The fallacy here is obvious. Men, for instance, have average life spans that are shorter than women.
I'd completely forgotten about that. Dang! That should have been one of my arguments.
Using Discreet's reasoning, we would be justified in arguing that maleness should be banned. Likewise, blacks have, on average, shorter life expectancies than whites. So Discreet should also be asking why we should allow blackness. Clearly, that's absurd, but no more absurd than hanging an argument about "permitting" homosexuality on life span data.
Not only that, but somewhere in this thread, Discreet stated that married couples tend to have longer life spans than homosexuals. If that is true, then perhaps homosexuals should be allowed to marry, then they too would have longer lifespans.
p.s. im sick of this christian stereotype im given considering im an agnostic. As soon as i go against homosexuality im labeled as a religious activist....classic
love thy neighbor as thyself . . . unless, of course, if thy neighbor is gay .
If you truly are an agnostic, you are thus claiming to not know for sure whether there is a God and whether He takes the form Christians think He does. Agnostics are generally against persecution and rather wary of moral condemnation.
I say this, because from the way you posted, I clearly had no idea you had the same belief as I do.
Well, I guess as with other things in this world, there are varying degrees of agnosticism.
The only reason that nobody else has not conducted experiments to show that homosexuals have a shorter lifespan, because it is at the moment, impossible to do so or at least, if someone has attempted to do so, they haven't finished their findings (because it requires observing a homosexual from the day they were born to the day they die and a large number of them at that).
Also, what is the point of doing experiments to show that the lifespan of a homosexual is different from that of a heterosexual? What possible reason could there be?
(I also find it strange how some people are trying to find out the cause of homosexuality, looking into genetics and environment. Are they just curious? Do they want to find out how to prevent homosexuality from occurring? Or do they want to proof that homosexuality isn't a life span and that we cannot condemn homosexuals for being who they are?).
Maruis de Carabas wrote:
Unless my memory fails me they suffer said diseases less than straight women, it's an anatomical thing.
You mean, STDs? Yeah, I would have thought so too.
Let's face it. Males are the weakest link. They're the ones affected by STDs the most. They're the ones passing STDs around and they're the ones that are causing noise pollution outside my window, not to mention spewing out carbon dioxide unnecessarily from the exhaust pipes of their cars.
I feel so bad for our gender, right about now.