I went out and did some ACTUAL RESEARCH on domestic violence among hetersexual families and homosexual partners. Let the facts speak for themselves. Prevalence of domestic violence in the general population (which would be the heterosexual population) according to various sources including the U.S. Department of Justice, 7-22% of the population. http://www.amwa-doc.org/index.cfm?objectid=5C60A338-D567-0B25-5492577147F7E918 http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07148r.pdf Prevalence of domestic violence among homosexual partners, 25-40%. http://www.rainbowdomesticviolence.itgo.com/ http://www.pacificpridefoundation.org/LGBT_Services/lgbt06_Domestic_Violence.htm BOOKMARK THIS TALKBACK

If gays and straights both have domestic violence problems, then homosexuality is not the deciding factor here. That said, if domestic violence partially stems from social condemnation and discrimination, which it does for many types of people, then at least part of the gay domestic violence problems stems from your (you or others') condemnation of it! Heterosexuals as a group do not have that problem.

I largely agree with you. However, to prevent people from sinning, should we not discuss, debate, convince, etc to build up a community ethic? State laws, particularly from a secular state, do not change peoples' hearts or minds. Peoples' hearts and minds set the law.

Knock Knock!! time to come out

I love it when I can send good news to the folks in the Galut!

Dear Mike: I do believe that it takes more than just the "law" to change the hearts and minds of people, i.e. the Spirit of God. However, God did set up governments and it was HE who came up with basic foundational laws for Israel and in so doing He didn't ask Moses opinion or put the 10 commandments or other prohibitions found in the Old Testament on the ballot for a democratic vote. I agree that with democracies we do discuss, debate, and strive to convince people to do what each believe is to be right. But should ALL things be up for debate even in a democracy? Murder? Is that up for debate? Adultery? Should that be up for debate? Confiscation of peoples property? Should that be up for debate? That is why in the U.S. we don't have a pure democracy, but a Republic and Bill of Rights to avoid the tyranny of the majority. However, it is not perfect as you can see. I note majorities in some nations have enacted laws, in the present and past, that have been destructive. Shoot a majority after discussion and debate voted in Hamas. But when God says that certain things are sin (even when we don't like what He says), I think it is wise to abide by His will and His instruction. Homesexuality is destructive not only to society, but more importantly to the individual both earthly and spiritually. It is by God's LOVE for mankind that He states and/or outlines certain acts as sin for He knows better than we do. I know the struggle of the homosexual. It is not an easy life and it can be fun for a season; yet it wrecks havoc in one's life and family. It is an empty lure. It can be "pleasing to the eye", yet never truly satisfying. But it like any sin separates man from God. One should be trying to help bridge the gap between man and God...not advocate further emnity by applauding continued separation which will have devastating consequences both in this life and for eternity. I have seen people in both straight and gay bars, and beyond the "celebration" I see/saw emptiness and loneliness. Once the "beauty of youth" faded away, I saw further emptiness and loneliness. We all have struggles and all have sinned. The struggle to be "holy" is not an easy task. It takes a change of heart and yet still the struggle can persist. I know some people like to categorize sin, i.e. murder is worse than lying or homosexuality is worse than others. But sexual immorality, be it fornication, adultery, or homosexuality are all sins nonethelesss. We should be as adamant against adultery and fornication as we are against homosexuality, but against them all nonetheless for they are sin and God declares them to be sin. But if one does not believe in God or what His word says, then I can understand the anger expressed against those who do and calling them "pathetic or primitive" as one talk back did. God gave us a conscious and created the law to give us knowledge of what sin is and if we transgess our conscious or that law we sin. But God loves the sinner (including the homosexual); let's not forget that and we oftemtimes do forgetting we all our sinners and are guilty of transgressing God's law. As a believer in Christ, I can attest that God even died & resurrected for sinners because He so loved the world. True LOVE is not a love that will sit back and let people destroy themselves both physically, mentally, and for eternity. True love must speak out even if unpopular and subject to recriminations and hate which said evil in this world is ever increasing making it more difficult or dangerous to do.

If you really believe that facts should speak for themselves then stop writing on there boards from here on forward. But facts DO NOT speak for themselves, because the people who employ them have bias, because the people who recite them have motive... As someone you reads your posts, THIS is one major reason why you post. Don't play games.

