Broccoli Sux (And So Does The Southern Poverty Law Center)

Earlier today, I got the following email from an advocate of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC):

(If you are interested in the RSVP form referenced above, click here)

First and foremost, I’d like to state that I disagree with the notion of “conversion” therapy.  That said, I do not believe that a group’s belief in “conversion” or “reparative” therapy, or that homosexuality is a sin, should cause them to be labeled a hate group.  In fact, by SPLC’s own definition, SPLC itself is a hate group (emphasis mine):

All hate groups have beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people, typically for their immutable characteristics.

This list was compiled using hate group publications and websites, citizen and law enforcement reports, field sources and news reports.

Hate group activities can include criminal acts, marches, rallies, speeches, meetings, leafleting or publishing. Websites appearing to be merely the work of a single individual, rather than the publication of a group, are not included in this list. Listing here does not imply a group advocates or engages in violence or other criminal activity.

Why is SPLC a hate group?

  1. They attack or malign an entire group of people, namely theists who believe that homosexuality is a sin.
  2. They are an organized group that hosts meetings, have a website and engage in other activities that are clearly not the work of a single individual.
  3. Engaging in violence is not a prerequisite to be listed as a hate group.

I hate broccoli.  If I set up a website encouraging people to boycott farmers who grow broccoli and stores that sell broccoli and I was able to recruit a large following, Broccoli Sux would qualify as a hate group according to SPLC’s definition.  The point is, the First Amendment still applies.  Nobody is forcing people to participate in “conversion” or “reparative” therapy.  Be gay, but don’t label groups who disapprove as “hate groups” because they disagree with you.

And for the record, Broccoli Sux.

About these ads

65 thoughts on “Broccoli Sux (And So Does The Southern Poverty Law Center)

  1. Of course SPLC is a hate group. It has been such since its founding, but the real point of all of this is that there are one set of rules applied by the Left to everyone else, and one set for them. SPLC is a classic example of that.

  2. Try oven roasting it, with hollandaise on top.

    You may still not like it, but it’ll be better than swallowing what the SPLC puts out.

  3. So these gay guys are really born with that fake high voice schtick that you see on all the designer TV shows? Geez, I thought they learned that trick.

    • Actually there has been quite a bit of research done in this department. Only 15-20% of the homosexual population are of the effeminate variety. The Romans referred to this kind as a catamite. No catamites were allowed to retain Roman citizenship. The vast majority of homosexuals are of the “butch” variety. They are best exemplified by their most famous organization the Nazi SA. Such men often do not even acknowledge their homosexuality since they never allow themselves to be the “receptacle” in the homosexual sex act. This leads to all of the wonderful confusion that homosexuality has always brought with it to the societies that have tolerated it (Greece and Rome) or been run by it deceptively (Frederick the Great, Nazi Germany). There was never any such thing as homosexual marriage or a homosexual culture until the most recent acts of nonsense by homosexual advocates. It was a practice completely disassociated from the family organization.
      Jerry Sandusky will never acknowledge he is a homosexual in spite of the fact that he is exhibiting the historically consistent pederastic behavior of Standard Greek and Roman homosexuality. He will prefer to be mislabeled as a pedophile so people will think he is sick. Strange, but this is the world we are creating.
      It was the apostle Paul who properly identified all who participate in the act of homosexual sex to be equally guilty of the sin of homosexuality. Not just the passive
      catamites.
      Rest assured, no one is born this way. It takes a lot of work, very evil work, to make a homosexual. Jerry Sandusky created many. And there are many Jerry Sanduskys.

      • I will allow this comment to stand, however I cannot do so in good conscience without noting that I disagree with the basic premise of your argument. I don’t like labeling people, but you are sort of proving SPLC’s point for them.

