So why does 2% of the population get put on a pedestal for doing nothing?
I understand that not everyone is American and thus does not understand our history, but the first TRIBBLE pride marches were held in New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles following the stonewall riots.
At the time, homosexuals had few protections from persecution. Homosexuality was largely outlawed in the United States. The marches started with a few brave souls willing to show their face in public, to march for civil rights, not unlike Martin Luther King Jr. or the Freedom Riders.
Today, those parades are not only a celebration of that tradition, but in a world where homosexuals still do not have equal rights, a continuation of that struggle.
All the wars and evils that have been perpetrated throughout history have been because of perceived differences between various groups of people for various reasons. Nationalism, Race, Culture, Religion, Sexual Orientation, etc have all been used, and continue to be used, as an excuse to perpetrate oppression and violence on those that one group deems "unfit" or "less than".
Untrue. 90% of the BIG wars in history were all about controlling resources. In order to swing voters to the side of government, world presidents would align themselves with certain social movements. Abraham Lincoln was for the freeing of slaves; however, he also wanted to gain control over the oil fields in the south. Lincoln fused a social movement with a war, so he can also gain access to the oil reserves.
Here is another one... While we were fighting for independence and freedom, during the Revolutionary war, the British Empire was fighting to gain control over America's natural resources.
I understand that not everyone is American and thus does not understand our history, but the first TRIBBLE pride marches were held in New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles following the stonewall riots.
At the time, homosexuals had few protections from persecution. Homosexuality was largely outlawed in the United States. The marches started with a few brave souls willing to show their face in public, to march for civil rights, not unlike Martin Luther King Jr. or the Freedom Riders.
Today, those parades are not only a celebration of that tradition, but in a world where homosexuals still do not have equal rights, a continuation of that struggle.
You still did not answer the question on why 2% of the population is placed on a pedestal for doing NOTHING.
Untrue. 90% of the BIG wars in history were all about controlling resources. In order to swing voters to the side of government, world presidents would align themselves with certain social movements. Abraham Lincoln was for the freeing of slaves; however, he also wanted to gain control over the oil fields in the south. Lincoln fused a social movement with a war, so he can also gain access to the oil reserves.
The "true" cause of wars is generally a matter of perspective rather than fact. From a biological-anthropological point of view, wars are an evolutionary throwback to the primates we evolved from. These primates divided themselves into tribes and by massacring members of other tribes, especially infants, we were able to ensure the dominance of our tribes' (and ergo our own) gene pool.
Modern humans, as enlightened as they are, still carry these instincts and a whole field called evolutionary psychology was created to study it.
Wars never have a single cause. It largely depends on your perspective.
You still did not answer the question on why 2% of the population is placed on a pedestal for doing NOTHING.
If you have a point to make, be explicit and stop dealing in ambiguities. There was a blog about diversity in Star Trek and its history of promoting tolerance and social change. The author invited STO players to attend a fleet event relevant to that topic.
If you have a point to make, be explicit and stop dealing in ambiguities. There was a blog about diversity in Star Trek and its history of promoting tolerance and social change. The author invited STO players to attend a fleet event relevant to that topic.
I
The point has already been made. Thank you for your time
What percentage of the population does one have to reach to be considered equal and deserving of protection? 5%? 10%? I am not sure what it is that you are implying by attempting to determine the population numbers, so could you please clarify?
For comparison, the Global Jewish population is approximately 13.3 million, or about .0018%. So, LGBT's are wellahead of that mark. Also, bear in mind, there can be no true calculation of our numbers because so many of us are still forced to remain in the closets, for fear of our safety and lives.
Actually, the scientific evidence is quite different. The size of the homosexual population depends largely on how you define it, and ranges from about 2% on the low end of the estimate (people who exclusively are attracted to members of the same sex and openly admit to relations) to well over 50% (people who have experienced some homosexual relations or latent attraction).
The most common definition would be people who are naturally attracted to and prefer sexual relations with members of their own gender, something that is unlikely to vary much by culture (although the ease of admitting to a researcher might), and the numbers seem to indicate that about 5% of the population fits that definition of homosexuality, with a single sigma margin of error of about 2%.
