Gallup- 3.2% adults have gay sex or cross dress

http://www.advocate.com/society/2012/10/18/32-percent-americans-identify-lgbt


well there you have it. Gallup now shows the total population who engage in alternative sexual activity, be it gay sex or cross dressing to be 3.2% of the adult population. I wonder how many are cross dressers and what the number is for those who have gay sex.

Anyway, is pandering to this small population a more important topic for the fed govt vs tackling Iran, radical Islam and $16 Trillion in debt, tens of millions out of work etc

what say you

 

of adults who either have gay sex or cross dress

feel free to visit the thread

http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...-have-gay-sex-cross-dress.html#post1061842512

 

This can't be right. Liberals tell us 10% of the population is gay, and they would never lie to us!

 

I understand the claims and poll after poll proves them wrong

This 3.2% is the total for all alternate sexual activity. In other words, 3.2% engage in acts other than heterosexual acts. The amount are not all homosexuals because it also includes cross dressers. A cross dresser could be a heterosexual.

The point here is that there are much bigger and urgent issues than sparing the feelings of a small segment.

 

We always knew liberals were lying. It's what they do. It's how they got this far- lies and judicial activism.

 

I am not sure who claimed what was more important.

However, the 3.2% that self identify as gay (not who actually are gay or who refuse to admit they are gay) are indeed citizens of this country and are entitled to the same rights, benefits, and courtesies as everyone else.

I would imagine that any minority class that is treated differently than others in the eyes of the law would feel that leveling the playing field is an important topic.

 

What about a majority member? Are they "entitled to the same rights, benefits, and courtesies as everyone else."

 

OK, here we go again with false innuendo. Those who are gay can speak freely, vote, carry a weapon etc

if you are implying the part about govt over-reach into the lives of heterosexuals then yes, govt has over stepped and needs to focus only on the individual.

So again, there are more pressing matters for the fed to address than pandering to a small group who are denied nothing

and about those who identify as being gay or cross dressers; do you not want to believe yet another poll? WHat do you want to happen? Do you want Gallup to make up a number which will please you? How about 80% have gay sex or cross dress? Sorry, poll after poll shows the total adult population who engage in alternative sexual behavior is well under 5%

 

I am not sure I understand your argument.

 

Identifying as gay, lesbian or bisexual doesn't necessarily means engaging in "gay sex" (trust me, identifying as straight doesn't automatically mean getting any straight sex either). Identifying as transgender certainly doesn't mean cross dressing.

Not more important, no. It's about as important as countless of other things the US Federal Government does (or should do) but less important than countless of other things is does (or should do). Luckily there are thousands of people who make up the Federal Government so they're perfectly capable of doing more than one thing at one.

 

I see nothing false about what I said.

I have not a clue what that is supposed to mean

Once again, I clearly stated that I am sure there are those, underrepresented by the law, disenfranchised by the law, who probably feel differently.

 

I'm sorry to burst your little bubble there honestjoe but a gay male walks like me, bleeds like me, breathes like me, can vote, ride in a bus, carry a weapon and the list goes on

the only difference is when I close my bedroom door there is a woman in my bed (a dog too)

when a gay male closes his bedroom door there is a male in his bed and maybe a dog as well

so honestjoe, please live up to your forum name and accept the only difference. A Dr is a Dr regardless of how they have sex. A teacher is a teacher regardless of how they have sex. Liberalism does nothing for bringing people together. It only divides us further apart

 

Your comments summarizing the study are significantly. The question asked in the survey was :

Do you, personally, identify yourself as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender.

It does not quantify it. I cannot find where it says a word about cross-dressing, and does not ask if one has gay sex. If you want to assume those things, then say it as such. But I think you took excessive liberty with presenting the study.

 

As a loyal, useful idiot group of voters, it's not necessarily the "quantity" of gays that matter to the progressive left...though, 10 million or so would be a respectable voting bloc.....it's using them and their "issues" as the canvas to paint the entire right-wing as evil, hateful bigots (or racists, or misogynists, or Islamophobic, or....), and thus shame or scare the undecided "center", and the easily impressionable, up-and-coming young into supporting a leftist infiltrated Democrat Party.

In not so many words, the ultimate goal of leftism is Euro-styled "social democracy" and, more importantly, economic collectivism, and leftists invent, expand and exploit social issues to wedge as many voters as possible away from supporting the right-wing...and by extension, capitalism and the Constitution.

