New Yorkers live longer!

[Cancel3]

Again, a more detailed dictionary has multiple definitions, and I, as well as the US Census bureau, have chosen a different, more scientific definition that you have.

Please show me this "scientific" definition.

"ho·mo·sex·u·al·i·ty (hm-sksh-l-t, -m-)
n.
1. Sexual orientation to persons of the same sex.
2. Sexual activity with another of the same sex."

That is the definition given by American Heritage Stedman's Medical Dictionary and Dorland's Medical Dictionary.




You are trying to make it sound as if you are using a more correct definiton, but you are unable to quote a source.

You are simply picking what PART of the definition that backs your claims. That is about as unscientific as it gets.

 

[uscitizen]

Sol southern guy is just right and he knows it. He does not know why or how he is right but he is certain he is right.

You will not change that in his type of mindset.

 

[Cancel3]

Sol southern guy is just right and he knows it. He does not know why or how he is right but he is certain he is right.

You will not change that in his type of mindset.

I know I won't change his mind. But its such fun to see him try and spin his way out of the holes he digs.

Besides, work is slow this time of year, so I have time.

 

[uscitizen]

I know I won't change his mind. But its such fun to see him try and spin his way out of the holes he digs.

Besides, work is slow this time of year, so I have time.

My friend in the fiber equipment installation business just lost his contracts with ATT. Out of business.

 

[Cancel3]

My friend in the fiber equipment installation business just lost his contracts with ATT. Out of business.

Our phone contracts are holding steady and the municiple builds are looking up.

I am hoping 2009 will actually be better.

 

[DamnYankee]

Sol southern guy is just right and he knows it. He does not know why or how he is right but he is certain he is right.

You will not change that in his type of mindset.

I know why I am right and have explained why several times. It's not The Southern Man's fault that y'all are closed minded.

 

[DamnYankee]

.....

You are simply picking what PART of the definition that backs your claims. .....

That's how the English language works. Many words have multiple meanings.

 

[uscitizen]

I know why I am right and have explained why several times. It's not The Southern Man's fault that y'all are closed minded.

Yeah I am so closed minded in that I have no personal use at all for homosexuality, but do not think I should write the rule for others that do need or want to indulge in such things.

I also virtually do not drink, but do not rag on those who do.

Unless like rob they praise drunk driving which could literally impact me.

 

[uscitizen]

That's how the English language works. Many words have multiple meanings.

which means you cannot just ignore all the meanings that do not suit you.

 

[DamnYankee]

Your "source" does not ask a single question about sexuality. Which makes it a rather shakey "source", wouldn't you say?


Your position is all well and good. If you want to believe that, more power to you. But you are making assertions that homosexuality is a choice, and therefore you are ignoring all data to the contrary.

1. So you don't have a problem with militant gays changing APA scientific policy by fascist political means?
3. The Census reported on the issue as stated previously.
4. My view is that most of it is a choice, and some my be due to a birth defect. Society should work to cure birth defects as well as expect those making poor choices to be responsible for their own actions.

 

[DamnYankee]

which means you cannot just ignore all the meanings that do not suit you.

Correct. Example, the term "ass". Consider: "The symbol for a Republican is an elephant, while the symbol for a Democrat is an ass."

 

[DamnYankee]

So you are saying that anyone who is not living in a gay household is not gay? wtf?.....

Like the word change from "been" to "included" in the other thread, you have proven yourself incapable of understanding concepts beyond the woefully simple. I suggest that you re-read my prior posts for a better understanding.

 

[uscitizen]

Like the word change from "been" to "included" in the other thread, you have proven yourself incapable of understanding concepts beyond the woefully simple. I suggest that you re-read my prior posts for a better understanding.

NO WAAY< they were horrible enough reading the first time.

 

[Cancel3]

I know why I am right and have explained why several times. It's not The Southern Man's fault that y'all are closed minded.

I am not being closed minded at all.

I have not seen where you are right. Among other things, you have claimed to have used the same definition of "homosexuality" that the US Census uses and that it is the correct and scientific definition. But I have posted 7 or 8 quotes from various dictionaries that show you to be wrong.

You have tried to argue against the idea that homosexuality is NOT a choice, despite the medical and research evidence offered. And you have offered none in return.

You have gone to great lengths to claim that the population of gays in the US is 1% instead of the 10% so many have quoted. And yet you use as a basis, a census that does not ask any sexuality questions. And has only been able to count gay couples living in the same residence that answered the 1 in 5 long forms. And THEN you try and alter your definition of "homosexuality" to be"...only people who are actually in a gay household.".




No southern man, you have been dancing around TRYING to make a point. But the only point you have made is that you do not approve of homosexuality.

