(03-24-2017, 06:41 AM)Asura Wrote: So you result to insults? Whatever you say, really.

Quote:No shit that homosexuals would have a high chance of contracting STIs and such since they are hitting the A-hole. Again, I didn't need to read anything about that because it's pretty obvious. I am simply speaking in a reality sense. If you rely too much on statistics and studies conducted by other people instead of your own, you really aren't thinking and just accepted what you're being spoonfed.

Quote:It seems you have some sort of prejudice to homosexuals and just trying to justify it.

(03-24-2017, 09:05 PM)Aether Wrote: At this point, you're delusional.  You're trying to state a legislation is wrong, a legislation that's been signed by 88 countries and is discussed by a panel of people with qualification (PhD/Doctorate) simply because you  -a person in school that social engineers on the side-disagree with homosexuality.

(03-24-2017, 10:47 PM)pvnk Wrote:

Quote: Was this supposed to be an argument? If you can refute or point out a flaw my statement then I'd like you to. My statement is completely statistically backed.

I didn't know you could objectively substantiate promiscuity.

(03-25-2017, 09:26 PM)meow Wrote:

(03-24-2017, 06:41 AM)Asura Wrote: So you result to insults? Whatever you say, really.

It wasn't an insult so much as it was an accurate description of the ideology which you follow.

The adjective "stupid" is defined as, according to Google, -

Code:

1. having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense.

Subjectively, one could argue that it is common sense to gather a great wealth of information regarding the topic which you're justifying your stance on. According to implications that have been made by yourself, you refrain from obtaining knowledge externally and rather have chosen to extract knowledge using "thinking for yourself". The reason this could be considered a violation of common sense is due to the fact that literally every education on the planet utilizes knowledge from external sources in order to educate people, there is not a single education system in the world which says that you should only think for yourself to form opinion rather than obtaining knowledge through the reading external sources of information and using that to form one's opinion. And, since your ideology is a violation of common sense, and since you are a tangible representation of your definitively stupid ideology, you are, by definition, stupid.

Quote:No shit that homosexuals would have a high chance of contracting STIs and such since they are hitting the A-hole. Again, I didn't need to read anything about that because it's pretty obvious. I am simply speaking in a reality sense. If you rely too much on statistics and studies conducted by other people instead of your own, you really aren't thinking and just accepted what you're being spoonfed.

One does not simply realize after long periods of thinking to oneself that homosexuals made up 63% of the cumulative total of male AIDS cases in 2001. One does not simply realize after long periods of thinking to oneself that homosexual men accounted for 67% of all new HIV diagnoses in 2015. One does not simply realize after long periods of thinking to oneself that ANY men that has sex with other men are 17 times more likely to get anal cancer than heterosexual men. I could go on with these. None of these are things you can conclude purely through the use of self-rationalization without utilization of external information. These conclusions require surveys, statistical analysis, and so forth. Is it common sense to think that homosexual men should contract more illnesses than heterosexual men? Yes. The crucial part though is to know how much more likely homosexuals are than heterosexual men, in other words, quantitative reasoning is what matters. Knowledge of numerical quantities cannot be obtained in the absence of external information. That's why your method thinking is inherently flawed.

Quote:It seems you have some sort of prejudice to homosexuals and just trying to justify it.

Considering the fact that prejudice is defined as a preconceived opinion that is not based on reason, I have no such thing. For one, my opinion is a conception, not a preconception, this is explained in its entirety in the OP through the many links of statistics and studies in addition to several of my posts on this thread. Secondly, my opinion actually happens to be based only on reason. Emotional arguments have no intrinsic value to me. Everything I have stated in this entire thread is originated through the use of logical appeals, and therefore reason. So no, I don't have prejudice.

(03-24-2017, 06:41 AM)Asura Wrote: I don't follow the whole common sense thing and kinda find it bullshit. Reason is because it sounds like you're expected to exactly know this and that since birth; as you mature.

Quote:Anyways, it seems I haven't been wording it right (Had a little more sleep). What I meant is that you just suck up information but the way how you express them is in a way a "zombie" would by posting links and perhaps rephrasing of the information you've gathered. That's why I said you're not thinking for yourself and just being spoonfed. All you're doing is just throwing in stuff from other people's reasearch and whatnot. What I wanted to know is your reason and thoughts yourself. Not through studies and statistics because I can just look those up myself but don't feel the need to because I just don't give a damn.

Quote:It's 2017 and we should be able to coexist by now but I guess we do need some form of balance or something. Really, I just posted out of boredom but was interested in your reason. All you did was posted about what you've reasearched.

Quote:"I care personally because homosexuality is strongly indoctrinated at the school I go to and yes, I am affected by it. If you had asked why I cared on a societal and global level, my response would've been that I care about eradicating degeneracy among humans, which homosexuality is a great example of."

Yep, seems you're just trying to justify what you hate. Your school is simply trying to teach you how to coexist with them. Sure, you're free to dislike the idea but as mentioned, they are people too. Question is, how does it exactly affects YOU as an individual?

(03-26-2017, 05:03 AM)Jiggly Wrote: I think what meow is trying to do here, and naturally does, is think about this objectively. What he's looking for, as far as I understand, is somebody to present an OBJECTIVE reason to change his mind. I don't think he's opposed to changing his mind if he's sees purely logical reason for it. While we may have different views, this thread has a very specific purpose.

(03-26-2017, 06:39 PM)meow Wrote:

(03-26-2017, 05:03 AM)Jiggly Wrote: I think what meow is trying to do here, and naturally does, is think about this objectively. What he's looking for, as far as I understand, is somebody to present an OBJECTIVE reason to change his mind. I don't think he's opposed to changing his mind if he's sees purely logical reason for it. While we may have different views, this thread has a very specific purpose.

You've hit the nail on the head. I am very familiar with the emotional arguments regarding this subject, however I am not interested in them. I'm either looking for someone to logically refute my points or present logical evidence which contradicts them. The purpose of this is to strengthen my "chain of information" if you'd like to call it that. An argument, like a chain, is only as strong as its weakest point, and in a chain's case, it would be as strong as its weakest link. So far, my weakest point seems to be homosexuals and their promiscuity. This is because in a Twitter debate someone presented a statistic which showed that homosexuals are only very slightly more promiscuous than heterosexuals, therefore, even though I'm still correct, it is my weakest point on this subject.