Originally posted by robbie carrobieOf course they do.
It proves that not all sexual practices contain inherent risks as you have assumed.
You asked me this:
...[If] you have remained chaste with a single partner from virginity how does that carry the same risk as a promiscuous homosexual man who has had multiple partners. Are you seriously telling us that the risks are the same?
And I answered: Of course they are not the same. Indeed, if someone has remained chaste with a single partner from virginity it does not carry the same risk as a heterosexual man - or woman - who has had multiple partners. This does not make heterosexual sex immoral.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
18 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobierobbie could you please define what you mean by 'homosexual sex'. you refer to it as being a cause of high levels of hiv in the uk. are you including all sexual acts between men? because thats how you word it.
It proves that not all sexual practices contain inherent risks as you have assumed. Now i too need to go. Have a pleasant afternoon.
ha! as I suspected, the false analogy, deductively valid but unsound.
homosexual behaviour is dangerous and therefore morally objectionable
Driving a car is dangerous
Driving a car therefore is also morally objectionable.
Why is it a fallacious argument? because driving a car is different in both nature and degree than to engaging in homosexual behaviour to such an extent as to warrant the comparison invalid.
http://www.onegoodmove.org/fallacy/falsean.htm
Originally posted by stellspalfieThe fact is that we have now the highest ever recorded figures for HIV among homosexual men in the UK. I don't care how they contracted it, its irrelevant. What is relevant is that they have wilfully and knowingly engaged in behaviour that is dangerous and thus morally reprehensible.
robbie could you please define what you mean by 'homosexual sex'. you refer to it as being a cause of high levels of hiv in the uk. are you including all sexual acts between men? because thats how you word it.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
18 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobiehow do you feel about two gay virgins having sex for the first time....im not a scientist but i reckon there is about 0% chance of catching HIV?
The fact is that we have now the highest ever recorded figures for HIV among homosexual men in the UK. I don't care how they contracted it, its irrelevant. What is relevant is that they have wilfully and knowingly engaged in behaviour that is dangerous and thus morally reprehensible.
18 Apr 15
Originally posted by stellspalfieSo do I but I am concerned with those who make up the highest ever recorded figures for HIV among gay men in the UK.
how do you feel about two gay virgins having sex for the first time....im not a scientist but i reckon there is about 0% chance of catching HIV?
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
18 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieyou sound like nigel farage...blah blah highest immigration blah blah.....the question was - how do you feel about two gay virgins having sex for the first time? do you think it is dangerous?
So do I but I am concerned with those who make up the highest ever recorded figures for HIV among gay men in the UK.
19 Apr 15
3 edits
Originally posted by stellspalfieThe question is not simple one! I could say I believe driving 25 mph is
you sound like nigel farage...blah blah highest immigration blah blah.....the question was - how do you feel about two gay virgins having sex for the first time? do you think it is dangerous?
dangerous, but there are times it is not, I can say driving 80 mph is
dangerous, but there are times it is not. So does that mean I should be
able to drive at whatever speed I want whenever I want to, no! If we look
at just conditions, or just how many others are on or near the road would
that change whatever speed limit I want to drive at, or would it always
be right or wrong according to the law?
If it is the law than being able to do it because I want to is no longer a
good measure towards I should be allowed to, or if I can define a few
ways it is safer than others that too isn't a good measure towards should
I be allowed too, it is the law that matters.
Now you can look at the law and choose to obey it or not, and for some
times get away with it, that is until someone who actually enforces the law
nails you for breaking, than you pay a price no matter how safe you were,
or how you were not hurting others at the time of your crime.
If you reject that God created man and woman and gave us laws/rules to
live by than that is on you. You can as you can speed down any road do
whatever you will, until you are called in by someone who enforces the
law. Then you'll pay the price.
If you reject God I get why you don't care what His laws say, you are not
part of His Kingdom, and unless you turn towards Him as Lord you never
will be.
Originally posted by stellspalfieIt's exposure to HIV that is dangerous. Sex is dangerous, if it exposes the person to diseases. It has nothing to do with being gay or not. Homosexuality is not the cause of AIDS/HIV. 😏
you sound like nigel farage...blah blah highest immigration blah blah.....the question was - how do you feel about two gay virgins having sex for the first time? do you think it is dangerous?
The Near Genius
19 Apr 15
1 edit
Originally posted by stellspalfieI don't feel anything, do you think i should drink more shandy and see if that has any effect? The fact of the matter is that homosexual sex in itself contains inherent health risks because it contravenes the natural physiology of the human body. So to answer your question, yes its potentially dangerous. Now I understand that no amount of empirical evidence can dissuade such a loon of epic proportions from his mindset (formed of the shifting sands of secular liberalism and political correctness) but I provide it anyway.
how do you feel about two gay virgins having sex for the first time....im not a scientist but i reckon there is about 0% chance of catching HIV?
http://www.catholiceducation.org/en/marriage-and-family/sexuality/the-health-risks-of-gay-sex.html
19 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhen you say homosexual do you mean 'anal sex'?
I don't feel anything, do you think i should drink more shandy and see if that has any effect? The fact of the matter is that homosexual sex in itself contains inherent health risks because it contravenes the natural physiology of the human body. So to answer your question, yes its potentially dangerous. Now I understand that no amount of empirica ...[text shortened]... tp://www.catholiceducation.org/en/marriage-and-family/sexuality/the-health-risks-of-gay-sex.html