Philo,

I know what social intelligence is but I am not clear on what you mean or at least why you said that you expect the social intelligence to decrease. Jpw2040 has apparently put you in the same category as J Bennett as a result of your full comment. As you can see he said:

“One advantage of a forum like OLO, with visitors like Philo and J Bennett, is that the rest of the world gets exposed to gay people’s daily reality.”

Since your view on sharia law seems to be similar to that of a same sex attracted author I presume that either your speculation about social intelligence or making a negative comment about anal sex causes him undue hardship. He apparently found it extremely upsetting. Indeed his statement above seems to suggest feelings akin to oppression. Obviously to complain that gay people have to suffer that type of thing daily he doesn’t view it as a positive thing. He goes on to say that:

“We deal with this kind of hate, spite and even violence every day...”

The quote is just the beginning of such comments.

Since Jpw2040 found the comment so upsetting and I am now very curious I’d appreciate it if you could fully explain what you have in mind. Perhaps if Jpw2040’s upset doesn’t relate to you saying that anal sex is unhygenic it may turn out he misunderstood you and it might clear the air. I'm sure you'd like to remove his hurt if you could.

Further, it might be worthwhile explaining where your view that acting out a same sex attraction is not ideal is sourced. Jpw2040 apparently believes that it is the result of the present state of government legislation. I know from personal experiences that he doesn't always get mind reading right so I'd like to check with you before assuming he is on the money.

There you go again, mjpb, cheering on the homophobes, while no doubt you will try to claim that you're not one yourself.

You've just invited Philo to provide more of his irrational bigotry. This is a discussion about civil rights, not the application of islamic law, or people's sexual practices.

As I've said before, if you want a discussion about these things, start one somewhere else.

Sorry Jpw2040 I guess as a neanderthal it takes me a while to catch on. "Cheering on" seems a rather dramatic way of describing my request to Philo to clarify. Are you sure it is the best way to describe my request to Philo and how do you know whether or not his explanation will be rational until you hear it?

You distinguish between civil rights and Islamic law in the context of the rights of people actioning a same sex attraction. However, googling seems to indicate that actioning a same sex attraction in most Islamic countries is illegal and doing so in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Mauritania, Sudan, Somalia, and Yemen carries a death penalty. Don't you consider that a civil rights issue? What do you think is involved - a brutally harsh sanction of a moral issue?

I know how sensitive you are about name calling so I won't call you a bully again but I am not going to leave just because you say so.

Finally, I thought you didn't like armchair analysis so why are you diagnosing Philo as having homophobia and being irrational?

Thanks

As I've said before, if you want a discussion about these things, start one somewhere else (refer rule number 1: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/rules.asp).

When a society wishes to maintain a set of values for the benifit of that whole society it will outlaw certain unnaceptable behaviours. Anal sex is one of those unnaceptable behaviours because of its unhygenic practises. In gay men that practise is exclusive.

The anus and its region is the breeding ground of high levels of bacteria, viruses etc, because it excretes the body garbage. The anus is prone to high incidents of tearing and rupture from such practices which allows bacteria to enter the blood stream. That viruses like AIDS be present in body excreta has dire social effects as we learned in Sydney in the 1980's, when over 400 homosexuals died. The virus then spread into the sex workers as men involved in homosexual acts carried the disease into the hetrosexual community.

There again this represents adultry and unfaithfulness in relationships - a moral and social disease. A society wishing to keep free of expensive health costs will want to maintain social purity. How much has Aids treatment cost NSW? Gay marriage must always be outlawed as anti-social because of the nature of its practices.

Two men cannot produce a child of their union. For them to believe a child in their relationship would be well adjusted to the norms of a hetrosexual society is unlikley.

Marriage is for the procreation and protection of children. The very continuation of that society. The best practise for child rearing is for Children to have their natural loving parents. Marriage only exists between a male and a female any other practise is not a marriage, it is a perversion of the human design. While a male or female are fertile human design demonstrates what is the purpose of their design.

Off topic, Philo. Take it somewhere else.