Gay marriage..r the 2 mutually exclusive?
 

I personally think the ramifications and consequences of gay marriage being allowed are detrimental to core family values. I have lots of opinions and facts that I can post, but I am interested in what other GCers think before I go into it. If there is interest, I will elaborate. Here's an article to get us started.

Apologies if this topic is posted anywhere else.

************************************************** **

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush indicated Wednesday he opposes extending marriage rights to homosexuals, saying he believes marriage "is between a man and a woman."

Bush said it is "important for society to welcome each individual," but administration lawyers are looking for some way to legally limit marriage to heterosexuals.

"I believe marriage is between a man and a woman, and I think we ought to codify that one way or another," Bush told reporters at a White House news conference. "And we've got lawyers looking at the best way to do that."

Bush's comments drew praise from conservative groups, but criticism from gay rights advocates.

"The president has taken a courageous stand in favor of traditional marriage at a moment in American history when the courts are conspiring with anti-family extremists to undermine our nation's most vital institution," said the Rev. Louis Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition.

But a spokeswoman for a gay rights group faulted the president.

"We are very disappointed that the president is trying to further codify discrimination into law," said Winnie Stachelberg, political director of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay rights group.

Earlier this month, Bush said a constitutional amendment to block gay marriages might not be necessary, although the proposal has the support of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee.

The question of gay marriage has moved to the foreground of American politics after a U.S. Supreme Court decision in June that struck down state laws banning sodomy. Canada courts also have recently recognized gay marriages. In addition, the Massachusetts high court is expected to issue a ruling soon on whether the state can allow gay marriages.

The prospect has outraged religious conservatives, an important voting bloc in the Republican Party. And a recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll suggest the Supreme Court ruling has prompted a backlash: The number of people who have endorsed the idea that homosexual relations should be legal has dropped from 60 percent to 48 percent since the ruling, and only 40 percent of Americans say they now would support civil unions for homosexuals.

Even as he made it clear that he did not support the idea of gay marriage, Bush appeared to issue a call for tolerance.

"Yes, I am mindful that we're all sinners," the president said Wednesday when asked for his views on homosexuality. "And I caution those who may try to take the speck out of the neighbor's eye when they've got a log in their own."

"I think it's very important for our society to respect each individual, to welcome those with good hearts, to be a welcoming country," Bush added. "On the other hand, that does not mean that somebody like me needs to compromise on an issue such as marriage."

A number of states have passed laws forbidding gays from marrying or barring the recognition of a same-sex marriage performed in another state. The federal government's 1996 Defense of Marriage Act affirms that states are not required to recognize a same-sex marriage performed in another state.

The act also defines marriage as "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife."

Your reasoning sounds really similar to what white folks said for decades to justify bans on interracial marriages.

it be nice if you elaborated...i have no idea what you're talking about

The problem here, in my opinion, is that people are confusing legal marriage with their religious and/or moral views on marriage. The two are totally different and since this country was founded on the principles of freedom of religion and separartion of church and state, religious views and opinions on marriage should not even be considering when discussing a change in law.

Any couple, opposite or same sex, should receive the same rights and benefits of the law. A gay couple should be able to enjoy the same rights as a straight couple when it comes to healthcare, inheritances, or anything else along those lines. Legally, the two groups should be treated the same.

I will refrain from discussing my personal religious and moral beliefs because they truly are not applicable. This issue needs to be more focused on the legal, not religious, marriage of two people.

I'll try to be a little clearer. You said you "personally think the ramifications and consequences of gay marriage being allowed are detrimental to core family values." People tried to justify bans on interracial marriages by alluding to the same idea of some kind of irreperable damage being done to families, to the children, to society. See what I'm saying?

Personally, I see no reason to come out against gay marriage. I've known plenty of gay couples who had more stable, loving and committed relationships than most of the married hetero couples in my family or immediate circle.

hmmm....
 

I think that see we live in a democracy and have laws that supposedly secure ones right to be who they want to be, there really should not be an issue with homosexuals seeking the same rights as heterosexuals.

I agree that similar comments against homosexual marriage were the same for interracial marriage. It was as if interracial marriage was going to be the death of society.

I also agree that there are plenty of homes in which homosexuals raise loving responsible citizens.

I think no one has the right to judge anyone and that as long as there is a democracy, people should live and be how they see fit. Since there is a large population of homosexuals, we as a society need to wake up and start making appropriate and necessary changes.