Dont confuse admitted individuals with all individuals in a group. There is no science that says the percentage is any different in any culture, there are just cultures where it is forced underground to this day. If there is 5% in one place, chances are there are 5% in all the other places. The same is true of most subcultures throughout history. When England declared itself Anglican and that Catholicism was illegal, most Catholics did not leave the country, they just pretended to be Anglican.
New home of the Romulan Republic.
I have an idea for what Season 11 should be; Season 11: The Big Bug Fix.
I have not been able to read my bug tickets in over a year, not even the tickets about not being able to see my tickets.
I find the drama of your signature proof of your immaturity, this means you, DR whiners.
What percentage of the population does one have to reach to be considered equal and deserving of protection? 5%? 10%?
oh just one person as far as im concerned but the number of actual homosexuals is TINY at about 1 in 1000
For comparison, the Global Jewish population is approximately 13.3 million, or about .0018%
hmm probably depends how you count them
practicing Torah Jews or "one or more Jewish ancestors"
. LGBT's are well ahead of that mark.
but then those are several catagories
Homosexuals about 1 in 1000
Bisexuals I have no figures for
Genuine transgenders ? tiny tiny tiny group (not including "social" transgender or "financial" transgender" like the lady boys of Thailand ) there are probably a few about but not many
I am not sure what it is that you are implying, so could you please clarify?
that the 2% figure is wrong
2%??????
Globally just under 0.1% (one in 1000) surely
Actually, the scientific evidence is quite different.
that was the scientific evidence
The size of the homosexual population depends largely on how you define it, and ranges from about 2% on the low end of the estimate (people who exclusively are attracted to members of the same sex and openly admit to relations)
Homosexuals are "exclusively attracted to members of the same gender"
Bisexuals are "attracted to members of both genders"
Bi is not TRIBBLE
to well over 50% (people who have experienced some homosexual relations or latent attraction).
who did they ask?
100 people at a TRIBBLE pride rally in brazil??
The most common definition would be people who are naturally attracted to and prefer sexual relations with members of their own gender, something that is unlikely to vary much by culture (although the ease of admitting to a researcher might), and the numbers seem to indicate that about 5% of the population fits that definition of homosexuality, with a single sigma margin of error of about 2%.
or less than that in 99% of cultures where it has not been repressed or hidden thus leading to less in the actual population (there is some evidence that homosexuality Is genetic and those "passing" and raising familys have increased the numbers)
Personally I do not care what causes it or why it happens
The vast majority of people could not care less if a tiny part of society is different
BUT claiming that half of us are would be an existential threat to many
Since you do not seem to be interested in having an actual discussion, I will have to assume that you are simply trolling, and add you to "ignore."
Judaism is a religion. Jews are an ethnicity, a group of people who share a common genetic ancestry and culture, just like the Arabs or the Han Chinese.
Homosexuals are neither a religion nor an ethnicity, but they do often share a common culture and a history of being persecuted in the United States simply for the crime of being being born a Jew or a homosexual.
The population of Americans who identify themselves as being of the Jewish faith or ethnicity is probably smaller than those who identify themselves as homosexuals. Both groups deserve equal protection under the law and cultural tolerance, which was the thesis of this blog.
Jewish is a faith (it being ILLEGAL to refer to it as a race in parts of Europe)
Hebrew is a Race
Homosexual is a sexual identity
And Romulan is a species
But diversity is a good thing as long as we are all allowed to be what we are
Straight , TRIBBLE , white , black , green , liberal , republican , monarchist or communist
Everyone is people
of course a TRIBBLE Green liberal would be somewhat rare
oh just one person as far as im concerned but the number of actual homosexuals is TINY at about 1 in 1000
hmm probably depends how you count them
practicing Torah Jews or "one or more Jewish ancestors"
but then those are several catagories
Homosexuals about 1 in 1000
Bisexuals I have no figures for
Genuine transgenders ? tiny tiny tiny group (not including "social" transgender or "financial" transgender" like the lady boys of Thailand ) there are probably a few about but not many
that the 2% figure is wrong
that was the scientific evidence
Homosexuals are "exclusively attracted to members of the same gender"
Bisexuals are "attracted to members of both genders"
Bi is not TRIBBLE
who did they ask?