        • You don’t like labeling people but this is a fine example of the misinformation and discredible nature of homosexuality. Homosexuals are labeling themselves and creating confusion…Intentionally. Many who practice homosexual behavior do not consider themselves homosexuals at all. In the case of the rampant homosexuality of both Nazi Germany and Rome, those who practiced homosexual acts would even persecute others for intolerably effeminate homosexuality even as they made use of them for their own desires. The same is happening today.
          Christianity clears up the mess nicely. Equality for all. Allowing homosexuals to define themselves is bad enough. Worse is allowing them to say they are born homosexual. Homosexuality is a behavior. You are not born enslaved to behave homosexually. Now we are allowing them to redefine marriage? Did we really need this? Sometimes you have to have the courage to call something what it is.
          This is nothing new. We are re-learning what our ancestors learned long ago. That homosexuality is a predatory behavior.
          Both homosexuality and its SPLC defenders are simply useful cogs in a mechanism designed to destroy our country. If and when such success occurs, both will be instantly discarded and even enthusiastically persecuted by the new order. It has always been and it will always be.

          • Again, you are entitled to your opinion. You are, in fact, entitled to shout it from the mountaintops. As long as you do not take any actions based on your opinion that forces others to conform to your worldview, we can do what has made this country so great for so long: agree to disagree.

  4. SPLC has protected the minority community from oppression and reprisals for decades. I find it sad that you would single out our organization for a mean-spirited tirade without first doing your research.

    • I wouldn’t mind if you listed certain groups as “Groups We Disagree With” rather than “Hate Groups”. Perhaps you should ponder for a moment why I’m on a mailing list to receive invitations to SPLC events of concern to the LGBTQ community. My blog post was neither mean-spirited nor a tirade. Get to know me before you judge me.

      • Well, your tirade was indeed mean-spirited, which is why I leveled the accusation. Think before you speak. Calling our organization a “hate group” is beyond the pale. You should apologize for your rush to judgment and read up on what we actually stand for.

        • I didn’t call your organization a hate group, I simply pointed out that using YOUR OWN DEFINITION, SPLC qualifies as a hate group. It would be more helpful if you were to stop using the term “hate group” and choose a more appropriate term, such as “Groups We Disagree With”. If I wanted to, I could easily make a case that the Gay Men’s Chorus of Washington, DC is a hate group (according to YOUR DEFINITION) as it actively excludes participation by heterosexuals and women and promotes what some might call a “homosexual agenda” (what if this were the other way around?). Do I really think GMCW is a hate group? Absolutely not! They do great work and are a wonderful asset to the community. The problem is your definition.

    • How have you managed to finance your advocacy for the poor of the South all these years? And why are there still poor in the South, after all the lawsuits you have filed on their behalf? And are you now advocating for wealthy southern LGBTxyz, cuz you run out of poor ones? I’m only a group of one, but you can add my name to the I hate your group, group.

      • I think you’re being a little too hard on the SPLC. Once they get done paying their millionaire all-white management team six-figure salaries, I’m sure there is precious little left to actually help people, poverty stricken or otherwise. But seriously, the SPLC’s days as a great civil rights organization are decades in the past. Nowadays, the organization is basically a Left-wing money-making machine. They’ve made a fine art of the high-stakes legal shakedown. I live in Montgomery, AL–where the SPLC’s corporate headquarters is located–and the SPLC is a running joke around here. I will say this, though: SPLC founder Morris Dees has got style. Check out his sweet poverty palace: http://tinyurl.com/y4745us

  5. More of the “you disagree with me so you must hate me” meme. The party of tolerance and inclusion is anything but. Oh, the irony!

  6. QUOTE: “Be gay, but don’t label groups who disapprove as ”hate groups” because they disagree with you.”
    Thank you. The SPLC has been a “special interest group” for Leftists ever since the Civil Rights Act stole their thunder. These kinds of busybodies always NEED someone, anyone, to demonize.
    Does anyone really care what oozes forth from that gaggle of gossips? They’re way “off bubble”.

  7. The SPLC is only interested in one thing: Increasing the revenue stream for the SPLC. They will do or say whatever it takes to keep those dollars coming in.

