smoking healthier than gay marriage says christian lobby
catefrances
Posts: 29,003
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1689 ... riage--ACL
Legalising same-sex marriage would promote a lifestyle that is less healthy than smoking, a Christian group has claimed.
The head of the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) Jim Wallace says smoking is healthier than the lifestyle that would be promoted by same-sex marriage.
Mr Wallace made the claim in a debate on marriage equality with Greens leader Christine Milne at the University of Tasmania on Wednesday.
Answering a question from a student on the relevance of his views, he said health statistics among the gay community were worse than those for smokers.
"I think we're going to owe smokers a big apology when the homosexual community's own statistics for its health - which it presents when it wants more money for health - are that is has higher rates of drug-taking, of suicide, it has the life of a male reduced by up to 20 years," he told the audience.
"The life of smokers is reduced by something like seven to 10 years and yet we tell all our kids at school they shouldn't smoke."
After the debate, Mr Wallace said the figures saddened him.
"But what I'm saying is we need to be aware that the homosexual lifestyle carries these problems and ... normalising the lifestyle by the attribution of marriage, for instance, has to be considered in what it does encouraging people into it," he said.
Mr Wallace said legalising same-sex marriage in other countries had not reduced risk factors for gay people.
"Where gay marriage has been introduced, or civil unions, it hasn't changed the level of suicide," he said.
"We have to accept the unfortunate levels of suicide, the unfortunate levels of excessive drug use (are) because of the nature of the lifestyle.
"I am very sorry for that. My heart goes out to those people. But it is a fact."
Senator Milne said discrimination in laws such as the Marriage Act was a contributor to any health concerns.
"What I know is that the mental health issues for young gay people particularly are certainly increased when discrimination occurs," she told reporters.
There was little love lost between Mr Wallace and Senator Milne during the debate.
Senator Milne accused the ACL of homophobia and said Christians should be more concerned with poverty than homosexuality.
She said with bills before the federal parliament and Tasmania's lower house last week passing a same-sex marriage bill, change was inevitable.
Mr Wallace accused the Greens of demonising churches with "hate language" and caring more for trees than children.
He described gay activism as "bullying" and said a climate had been created for "legislation by fatigue".
Tasmanian marriage equality advocates said the ACL was using outdated figures from a survey of obituaries in San Francisco newspapers at the height of the AIDS crisis.
"Yes, there are health problems in parts of the gay and lesbian community, but they are caused by the prejudice of people like Mr Wallace and the discriminatory laws he defends," Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group spokesman Rodney Croome said in a statement.
"Mr Wallace's offensive remarks show how desperate he has become, and they effectively deal the Australian Christian Lobby out of the marriage equality debate."
Mr Croome said ACL representatives had previously linked gay equality to Nazis, paedophiles and the stolen generations.
"The quoting of irrelevant and biased studies to stigmatise gay Australians is a low and desperate tactic that diminishes Mr Wallace and his cause," Mr Croome said
Legalising same-sex marriage would promote a lifestyle that is less healthy than smoking, a Christian group has claimed.
The head of the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) Jim Wallace says smoking is healthier than the lifestyle that would be promoted by same-sex marriage.
Mr Wallace made the claim in a debate on marriage equality with Greens leader Christine Milne at the University of Tasmania on Wednesday.
Answering a question from a student on the relevance of his views, he said health statistics among the gay community were worse than those for smokers.
"I think we're going to owe smokers a big apology when the homosexual community's own statistics for its health - which it presents when it wants more money for health - are that is has higher rates of drug-taking, of suicide, it has the life of a male reduced by up to 20 years," he told the audience.
"The life of smokers is reduced by something like seven to 10 years and yet we tell all our kids at school they shouldn't smoke."
After the debate, Mr Wallace said the figures saddened him.
"But what I'm saying is we need to be aware that the homosexual lifestyle carries these problems and ... normalising the lifestyle by the attribution of marriage, for instance, has to be considered in what it does encouraging people into it," he said.
Mr Wallace said legalising same-sex marriage in other countries had not reduced risk factors for gay people.
"Where gay marriage has been introduced, or civil unions, it hasn't changed the level of suicide," he said.
"We have to accept the unfortunate levels of suicide, the unfortunate levels of excessive drug use (are) because of the nature of the lifestyle.
"I am very sorry for that. My heart goes out to those people. But it is a fact."
Senator Milne said discrimination in laws such as the Marriage Act was a contributor to any health concerns.
"What I know is that the mental health issues for young gay people particularly are certainly increased when discrimination occurs," she told reporters.
There was little love lost between Mr Wallace and Senator Milne during the debate.