100 people at a TRIBBLE pride rally in brazil??
or less than that in 99% of cultures where it has not been repressed or hidden thus leading to less in the actual population (there is some evidence that homosexuality Is genetic and those "passing" and raising familys have increased the numbers)
Personally I do not care what causes it or why it happens
The vast majority of people could not care less if a tiny part of society is different
BUT claiming that half of us are would be an existential threat to many
Actually, there is no scientifically accepted definition of homosexual, bisexual, and heterosexual. Most researchers use a sliding scale based on Kinsey's original work with exclusively heterosexual on one end and exclusively homosexual on the other, with the overwhelming majority of people being somewhere between.
Studies on homosexuality in the United States show that about 2% of the population self-identify as being exclusively homosexual and about 5% of being a member of being homosexual or bisexual. Given the sample sizes, the margin of error is extremely low. Since all the scientific evidence shows that sexual orientation is a congenital trait and since many homosexuals are not comfortable honestly answering a survey, it can be extrapolated that, at a minimum, about 2% of the world's population is homosexual and 5% homosexual or bisexual.
SOURCE: Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy, University of California Los Angeles, "How many People aer TRIBBLE, TRIBBLE, Bisexual, and Transgender", April 2011.
Actually, there is no scientifically accepted definition of homosexual, bisexual, and heterosexual
just gave you it
Homosexual ONLY sexually attracted to own gender
Bisexual Attracted sexually to both genders
Hetrosexual ONLY sexually attracted to other gender
(and that's the definition from the people who INVENTED the words)
.
Most researchers use a sliding scale based on Kinsey's original work with exclusively heterosexual on one end and exclusively homosexual on the other, with the overwhelming majority of people being somewhere between.
then Kinsey is wrong
the vast majority of people never have a same sex encounter in their life times
and same sex attraction is extremely rare
Studies on homosexuality in the United States show that about 2% of the population self-identify as being exclusively homosexual and about 5% of being a member of being homosexual or bisexual
unbalanced due to "free citys" like san Francisco probably that an the long term passing and repression
. Given the sample sizes, the margin of error is extremely low.
the margin seems to be quite large seeing as its 20X the norm
Since all the scientific evidence shows that sexual orientation is a congenital trait and since many homosexuals are not comfortable honestly answering a survey, it can be extrapolated that, at a minimum, about 2% of the world's population is homosexual and 5% homosexual or bisexual.
or that 0.1 % are homosexual and the researchers phrased the question wrong
which is more likely
SOURCE: Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy, University of California Los Angeles, "How many People aer TRIBBLE, TRIBBLE, Bisexual, and Transgender", April 2011.
yes California who it seems do not have a definition of homosexual
If you have a point to make, be explicit and stop dealing in ambiguities. There was a blog about diversity in Star Trek and its history of promoting tolerance and social change. The author invited STO players to attend a fleet event relevant to that topic.
Jewish is a faith (it being ILLEGAL to refer to it as a race in parts of Europe)
Hebrew is a Race
Homosexual is a sexual identity
And Romulan is a species
But diversity is a good thing as long as we are all allowed to be what we are
Straight , TRIBBLE , white , black , green , liberal , republican , monarchist or communist
Everyone is people
of course a TRIBBLE Green liberal would be somewhat rare
Sorry, but as someone who is both part Jewish and has written scholarly papers on the subject, your claim is utterly false. To begin with, the fact that European law does not allow the freedom of speech is irrelevant. By both the common dictionary definition and its use in scholarly publications:
JUDAISM: Modern or historical religious practices based upon Judaic beliefs as guided by the Torah and Tanakh.
JEW: Someone who either practices Judaism or is the cultural or familial heir of those that once did.
HEBREW: The written alphabet or language of modern and ancient Israel. Can also be a synonym for Jew or Jewish.
People rarely call Jews a "race" these days, since that term usually refers to a much larger group. The term ethnicity is more appropriate, although it is possible to use either.
Homosexuals are neither a race nor an ethnicity, but they share a common history of being persecuted in the United States simply for being born. William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy are both Jews. George Takei came out of the closet recently.
Judaism is a religion. Jews are an ethnicity, a group of people who share a common genetic ancestry and culture, just like the Arabs or the Han Chinese.
Homosexuals are neither a religion nor an ethnicity, but they do often share a common culture and a history of being persecuted in the United States simply for the crime of being being born a Jew or a homosexual.
