Iam wondering why all you strait people are so worried about what should not, bother you at all?

Its a changing world and if you don't allow it, it will just go underground along with most things the religious factions disagree with.

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CCAQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwiki.answers.com%2FQ%2FHow_many_gay_people_are_there_in_Australia&rct=j&q=what%20is%20the%20number%20of%20gay%20people%20in%20australia%3Fyoutube&ei=-WfXTPCeHMKXcdXw4fcL&usg=AFQjCNEwn_DVyoMVQwIPNPw4MKZsleJMRA&cad=rja

This one has a nice little point in it about who's responsible for making them turn out the way they are, I think its you!

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CBwQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DEtfTmmLGoCc&rct=j&q=what%20is%20the%20number%20of%20gay%20people%20in%20australia%3Fyoutube&ei=-WfXTPCeHMKXcdXw4fcL&usg=AFQjCNGXhE1dYx94dQvvED9lv7y5GkwHEw&cad=rja

You know the old saying , don't you....." Its the one's that scream the loudest in protest, that are the one's you have to watch.

Well! What better way of throwing the scent off those who enjoy opening the closet door and then jumping back in again.lol

Only if people weren't so full of it.

BLUE

As a CONSTITUTIONALIST (and INDEPENDENT candidate for the seat of IVANHOE see also http://www.schorel-hlavka.com) I view it is time we are realistic and not force upon people the opinions of others not just as an opinion but as to dictate what they can or can’t say. It is irrelevant to me if a person has a pro or anti gay opinion because we are under a federal constitution that has embedded in it “Political Liberty” and “Civil Rights” and that includes the right to express oneself in a positive or negative way about gay’s provided it is not a slanderous attack upon a specific person. I do not accept that the Victorian parliament or any other parliament can interfere with this “Political Liberty” and/or “civil rights” as any legislation that undermines this is unconstitutional and of no legal force. Our danger is more from those wanting to legislate our “Political Liberties” and “Civil Rights” out of existence then of the groups they purport to protect.

Diseases disproportionately contracted through homosexual behaviour:
Anal cancer,
Rectal cancer,
HIV,
AIDs,
MRSA,
Syphilis,
Gonorrhoea,
Hepatitis A,B,C...
etc,
etc.

What is so normal and natural about a behaviour which has such a high attendant disease risk?
Why would a sane society encourage homosexuality given the disease risk?

Dysfunctional sexual behaviours:
Homosexuality,
Paedophilia,
Bestiality,
Incest,
Necrophilia,
etc,
etc.

If a society becomes sufficiently insane so as to validate and hence encourage homosexual behaviour, why would it discriminate against other dysfunctional sexual behaviours. There is at least evidence that the dysfunctionality of paedophilia is socially constructed when you consider the Islamic penchant for sex with nine-year old girls based on Mohammed's example with Aisha. On the other hand, the dysfunctionality of homosexual behaviour is based on a logical analysis of disease risk and anatomical incompatibility, neither of which are factors in the widespread Islamic practice of child marriage. Although, admittedly, vaginal trauma in the very young may be a danger in much the same way that anal trauma is, given that the anus is designed for extruding excrement and not for receptive anal intercourse.

You have no logical comeback at the dysfunctional analogies which is why you always cry "red herring", "straw man", "bigot", "homophobe", etc.

Religion, like atheism, has nothing to do with it.
I embrace neither ideology.

Proxy

Facts mean little to those desperate for society to not only accept but also promote what is clearly not good for society. No one would dare do a study as to the percentage of priests who abused kids being homosexual.

"What is so normal and natural about a behaviour which has such a high attendant disease risk?"
-Proxy

It's natural because it is a naturally occurring phenomenon - one which occurs in nature with no artificial assistance. You seem to have some difficulty with this concept.

And it's normal because a lot of people prioritise other things above their health. For instance, I engage in a behaviour which has a very high attendant disease risk, which means I am more susceptible to at least these diseases, and probably more:

* Stroke and cardiovascular disease.
* Hypertension
* Left ventricular hypertrophy
* Oedema
* Duodenal and gastric ulcers
* Heartburn
* Osteporosis
* Gastric cancer
* Death

But you know what? I really like salt on my food, so I'm going to keep using it. What's the point of living to 100 if every meal you ever eat is bland? And that's just from one of my unhealthy habits - I'd go over my word limit if I tallied all the diseases I'm setting myself up for.

Why would a sane society validate and hence encourage high salt intake given the disease risk? More to the point, why aren't you out there in the trenches campaigning for less sodium in folks' diets? Could it be because you're less interested in public health than you are in bullying gay people?

To be continued...

continued...

"If a society becomes sufficiently insane so as to validate and hence encourage homosexual behaviour, why would it discriminate against other dysfunctional sexual behaviours."
-Proxy

Because every form of dysfunctional sexual behaviour you have listed, with the exception of homosexuality, is a form of rape. I don't need to explain to you why rape is a bad thing, do I? Do I?

Homosexuality is different because it involves two consenting adults of sound mind and judgement - if it doesn't, it's rape, and no better than pedophilia or necrophilia.

"You have no logical comeback at the dysfunctional analogies which is why you always cry "red herring", "straw man", "bigot", "homophobe", etc."
-Proxy

Not so. My logical comeback is that your analogies are disfunctional. Argument by analogy is a very tricky business, and the analogy you've attempted to draw 'twixt homosexuality and rape is deeply flawed, as I explained above.

I cry red herring when you use red herrings, straw man when you use straw men, bigot when you're being bigoted and homophobe when you're being homophobic. I'd be happier not to cry anything - all you need to do is learn how to formulate valid arguments. It really isn't that difficult.

"Religion, like atheism, has nothing to do with it."
-Proxy

Ha! That'll be the day. Why not just admit the truth: you don't like gay people 'coz the Bible says you shouldn't. There's nothing wrong with that - you just shouldn't expect non-Christians to accept Biblical teachings as readily as you do.