Profound insights from MAD on Gay Marriage

[_Blixa]

Not according to science....Bernard J. Klamecki, “Medical Perspective of the Homosexual Issue” in J. Isamu Yamamoto, ed., The Crisis of Homosexuality (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1990) 116-123.

Anyone interested in what kind of "science" this tome propounds may Google it to find it listed among myriad fundie xtain bibliographies...

[_Ren]

Anyone interested in what kind of "science" this tome propounds may Google it to find it listed among myriad fundie xtain bibliographies...

Thank goodness fundies don't speak for science!
For lessons on how disasterous that can be, check out what's known as the 'I.D. movement'...!

[_Zoidberg]

And it surely couldn't be that this lifestyle is dangerous and destructive because our society is full of bigots who are willing to physically exterminate homosexual people and/or discriminate against them in just about every area of life?

Not at all. [/quote]

Yeah, the suicides just happen because they are gay.. not because they are ostracized for being gay.

There are plenty of health benefits derived from being lesbian, such as lower risk of STDs and cervical cancer compared to heterosexual women.

Not according to science....Bernard J. Klamecki, “Medical Perspective of the Homosexual Issue” in J. Isamu Yamamoto, ed., The Crisis of Homosexuality (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1990) 116-123.

Are you serious? I was unable to locate this article, so please cite what exactly it says on this topic. What I was able to find, however, is that it was written by a proctologist. That makes him a real expert on lesbians, STDs and cervical cancer. Are you hoping to impress anyone with citing random articles hoping no one will bother to look up the author's credentials?

[_barrelomonkeys]

Blixa, loving your avatars.

Still waiting to find out how my reading comprehension suffers from bcspace. Or my logic?

[_guy sajer]

My point is merely that it's a very dangerous and destructive lifestyle choice and therefore not subject to legitimization in law nor a compelling reason to marry.

And it surely couldn't be that this lifestyle is dangerous and destructive because our society is full of bigots who are willing to physically exterminate homosexual people and/or discriminate against them in just about every area of life?

Not at all.

There are plenty of health benefits derived from being lesbian, such as lower risk of STDs and cervical cancer compared to heterosexual women.

Not according to science....Bernard J. Klamecki, “Medical Perspective of the Homosexual Issue” in J. Isamu Yamamoto, ed., The Crisis of Homosexuality (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1990) 116-123.

Is this one of your examples of "thorough research?"

[_barrelomonkeys]

Are you serious? I was unable to locate this article, so please cite what exactly it says on this topic.

I searched for it too, in a few different academic search engines, and could not find it.

[_bcspace]

The possibility of raising children is the only compelling reason to marry.

I understand that your statement suggests that the only compelling reason that heterosexual couples marry is to raise children. That seems rather absurd to me!

Only because your slight change from what I actually said fundamentally changes the meaning.

Are you not aware that there are plenty of people that marry (THE ELDERLY? STERILE?) that have no possibility of having children?

Yep. See above.

A ridiculous, absurd statement. Not made by you, but you decided it wise to quote it.
Hetrosexuals are more than capable of doing the above.
If you don't know this, then you are living under a rock.

LOL! The statement was made by a popular homosexual columnist.

More spin. Thankfully, I can read.
Which is why Cameron tried to take a ludicrous dig at Lesbians too
So Lesbians are more likely to meet an 'accidental' death?! Traffic death?!
I think you may want to provide the actual DATA that backs these ludicrous assertions up bcspace, rather than relying on some 'summary' to inform you.

I see you have no science to contradict the references I gave. Your traffic comment shows that you are the one who is spinning (because you have no references).

Modern studies show direct links between homosexuality and conditions in the womb. That's got very little to do with genetics.

Then you should be able to provide a reference.

http://lesbianlife.about.com/od/lesbianhealth/a/DVFactsMyths_2.htm
"Lesbian relationships can’t have domestic violence, because they are both women."

The article contained no references at all to counter the numerous ones I gave. In addition Kathy Belge is a lesbian activist and has no scietific background (all you had to do was read the bio).

Do all the studies you referenced demonstrate that Lesbians have a WORSE domestic violence than the average hetrosexual couple? Or do they show that domestic violence does indeed exist within many lesbian relationships - to any kind of worrying degree?