The population of Americans who identify themselves as being of the Jewish faith or ethnicity is probably smaller than those who identify themselves as homosexuals. Both groups deserve equal protection under the law and cultural tolerance, which was the thesis of this blog.
I should have stayed out of that one. My intent wasn't to start a dialog about race or religion. I unfortunately responded to a trollish post designed to lead down a rabbit hole.
My husband and I took today off and are spending it with our friends, celebrating our HUGE victories today. I am admittedly a little tipsy and not thinking clearly.
Homosexual ONLY sexually attracted to own gender
Bisexual Attracted sexually to both genders
Hetrosexual ONLY sexually attracted to other gender
(and that's the definition from the people who INVENTED the words)
.
then Kinsey is wrong
the vast majority of people never have a same sex encounter in their life times
and same sex attraction is extremely rare
unbalanced due to "free citys" like san Francisco probably that an the long term passing and repression
the margin seems to be quite large seeing as its 20X the norm
or that 0.1 % are homosexual and the researchers phrased the question wrong
which is more likely
yes California who it seems do not have a definition of homosexual
No, you provided your own definition, which is neither supported by the literature nor the scientific consensus. It is also the logical fallacy of bifurcation. And no one person, "invented the words". They slowly became to be used in English over time and can have many different meanings. The way a person who specializes in human sexuality research is likely to use those terms varies greatly from how someone from the slums of New Dehli or the Australian outback might.
Kinesey's scale was not "wrong". It was simply zoological in nature and cannot be proved or disproved. It is the basis of how modern researchers define the spectrum of sexuality. The demographic information Kinsey included in his report is irrelevant to anything I have written given that I have only used modern sources of high quality, containing the responses of over 100,000 Americans.
The University of California at Los Angeles is one of the premiere universities in the world. I see that when you lack scientific evidence, you simply assert you are correct (without valid sources) and then attempt ad hominem attacks against my country's greatest State.
Sorry, but as someone who is both part Jewish and has written scholarly papers on the subject, your claim is utterly false. To begin with, the fact that European law does not allow the freedom of speech is irrelevant. By both the common dictionary definition and its use in scholarly publications:
A certain insane Austrian called Jews a race
he then tried to wipe them out
thus its no longer legal in parts of Europe to call them one
JUDAISM: Modern or historical religious practices based upon Judaic beliefs as guided by the Torah and Tanakh.
correct (more or less)
JEW: Someone who either practices Judaism or is the cultural or familial heir of those that once did.
Not so much
" a person practicing the Jewish faith OR having a Jewish mother"
(Quoting my friend Ruth who IS one(a Jewish mother))
HEBREW: The written alphabet or language of modern and ancient Israel. Can also be a synonym for Jew or Jewish.
Hebrew a language of the semitic grouping and the genetic decendants of Abrahams line
by his younger son
People rarely call Jews a "race" these days, since that term usually refers to a much larger group. The term ethnicity is more appropriate, although it is possible to use either.
you technically can't convert to a race
ergo its legally considered a "cultural group"
Homosexuals are neither a race nor an ethnicity, but they share a common history of being persecuted in the United States simply for being born. William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy are both Jews. George Takei came out of the closet recently.
William shatner believes only in William shatner
And frankly anyone who could not spot George as homosexual in the 1970's needs an eye test
I should have stayed out of that one. My intent wasn't to start a dialog about race or religion. I unfortunately responded to a trollish post designed to lead down a rabbit hole.
My husband and I took today off and are spending it with our friends, celebrating our HUGE victories today. I am admittedly a little tipsy and not thinking clearly.
I admit, I forgot to check the paper. The rulings turned out exactly as I expected they would. Congratulations to those who worked hard for equal rights. My fellow Californians will soon be able to have their marriages legally recognized in this State and my fellow service-members will soon have the same marriage benefits regardless of their orientation.
No, you provided your own definition, which is neither supported by the literature nor the scientific consensus.
