Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

100,000 for Equality!

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
3,295
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Feb 23, 2009

www.causes.com/StopProp8

Join 100,000 in standing up for Equal rights for ALL Californians!

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 3 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Top Comments

  • I still disagree with your premise that gay marriage promotes people to become gay. Because we disagree fundamentally on what being gay is. Gay marriage is for people who are already admittedly gay. Not for coaxing straight people to gaydom.

    Blah. I want to address your twin study and the new zealand one but I'm doing college work and honestly I've got a stressful week ahead of me. I'll reply back when I get a chance. There's a lot to cover and I'm not able to condense it all right now.

  • Wow. We spend so much time, money and energy on passing Prop 8 and fighting Prop 8 and in the end, it really is this simple. I can't believe this is still up for questioning. Getting million's of strangers' permission to marry makes absolutely no sense. The decision to marry should be between the couple, the couple's family and if they so choose, they can share it with their friends. Why was Prop 8 even allowed to be on the ballot?

see all

All Comments (221)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • i think fags and niggers should be treated like what they are: SCUM. if you wanna have sex with a guy there is something wrong with you and you're going to hell.

  • Same that the people who legislate them have NO morals :)

  • Feel free to look them up, but here is my point. If there was a scientifically sound, broad based study done that proved conclusively that Homosexuality is a mental illness that results in greater illness and self-destruction behavior, would you accept the results and change your lifestyle? My guess would be "No".

  • And that isn't my full reply about the studies. Still haven't gotten a chance to read the whole things through. I've tracked down the original articles, though, so that'll help. I also want to know if they bothered to make sure the 'suicidal' gays weren't aids positive. Someone with a life-threatening disease having suicidal thoughts is a lot different from someone without it. Need to make sure the comparisons are correct, etc. And that they didn't warp their statistics. I'll respond later. :)

  • Look, I'm sure you want the other two studies to support Cameron, but they don't. Cameron claims that just by being gay shortens, your life loses what 20 something years?. That's just not supported by facts.

    Now, regarding your other two studies. They're looking at suicidal tendencies in homosexual versus heterosexual populations. I've not disagreed about a higher rate of suicidal tendencies. But self-reporting suicidal thoughts does not a dead body make. And people are looking at the topic.

  • The problem is that other studies have confirmed their findings. I gave you two others. You see no one dares look at the subject because of the political fallout. No one questions the premise that homosexuality and heterosexuality are the same in terms of the effects on the individual. Why should we because they are all operating on the other false premise of sexual orientation. If gays are born this way and cannot change, the risks do not matter. They cannot choose to live differently.

  • Paul and Kirk Cameron have repeatedly made faulty studies using bad methodology. I've addressed their study more than twice already here. You've ignored what I've said. I'm starting to get tired of repeating myself. Google "Paul Cameron's Footprint

    And Another Stab At "The Homosexual Lifespan" " for the latest. Also read the older critique of his methodology and why that wasn't sound also. It's technical but maybe you'll stop quoting him now. Using him for a source hurts your arguments a lot.

  • As for legislating morality, we try to avoid legislating morals and instead legislate based on facts and how things affect society. Other countries legislate things like telling women they have to be covered head to toe. That fits in with their 'morals'. And that's the problem. Morals are subjective. Catholics think divorced people shouldn't marry, yet we allow divorcees to get civil marriages. We can't push one set of morals based on opinion. That infringes on our freedom of choice.

View all Comments »
Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more