Senator Milne accused the ACL of homophobia and said Christians should be more concerned with poverty than homosexuality.
She said with bills before the federal parliament and Tasmania's lower house last week passing a same-sex marriage bill, change was inevitable.
Mr Wallace accused the Greens of demonising churches with "hate language" and caring more for trees than children.
He described gay activism as "bullying" and said a climate had been created for "legislation by fatigue".
Tasmanian marriage equality advocates said the ACL was using outdated figures from a survey of obituaries in San Francisco newspapers at the height of the AIDS crisis.
"Yes, there are health problems in parts of the gay and lesbian community, but they are caused by the prejudice of people like Mr Wallace and the discriminatory laws he defends," Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group spokesman Rodney Croome said in a statement.
"Mr Wallace's offensive remarks show how desperate he has become, and they effectively deal the Australian Christian Lobby out of the marriage equality debate."
Mr Croome said ACL representatives had previously linked gay equality to Nazis, paedophiles and the stolen generations.
"The quoting of irrelevant and biased studies to stigmatise gay Australians is a low and desperate tactic that diminishes Mr Wallace and his cause," Mr Croome said
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
If this "group" doesn't know being gay isn't a "lifestyle" I'm pretty sure everything else they have to say is just as ridiculous
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
life·style [lahyf-stahyl] Show IPA
noun
1.
the habits, attitudes, tastes, moral standards, economic level, etc., that together constitute the mode of living of an individual or group.
I think what we really learned from this article is that statistics can be twisted to fit whatever agenda we want them to support.
sexual orientation n.
1. an individual’s enduring physical, romantic, and/or emotional attraction to another person,
2.The direction of one's sexual interest toward members of the same, opposite, or both sexes, especially a direction seen to be dictated by physiologic rather than sociologic forces. Replaces sexual preference in most contemporary uses
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
ok, got it..
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Exactly! "Out to lunch" is the nicest thing I can come up with.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
That's a fair explanation.
So really you just meant genetics, since aren't all those other things derived from there? I'm honestly trying to understand how sexual orientation is so different from any other part of what makes us who we are. What are some other "biologically based" facets of our "identity" that cannot be considered malleable or under our control? Intellect, perhaps? Memory capacity? The way we interpret color? Degradation of vision?
Godfather.
It's not just genes. If that were the case, we would see 100% correlation in identical twins, when it's more like 52%. The prevailing thought is that it's a complex interaction of perhaps one or more genes, hormones (of the individual and exposure in utero) as well as other environmental conditions in utero that can impact brain, personality and temperamental development. So while genes likely play a big part, it doesn't come down just to genes; it involves other biological mechanisms as well.
That is my point - that it's not that different than other parts of identity. There is always going to be a combination of nature and nurture at play (genetic disposition impacted by environment), but that doesn't make it a lifestyle choice, nor something that we should change. The idea of trying to change sexual orientation only makes sense if we view it as defective. While some in society may believe that, the WHO, APA and NASW staunchly disagree. It was removed from the list of mental illnesses by the APA back in 1973 - 39 years ago. and by the WHO in 1981 - 31 years ago. Society in general is lagging far behind the medical community in this regard. Being different doesn't make one defective. According to the APA "homosexuality is not an illness that requires treatment, nor is it a choice. Rather, homosexuality is a biological condition that is not subject to change by therapeutic modalities that seek to reverse a homosexual identity to heterosexuality. Further, these therapies could potentially harm patients. "
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
Um...what?
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
it's cool by me I was just pointing out the way things are really seen by some.
Godfather.
That was Me
Bad BJ :nono:
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
nothing worse than a bad BJ
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
ha ha haha ha ha ha oooohhhhh shiiiit that was great !!!!!!
Godfather.
awesome !!!!!
Godfather.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
(then I thought about teeth...so yes, there CAN be a bad BJ
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
Anyhow, the idea that I'm trying to discuss is whether there are "identity" traits, rooted in genetics and hormones and etc, about which we can inoffensively discuss our ability or desire to change, modify, improve. I'm trying to come up with examples of non-superficial aspects of our identity that are not inherently negative or immoral, but nevertheless that we as a society are okay with being changed or just entertaining the discussion of being changed. For example, weight, hair color, eye color -- these are genetically influenced superficialities that for the most part no one thinks twice about changing and thus are pretty poor parallels/analogies for this conversation. That is to say, technically speaking they are parallels, but they are so superficial as to carry almost no weight.
I'll admit I am having trouble completing my little academic exercise of coming up with an example, but as I can see this thread has already devolved into Hillary and BJs, which I happen to find uproariously funny, I think I'll focus on that for now.