I posted THE Definitions of three very old terms
all of which have recognised correct definitions
science uses our words so it uses them OUR way
It is also the logical fallacy of bifurcation. And no one person, "invented the words".
we did you know
They slowly became to be used in English over time and can have many different meanings. The way a person who specializes in human sexuality research is likely to use those terms varies greatly from how someone from the slums of New Dehli or the Australian outback might.
you mean someone whose job it is to pretend there are more than there are?
oh and in Dehli they speak a different language
the Australians speak English but frankly if they speak fast I have to ask them to repeat it sometimes
Kinesey's scale was not "wrong". It was simply zoological in nature and cannot be proved or disproved.
so you admit its bogus
It is the basis of how modern researchers define the spectrum of sexuality. The demographic information Kinsey included in his report is irrelevant to anything I have written given that I have only used modern sources of high quality, containing the responses of over 100,000 Americans.
chosen from among the wrong group and not globally applicable
The University of California at Los Angeles is one of the premiere universities in the world.
Sorry ????
WHAT??
I see that when you lack scientific evidence, you simply assert you are correct (without valid sources) and then attempt ad hominem attacks against my country's greatest State.
science and language
your arguing based on BAD social science
Im correcting based on actual language
example "universe" there is exactly ONE universe "uni" means ONE
BI means "two of" so Bisexual "two sexual interests" BIcycle "two wheeled cycle"
Look its clear you do not like the idea that TRIBBLE people are naturally occurring in a tiny fraction
but we need to tolerate them as we do any other minority
they are people just like everyone else (and less of a problem than some)
Not so much
" a person practicing the Jewish faith OR having a Jewish mother"
(Quoting my friend Ruth who IS one(a Jewish mother))
That definition only applies to Orthodox practitioners of Judaism and only refers to who is considered a Jew in the eyes of the Orthodox sects (and you forgot to include converts). The general use of the phrase Jew or Jewish is the one I provided.
Hebrew a language of the semitic grouping and the genetic decendants of Abrahams line
by his younger son
No, it is not. Even if we accept that Abraham was truly a person, his "decendants" (id est the Hebrews) have spoken many Semitic languages (such as Aramaic, Assyrian, and Arabic) which are most certainly not Hebrew. Hebrew is the language and the primary alphabet of the Hebrew family of languages, primarily modern and ancient Hebrew.
I admit, I forgot to check the paper. The rulings turned out exactly as I expected they would. Congratulations to those who worked hard for equal rights. My fellow Californians will soon be able to have their marriages legally recognized in this State and my fellow service-members will soon have the same marriage benefits regardless of their orientation.
Which ironically funny that the voters of CA clearly voted 52.24% in favor of Prop 8. No sense in having democratic elections when courts just go against the voters wishes.
I posted THE Definitions of three very old terms
all of which have recognised correct definitions
science uses our words so it uses them OUR way
we did you know
you mean someone whose job it is to pretend there are more than there are?
oh and in Dehli they speak a different language
the Australians speak English but frankly if they speak fast I have to ask them to repeat it sometimes
so you admit its bogus
chosen from among the wrong group and not globally applicable
Sorry ????
WHAT??
science and language
your arguing based on BAD social science
Im correcting based on actual language
example "universe" there is exactly ONE universe "uni" means ONE
BI means "two of" so Bisexual "two sexual interests" BIcycle "two wheeled cycle"
Look its clear you do not like the idea that TRIBBLE people are naturally occurring in a tiny fraction
but we need to tolerate them as we do any other minority
they are people just like everyone else (and less of a problem than some)
Scientists do not use words as the common lay people use them. To argue otherwise, you would have to argue that, for instance the common definition of a theory (someone's unproven idea) means the same as the scientific usage of a theory (a testable, falsifiable, natural explanation for observed phenomena).
Work, according to the dictionary, does not usually include the scientific definition of the position derivative of time(dx/dt * dt) multiplied by force and integrated over time (t1-t2). Just like physicists have a whole set of definition of work you would not find in Webster's, sexuality researchers have a whole set of definitions of sexuality that would not exist in a standard dictionary. Additionally, how such terms are defined is an ongoing debate and research that is still occurring today.
Also, the dictionary is hardly the clear arbiter you think it to be. For instance, Webster's defines homosexual as, 'Of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex".
Nowhere in that definition do they provide a clear delineation between what desires are homosexual and what are not. For instance, if you are sexually attracted to someone whom you believe is a woman but they are indeed a man, then are you are homosexual? According to Webster's, you fit the definition.
