One thing I forgot to mention, the narth link left out some points. It didn't say that straight women can get cervical cancer from the same virus that gives gay men anal cancer.

Rates may be higher in terms of mental illness according to this or that study, but that is not a causal link between being gay and mental illness. Rates would have to be much higher. There have been studies in the U.S. which show some ethnic groups have higher rates compared to whites. That isn't a link either.

Here is a link to what the AAP has to say about gay parenting...

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics%3b109/2/339

Boaz: It's not really so horrible for two men to sexually make use of one another's bodies. Body parts perform multiple functions, not just one or two. For example, your fingers will pick your nose, put food in your mouth, help to build things, make hand gestures, or type on a computer keyboard. Your legs will help you to run to jump, or kick a ball or kick an enemy, or to swim or dance.

The sex act seems to perform many functions as well. It leads to reproduction very few times. When it does, that is not necessarily a good thing. The ability to reproduce will not elevate one to be a great achiever in this society.

lol@Boaz, Monty Python's the Meaning of Life, "every sperm is sacred". I already answered your questions about 5 times up the page BOAZ. Some gay men do have love without sex. You just didn't bother to ask them. Many straight couples have the kind of pornographic sex that you are into, including the stuff that you mentioned above.

Which porno videos did you see gay men having oral sex BOAZ? You took special attention to notice the sperm going down their necks. That is interesting that you had the time to do this. If it repulses you so much, stop watching them. Is that what you think this is all about?

Will someone sensible please bring this post back to order. Game over. I will ignore BOAZ from here on. Lets stop filth from the Eternal Brethren and get on with decent gay civil unions.

BOAZ_David wrote: "When a man has an orgasm, is it primarily for 'pleasure' ? of course not, SEMEN is produced".

Arousal clearly plays a large role in motivating intercourse. Moreover, those who suggest procreation is the only legitimate purpose of human sexual intimacy are living in a fantasy world of their own contrivance. Studies on human sexual behaviour, starting with Kinsey, as well as the lived experiences of real people the world over, belie such nonsense. In this context, pagan3000 makes the apt point that many biological structures, functions & behaviours serve multiple purposes.

BOAZ_David also wrote: "perverting [sexual intimacy] into anal or oral sex with another male is to my mind disgusting". The actual perversion here is BOAZ_David trying to debase same-sex relationships as nothing more than mere homogenital acts. The lived reality of committed same-sex couples, best evidenced in recent submissions to the HREOC 'Same-Sex : Same Rights' Inquiry ( http://www.hreoc.gov.au/samesex/submissions.html ) show that they are & can be so much more. Visceral objections to homogenital acts steadfastly ignores that many heterosexuals engage in similar non-vaginal acts. Those who condemn the former but remain eerily silent on the latter are disingenuous at best.

Ultimately, the shrill claims of the frantic homo-hater lobby, on what consenting adult partners across all persuasions do in their bedrooms, are irrelevant to the issue at hand: equivalent treatment of committed same-sex partners under Australian law.

For those who think I'm of the 'sex is JUST for reproduction/every sperm is sacred' ..I don't know how you got that from my reasoning.

I used the reasoning that the semen produced during sexual activity is what provides the framework, which gives the primary intention of sexual activity. Does this mean we cannot enjoy 'non' procreatively intended sex ? of course not, but it does show the central point of sexual union.

Semen dribbling down necks ? Fletch, where in the world did you get THAT from? I didn't mention it.

Oh..by the way, for the poster who tried the old "Attack is the best form of defense/lets attribute this and that to Boaz to weaken his argument" -sorrrrry.. it aint gonna work !

Southpark does have some very deep social commentary, INCLUDING showing up some of the pathetic shallowness in much of contemporary Christianity. But yes, it does go over the top at times, I don't find the 'turd' character as having any value to the show whatsoever.

If so called gay people did NOT have sex with the same gender, then I would have no issue with them. Loving other people, caring for them etc is not a 'sin', but sex with the same kind IS.

No one has in the slightest shown any flaws in my reasoning that:

"Anyone can claim 'I was born this way' to justify other types of deviate sexual behavior"

So my argument stands firm.

BD
Quote "No one has in the slightest shown any flaws in my reasoning that:

"Anyone can claim 'I was born this way' to justify other types of deviate sexual behavior"

I'm afraid what people do or do not claim is irrelevant BD. I'm going on facts NOT what people claim. People are born homosexual or heterosexual. Child molesters on the other hand are the product of child molesters in their past. They are NOT born that way no matter what they claim. There is NO evidence to support any such claim but there is to support the FACT that homosexuals are born not made.

Conclusion: Anyone CANNOT TRUTHFULLY claim that they were born that way. Only those for whom there is evidence which supports it.
So your argument does NOT stand.

Want to point out the scriptures that support your contention that homosexuality is a "sin"? I would say that they would just be more verses taken out of context. Sorry BD but in the end your oposition to homosexuals is baseless.

As I have trawled through the statements made, I am appauled with both the lack of Christian charity, and common humanitarianism displayed by detractors in the debate. We are all humans, of God's creation, whether you believe in God or not.

What we should be doing is extending the hand of friendship to homosexual people, not denying them basic human rights, which we have fought for for a hundred years. Sexual preferance is a decision God makes, not parents. Who would willingly be homosexual? certainly not I this section of of our community cop the rough end of the pineapple in all legal cases, as my friend has recently. After a 10 year relationship, does anyone here know what percentage of hetrosexual relationships last for a decade?

I am a conservative on this issue, at least I was until I actually met and liked a homosexual lady, before knowing her sexual preference. I am in the reality position, not the theoryetical one, and I can assure the general population that homosexual people don't wan't to rape and pilage the general community, all they desire is to be recognised by the rest of us as equal, not inferior, or superior, merely equal, in my Christian belief that is the least we can do to recognise the homosexulal contribution to our nation.

How do we tell whether or not any of our past Prime Ministers were homosexual, or bi-sexual? their contribution will still be recognised. As an Australian community we need to chill out and rate people on merit, sexual preference should not be an issue.