I watched the Adoption Story on TLC and there was a seemingly loving couple who adopted two boys into their home. Where this issue is concerned, there are too many children residing in the foster care system and I think part of the reason is that there is too much emphasis on ones perception of morals and values all at the detriment of these children. If there are 2 people who are loving, stable and caring who wish to open their arms and their home to a child(ren) who came from complete dysfunction, I see no reason why they should be denied.

I know that was off the topic, however, I thought it was a good example of how our desire for moral decency is slowly killing a generation of potential leaders and responsible citizens.

I figured I'd be the only voice of dissent..but that's ok :cool:

I think the more tolerant this society becomes of every little perversion one wants to do...the more INtolerant we are actually becoming toward those that want to stand up for what they believe in based on their moral beliefs. If you change the institution of marriage from a man and a woman....what's to stop it from including bygamy/polygamy...or marrying a cow! Although I think homosexuality is a perversion of humanity, that is NOT why I believe the definition of marriage should only include a man and a woman. I think once you change it, the floodgates will be open and you'll have Mike Tyson trying to marry his pet Tiger.

Also, it irks me to no end when people compare any facet of race/racism and homosexuality! I cannot go outside of my house and decide not to be black today! I can't cover it up nor did I have a choice in the matter! (except Michael Jackson)...however I no several gay, bi people who can and do. To compare one fallacious argument (how SOME whites felt about interracial marriage) does not make a valid point on the subject of homosexual marriage. And this is not some "white man" argument!

A man with 16 wives may raise good children to...but that doesn't mean that is a good situation for children to grow up in. It amazes me how topics we dispute today would have had people marching in the streets protesting years ago. Some would say that is progress, but I think it's just another sign of our society going to hell in a handbasket!

And someone mentioned that people are confusing their religious beliefs with their political views. Uh....well if that's what you believe, are you supposed to be a part time Christian?? Are you supposed to leave what you believe outside the Courts and Congress? I wonder is that what God wants his people to do...be one way in the church...but another way at work....:eek: Secularists pride themselves on passing laws based on how they feel...but its not popular to do when you are "religious." ANd again, I think the issue has less to do with how you may feel about what someone does with their partner, and more about the definition of marriage between a MAN and a WOMAN.

If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything. Just because its popular today to be liberal and accepting of everything folx want to do..doesn't mean I'm going to follow the crowd. Its an unpopular viewpoint...but that's just my opinion..

Very well said. I too agree with you. What is the country coming too? I know it sounds cliche' but we need to do some serious praying for this country, and where it is headed. While I do not agree with some of the things that President Bush has done while in office, I do applaud him for not being afraid to profess his faith.

Amen!! I am so scared for the direction this country is going in....

I could have sworn there was a previous thread on here about this topic, but I can't find it.:confused:

Anyway, most folks know that I don't support gay marriages, but what bothers me more is when people compare their struggle to that of African Americans.

The two are like oil and water.

1963 Communist Goals
 

I'm kinda hijacking my own thread.....I am posting theCommunist Goals from 1963 that were read into the United States Congressional Record by the Honorable A.S. Herlong of Florida in 1963. (In response to Neosoulchild's remarks about what is the world coming to :) These are from the book "The Naked Communist) by Cleon Skousen..and they indicate what needs to happen to turn the United States into a Communist Nation. Its scary to see how many of these have already been accomplished.:eek: :eek: :( :mad:

HOw many can you count??

[From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen]

CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament of the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand.

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use united force to solve economic, political or social problems.

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction over nations and individuals alike.

One doesn't choose to be gay any more than one chooses to be black. It's hysterical to me when people suggest homosexuality is a choice. Why would anyone choose to live on the fringes of society and be discriminated against?

I'm sensing alot of homophobia here, which isn't surprising given how many of us were brought up in the church. But what's sad about that it the Delta who told me about this message board is a lesbian. I hope those of you in these sisterhoods understand that some of the women you bonded wih/cried with/laughed with are gay.

And I don't understand this fear about the direction this country is going into. Look at where it started and what it's based on--slavery, murder and rape. Our first presidents were slave holders. Whatever is going on now, as far a is business as usual.

I support this isuue 100%, gays have the right as human beings to share their lives with whomever they want. The basis for it being wrong is a moral/religious one as well stated earlier by Classylady.. Imagine if one tried to stop a tall and short person from being married based on their morals. I know sexuality is much more extreme but when we allow people to force their views and opinions on our right to make decisions then we as a society are failing at the principal of democracy.