 

I am going to have to disagree. As Joe noted, identifying as "gay", etc. does not mean one is a sexually practicing gay. And it more certainly does not guarantee anything in his bed. I certainly understand that labeling oneself as gay would lend itself to one eventually practicing sex as with the same sex, but many "gays" are quite confused for much of their early life, and often are very much later in life before they actually engage in gay sex vs. a heterosexual timeline.

I think you have been a bit callous with this study, as I already noted.

 

Go ahead and insult me some more. Display it for the world. Suck at it? Running away?

Your question was a vague, one line piece of nonsense. I politely asked you to expand on it and I said I would answer it.

Instead, your post resorted to the typical, pathetic juvenile insults. You have no argument. You have no debate. You have nothing more than name calling. Your entire line of posts here are representative of the worst sort of trolling. Ask a vague question and then call the person names when they refuse to answer said vague question. there was no expansion, no explanation of what you were talking about. Just snotty little insults spawned in the fetid bowels of your posts failure.

 

But, you've used this tactic before with me. I ask a question that you don't want to answer, and you play purposefully obtuse. "Oh, Don, I just don't understand what you mean. Can you repeat yourself over and over."

We seen it before.


This is the difficult question that you can't even begin to answer:


"What about a majority member? Are they "entitled to the same rights, benefits, and courtesies as everyone else."

It is soooo hard....... LOL!!!!

 

More snotty little insults? I clearly asked you to expand on your question so I would know what you were talking about and i clearly, (*)(*)(*)(*)ing clearly, said I would respond to it.

Instead, you utterly refused and resorted to a wonderful display of snotty, juvenile, trolling, intellectual vacuous, mentally undeveloped insults.

Bravo on showing the world your argument.

 

The libs include all the children they have caused to be molested by older teens and brainwashed in that 10 percent. I have feelings here but I will I will keep them to myself as my observations would (could) be construed a racist by whites around here. Funny thing is I have not had those issues with black members of the PF community. Just whites who think they know. Ignorant ass progressives.

 

No, that is not the only difference between heterosexuality and homosexuality, and your failure to understand this is telling of how well you understand the issue. There's more to it than that. Oh, and nice touch with the dog, you bigoted (*)(*)(*)(*)wit.

 

That would be the media and politicians who spend time pandering to the homosexuals as if they have something to contribute to society as a ho0mo.

What rights have homos been denied? One guaranteed by the Constitution or at least common law?

BTW the very old liberal notion that there are still a lot of homos hiding is totally worn out.

So homos that you associate with want to be treated like normal people? You act normal and you will be treated normally. You tattoo yourself pink and sleep hanging upside down from your front porch and you will be treated differently.

Homosexuality is just about the only self identity that is about sex and homos have places where they can go and have sex with ten men in one night. I suspect that the ugliest girl has more trouble than homos but she can find a man to have sex with if she really tires.

Give us some examples of you are effected and disenfranchised by the law. What law is it that you want taken away?

<<<mod edit>>> off topic

 

The poll only identifies those out of the closet.

 

does crossdressing include Halloween or costume parties?

 

It's not apples to apples,,while socially this maybe interesting and important, in other areas it's not at the top of the List.

This does not take away from it's importance, it's just a different area of concern and discussion. Some things effect us with the Military,,some socially.

 

I'm not sure what bubble you think you're bursting but I never said anything to the contrary. I was mainly picking you up on your misrepresentations of the terms in the survey.

My point about government policy was that there are lots of things government gets involved with that only affect a tiny proportion of the population who are just like the rest of us but for a single characteristic. Your very own point means that there is no good reason for them not to consider policies in relation to homosexuals too. None of that is going to impact government work on the big issues like the economy, crime and security.

I sleep alone. Does this mean I've stopped being heterosexual? The key thing you need to get your head around is that homosexual (and indeed heterosexual) isn't something you do, it's something you are.

You are quite right though, in stating that beyond sexuality homosexuals are, on average, no different to heterosexuals. In our societies though, they are still treated differently and more often than not negatively. At the extreme end, it is still not unknown for people to be attacked and even killed just because they're gay.

Government policy shouldn't be (and generally isn't) about treating homosexuals differently but about treating them the same.