rolling7

Maybe they don't give a damn to respond, either, to yours. Maybe the see it as dealing with a brick wall.

Deafness

__________________
This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

jillio

Funny. I always get a response!

deafskeptic

or maybe they don't want to get into an argument with an unreasonable person.

__________________
Left ear implanted with Med-El on April 24 2007.
Activated on May 9th.
Upgraded to Opus 2 9/10/2010
Think Pink.
FREE JILLIO!

Daredevel7

*walking away whistling*

TheOracle

This is a bad view. You're acting like those who say that being born deaf is due to a genetic flaw.

__________________
In the confusion we stay with each other, happy to be together, speaking without uttering a single word.

Question everyone. This is the Internet.

jillio

And then again, some of us never learn!

Daredevel7

Didja know that dimples are actually a birth defect? Aren't "flaws" really in the eye of the beholder?

jillio

As is a cleft chin.

deafskeptic

Lol... so they're birth defects? I hadn't known that.

__________________
Left ear implanted with Med-El on April 24 2007.
Activated on May 9th.
Upgraded to Opus 2 9/10/2010
Think Pink.
FREE JILLIO!

shel90

That's interesting! Didnt know that.

__________________
"Wine improves with age. The older I get, the better I like it."

--- Anonymous

lanapoo

So the tiny dimple in my chin is a birth defect, eh. What about the dimples above your butt? I see a lot of people have them and so do I.

__________________

rolling7

That is your tail bone, everyone has one.

lanapoo

Uh, no? I know what a tailbone is... I'm not talking about a sacral dimple. I'm talking about the dimples on the sides.

__________________

StSapphire

If a man doesn't want children and doesn't trust the woman he's dating/sleeping with not to lie to him, 1) that's one hell of a ****ed up relationship, and 2) guys can get a vasectomy to take birth control into their own hands.

No, they have lots of sections on what sells to women who buy their magazines. What you're looking at is sampling bias.

Properly conducted S&M isn't harmful, either. That's what safe words and the like are for.

Since you seem to think a lack of responses is an acceptance of your point... what "consequences" are you talking about? The primary three mentioned are pregnancy, STDs and emotional trauma.

Pregnancy is certainly a valid issue, but isn't the case with homosexual activities (and if you think it is, then you need a class in basic anatomy). For heterosexual activities, it's simply one important reason why teaching people about methods of contraception and safe sex is important.

STDs are an issue for everyone, but again, is an issue of sex education.

Emotional trauma has been widely discredited, and there have been studies showing that people who choose to participate in casual sex are less stressed and happier than those who choose not to.

If there are any other "consequences", feel free to share.

Not from lesbian activities. So basically, you're saying that homosexuals need to be careful in case they accidentally slip up and have heterosexual sex? That doesn't even make the remotest bit of sense.

Again, which?

Nobody else is because you appear to be a flaming nitwit. Jillio likes responding to anyone who addresses her, and I like arguing, which is why the two of us are the primary people calling you out.

Presumably, everything that is a mutation from the originally joined parental DNA is a "birth defect", unless that's merely referring to developmental abnormalities. Genetics and development are all very complex topics, though.

rolling7

The consequences depend on the individual. Example: 14 year old hetro girl get pg.,look at the $$$ and education problem. 14 year old les gets pg. (and if you don't think this happens..... and I do know how it happens!...you are more confused than the girl) same probles as above but in addition confusion about herself (remember she is 14!!!) You can use all the VDs and STDs and etc. you want with hetros but don't tell me it is not possible for the homos to get them too.....those are the consequences I am speaking of. Why, just post it here if you have the guts!, does the public have to bear the consequences of the individual actions? If you say the public does NOT, then Washington really loves you because you do NOT know where your money is going.

StSapphire

Okay, let's break this down a bit:

1) If there are 14 year old girls getting pregnant, the clear response is... more and better sex education, especially with teaching on contraception.

2) Explain, please, how a lesbian gets herself pregnant? Of note - lesbian means "a female who is only romantically interested in other females". It doesn't mean "two girls who like to kiss each other before they both have sex with a guy". Porn does not teach you about real life.

3) Even assuming we're talking about a bisexual, rather than homosexual person, the reasonable response is better sex education. For everyone. Additionally, assuming you don't think 14 year old girls should be giving birth and raising children, then there's a valid medical procedure to stop that course of action, and is far less costly in the long run than pregnancy, birth and raising a child, both to an individual and to society as a whole.

4) What the hell is this word salad? I don't even know what you're going on and on about now. Nobody's claiming that homosexuals have less STDs than heterosexuals, though I am claiming that there are far less consequences for either than you're implying.

Daredevel7

.......Then your problem lies with 14 year old girls who have sex with guys regardless of what they call themselves (straight or lesbian). NOT gay people.

I don't even understand what is your point? Are you trying to make a point that homosexuals have consequences to deal with? Such as "being confused and having sex with the opposite sex and having a baby"? THOSE are the consequences that gay people have to deal with? Please tell me what's your point with this whole 14 year old lesbian getting pregnant babble? What does it have to do with consequences FOR gay people? It's a consequence alright, but do you believe it's a common occurrence among lesbians, or something?

By the way, a 14 year old girl who calls herself a lesbian but has sex with guys is confused ANYWAY, whether she is pregnant or not.

jillio

Those are just normal physiology.

jillio

Show me a single solitary documented instance of a lesbian getting pregnant from engaging in same sex relations; not just a 14 year old lesbian, but in the entire population of homosexual people. It just does not happen. Biologically impossible.