    Anyone who thinks this isn’t so ought to take a look at the photo spread a couple years back that was taken of Morris Dees’ house. For someone interested in “Southern Poverty”, Dees sure does have a palatial spread. :)

  8. Hate is a tool, one the left uses quite often as a cudgel. While they’re seeking out “haters”, they’re the ones with blood in their eyes.

    Reminds me of hate laws. Absurdity. Most crimes could be classified as hate crimes since, if we loved one another, we wouldn’t willingly commit a crime against our neighbor. If hate is the opposite of love, you get the picture.

    But, until our nation sees true restoration and the culture shifts away from its slouching, devolvement towards liberalism, organizations such as the SPLC will continue their own hateful, biased ways. So, listen to their message of “love”, or face their cudgel…

  9. “Nobody is forcing people to participate in “conversion” or “reparative” therapy.”

    As a matter of fact, glbt teens (or those perceived to be so) are frequently subjected to such attempts at conversion therapy by their parents.

    Next, as it happens, gay members of different religious congregations (it’s not limited to Christianity) are frequently pressured to attempt conversion therapy.

    BTW–mahometanism is a hate group, according to SPLC. Have you ever read what mahometan writers say about homosexuality? Why won’t the SPLC do something about that? Or could it be because mahometans are considered a minority group with special rights by them?

    • Thank you for the information, especially about mahometanism. With respect to GLBT teens and their parents, my personal opinion is that it would make more sense for SPLC to direct their outreach efforts at the teens and parents (rather than broadly labeling people as “hate groups”), but I am only one person.

  10. Jacob Edelman, mosesmosesmoses has judged the SPLC according to the standard that the SPLC judges everyone else, mosesmosesmoses has in fact judged you not just by your standards, but by your very own words.

    If their is anything what so ever mean spirited in that, then you must find the point of origin for the mean spiritedness, and that point of origin is none other than the SPLC itself.

    Calling the SPLC a hate group is not only not “beyond the pale”, but since the definition used to do so is in fact the definition created by and employed by the SPLC it is SPCLC who has defined the SPLC as a hate group and mosesmosesmoses has merely exposed the extent to which the SPLC has hoisted itself upon it’s own petard with their hate filled rhetoric.

    • You are projecting, pure and simple. If you research our organization and what we actually stand for, you will find that we are adamantly opposed to hate groups.

      In fact, if it weren’t for people like mosesmosesmoses who think it’s “hateful” to protect sexual, religious and ethnic minorities from violence and bigotry, we would have no reason to exist in the first place.

      Read about us on wikipedia, or go to splcenter dot org.

      • Oh Robespierre, did you really think having sent so many yourself to the guillotine, that you were immune to the very rules you used to send them there? There is none so intolerant as those who refuse to tolerate allowing others to choose what they will or will not tolerate. Projection is the act of placing upon another, characteristic’s which are actually your own, neither I nor mosesmosesmoses have done that , it is the SPLC that defined what constitutes a hate group, and then behaved exactly according to that definition. Your righteous indignation is a fiction Jacob, it exists only because your hypocrisy has been exposed. To bad you don’t have the intellectual honesty to look in the mirror and see that it is you wearing the sheets of a hate group.

  11. If an alcoholic can be treated to stop drinking why cant a homosexual be treated to stop having homosexual sex? Homosexual sex is far more dangerous and unhealthy than alcohol. Orientation matters not. A thief may always want to steal. We call him rehabilitated when he stops actually doing it. There are no redeeming qualities to homosexual sex. Never have been. Eradicate it…by any means necessary.

  12. In your opinion, ss self-descibed “theists”, how is it that homosexuality is such an aberration if it has existed in every society at every time in human history? Also, did your god make a mistake with these people? THrough all of history? I’m not trying to be snarky, I’d really like to know what you think. Thank you.

    • I appreciate the non-snark. I don’t believe that God made a mistake with anyone. Rather, I think that people often make mistakes with what God has given them (life, their ability to act in certain ways– essentially free will). Through all of history, people have sinned in various ways. They’ve always killed other people, but you wouldn’t say that God made a mistake with murderers in history (I don’t mean to equate murder with homosexual acts, but I figured it would be a good example that we could both agree is wrong).

