2006-10-15 13:16:42 · 19 answers · asked by gotslayer 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
I have plenty of gay friends. Seriously, is homosexualit brought on by feeling like an outcast to society, seeking comfort by a group that will accept you?
To those of you saying that being hetrosexual is the social disease, ???? come on!!!! now youre just being dumb.
Lets look at from youre point of view...
Women should only be with women and men should only be with men...
80 years later... no babies... end of humanity. Is that what you all want?
If so you are a threat and enemy to humanity.
Not saying all gays... just those who think procreating is a social disease.
2006-10-15 13:41:45 · update #1
No! It's not a disease of any kind! What a bigot you are.
2006-10-15 14:05:03 · answer #1 · answered by You Don't Know My Name 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
First of all maybe we need a population cut back. With what we are doing to the world it is much more favourable not to bring any kids into it. Also if a child is born into a same sex home they are better loved for it because the parents know how hard it is in life and also it doesn't mean they will be gay.
It is not a social disease - it is a genetic thing. I think the biggest social disease we should be worried about at the moment is hatred. This is not intended towards yourself - you are just asking a question.
I just think that hatred is a bigger issue in this world. What is wrong with two people loving each other - is love a disease.
2006-10-15 15:41:49 · answer #2 · answered by gretphemelger 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Bearable's analysis is spot on! Homosexuality can be a social disease only if you consider civilization a symptom as mainly the civilized develop the symptoms.
I would like to add the basic priciple that societies must define or embrace every significant change that comes to it. If the society decides to ignore, fight, or ban the change, then the change will still occur and more strongly due to it having defined its own role.
The definitions that conservatives are giving to homosexuality is inadaquate in our hi-tech society. They are using mainly religious reasons and hate-speech. This type of reasoning is not enough anymore so homosexuals are forced to create their own definitions for themselves. This forces a ridged gay/straight barrier that you may consider a social disease.
The cure is to recognize sexuality as a spectrum. No gay or straight, just people. Not only is this closer to the human truth ( as any course in human sexuality will tell you) but it is inituitive and easy for our society to implement. Make sexual labeling politically incorrect also. In other words, destroy the entire issue.
2006-10-15 14:02:16 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hate and intolerance is a social disease. Homosexuals reproduce all the time, just attend Pride days in any community, you can't walk for the kids and the dogs. We have children the very same way that heterosexuals do. Sperm is not that hard to come by, and adoption is available in most communities if you qualify. Some of us have children from failed heterosexual relationships, others simply don't want children. Just like heterosexuals. And you sound like a bigot who says "oh yeah, some of my best friends are blacks". No one believes that either.
2006-10-15 18:47:30 · answer #4 · answered by tjnstlouismo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm gay. Gays that think that procreating is a social disease have a disease in their heads. Being gay does mean that you cant have kids but, our orphanages are over crowded and since we realize that being gay isnt a choice there is no gay person that would try to rase another child to be gay. It would contradict ourselves. Because such a small portion of the population is gay then i would expect an adopted child of mine to be straight. Being straight is normal. Just like being gay is normal. Call it a disease but dont call it a choice.
2006-10-15 14:17:00 · answer #5 · answered by defenderof thehumanright 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This goes to talking a walk in somone else's shoes, even if just for a day. I cannot judge, I have four young sons and i don't know what path their life will take so I love them today and I will love them always as I would hope the world would. Judge not.
2006-10-15 14:05:46 · answer #6 · answered by JennieLouie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. You are suggesting that homosexuals were outcasts long before they "turned" to homosexuality....
Homophobia and anti-gay bigotry are what creates the social stigma-illusion in some people's mind that homosexuals are or were outcasts, not the other way around.
You have it quite backward.
2006-10-15 14:16:45 · answer #7 · answered by IndyT- For Da Ben Dan 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
no, but ignorance and stupidity is! cure yourself by reading up on actual facts! I don't know anyone who says being heterosexual is a social disease. nor do any of us "turn" to being homosexual because we are "outcasts." seriously, where do you come up with lame crap like that?
we've been around as long as mankind and it hasn't slowed any population growth yet! unfortunately, being ignorant and stupid hasn't either...
2006-10-15 14:47:15 · answer #8 · answered by redcatt63 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh my word you cannot be serious?
Please tell me you are just being a hateful person or just pushing buttons, or just plain sarcastic or something!
No homosexuality is not a social disease.
Heterosexuality is!
It has run rampant to epidemic proportion they are working on a vaccine for it but we probably won't see the results in our life time!
That is other then a nuke bomb or global warming or world war three.
2006-10-15 13:26:03 · answer #9 · answered by Crampy Grampy 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
First, homosexuality is brought on simply by being homosexual. How do I know it isn't a choice? Use yourself as an example. Dude, if you're straight, try choosing to be a homosexual to see how IMPOSSIBLE that is to do...you can't -- you're straight.
2006-10-15 18:00:46 · answer #10 · answered by Mark L 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are those who , against the waffling advice of the APA , still think that sodomy is a spiritual and social illness.
2006-10-16 09:20:44 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