Do not forget how AIDS originated. This is also how it continues to be propagated. Only sex between a man and a woman can result in children. That much is obvious and natural.
Societal grounds:
The family is the bedrock of society. Lose that and you lose your children, and everything that that entails.
Ethical/Moral reasons Sexual relations is to be consummated between a man and a women. Not man with man, not woman with woman, not woman with beasts (animals), etc. You don't have to be religious to agree with that.
Summary Eliminating 377A will bring about moral ambiguity, which will surely lead to more experimentation with the dire consequences listed. What a person does in the privacy of his/her bedroom impacts society as a whole, for better or worse.
AIDs? A hunter (most likely hetrosexual) got attacked and bitten by an ape. Nowadays, the number and growth rate for AIDs is by hetrosexuals. MOH and worldwide has acknowledge that.
Biological? Please. Do some research. Aps, dolphins, etc also have homosexual. It is the survival of species. How do you know that homosexuality does not benefit the species even though it does not benefit the individual? Look up sickle-cell anemia to see an example of this.
Social? Family? Look at hetrosexual marriages and divorces first. They destroy more families since gay population <10% but in Singapore, divorces > 20%
Ethics/Moral? That is was the same excuse as inter-racial marriages now and a generation ago. You have not put forward an ethical (ie harms others) argument rather than "agree with that" belief.
In the rush to make a our point, let us not rush to debase ourselves. The argument that 'beasts do it, so there is nothing wrong if humans do it too' is fallacious. Animals eat one another. Does this mean that humans should eat one another? (i.e. engage in cannibalism)? Some animals attack and kill their young. Does this mean it is acceptable for humans to do the same?
Research? Depending on who you CHOOSE to quote, the argument can go either way. For example, a simple Google search on 'homosexual animals' shows:
I'm sorry but I do not agree with your reasoning epilogos.
Biological: Hundreds of STDs are transmitted through straight sexual contacts. Should we outlaw all forms of sexual contacts too? And should we outlaw all oral and anal sex, since abviously they are not 'natural' and can not result in babies?
Societal: Why is family the bedrock of society? Families are important but I think equality and respect for other people who are different are equally important, if not more so. By keeping 377A, we are discriminating against this minority group, whose actions actually do not bother us.
Ethical/moral: I'm sorry but I can only think of religious reasons of why sexual relations must be strictly between man and woman. Perhaps you can elaborate?
Quote Ethical/moral: I'm sorry but I can only think of religious reasons of why sexual relations must be strictly between man and woman. Perhaps you can elaborate? Unquote
You mean to say that Atheists, Free Thinkers and the like do not have ethics nor believe in morality in matters of sex? Indeed, if this is so, anything goes for them? Wow. No only are a-theists a-moral, they are also a-ethical. Something to ponder over.
Unhealthy sexual behaviour is the main reason why HIV/AIDS is spreading in China, its Ministry of Health said on Thursday, noting that men who have sex with men (MSM) are the most likely to become infected.
"In the past, between 1 and 3 percent of MSM in the mainland had HIV/AIDS. Now, it is anywhere from 2.5 to 6.5 percent", the China Daily reported, quoting a senior ministry official.
According to the official, more than half of China's MSM have more than one sexual partner. Yet only some some 10 to 20 percent of them use condoms.
He added that as many MSM are bisexual, there is a risk of them spreading HIV/AIDS to their girlfriends, wives and children...
8 comments :
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. May I ask why you'd rather retain 377A?
Biological grounds:
Do not forget how AIDS originated. This is also how it continues to be propagated. Only sex between a man and a woman can result in children. That much is obvious and natural.
Societal grounds:
The family is the bedrock of society. Lose that and you lose your children, and everything that that entails.
Ethical/Moral reasons
Sexual relations is to be consummated between a man and a women. Not man with man, not woman with woman, not woman with beasts (animals), etc. You don't have to be religious to agree with that.
Summary
Eliminating 377A will bring about moral ambiguity, which will surely lead to more experimentation with the dire consequences listed. What a person does in the privacy of his/her bedroom impacts society as a whole, for better or worse.
AIDs? A hunter (most likely hetrosexual) got attacked and bitten by an ape. Nowadays, the number and growth rate for AIDs is by hetrosexuals. MOH and worldwide has acknowledge that.
Biological? Please. Do some research. Aps, dolphins, etc also have homosexual. It is the survival of species. How do you know that homosexuality does not benefit the species even though it does not benefit the individual? Look up sickle-cell anemia to see an example of this.
Social? Family? Look at hetrosexual marriages and divorces first. They destroy more families since gay population <10% but in Singapore, divorces > 20%
Ethics/Moral? That is was the same excuse as inter-racial marriages now and a generation ago. You have not put forward an ethical (ie harms others) argument rather than "agree with that" belief.
In the rush to make a our point, let us not rush to debase ourselves. The argument that 'beasts do it, so there is nothing wrong if humans do it too' is fallacious. Animals eat one another. Does this mean that humans should eat one another? (i.e. engage in cannibalism)? Some animals attack and kill their young. Does this mean it is acceptable for humans to do the same?
Research? Depending on who you CHOOSE to quote, the argument can go either way. For example, a simple Google search on 'homosexual animals' shows:
For:
National Geograhic
Against:
Narth
Rather, let an honest conscience guide us. And my conscience tells me that homosexuality is wrong, for the reasons already cited.
I'm sorry but I do not agree with your reasoning epilogos.
Biological: Hundreds of STDs are transmitted through straight sexual contacts. Should we outlaw all forms of sexual contacts too? And should we outlaw all oral and anal sex, since abviously they are not 'natural' and can not result in babies?
Societal: Why is family the bedrock of society? Families are important but I think equality and respect for other people who are different are equally important, if not more so. By keeping 377A, we are discriminating against this minority group, whose actions actually do not bother us.
Ethical/moral: I'm sorry but I can only think of religious reasons of why sexual relations must be strictly between man and woman. Perhaps you can elaborate?
Please read:
Homosexuality - Truths and Myths
Quote
Ethical/moral: I'm sorry but I can only think of religious reasons of why sexual relations must be strictly between man and woman. Perhaps you can elaborate?
Unquote
You mean to say that Atheists, Free Thinkers and the like do not have ethics nor believe in morality in matters of sex? Indeed, if this is so, anything goes for them? Wow. No only are a-theists a-moral, they are also a-ethical. Something to ponder over.
Unhealthy sexual behaviour is the main reason why HIV/AIDS is spreading in China, its Ministry of Health said on Thursday, noting that men who have sex with men (MSM) are the most likely to become infected.
"In the past, between 1 and 3 percent of MSM in the mainland had HIV/AIDS. Now, it is anywhere from 2.5 to 6.5 percent", the China Daily reported, quoting a senior ministry official.
According to the official, more than half of China's MSM have more than one sexual partner. Yet only some some 10 to 20 percent of them use condoms.
He added that as many MSM are bisexual, there is a risk of them spreading HIV/AIDS to their girlfriends, wives and children...
Source: Weekend Today, 17 Nov 07, page 21.
Post a Comment