      The fact is people have the ability to choose how to live. And I also think that until the debate over the origins of homosexual inclination comes down clearly on one side or the other (i.e.– when it’s determined whether someone is “just born that way” or whether there are certain psychological characteristics to it that are yet unknown) people should refrain from calling those who think it sinful “hate-filled.” And not all those who think homosexual acts are sinful think that gay people are evil. Unfortunately, nuance is something that many people refuse to acknowledge–they just want things in black and white terms (Support or Hate).

      • According to pre-Vatican 2 Catholocism all Homosexuals are demon possesed. Therefore who is doing the choosing where this behavior and lifestyle are concerned. As such they are entirely cureable. Only hateful people and demons would wish to keep them in that condition.

  13. Hold on – there’s another condition. The “haters” have to be non-Mohammedan.

    As a matter of policy, the SPLC will not look into Mohammedan organizations.

    Why? The American Nazi Party, or the KKK who will respond to criticism by writing an angry letter. Or burning a cross on their own property (whooo, scary!). Or filing a lawsuit.

    But American Mohammedans will respond to criticism by blowing up the SPLC offices. Louis Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright, Ibrahim Hooper and the other Quranic leaders will admit: EVERY mosque is a hate group. Every Shari’ah-compliant organization is a hate organization.

    Any organization that’s not actively working to exterminate Shari’ah, cannot call itself “Liberal” or “Progressive”.

  14. There’s nothing wrong with this post, the problem is that it’s probably not going to change anyone’s mind about the SPLC. For instance, I don’t think any reporters who currently repeat what the SPLC says are going to stop doing that because of this post. Meanwhile, I’ve got 90 posts about the SPLC going back to 2004, and many of those might be more persuasive towards those who would otherwise agree with the SPLC. But, the supposed opponents of the SPLC won’t link to them and are completely worthless in other venues too, such as when I’ve tried to challenge the SPLC and their friends on Twitter. There’s a reason why the SPLC is going to continue raking in the big bucks and making TPers look bad.

    • Add the CBC and every other alphabet, exclusive, exclusionist on the basis of color and ethnicity too. Tell what…if there was one group , club ,organization or periodical that used the name..WHITE in their masthead…it’d sure be labeled a”hate” group, wouldn’t it?

      • Just ask Joseph Cao. Although to be fair, at least the NAACP’s mission statement is color-blind:

        Our Mission

        The mission of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is to ensure the political, educational, social, and economic equality of rights of all persons and to eliminate race-based discrimination.

        Vision Statement

        The vision of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is to ensure a society in which all individuals have equal rights without discrimination based on race.

        Objectives

        The following statement of objectives is found on the first page of the NAACP Constitution – the principal objectives of the Association shall be:

        To ensure the political, educational, social, and economic equality of all citizens
        To achieve equality of rights and eliminate race prejudice among the citizens of the United States
        To remove all barriers of racial discrimination through democratic processes
        To seek enactment and enforcement of federal, state, and local laws securing civil rights
        To inform the public of the adverse effects of racial discrimination and to seek its elimination
        To educate persons as to their constitutional rights and to take all lawful action to secure the exercise thereof, and to take any other lawful action in furtherance of these objectives, consistent with the NAACP’s Articles of Incorporation and this Constitution.

  15. Moses, your problem is that you issued a tirade against our organization that is entirely untrue and paints us as a hate group.

    On the contrary, if you would actually do your research, you will find that we have been on the front lines combating hate groups, intolerance and discrimination. It’s your right to post mean-spirited comments about minority groups, but don’t try to project your own bigotries onto us. It doesn’t work that way.

