Obama=Liar & Puts american soldiers lives at risk

Southern Man said:
I read your entire post and you accused the source as biased while ignoring the fact that there were five sources, at least 8 different researchers, and the sources date back to 1978. So you can attack "Orthodoxy Today" all you like but that's not the source of the data. *shrug*

And again, we're not talking simply promiscuity but up to 28% of a group poking over 1000 different men up the ass in the age of HIV. I wouldn't hire anyone who did that, gay or not.
Click to expand...
And again, it takes no notice of changes among the group after the advent of HIV, it cherry-picks the comparative groups, and is not published in peer reviewed magazines because the study does not meet peer review. I did point that out, by stating that the people who paid for the "survey" were from groups like "orthodoxy today" and again in another post where I pointed out that you cannot find this study in any peer reviewed source and told you why, and now again I am directly telling you why your "study" isn't even a study, it is an appeal to authority fallacy.

Either you are deliberately disingenuous when it comes to this subject (my personal belief is you are) or you cannot comprehend what people write unless it is direct. So I am being direct. Please post a peer reviewed study that shows MENTAL INSTABILITY in a larger measure among all homosexual groups that does not attribute the instability to poor treatment by society (like refusing to allow them into the military unless they lie). Promiscuity is not "mental instability" as I have pointed out several times here.
 
Superfreak said:
Lets try a different line of thought, since you are so hung up on the 28%.

What about the other 72%? Would you hire them? Can they serve in the military? Or are you going to hold them accountable for the actions of the 28%?
Click to expand...
Read the summary report. The 28% were over 1000 different partners. The remainder were lesser numbers, with a significant percentage 100 or more, which is of course unstable.

The current "don't tell" policy, which I happen to agree with, requires gays who serve to be discrete. If they can do that, then it lends credence to their claim of being stable individuals.
 
Damocles said:
And again, it takes no notice of changes among the group after the advent of HIV, it cherry-picks the comparative groups, and is not published in peer reviewed magazines because the study does not meet peer review. I did point that out, by stating that the people who paid for the "survey" were from groups like "orthodoxy today" and again in another post where I pointed out that you cannot find this study in any peer reviewed source and told you why, and now again I am directly telling you why your "study" isn't even a study, it is an appeal to authority fallacy.

Either you are deliberately disingenuous when it comes to this subject (my personal belief is you are) or you cannot comprehend what people write unless it is direct. So I am being direct. Please post a peer reviewed study that shows MENTAL INSTABILITY in a larger measure among all homosexual groups that does not attribute the instability to poor treatment by society (like refusing to allow them into the military unless they lie). Promiscuity is not "mental instability" as I have pointed out several times here.
Click to expand...

The summary study that I linked to was a "peer review" of the ones cited. :)
 
Southern Man said:
Read the summary report. The 28% were over 1000 different partners. The remainder were lesser numbers, with a significant percentage 100 or more, which is of course unstable.

The current "don't tell" policy, which I happen to agree with, requires gays who serve to be discrete. If they can do that, then it lends credence to their claim of being stable individuals.
Click to expand...

You are so full of shit....

Tell us genius, what is the number of sexual partners that makes a person go from stable to unstable? 10? 20? 53?

What is the arbitrary number you wish to choose?

Being discrete has nothing to do with being stable you moron. They could be discrete and still sleep with over 100 men, which you say is unstable. How could they be stable and unstable at the same time? Oh yeah, because your bullshit is all arbitrary nonsense that you created to somehow justify your bigotry.
 
Southern Man said:
Actually a strawman is to create a "caricature or extreme form" of my argument, then arguing that, which is clearly what you have attempted. Please read and understand these definitions before you use them to avoid looking so foolish. http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html#Straw man
Click to expand...

Listen ass clown.... show me where I did such a thing? Quote my post where you think a strawman was created and then explain why you think so.

You cannot do so.
 
Southern Man said:
Because the military doesn't need fancy hairdos, and gays can't be depended on in any other necessary role. :)
Click to expand...

You cannot actually believe what you just said. I am sure you don't truly believe that all gay men are flaming hairdressers.

