Previous 11 - 20 Next
For David and the others who won't respond to this, and for general knowledge and consumption: yes, there have been some complaints about the UT-Austin study. Unfortunately, UT-Austin, not even REMOTELY a "conservative" institution, thoroughly examined the methodology of the study and found NOTHING wanting in its methodology or construction. The biggest complaints are, basically, one of interpretation and personal bias. These are legitimate concerns to be discussed, but the out of hand dismissal of the study based on half-baked theories/allegations with nothing more to support them other than the reflexive charges of "homophobe!" are worthless protestations. Please, try to bring up something more than those arguments that UT-A, itself,
with doesn't make men lisp nor does it make lesbians dykes. It's a CULTURAL/MENTAL issue, NOT biological. It is learned. Which, of course, is an argument many a homosexual has made (with articles like "Recruit, recruit, recruit," and literature that emphasizes the importance of pre-pubescent induction into the homosexual lifestyle.
One could also argue that the behavior of homosexuals towards heterosexuals (just one example, though not definitive, is evidence of this: the treatment of the heterosexual firefighters FORCED to "march" in the "gay pride" parade in San Diego not so long ago by homosexuals), the open-air sex/nudity/perversity in SF at various "pride rallies" or "[insert name of homosexual fetish here] festivals" shows pretty much exactly what the homosexual subculture expects to be accepted. Oddly, homosexuals who grow up, in my experience (which means this is of limited use but might be an interesting point of inquiry) within more traditional regional cultures/families tend to NOT behave this way. Which, of course, means that whom one chooses to have sex
your statements of blatant belief and sentimentality bear little resemblance to reality.
No, Kev, it does not. It talks about *results*, NOT *families.* Read more carefully. I'd also say that when studies/surveys conducted by homosexual publications like the Blade (in its various incarnations in various cities) that show vastly higher number of sexual partners in a lifetime, for both homosexual males and females in comparison to their heterosexual counterparts, sorta destroys your next statements. I also believe that a "legally recognized relationship" ameliorating that situation is little more than an hot air statement of belief, given that the sexual promiscuity tends to extend into cultures/cities/locales that are very accommodating (like SF and Long Beach, CA - which I have witnessed) toward homosexuals. Sorry, but
Actually, David, the APA research is pathetically, woefully biased and unscientific. These two studies are FAR more rigorous. In fact, complaints against the Texas one were lodged, and, after an investigation into the methodology of the study, dismissed. These are NOT "bogus studies." If there are any "bogus studies," they come from the APA, who caved due to political pressure in the first place regarding homosexuality. Sorry, your fallacious "appeal to authority" doesn't work.
Actually, David, the APA research is pathetically, woefully biased and unscientific. These two studies are FAR more rigorous. In fact, complaints against the Texas one were lodged, and, after an investigation into the methodology of the study, dismissed. These are NOT "bogus studies." If there are any "bogus studies," they come from the APA, who caved due to political pressure in the first place regarding homosexuality. Sorry, your fallacious "appeal to authority" doesn't work.
And, yet, homosexuals have higher rates of substance abuse, unhealthy sexual activity (including VASTLY higher numbers of partners), STD's, etc. No, AIDS is NOT a "homosexual" disease. But relative to the population, it is a much higher risk amongst homosexual men.
KevNC - your first sentence is incorrect. The particular study you were citing, it appears, has a completed rate of over twelve thousand. The first study was over 260 individuals. Next, your anecdotal evidence may be emotionally compelling, but a poor basis for a general position on an issue like this. And, last, you are assuming that homosexual relationships are inherently stable or at least as stable as the average heterosexual marriage. They are not, as has been shown repeatedly (even by homosexually targeted publications).
In response to:

Losing Our Religion

Charles the Hammer Wrote: Sep 15, 2012 2:42 PM
No, it's that you misstate the point. The point is that the author sees a threat in secular humanists looking to use these kinds of events to further erode what she sees as the civil religion she believes this nation was founded on. It is not one religious person insulted another religion, and so birthday balloon! By the bye, the idea that whoever made this movie is necessarily religious is up for debate, according to all the information I've seen so far.
In response to:

Losing Our Religion

Charles the Hammer Wrote: Sep 15, 2012 2:36 PM
Church (not Rome, nor any made up "invisible church") is the pillar and ground of Truth. The Church "made" the Bible, not the other way around; the Bible reflects the Faith, the Church maintains it. No human language or writing can contain the whole of Truth, which is the Faith.
Previous 11 - 20 Next