Yea...if a man wants to marry his pet donkey...why not!! He's a human being and has the right to share his bed and his life with whomever he wants...:rolleyes:

Since we have separation of church and state, I do not see any reason for banning same-sex marriages. I have not heard of any valid non-religious reasons why homosexual marriage should be prohibited. This should've been challenged a long time ago.

Oh people don't choose to be homosexual...tell that to 5 girls I went to undergrad with that thought they were gay...and now they're married/dating men! Maybe some don't choose...but some damn well do....and like I said....I don't have a choice in whether I want to be Black. I can't go to church and get saved and say "Oh wow....I'm Free....I'm not Black anymore!!" :mad:

Why does one have to be labeled homophobic to disagree with something. I don't like it when people wear white after labor day...doesn't mean I hate them. I understand homosexuality and do not fear it. I just happen to think its a perversion of nature.

And here we go with saying our presidents were slave owners...and that proves what??.... I love the way people point out the mistakes/misjudgments/prejudices of our forefathers as if that nullifies the fact that this is the greatest country in the world and that our moral "stick to it-ness" was stronger back then. Just as the Africans in Africa are enlaving their own people TODAY...doesn't mean that Africa isnt a beautiful country....to visit.

thank you!!!!
 

very well said sf!!!!

Last time I checked a donkey and a human being were not anywhere on the same level and to compare a relationship that two human beings share with that of an animal and a human is insulting.
On your previous comments in reference to communism, those goals discussed by The United States (a democracy) on the goals of a communist state are hardly set in stone, considering that the United States has continued to re-affirm its role as the "worlds police" by spreading democracy through out the world (which in theory is a good thing). However much like the U.S. we can not decide what the goals of ANOTHER government should be (Iraq is a mess), other people should not be able to dictate what others choose to do with other consenting adults. If the case of homosexual marriage is a moral issue so are many other parts of society. Including but not limited to
1. Smoking cigarettes
2. Consuming alchohol
3. Watching porn
4. Abortion
5. Posting on greekchat (have you seen the "Have you Ever thread?" ;)

and the list goes on and on, should we also dictate to sensible adults all the things they should be able to do with their lives based on others morals. Its interesting you mentioned communism as a reference when the basis of its idea removes choice, which is exactly what a democracy is against. I am quite religious and believe in my Lord and savior, but that is MY belief if you WANT to share it it's YOUR decision as a human. If we want to be religious Jesus gave those a CHOICE on if they believed in him and his teachings, he did not FORCE anyone to believe or conform to what he said. That is a personal choice, that one makes. Much like marriage.

Honeykiss1974, elements of this were discussed in the "Gays" thread on APhiA Avenue. That might or might not be what you're referring to.

By the way I agree with most of what Love_Spell_6 has posted on this topic. People can do what they want (as we see on TV daily) but I get so sick and tired of people who disagree with the alternative lifestyle getting almost automatically carriacutured (sp) as homophobic, haters, insecure and all the rest.

if everybody get's an opinion, shouldn't that mean everybody?

Interesting Topic
 

Hmmmmmmmmmm, I agree that the belief that homosexuality is wrong is based in religion alone. Most who do not agree with gays would say that they feel this way b/c it is against God and the Bible (so an atheist probably wouldn't be affected by this at all). That's fine, as a Chrstian I personally don't agree w/homosexuality either. However, as was stated b4, this counrty is founded on freedom of religion and separation of Church and State. That means that laws cannot be dictated based on any one's religious beliefs or values. If you feel that abiding by our constitution makes you a "part time Christian" then you should argue that the constitution is wrong. You should argue to the Supreme Court that the Constitution should be changed. However, until that happens, we have to abide by it (inso much as the laws that we write). However, to give you another example of separation of Church and state, that is less disputed: many states honor "common law marriages". However, we all know that the Bible speaks against sex outside of marriage. Should we also change this law? or better yet, should we make it illegal for couples to engage in these sorts of partnerships/sexual relationships?
Just my thoughts,
Marie

I agree with you, Wonderful1908.

Since Christianity is the big "vilator of the moment", will all other religions be held to the same standard and rule? There are plenty religions out there besides Christianity. If I deem the pyramid on the back of our currency to be religious in nature, will it also be removed?

We can't just say "well, common sense tells us....", because everyone's rule of common sense is different. For example, it didn't make sense to me for the Ten Commandments monument in Alabama to be removed from the courthouse, but yet and still in this very same courthouse (and all others) a person must swear upon a Bible " to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me God"? :confused:

I don't believe in common law marriages either. Even if I wasn't religious, I would feel the same for reasons that don't even have to do with religion (women issues).