Comments
I understand that not everyone is American and thus does not understand our history, but the first TRIBBLE pride marches were held in New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles following the stonewall riots.
At the time, homosexuals had few protections from persecution. Homosexuality was largely outlawed in the United States. The marches started with a few brave souls willing to show their face in public, to march for civil rights, not unlike Martin Luther King Jr. or the Freedom Riders.
Today, those parades are not only a celebration of that tradition, but in a world where homosexuals still do not have equal rights, a continuation of that struggle.
Here is another one... While we were fighting for independence and freedom, during the Revolutionary war, the British Empire was fighting to gain control over America's natural resources.
You still did not answer the question on why 2% of the population is placed on a pedestal for doing NOTHING.
The "true" cause of wars is generally a matter of perspective rather than fact. From a biological-anthropological point of view, wars are an evolutionary throwback to the primates we evolved from. These primates divided themselves into tribes and by massacring members of other tribes, especially infants, we were able to ensure the dominance of our tribes' (and ergo our own) gene pool.
Modern humans, as enlightened as they are, still carry these instincts and a whole field called evolutionary psychology was created to study it.
Wars never have a single cause. It largely depends on your perspective.
If you have a point to make, be explicit and stop dealing in ambiguities. There was a blog about diversity in Star Trek and its history of promoting tolerance and social change. The author invited STO players to attend a fleet event relevant to that topic.
I
The point has already been made. Thank you for your time
Globally just under 0.1% (one in 1000) surely
What percentage of the population does one have to reach to be considered equal and deserving of protection? 5%? 10%? I am not sure what it is that you are implying by attempting to determine the population numbers, so could you please clarify?
For comparison, the Global Jewish population is approximately 13.3 million, or about .0018%. So, LGBT's are wellahead of that mark. Also, bear in mind, there can be no true calculation of our numbers because so many of us are still forced to remain in the closets, for fear of our safety and lives.
Actually, the scientific evidence is quite different. The size of the homosexual population depends largely on how you define it, and ranges from about 2% on the low end of the estimate (people who exclusively are attracted to members of the same sex and openly admit to relations) to well over 50% (people who have experienced some homosexual relations or latent attraction).
The most common definition would be people who are naturally attracted to and prefer sexual relations with members of their own gender, something that is unlikely to vary much by culture (although the ease of admitting to a researcher might), and the numbers seem to indicate that about 5% of the population fits that definition of homosexuality, with a single sigma margin of error of about 2%.
I wasn't aware that TRIBBLE was a race.
We aren't. Neither is Judaism.
Since you do not seem to be interested in having an actual discussion, I will have to assume that you are simply trolling, and add you to "ignore."
Dont confuse admitted individuals with all individuals in a group. There is no science that says the percentage is any different in any culture, there are just cultures where it is forced underground to this day. If there is 5% in one place, chances are there are 5% in all the other places. The same is true of most subcultures throughout history. When England declared itself Anglican and that Catholicism was illegal, most Catholics did not leave the country, they just pretended to be Anglican.
I have an idea for what Season 11 should be; Season 11: The Big Bug Fix.
I have not been able to read my bug tickets in over a year, not even the tickets about not being able to see my tickets.
I find the drama of your signature proof of your immaturity, this means you, DR whiners.
oh just one person as far as im concerned but the number of actual homosexuals is TINY at about 1 in 1000
hmm probably depends how you count them
practicing Torah Jews or "one or more Jewish ancestors"
but then those are several catagories
Homosexuals about 1 in 1000
Bisexuals I have no figures for
Genuine transgenders ? tiny tiny tiny group (not including "social" transgender or "financial" transgender" like the lady boys of Thailand ) there are probably a few about but not many
that the 2% figure is wrong
that was the scientific evidence
Homosexuals are "exclusively attracted to members of the same gender"
Bisexuals are "attracted to members of both genders"
Bi is not TRIBBLE
who did they ask?
100 people at a TRIBBLE pride rally in brazil??
or less than that in 99% of cultures where it has not been repressed or hidden thus leading to less in the actual population (there is some evidence that homosexuality Is genetic and those "passing" and raising familys have increased the numbers)
Personally I do not care what causes it or why it happens
The vast majority of people could not care less if a tiny part of society is different
BUT claiming that half of us are would be an existential threat to many
Judaism is a religion. Jews are an ethnicity, a group of people who share a common genetic ancestry and culture, just like the Arabs or the Han Chinese.
