Cerek, it may not be intentional, lumping homosexuality in the category of "self-destructive behaviour" is a bit harsh. The risks of any sexual activity could be labeled as such.

Agreed. I was way more self-destructive back when I was in denial. I'm happier now than when I was growing up.

Though with the bridge analogoy, I was trying to say that not everything a majority does is something an individual can do happily.

[ 03-04-2004, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: Jerr Conner ]

<font color=deepskyblue>I was just dissecting the bridge analogy introduced by <font color=crimson>Jerr</font>. The reason parents (and others) use the "bridge analogy" (or a jumping off a building) is because they are asking if we would want to go along with our friends or with society if they were doing something inherently dangerous. And before bungee jumping became popular, jumping off bridges and buildings was a somewhat self-destructive behavior.

I realize that <font color=crimson>Jerr</font> was just trying to point out that a certain idea or activity is not necessarily "right" just because the majority of people are doing it. But I was pointing out that this example was not really relevant to the situation. You can't apply the "bridge analogy" to society as a whole, because ANY society will avoid accepting a practice that has inherent risks to the society.

Sorry, I'm just over-analyzing the analogy. NO, I did not mean to imply that homosexuality is self-destructive. There are deadly STD's for hetero's and homosexuals alike, so the the activity itself is no more self-destructive than the alternative (well, the risk of AID's is somewhat higher for homosexuals, but it certainly isn't exclusive to them, so that isn't as pertinent an example as it once was).

Anyway, I do apologize for inadvertantly implying that homosexuality was self-destructive. You are correct that it was not my intention to do so.</font>