I don't see Islam, Shinto, Judaism, Buddahism or any other religion, using religious justification as reason for a marriage not being allowed. I don't believe that christianity is the villian here at all, (that would be to easy) the villian here is CHOICE. Gays who want to marry choose to do something outside the realm of Christianity, and it is frowned upon.
If we agree that people should be allowed to be Christians and believe in Jesus freely why can't people choose not to, and not have to worry about their personal choices being dictated for them, Who likes being told what to do or believe?
I want someone to answer this question: outside of the Bible what is your basis for gay marriage being wrong?

If someone disagrees with "gay marriages" (for Biblical reasons), why do they need to justify it using a basis"outside of the Bible" that basically says that marriage is a scared act between a man and woman?

Is any other basis ok except a Biblical one?

So, ok, If the whole point of this is a legal rights issue,let's get rid of any legal distinction or respect that marriage currently has. There should no longer be ANY legal distinctions between those who are married and those who are single. Let's abolish the practice of divorce (since people will be able to leave a relationship like single folks with no fear of legal consequences such as alimony, etc.), different tax rates of married couples, and make polygamy ok (man/woman to take more than one wife/husband ).

I don't think that this issue requires one to turn their beliefs off and on. This country is one that was founded on the separation of church and state. For each citizen to enjoy all of the rights afforded to them under the constitution, that separation must be maintained, regardless of what your (not you personally) personal beliefs are.

What happens if the majority religion of the country changes? What happens if Christians become the minority and this country is run by Gozer worshippers? I sure don't want them telling me how to live my life based on what their god tells them is right. This may sound extreme, but it really isn't. It's important to be able to see another side of an issue.

Hello all,
This is my first post in Greekchat. I would like to say that although I don't have a view as yet as to whether gay marriages should be legalized, as a law student, I would like to comment on the notion of separation of church and state.

Although as far as I can tell, courts try to *formally* uphold a separation of church and state, to some extent, judicial opinions in many areas of law like freedom of speech is informed by the court deciding whether the state's interest in maintaining morality, etc. outweighs the individual's right to expression. So, for instance, when the court considered whether child porn, hate speech, etc. should be constitutionally-allowed it factored in the state's interests, which were largely based in morality, which is largely informed by the *dominant religious views* in this country.

So although there is a formal separation of church and state, to some extent, many, if not most, laws are informed by the moral fabric of the country - which is often a result of core religious values. So at the end of the day, I think that the "separation of church and state" is not as separate as we might think.

This thread has opened my eyes to a lot in the past few days. My reasons against same sex marriages are totally religious. My fear comes from the fact that God destroyed a city for this, so what is stopping him from destroying America since we are condoning the same behavior? But as ClassyLady has pointed out what if the majority religion changes? I would not want to be subject to the beliefs of others because I will only follow the beliefs of the God that I worship. I am still against gay marriages, but this thread has really helped to me see a lot.

Re: Interesting Topic
 

ITA...

Ok lets see........reasons to be against homosexuality other than religion..... I believe its against the rules of nature. If the population was to become homosexual, natural conception would cease, and we would have to rely on test tubes and sperm donors to replenish the earth. I do not believe this is natural. I also believe its just as disgusting and un-natural as beastiality and necrophilia. Next I assume we'll be in court saying if a man loves a dead person or an animal....who are we to stand in his way of eternal love!! :rolleyes:

Also, someone mentioned it was insulting to say compare homosexual marriage to marrying an animal. Well I am asserting that once you change the institution of marriage from a man and a woman....all is fair game.. A man marrying 16 women and folx wanting to marry animals (if you think this is not realistic...think again). I think it is insulting to insist that a marital union consist of two men or two women...or anything other than a man and a woman....but that's just me....

Also...it still bewilders me that folx don't think some people choose to be bi/homosexual....:rolleyes:

Lastly...I think its great that we can exchange somewhat controversial ideas about such hot topics. But at the end of the day...we all have to live with the decisions we make....and the current state of society (fatherless homes, promiscuity, STD rates etc..) are the DIRECT reflection of how we choose to live our lives.

Link between Homosexuality and Pedophilia
 

Someone asked for reasons to be against homosexuality other than religion....here's another....


