argue with liberal morons: They bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

[Dimensio]

Yeah, that's what... Yeah, but you want to put homosexuals in death camps!

What's wrong? I'm using exactly the same kind of argument style that you proposed: cutting off my opponent and interjecting some insulting statement that is likely totally inaccurate.

Are you too stupid to recognize your own debate tactic used against you, or are you just too arrogant to admit that you were proposing something quite childish and you are embarassed that it is being thrown back into your face?