If you do believe that I would suggest you tell that to Esea Tuaolo. He might convince you otherwise. Or hurt you.
 
Southern Man said:
Read the summary report. The 28% were over 1000 different partners. The remainder were lesser numbers, with a significant percentage 100 or more, which is of course unstable.

The current "don't tell" policy, which I happen to agree with, requires gays who serve to be discrete. If they can do that, then it lends credence to their claim of being stable individuals.
Click to expand...

WTF??

Why should they have to be discrete? Are you going to demand that the straight men be discrete too?

Them being discrete is doing nothing but making homophobes happy. You think by not knowing it changes the facts? It strikes me as odd that you think they are good soldiers as long as they hide their sexuality. But when they reveal it they suddenly become unfit?

Sounds like the problem is yours, not theirs.
 
Southern Man said:
The summary study that I linked to was a "peer review" of the ones cited. :)
Click to expand...
It was not. The summary you provided was a summary posted by orthodoxy today and was in no way a peer review.

Again, there is a reason you cannot find this study in any peer reviewed source, it is because it does not stand up to peer review.

What you linked to was a group of people who took studies done by other groups, picked and chose what they disliked, then created a "summary", which you linked to and called a "study". None of which are correct, nor does it stand up to any scientific scrutiny. If it had it would be proudly published as a scientific paper in a peer reviewed publication, not "orthodoxy today" and the "baptist ministers" websites only.

It wasn't even a study, it wasn't peer review, it was simply an appeal to authority fallacy posted on orthodoxy today, that you relentlessly defend as a "study" of its own. It is not a peer review, or it would be on a scientific source. You cannot find it there because it is rubbish as science.
 
Superfreak said:
You are so full of shit....

Tell us genius, what is the number of sexual partners that makes a person go from stable to unstable? 10? 20? 53?

What is the arbitrary number you wish to choose?

Being discrete has nothing to do with being stable you moron. They could be discrete and still sleep with over 100 men, which you say is unstable. How could they be stable and unstable at the same time? Oh yeah, because your bullshit is all arbitrary nonsense that you created to somehow justify your bigotry.
Click to expand...

Actually, you being so fat, you've probably got lots more shit in you then I in me.

The "don't ask don't tell" policy doesn't require a number, just discretion. :)

And thanks for the neg rep because you disagree with me, asshole!
 
Southern Man said:
Actually, you being so fat, you've probably got lots more shit in you then I in me.

The "don't ask don't tell" policy doesn't require a number, just discretion. :)

And thanks for the neg rep because you disagree with me, asshole!
Click to expand...

I neg rep'ed you because you are a bigot... thus it was deserved.

So in other words, you have nothing? You proclaim that someone who has sex with 100 partners is unstable, but you cannot tell us what number of sexual partners tips the balance and makes someone shift from being stable to unstable?
 
Superfreak said:
Listen ass clown.... show me where I did such a thing? Quote my post where you think a strawman was created and then explain why you think so.

You cannot do so.
Click to expand...
Post 56:

I posted:

Most reasonable people would consider having porking over 1000 different men up the ass as an indication of unstable behavior. The source of this data was A. P. Bell and M. S. Weinberg, not "Christians against Gays" as you suggest.
Click to expand...
This was in the context of 28% of gay men had over 1000 different sex partners.

And you responded:

So you are thus suggesting that all heterosexuals are also unstable due to the actions of Wilt Chamberlain?
Click to expand...
Obviously Wilt is not 28% or the heterosexual population. Thus you portrayed an extreme example of my argument and then, after crickets chirped for a wile, argued that. :D
 
So you want everyone to be discrete about their sexual history and everyone to be straight.

Sorry to break it to you, but you don't get to make those rules.
 
Southern Man said:
That has always been my consistent position. I had a good friend that chose to be gay due to an issue with her mother, then after a few years and meeting the right guy, chose back. :)
Click to expand...

You have a good friend who decided to fuck with her mother and did so.

There is no way meeting the right guy changed it. It sounds like she was bisexual and spiteful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top