URL: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2000/oct/00100603.html
Back to Previous Page | Print This Page



LifeSite Daily News
Friday October 6, 2000


LINK BETWEEN HOMOSEXUALITY AND PEDOPHILIA
NEW YORK, Oct 6 (LSN.ca) - Dr. Judith Reisman, formerly a research professor at American University, veteran pornography researcher and expert witness before the attorney general's commission on pornography has reached disturbing conclusions about the link between homosexuality and pedophilia. WorldNetDaily reports on Dr. Reisman's research in the current issue of their magazine. Contrary to the view expounded by homosexual activists that gays are no more likely to sexually moles children, Dr Reisman says research proves the opposite. Homosexual men are anxious to recruit young boys -- a practice that is becoming easier thanks to sex education and "diversity programs" in schools that teach children to consider homosexuality as both acceptable and normal, says Reisman.

Reisman conducted two recent scientific studies. "Crafting 'Gay' Children: An Inquiry into the Abuse of Vulnerable Youth Via Establishment Media and the School Room" and "Partner Solicitation Language as a Reflection of Male Sexual Orientation," are continuations of the work Reisman began with her study, "Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences."

Reisman's research based on government statistics for 1992 notes that: Of 86 - 88 million heterosexual men, 9 percent of them victimized 8 million girls under age 18, which constitutes 25 percent of all girls. An uncertain percentage of the estimated 2 million homosexual men victimized 6-8 million boys, under age 18, amounting to 17 - 24 percent of all boys. Therefore, considered in the aggregate, 3 to 4 boys are sexually molested per homosexual adult male. Only .09 girls are sexually molested per heterosexual adult male, which is to say that, on average, 1 in 11 heterosexual males victimizes a girl under 18.

Further corroborating these findings, the Journal of the American Medical Association published the following facts:
50 percent of male AIDS victims reported having sex with an adult male by the age of 16.
20 percent of male AIDS victims had sex with an adult male by age 10.

For more see WorldNetDaily at:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky...pe_sacre.shtml




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


(c) Copyright: LifeSite Daily News is a production of Interim Publishing. Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com).

NEWS TIPS to lsn@lifesite.net or call 1-866-787-9947 or (416) 204-1687 ext. 444

Please help us to continue this service. Mail contributions to: Interim Publishing, Att'n LifeSite, 104 Bond St. E., Toronto, ON M5B 1X9 or contribute on line at http://www.lifesite.net/contribute/lifesite/

Link between Aids and Homosexuality
 

Amazing Information on Homosexuals


Another reason...

Homosexuality and The Spread of AIDS


To link HIV or AIDS with homosexuality is to make homosexuals livid. This is very curious given the facts we consider in this section. For starters, in the early days of the AIDS epidemic, one of the names given to this disease was Gay Related Immune Deficiency Syndrome (GRIDS). 1 We need not examine the nature of AIDS, but it suffices to say that AIDS equals death.

The Origin of HIV

HIV-infection has been documented in Zaire since 1959. 2 HIV originated from its equivalent in chimpanzees, SIVcpz (simian immunodeficiency virus). SIV transfer from chimpanzees and sooty mangabey monkeys to humans has been documented on at least 7 occasions, and laboratory experiments have revealed the ease with which various SIV strains can infect and replicate within some cells in human blood. 3 SIV strains in two monkey species that are butchered and eaten by chimpanzees, hybridized to form SIVcpz. 4 SIVcpz mutated into HIV, and its transfer to humans was most likely a result of the sub-Saharan African practice of butchering and eating chimpanzees, gorillas, and monkeys. 4-6 This most likely occurred in Central Africa since it has been shown that SIVcpz infections are absent in West African chimpanzees but present in Central African chimpanzees. 7

In the First-World, AIDS was first diagnosed among American white homosexual men in the early 1980s, but retrospective studies have documented HIV and AIDS among Haitian immigrants to the U.S. and Americans associated with them in the late 1970s. 8 HIV appears to have entered the U.S. around the late 1960s, 8 and was then primarily spread by homosexuals throughout the U.S. and Europe. In a survey on AIDS conducted in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany (FDR), Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the U.K., in 1983, the most important contributors to the AIDS epidemic in Europe were male homosexuals (58% of all cases, and likely contracted from the U.S.A., Europe, and Haiti), followed by individuals from Central Africa (26%), and whites who had sex with natives from Central Africa (3%); drug abuse was not a risk factor. 9 Click here to learn about the bathhouse phenomenon.