Between 25 percent and 33 percent of relationships between lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender partners include abuse, a rate equal to that of heterosexual relationships, according to a 1998 report released by the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP). The report documented 3,327 cases of domestic violence in 1997. This number represents a 41 percent increase of domestic violence incidents from 1996.
The NCAVP report also highlights the finding that statutes in seven states exclude same-sex victims of domestic violence from qualifying for a domestic violence protective order. In three additional states, these orders are arguably unavailable. Statutes in only four states make these orders explicitly available to same-sex victims.

Other findings of the report include:

• The number of reports by men (52 percent) and women (48 percent) were essentially equal.

• The programs reporting serve a population of only 47 million, or less than 20 percent of the nation's population.

LGBT domestic violence still appears to be vastly under-reported, and appropriate services in most locations are not available.


Myths About LGTB Victims of Same-Sex Intimate Partner Violence

Men aren't victims; they can defend themselves.
Men are supposed to be aggressive.

Women don't really hurt each other. It's only a "cat-fight."

Women don't batter.

It's not domestic violence, it's "mutual" battering.

Abuse in same-sex relationships is different from domestic violence in heterosexual relationships.

LGTB people will identify as lesbian/gay/transgender/bisexual.

LGTB people have a lot of friends and "community" supports.

The bigger, butcher partner is the batterer.

You can always recognize a batterer.

Abuse in LGTB relationships is really just S&M.

Children are not part of the equation.

Gay men who are raped "wanted it."

Lesbians can't rape each other.

R.S. Nickel, Training Materials, from Fenway Community Health Center and from the NYC Gay and Lesbian Anti-Violence project 1998

Either way, it puts the lie in your implied notion that lesbianism is superior to male homosexuality (a bigot within a bigot you are).

[Guest]

My point is merely that it's a very dangerous and destructive lifestyle choice and therefore not subject to legitimization in law nor a compelling reason to marry.

And it surely couldn't be that this lifestyle is dangerous and destructive because our society is full of bigots who are willing to physically exterminate homosexual people and/or discriminate against them in just about every area of life?

Not at all.

There are plenty of health benefits derived from being lesbian, such as lower risk of STDs and cervical cancer compared to heterosexual women.

Not according to science....Bernard J. Klamecki, “Medical Perspective of the Homosexual Issue” in J. Isamu Yamamoto, ed., The Crisis of Homosexuality (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1990) 116-123.

For what it's worth. Wheaton, Il is home to Wheaton College, a fundie college (http://www.wheaton.edu/). I'm doing lazy research, but I'm also guessing that Victor Books is somehow affiliated with the College or with the fundies. Now, this doesn't necessarily imply bias in the aforementioned rigorous scholarly tome, but it raises the spectre of, shall we say, a taint of bias.

I'm wondering if bcspace is so ready to cite Wheaton affiliated conclusions viz the validity of Mormonism or, say, the Book of Mormon? Could our resident exhuastive reseacher be guilty of confirmation bias?

I should point out also that this is an edited anthology for which the standards of scholarship are lower, particularly if reviewers share the same anti-homosexual bias. It would be interesting to see what would happen if this research were submitted for true peer review in a scholarly journal. It might indeed be high quality scholarship, but count me as skeptical.

Surely, however, our resident expert researcher would recognize this.

[_bcspace]

Not according to science....Bernard J. Klamecki, “Medical Perspective of the Homosexual Issue” in J. Isamu Yamamoto, ed., The Crisis of Homosexuality (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1990) 116-123.

Anyone interested in what kind of "science" this tome propounds may Google it to find it listed among myriad fundie xtain bibliographies...

Does being quoted by such make him wrong, any less of a scientist or a doctor?

[cacheman]

I found this list of books by J. Isamu (Jerry) Yamamoto:

Hinduism, TM and Hare Krishna "About this title: This is one volume of a series of brief books on contemporary religious movements, comparing what they believe with Christian doctrine and explaining effective ways of witnessing to their adherents."

Beyond Buddhism: a Basic Introduction to the Buddhist Tradition (another volume in the same "witnessing" series).

The New Age Rage (another volume in the same "witnessing" series)

The Puppet Master: an Inquiry Into Sun Myung Moon and the Unification Church (and yet another "witnessing" book)

bcspace, I have to say I'm unimpressed. Would you use this guy as an expert on Mormonism?

Edit: And one thing more. bcspace did not give us the complete title of Yamamoto's book, which is The Crisis of Homosexuality: How the church can promote hope and healing for gays and lesbians.

Another edit: Dr. Klamecki uses anecdotal evidence from his own practice. Oddly enough, most of the health risks he mentions are not unique to homosexuals.