 

[Cancel3]

Like the word change from "been" to "included" in the other thread, you have proven yourself incapable of understanding concepts beyond the woefully simple. I suggest that you re-read my prior posts for a better understanding.

You are dancing again.

Your EXACT statement was: "My definition as well as the US Census definition is scientific, which counts only people who are actually in a gay household."

Now, whether you want to admit it or not, that statement says that you AND the US Census define homosexuality as only those people in a gay household.

That may not have been what you intended to say, but it is what it says.




Your insistence that the "scientific" definition is about the act and not the desire or attraction is totally bogus. You have yet to show me any proof that your assertion is valid.

 

[Cancel3]

Let me see if I understand the basics of what you believe, Southerman.


1) The US Census is the most accurate method of counting the number of gays in the US, despite the fact that they did not ask as single question about sexuality.

2) Most homosexuals chose to be that way, and the few that did not should be treated as victims of birth defects. And that we should strive to eliminate these birth defects.

3) The definition of "homosexuality" revolves solely around the sexual act and does not address desire, attraction or romantic love at all.




Are these accurate about what you believe?

 

[DamnYankee]

I am not being closed minded at all.

I have not seen where you are right. Among other things, you have claimed to have used the same definition of "homosexuality" that the US Census uses and that it is the correct and scientific definition. But I have posted 7 or 8 quotes from various dictionaries that show you to be wrong.

You have tried to argue against the idea that homosexuality is NOT a choice, despite the medical and research evidence offered. And you have offered none in return.

You have gone to great lengths to claim that the population of gays in the US is 1% instead of the 10% so many have quoted. And yet you use as a basis, a census that does not ask any sexuality questions. And has only been able to count gay couples living in the same residence that answered the 1 in 5 long forms. And THEN you try and alter your definition of "homosexuality" to be"...only people who are actually in a gay household.".




No southern man, you have been dancing around TRYING to make a point. But the only point you have made is that you do not approve of homosexuality.

You are dancing again.

Your EXACT statement was: "My definition as well as the US Census definition is scientific, which counts only people who are actually in a gay household."

Now, whether you want to admit it or not, that statement says that you AND the US Census define homosexuality as only those people in a gay household.

That may not have been what you intended to say, but it is what it says.




Your insistence that the "scientific" definition is about the act and not the desire or attraction is totally bogus. You have yet to show me any proof that your assertion is valid.

Let me see if I understand the basics of what you believe, Southerman.


1) The US Census is the most accurate method of counting the number of gays in the US, despite the fact that they did not ask as single question about sexuality.

2) Most homosexuals chose to be that way, and the few that did not should be treated as victims of birth defects. And that we should strive to eliminate these birth defects.

3) The definition of "homosexuality" revolves solely around the sexual act and does not address desire, attraction or romantic love at all.




Are these accurate about what you believe?

http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html#Argumentum ad nauseam

 

[DamnYankee]

....The US Census is the most accurate method of counting the number of gays in the US, despite the fact that they did not ask as single question about sexuality.....

http://www.gaydata.org/02_Data_Sources/ds008_USCENSUS/ds008_USCENSUS_Long_Form.pdf

See: Person 2 (pdf page 11), question 2: relation to person 1 (related, husband/wife or not related, unmarried partner), question 3: sex. IF person 2 is husband/wife or unmarried partner AND same sex and person 1.....

Again, I find it incredible that you fail to understand these simple concepts or rules of logic.

 

[Cancel3]

http://www.gaydata.org/02_Data_Sources/ds008_USCENSUS/ds008_USCENSUS_Long_Form.pdf

See: Person 2 (pdf page 11), question 2: relation to person 1 (related, husband/wife or not related, unmarried partner), question 3: sex. IF person 2 is husband/wife or unmarried partner AND same sex and person 1.....

Again, I find it incredible that you fail to understand these simple concepts or rules of logic.

Again, you are missing the ENTIRE point of what I have been saying. The census NEVER asked about sexuality.

The absolute best you can hope for with that survey is to get an idea of how many gay couples live together.

How does that tell you how many gay people are in america???



Please quite dancing and actually answer the question. How does the information gathered by the US Census tell you how many gay people there are in america?

 

[Cancel3]

http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html#Argumentum ad nauseam

There is no logical fallacy in what I posted when I wanted to clarify what you are saying you believe.

I stated three very clear points, and asked if these were accurate as far as your beliefs go.

But you refuse to answer a direct question, which leads me to believe that I am accurate when I say you are dancing around a topic.

I am not intereste in your opinion of my debating skills. I am asking for simple information concerning the topic at hand.

If you do not wish to answer, simple say that and we will end this little watz that has you refusing to answer question but expecting answers from others.