Thanks for your reply. Very thorough. I think murder, adultery, and confiscations of property should ALL be up for debate, especially in the United States, but also in a SECULAR Israel (not an Israeli religious state, mind you). We discuss murder in terms of abortion, stem cell research, etc. Additionally, I don't think people fear state penalties for murder. I think they adhere to a basic ethic. People who want to kill others do so despite the law. As for adultery and property, I think we both know that both are quite prevalent in this country. Check out the Supreme Court opinion of Kelo v. New London for why "confiscation of property" MUST be debated in our own country. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._New_London In a secular state with secular laws, these issues should receive debate. This includes homosexuality. Whether or not we agree or disagree with it in principle or practice, it goes on the table like anything else. As for homosexuality's destructive effects on society, I remain highly skeptical. I know a bunch of meth cases down here but I think their conditions occur because they're Southern white trash, not because they're gay.

There is a law in Israel . Every couple declared married by the law in a foreign coutry , has to be recognized so in Israel . A civil wedding in a foreign country is recognized here . That's all . And as long we live in a democracy this has not to change . People who do'nt want a rabbi at their wedding go to Cyprus , and are considered married here too Do not answer anymore to those religious fanatics H and Kyle , they not deserve it . They have only their religious hate against non believers . Sad that those two give such a bad representation of the TRUE religious not hate spewing people . Those are respected , they deserve it

Kyle, I do hope everyone bookmarks your talkback, as it establishes that the "research" you are evidently so proud of is completely incompetent and lacking in integrity. (1) To compare prevalence across subpopulations, one must use a comparable methodology for all of the subpopulations in the comparison. Your "analysis" fails to satisfy this basic principle. (2) Crappy methodology is not even worth reporting. One sign of crap is that methodological details are absent. This applies to the conclusions (based on what?) from Pacific Pride Foundation, which is apparently your ONLY source of information for your talkback, as the first link opens to a page with other links. (3) You do not even report the Pacific Pride percentages correctly, as these are 25-33%, not 25-40%. I notice, though, that your cooked percentages now make the range (high minus low) the same: 15%. Did you think this would make the hetero-homo comparison look more plausible? Frankly, the different ranges lead me to wonder what other differences exist in the studies being summarized. The GAO review that you link to makes this interesting point: "We cannot combine the results of the various collection efforts to estimate the prevalence of these four categories of crime nationwide among all segments of the population because the efforts use different definitions to measure the various offenses, and have varying scopes such as including different categories of victims and not always including estimates of unreported incidents." So, the GAO finds that different studies use wildly different approaches. Do we have any idea what approaches were used in the "findings" reported by Pacific Pride Foundation? Why is the variation in "findings" so much lower with Pacific Pride? Might there be some political purpose in dramatizing some point? (4) The same Pacific Pride source that you use for your data about gay couples also says the following: "Domestic violence occurs in same-gender relationships with the same frequency and severity as it does among heterosexuals." But you didn't report that, did you Kyle? It might weaken your exceptionally weak case. This omission establishes the dishonesty of your talkback.

Dear Mike: Speaking of Kelo v. New London. I have a cartoon for you: http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/05.12.11.EminentDomain-X.gif Might enjoy other cartoon pics at http://www.coxandforkum.com/

You're right, but did it ever occur to you that it isn't the court's revenge, but god's? You prohibit the gay parade and god punishes you by arranging for gay marriage and the court is god's divine tool.

Now that's news. I think most people, even most religious people would agree, that religious people, regardless of what religion they subscribe to, hate a great deal. Sometimes they hate openly and honestly, other times they try to disguise their hate by calling it something else, but their actions reveal the truth in their hearts. And none of this is to say that the secular don't hate, so don't even bother commenting with something like that.

Smart, astute, and of similar mind. Care to share conversation over a coffee or sandwich sometime ;)

Family violence is not so much reported , so there are no good statistics possible . In the religious circles it is even worser . Women will not report violence comitted against them . In gay circles , when there is violence it's probably more reported , because when a affair ends violently , there is a hate effect who makes that violence is reported . So statistics have to be intelligently interpreted , not by biaised people

No Marcus , TRUE religious do'nt hate . I said TRUE . Hate is not in their vocabulary . If you have seen other of my tb , you know i'm far from being religious .

Dear sk , who do not write , can not write errors . You write , generally i agree , but with this not : Israel was founded by secular ....I prefer : Israel was founded MOSTLY by secular ....There wer also some religious men and women , not to forget .

Mushugana

I accept your correction: Israel was founded MOSTLY by secular Jews. I wonder, though, how many Haredis (as opposed to religious Zionists) helped found this state? Zero? One?