    • I challenge you to:

      1) State what untrue points I have made about SPLC (I actually copied and pasted your definition of “hate group” from your web page)

      2) Quote any “mean-spirited comments about minority groups” I have posted (please copy and paste as I have done)

      3) Meet to discuss this on the radio or television show of your choice

      Calling someone a bigot does not prove your point or make them shut up.

      • 1. You called us a hate group. That is irrevocably, demonstrably false. Do your research.

        2. Your tirade in your blog post is filled with venom not just towards our organization but also against sexual minorities, for whom you hold a sneering disdain for. It’s your right to but don’t try to then project your insecurities onto us. Won’t fly.

        3. I’m not a spokesperson for SPLC and am not authorized to speak for it in an official capacity.

        My point is not to shut you up, it is to call your biases out and correct the record. I believe I have done that.

        Jacob Edelman

        • I asked you to quote specifically anything I said that was untrue. You failed to do that. I used YOUR DEFIINITION OF HATE GROUP, COPIED AND PASTED FROM YOUR WEB PAGE, to demonstrate that SPLC meets the definition of a hate group. You are clearly missing the point. The point is that YOUR DEFINITION is the problem, not that YOU are the problem. Please just stop using the phrase “hate group” and maybe change your definition. I also asked you to quote ANYTHING negative I said about ANYONE. Again, you failed to do so. You just repeated what you had said earlier. Please, I BEG OF YOU, directly quote my “venom not just towards [your] organization but also against sexual minorities, for whom [I] hold a sneering disdain for.” It pains me to learn that you cannot speak on behalf of SPLC. I would gladly speak with someone from your organization who is authorized to do so.

    • I did some research on the SPLC, as have many others.
      Nothing I that found convinced me that the organization
      is anything other than a Marxist chicken coop. Identity
      politics has no rightful place in American jurisprudence.

    • If you guys were to use actual argument, rather than shouting down people with the hackneyed/misused concept of “projection” and derivations of the word “bigot,” would the world explode? I’m thinking yes…

  16. The modern-day SPLC is shell of the original organization, which was so successful in bankrupting legitimate domestic terrorist groups like the Ku Klux Klan that it had to vastly expand the definition of “hate group” and “hate speech” to justify its own existence. Once a bulwark in the defense of the victims of voting rights violations, Jim Crow laws, and crooked prosecutors and judges, the org rarely engages in significant litigation — nowadays, it waves its figurative arms whenever they can find a group they can target, and try to whip the rest of the nation into a lather as if the next thing we know, they’ll be lynchings in the streets again. They say the only way to stop that, of course, is to give generously to the SPLC, which will reward your tax deductible donation with a colorful little sticker reading “Tolerance – Worth Reaching For.”

    To show you far things have swung now, consider this fact: In the state of California (among others), whether you were born with either a penis or a vagina is of no consequence when it comes to which sex you are. That doesn’t matter — what matters is whether you feel like a male or a female, and which you want to be perceived as by others. So if you want, you can have parts of your body removed, other parts of your body modified beyond belief, and fill yourself with hormones to make your breasts rounder, your voice deeper (or lighter), or your chest hairier. Once the stuff of exploitation movies (“Glen or Glenda?”) such practices are now fully protected, and one’s decision to switch sexes is legally protected in the workplace, in government, in schools. Even if it’s painfully obvious that nobody will buy that you are the opposite gender, there still will be hell to pay the person who says so out loud or in print.

    The SPLC would doubtless agree that if “Glen” wants to risk enormous expense, physical discomfort, and alienation from loved ones and friends in order to become “Glenda,” that’s his/her decision and nobody else’s business. On the other hand, if “Glen” is gay, and wants to change his circumstances so that he might find a “Glenda” to spend his life with, the SPLC thinks it’s its business to disrupt, discourage, and “cure” them of their wish to be heterosexual.

    “Tolerance – Worth Reaching For.” My ass.

  17. My point is not to shut you up, it is to call your biases out and correct the record. I believe I have done that.
    Jacob Edelman

    No Jacob you did not, you made baseless unsupported assertions, ignored indisputable evidence, cast aspersions upon the character of those who disagreed with you and proclaimed yourself the winner in a debate where your only contribution was inflammatory hyperbolic and illogical rhetoric.

