-->
@Theweakeredge
just because it is biased doesnt mean it is wrong
f there was a large amount unaccounted homosexual's then the proportions would be lower
and why would that be?
What happens next?
Posts
Total:
130
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Yep, everything is a product of the universe...... Even the concept of a supernatural GOD.
-->
@zedvictor4
not a concpet, the realoty tjat god exists
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Because - if a large non-married, and non-abusive portion of homosexuals are being unaccounted for, then the numbers in favor of said abuse will be exaggerated, not to mention, you still haven't even addressed an of my other arguments.
-->
@Theweakeredge
that would not exxagerate the results if you dont count them
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Yes.... if you don't count them, but you should, as you would with any other population of people
-->
@Theweakeredge
no we shouldnt
-->
@Dr.Franklin
And why not? Are homosexual teens not also homosexual?
-->
@Theweakeredge
why would they be accounted in abuse stasticis?
-->
@Dr.Franklin
They should be accounted in the total number of homosexuals. That should seem obvious, also, they need to be accounted, because as you have failed to refute, the entire study is flawed in it's methodology. The reason why there would even be an increased rate of abuse in homosexuals is that homosexuals are abused more often than any other section on sexuality, and people who are abused are more likely to become abusers, thus it is not the homosexuality that would even lead to such a result, but the cruel bigots in the first place.
-->
@Dr.Franklin
not a concpet, the realoty tjat god exists.
What's up Doc?
Was that written in Guadeloupean?
-->
@zedvictor4
the reality is that god exists
-->
@Theweakeredge
how do you know they arent?
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Because a large percentage of them are in a closet to hide themselves from bigots that would mistreat them. Also from um, how do I say this, oh no I know precisely how - from homophobes. Considering that I presented multiple lines of argument and we've only explored one.
-->
@Theweakeredge
that would not change stastitics!!!!!
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Yes, it would - it means that the number of gay people are underestimated, and therefore the indicative proportions would be lower than reported.
Not to mention, you haven't at all addressed literally any point. So even if I agreed with you here, you would be incorrect in every other aspect, but I don't agree. Because you still haven't presented valid evidence. As in - linked being homosexual and being an abuser beyond a vapid mischaracterization based on likely incomplete data, as well as not taking the entire case into the picture
Some resources that show the abuse of LGB people
Another source to go against your unfound claim of pedophilia
This article over a study similar to yours and why it's incorrect
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kids-of-gay-parents-fare-worse-study-finds-but-draws-fire-from-experts/
Etc, etc...
-->
@Theweakeredge
thosew are small numbers
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Are they?
GLAAD Studies are showing a massive rising of open LGBTQ individuals due to there being fewer and fewer individuals who are hateful towards them.
-->
@Theweakeredge
and that changes the stats significately, i doubt that,
the increase is also not just gay or lesbian, its trans, and other "identities"
-->
@Dr.Franklin
But again, I've already proven my point, you've chosen to pursue this line singularly because its the one suspected weak spot in your eyes. Do you have evidence that homosexuality is unnatural? Do you have solid evidence that being non-heterosexual inherently makes you more abusive? Anything of that sort?
Also LGBTQ - Lesbian (That's homosexual), Gay (Also Homosexual), Bisexual (Your study uses them, therefore so do I get to count them as homosexual), Transgender (They can be gay, bi, etc, but they aren't inherently so, but they are also the lowest percentage), Queer (Just a group name for non-heterosexual - therefore regarding any of the formerly stated letters)
-->
@Dr.Franklin
- Accelerating Acceptance 2017 survey shows that Millennials (people ages 18-34) are significantly more likely to openly identify as LGBTQ than generations before them. Specifically, Millennials are more than twice as likely (20% vs. 7%) to identify as LGBTQ than the Boomer generation (people ages 52-71) and two-thirds (20% vs. 12%) more likely than Generation X (people ages 35-51).
SO yes, it does massively change statistics
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Can you prove that?
As no one else as ever been able to.
-->
@zedvictor4
already done
-->
@Theweakeredge
that isnt just homosexual population
-->
@Dr.Franklin
So? It's mostly a homosexual population, not to mention, as I've already told you, transgender people are the lowest statistic there, and your study used bixsexuals. Now. do you have any actual evidence to support your claims? Or more vapid rebuttals?
-->
@Theweakeredge
doesnt change anything
-->
@Dr.Franklin
How, and by whom?
I must of missed that.
Did Donald Trump do it?
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Um.. yes, yes it does, as I have literally explained over and over again. Also, where is your evidence, do you have any evidence to support your conclusions at all? Oh, I see you are simply being the literal definition of unreasonable. You are stubborn and not willing to change your mind whenever evidence is presented.
-->
@Theweakeredge
And what of the numerous studies that demonstrate that children do just as well if not better in homosexual raised households
What of them? Science is for nerds.
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I agree science is for nerds, considering we are talking on an online debate website in a forum thread, I would call all participants nerds.