References

1. Shilts R. And the band played on. New York: Saint Martin's Press, 1987.

2. D'Amelio R. Epidemiology of AIDS. Revue Int Des Services De Sante Des Forces Armees 1990;63(7-9):216-22.

3. Grimm TA, Beer BE, Hirsch VM, et al. Simian immunodeficiency viruses from multiple lineages infect human macrophages: implications for cross-species transmission. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2003;32(4):362-9.

4. Bailes E, Gao F, Bibollet-Ruche F, et al. Hybrid origin of SIV in chimpanzees. Science 2003;300(5626):1713.

5. http://bushmeat.net/.

6. http://www.janegoodall.org/.

7. Prince AM, Brotman B, Lee DH, et al. Lack of evidence for HIV type 1-related SIVcpz infection in captive and wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) in West Africa. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses 2002;18(9):657-60.

8. Robbins KE, Lemey P, Pybus OG, et al. U.S. Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 epidemic: date of origin, population history, and characterization of early strains. J Virol 2003;77(11):6359-66.

9. Glauser MP, Francioli P. Clinical and epidemiological survey of acquired immune deficiency syndrome in Europe. Eur J Clin Microbiol 1984;3(1):55-8.

Template design by supremetemplates.com

Lovespell (and others) I appreciate your "documentation" as your non-biblical basis of not tolerating homosexuality. No matter how many refrences that are given (and I question the validity of much of your documentation) we will probably have to agree to disagree on this topic. IMO it is extreme to compare animals to humans in concern to a relationship. I do not consider myself a liberal but I can't invision a world were my beliefs have to become your beliefs, as I am sure you can't either, so to use Christianity as a rule of thumb for marriage just to me isn't fair to people who one are non-Christians or who choose to not believe in this aspect of the Bible. I am sure a world full of same sex marriage is probably repulsing to you, and I am not suggesting that it would make the world a better place, I do know that by removing choice the world will NOT be a better place. Since the majority of the country is "Christian" why must ALL of society abide by the principles of the Bible. Fact, the majority of the people in the WORLD are Muslim, shoud the United States conform to the principles of various sects of Islam because that is the majority religion of the world, surely the world as a whole must take precedent over the United States. So ladies should we be prepared to cover our faces, leave our jobs, not interact with men (extreme examples of sects of Islam) and conform to the majority religion? I don't think for someone who seems to be as dedicated to Christianity as those on this board that would go over well. Imagine the violation of being TOLD what you have to believe, I feel this is what we do as a society when we do not allow adults to make choices involving other willing adults, and please note I said willing adult... not child, nor animal, nor corpse but a WILLING ADULT.

I think that's a good idea. You asked for other reasons and they were given...it wasn't a means to convince you or anyone else for that matter.... What will be will be in the USA and as I said....our children of tommorrow will suffer the consequences of the laws and choices we make today.

This slope is paved with KY Jelly. There is no proof that that there is a relation between homosexuality and beastiality, nor that one will lead to another.

u misunderstand...i wasnt saying there was a relation...(although i think its funny thats what you think i meant!:D ) I was saying I thought both are equally perverse...and making the point that people will probably be in court next to defend their right to form a marital union with whomever they want...

coming from the perverted one....
 

i am gone a few months and the topic of homosexuality pops up, again???? :eek:

as i read the posts by lovespell_6, the comparisons still amaze me at how people think.

give me a moment to come back with my thoughts....i am laughing really hard on this one.



-the resident lesbian.

actually...
 

i was going to go propose to my dog.... :rolleyes:

People are always talking religion when it comes to law.
Telling homosexuals that they can NOT marry is like
telling PERSONS of color that they cannot marry out
of their race. How about when the slave owners told
our ancestors who to marry or not(by using religion)

It seems that only the homosexuals want to get married.
I am not saying,but how many people you know are
SHACKIN UP and not about to jump the broom???

deltadred

Re: actually...
 

This is just one of the times you can't understand why people think a certain way. As passionate as I am about gay marriage as an adult choice, people are determined to force thier belief systems on others which they are welcome to their opinion, because that is all part of the world of choice.
By the way..... you should invite a corpse to the ceremony, maybe a donkey can marry you it's a free world. :p :p

Re: Re: actually...
 

Ooooh I am laughing my head off...yall so funny :rolleyes:

Who's trying to force their beliefs on anyone??? I thought this was a dialogue/discussion?? Just because someone disagrees vehemently with what's popular...doesn't mean they are trying to impose or force anything on anyone...

We all will have to answer for our life decisions to a higher power...every knee shall bow!!

I'm not anyone's judge though... so its all good to me...
marry your sisters, moms, pets, whatever.... its on you!!;)