    • And they are so self absorbed with their own false sense of self righteousness that they cannot see what is obvious to everyone else. They are not fighting for the down trodden and oppressed, They are parasites feeding off the injustices inherent in society, enriching themselves in the process while attempting to force their intolerant version of tolerance on everyone else.

  18. In some ways I agree with you. However let me just say this.

    I have seen the damage so called reparative therapy has done to people. Some of whom are my friends. It is nothing less than a way to 1. Milk money out of people who desperately want to fit in with “normal” society. 2. Systematic torture of those whose sexual orientation and gender identities do not fit into “straight christian” society.

    ( http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/family-blames-gender-identity-therapy-for-abused-sons-suicide-decades-later/ )

    ( http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/06/07/sissy.boy.experiment/index.html )

    I do not believe that these so-called reparative therapy clinics are anything less than a confidence scheme. They do not work and anyone who believes in them is either a fool or worse.

    Being GLBT is not a crime, such as murder or theft, there is no need to cure it.

    If someone told you that there were clinics to change a persons ethnicity how would you feel about that?

    Lastly, there are reasons why many glbt folks place themselves at a distance (and are often antagonistic) from christian folk, this is one of them.

    • You make excellent points. Abortion is not a crime either, but someone may simply choose not to do it because of their religion (or other reasons). I vehemently restate that I do NOT agree with reparative therapy, but it is not my place to tell an adult how to reconcile their own sexuality with their own faith.

      • Confidence schemes are a crime though… Thats what this (reparative therapy)falls under in my opinion , same as quack medicine. In fact it is quack medicine.

        When you take someones money in pretense that you will cure them of something that cannot be cured, you are conning them. That is criminal- it is raising false hopes and then dashing them to the ground. Programs like reparative therapy are a cause of suicide in the lgbt youth community.

        This, again , is why many of the LGBT have run screaming away from Christian Churches. Some of them are even openly antagonistic to christianity, because of the lack of acceptance.

        • By that argument we cannot treat alcoholics and drug addicts either. The fact is that homosexual behavior is deadly to those who practice it and you can get people to stop having homosexual sex. It is behavior and it can be modified…as in STOPPED. Whether you want to call it a cure or not is your own affair.

          • You are entitled to your OPINION, but I encourage you to CITE how “homosexual behavior is deadly to those who practice it”. I would argue that heterosexual promiscuity is more deadly than homosexual monogamy. Homosexuality does not inherently equal promiscuity.

            • If it is necessary, then here it is…

              (1)An official with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced the CDC’s estimate Monday that in the United States AIDS is fifty times more prevalent among men who have sex with men (‘MSM’) than the rest of the population. Dr. Amy Lansky revealed this statistic during a plenary session at the 2009 HIV Prevention Conference in Atlanta.

              The CDC had already revealed last year that approximately 53% of the estimated 56,300 new HIV cases in 2006 were in homosexual men, with the African American population being particularly affected.

              (2)Earlier this year, as another example, the Centers for Disease Control released a statistical report indicating that homosexual men made up 65 percent of the reported primary and secondary syphilis cases in 2007. A report from the Public Health Agency of Canada in 2006 revealed that 51 percent of people infected with HIV in the country were homosexual men.

              In fact, the statistics on HIV/AIDS led one group, the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center, to state in 2006 that HIV/AIDS is a “gay disease,” in a billboard ad campaign geared to reducing rates of HIV infection.

              (3)Homosexual men are twice as likely to have had cancer than men who are not homosexual, with the difference likely being explained by the high prevalence of anal cancer and HIV/AIDS among homosexual men, according to a study issued in California today.

              The study, published in the journal Cancer, examined the cancer prevalence in men and women in categories of “sexual orientation” and subsequently compared the health of male and female cancer survivors.