Where is my money going? To cure homosexually contracted sexually transmitted disease? I think not. To raise the child of a homosexual union? I know not.

You are really out there, dude.

rolling7

Did you people even see the word "example"? Sometimes I feel I'm dealing with sight impaired folks rather than hearing impaired.
The girl/woman could be of any age, I just made one up. My point is that it is possible, and I think it is the singer David Crosby who is famous for this, for a girl/woman, who has declared herself as being a lesbian, to experiment and get pg. I never said any such thing as two same-sex making a baby. I'm saying that same-sex relations can have negative consequences as well and as often as opposite-sex relations.
What I see from you people is that you are deflecting and avoiding this question: "Should the public be required to suffer the consequences of an individual's actions?"
Getting pg. could mean a lack of sex education and, if so, the parents or the individual, if adult, carry the total cost of this education, not the public.
The total cost for the baby (i.e. Roof over head, food, medicine, clothes, etc) is the responsibility of the individual. The consequences for the Daddy is 18 years of child support, the public should not have to pay one penny. The consequence for the Mommy is 18 years of caring for her baby, that is not always a negative but, when it is, the public never is responsible in any form nor shape.
Anyone who does not believe that the public is right now carrying a heavy burden of the consequences of individuals is someone with there head in the sand.
Food stamps..free breakfast/lunch at school..free day care..section 8 housing..and on-and-on we go.......these are all the burden of the public.
Ever notice the word "free" as in free health clinic is never free but paid by the public?

rolling7

Can heterosexual relations sometimes cause hepatitis? Yes
Can homosexual relations? Yes

Can heterosexual relations sometimes cause syphilis? Yes
Can homosexual relations? Yes

Can heterosexual relations sometimes cause gonorrhea? Yes
Can homosexual relations? Yes

Can heterosexual relations sometimes cause herpes/mouth sores? Yes
Can homosexual relations? Yes

Can heterosexual relations sometimes cause AIDS/HIV. YES
Can homosexual relations? Yes


Guess who often times bears the cost of treatment? Yes, the public.

Daredevel7

I find it interesting that you said "sometimes" for heteros and not for homos....

Anyway, I still don't see your point REGARDING TO GAY PEOPLE. Seems like you have a problem with sex itself and it's effect on the cost of public which has NOTHING to do with gay people. Just people in general.

This is the practically same thing as what you are saying (but diff consequence):
"I'm cool with gay people. I believe they can do whatever they want. They just have to deal with the consequences. If they smoke a lot, then they just need to deal with lung cancer/emphysema. The public is burdened with the cost of them getting cancer or whatever from smoking. So do you think the public should be responsible from an individual's actions?"

Does the above make sense to you, rolling7?

rolling7

Yes, because I'm saying that sometime having intercourse and/or any other sexual relation could cause. It is NOT EXCLUSIVE to one or the other.
jillo's question was if her money was going "to cure homosexually contracted sexually transmitted disease" and my reply is meant to show that money is spent on both, heterosexual and homosexual individuals. In a round about way, she is admitting money is being spent......money taken from the public to pay the consequences of the individual.

Daredevel7

Okay... Well, now you're talking about whether we should pay our taxdollars for sexually transmitted diseases or for 14 year old lesbians who have babies.....

So you don't want to pay for those, right?

rolling7

That is correct, I don't. And it is never the responsibility of the general public to pay for any consequences of individual's actions. For the 14yro girl, the consequences fall on, in order, her, the daddy, and if both/one or a minor, the parents of the minor(s).

Daredevel7

I know we are way off topic but let me ask you this. Where do we draw the line? What about people who get cancer from smoking? Or heart disease from eating too much? Or their leg needs to be amputated because they were careless with a chainsaw?

Where do YOU think we need to draw the line for paying for others? Or are you trying to set up for an argument that everyone should get their own private insurance. No Medicare, no Medicaid, nuttin'. Everyone should be on their own. Is that what you are saying?

Beowulf

Yeah, let's have a meaner and rougher nation.

*spitting on floor*

rolling7

Ever heard of personal insurance? Take the Texas Chainsaw guy, he should be carrying personal instance. Thak the person who eats toooooooooo much..........who put a gun to the head and force this person to eat tooooooooo much? The personal insurance here is self-control.
This I'll give you.......look at a 4yro. child weigh 189 lbs. ( if you think this won't happen, it already has!)........YES, the consequences DO belong to the general public. The action to take? Charge the parent(s) with child abuse. AND, don't dare give me any of that b.s. "the child has a medical condition"..............because the child is not the one going out to get the un-healthy food.

Daredevel7

So everyone should get their own insurance, right? Do you believe that we should do away with Medicaid and Medicare? Everyone would be on their own, correct?

Btw, what we have been talking about has "virtually nothing"* to do with gay people only (which is the topic). You are referring to people in general.

* Copyrighted by Jillio.

rolling7

Go back to post 92/93, this is where we got into the talking of "consequences".
I was just answering, as I always do, the question(s) put to me.

To answer your question: Yes, I do enspouse the doing away of Medicare?Medicaid.
Individuals should first insurer themself.....then in the case of partnership/marriage, both parties.....then in the case of children, for eaxh child. In NO CIRCUMSTANCE SHOULD AN INDIVIDUAL MOVE TO THE NEXT LEVEL, without being able to toally cover the cost of the higher level. Hint: before an individual brings a new individual into this world, the first better be able to TOTALLY cover the cost of the second. OR zip it/cross your legs.