              The study was based on data from a self-reporting survey conducted by the California Health Interview of over 120,000 people in the state of California over 2001, 2003, and 2005. It is the largest state survey of its kind in the United States.

              Of those interviewed, 1,493 men described themselves as homosexuals and 3,690 men reported a cancer diagnosis. Homosexual men were 1.9 times more likely than other men to have had cancer and, on average, were diagnosed with cancer ten years earlier than other men.

              “The greater cancer prevalence among gay men may be caused by a higher rate of anal cancer, as suggested by earlier studies that point to an excess risk of anal cancer,” said the study.

              And as far as the myth of homosexual monogamy:
              (4)· A.P. Bell and M.S. Weinberg, in their classic study of male and female homosexuality, found that 43 percent of white male homosexuals had sex with 500 or more partners, with 28 percent having 1,000 or more sex partners.[9]

              · In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al., found that only 2.7 percent claimed to have had sex with one partner only. The most common response, given by 21.6 percent of the respondents, was of having a hundred-one to five hundred lifetime sex partners.[10]

              All of my examples CITE their sources. There are plenty more

              2.7% monogamous? You do notice that…

              Since homosexuals are getting more cases of syphillis (65%) than promiscuous heterosexuals, in spite of their far lesser numbers, it is clear that homosexual sex is deadly on every level.
              Why are you so defensive of homosexuality? The behavior is killing these people. The compassionate response is to encourage the abandonment of this behavior, not enabling it with tolerance and mythical tales of a born orientation.
              .

              • Thank you for proving my point. The problem is obviously not homosexuality, but promiscuity. I’m sorry, but I can’t see where you demonstrate that “homosexuals are getting more cases of syphillis (65%) than promiscuous heterosexuals”. There would have to have been a study comparing the number of partners for homosexuals and heterosexuals with syphillis. I’m fairly certain you’d find the homosexual population (your 65%) had, on average, more partners, or that perhaps they shared a common core of partners that allowed the disease to spread. I reiterate that MONOGAMOUS homosexuality is not dangerous. I did not assert that homosexuals are universally monogamous. I simply stated that the danger lies in promiscuity, NOT homosexuality.

                • Apparently you missed the point where monogamous homosexuals consist of only 2.7% of the homosexual population. Another study of just homosexual couples found that only 7 out of 156 couples maintained fidelity in their relationships. This in a study rigged to get the best possible result for homosexual monogamy. The fact is that homosexuality exists to violate rules, not follow them. It is perhaps the highest form of rebellion against rules and restrictions. I assert that these studies show that monogamous homosexuality is extremely rare.
                  If homosexuals comprise 65% of cases of syphillis yet they comprise (at best) 2-4% of the population, how do you not see that the danger is extremely great.
                  I will grant that monogamous homosexual sex MIGHT be safer for homosexuals. Might. You still have the physical damage caused by tearing of organs not designed to operate in the manner chosen. However the evidence shows that monogamy is not even close common. Promiscuity and homosexuality are linked. I would argue they are linked by the same choice that the homosexual made when he chose to be a homosexual.

          • Incorrect on many counts.

            First Alcoholism and drug dependencies are addictions, not an inherent part of someones personality. Homosexuality is an inherent part of someones personality, cannot be changed without serious damage to their personality – in fact I would argue that 9/10ths of the so called ex-gays are not ex at all, based on my own personal experience. The remaining 1/10 have suffered serious damage to their personality and will no doubt go to their graves without ever loving anyone again.

            Secondly you only account for HIV/Aids in that equation, what about cervical cancer caused by HPV virus? What about abuse? Not to mention the fact that lesbians have a lower rate of infection than heterosexual women. Does that mean lesbians have a better , healtier lifestyle, no it is just different.

            Thirdly there are types of homosexual interactions which do not expose one to any danger of HIV infection(I’ll let you figure these out.)

            In conclusion homosexuality is only about sex in that it is an expresion of the love that people feel for their partners. It is mostly about the person you fall in love with.
            I don’t feel that love is wrong, however your mileage may vary.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s