Homosexuals are neither a religion nor an ethnicity, but they do often share a common culture and a history of being persecuted in the United States simply for the crime of being being born a Jew or a homosexual.
The population of Americans who identify themselves as being of the Jewish faith or ethnicity is probably smaller than those who identify themselves as homosexuals. Both groups deserve equal protection under the law and cultural tolerance, which was the thesis of this blog.
I thought we were having a nice compelling discussion since it was you who in fact brought up race into the conversation.
Guess when the conversation doesn't go your way you storm off in another direction. So be it.
Hebrew is a Race
Homosexual is a sexual identity
And Romulan is a species
But diversity is a good thing as long as we are all allowed to be what we are
Straight , TRIBBLE , white , black , green , liberal , republican , monarchist or communist
Everyone is people
of course a TRIBBLE Green liberal would be somewhat rare
Actually, there is no scientifically accepted definition of homosexual, bisexual, and heterosexual. Most researchers use a sliding scale based on Kinsey's original work with exclusively heterosexual on one end and exclusively homosexual on the other, with the overwhelming majority of people being somewhere between.
Studies on homosexuality in the United States show that about 2% of the population self-identify as being exclusively homosexual and about 5% of being a member of being homosexual or bisexual. Given the sample sizes, the margin of error is extremely low. Since all the scientific evidence shows that sexual orientation is a congenital trait and since many homosexuals are not comfortable honestly answering a survey, it can be extrapolated that, at a minimum, about 2% of the world's population is homosexual and 5% homosexual or bisexual.
SOURCE: Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy, University of California Los Angeles, "How many People aer TRIBBLE, TRIBBLE, Bisexual, and Transgender", April 2011.
just gave you it
Homosexual ONLY sexually attracted to own gender
Bisexual Attracted sexually to both genders
Hetrosexual ONLY sexually attracted to other gender
(and that's the definition from the people who INVENTED the words)
.
then Kinsey is wrong
the vast majority of people never have a same sex encounter in their life times
and same sex attraction is extremely rare
unbalanced due to "free citys" like san Francisco probably that an the long term passing and repression
the margin seems to be quite large seeing as its 20X the norm
or that 0.1 % are homosexual and the researchers phrased the question wrong
which is more likely
yes California who it seems do not have a definition of homosexual
I wasn't speaking to you, at all. I was speaking to Sollvax, you already admitted to trolling.
Sorry, but as someone who is both part Jewish and has written scholarly papers on the subject, your claim is utterly false. To begin with, the fact that European law does not allow the freedom of speech is irrelevant. By both the common dictionary definition and its use in scholarly publications:
JUDAISM: Modern or historical religious practices based upon Judaic beliefs as guided by the Torah and Tanakh.
JEW: Someone who either practices Judaism or is the cultural or familial heir of those that once did.
HEBREW: The written alphabet or language of modern and ancient Israel. Can also be a synonym for Jew or Jewish.
People rarely call Jews a "race" these days, since that term usually refers to a much larger group. The term ethnicity is more appropriate, although it is possible to use either.
Homosexuals are neither a race nor an ethnicity, but they share a common history of being persecuted in the United States simply for being born. William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy are both Jews. George Takei came out of the closet recently.
I should have stayed out of that one. My intent wasn't to start a dialog about race or religion. I unfortunately responded to a trollish post designed to lead down a rabbit hole.
My husband and I took today off and are spending it with our friends, celebrating our HUGE victories today. I am admittedly a little tipsy and not thinking clearly.
DOMA's Dead
Prop 8's Dead
No, you provided your own definition, which is neither supported by the literature nor the scientific consensus. It is also the logical fallacy of bifurcation. And no one person, "invented the words". They slowly became to be used in English over time and can have many different meanings. The way a person who specializes in human sexuality research is likely to use those terms varies greatly from how someone from the slums of New Dehli or the Australian outback might.
Kinesey's scale was not "wrong". It was simply zoological in nature and cannot be proved or disproved. It is the basis of how modern researchers define the spectrum of sexuality. The demographic information Kinsey included in his report is irrelevant to anything I have written given that I have only used modern sources of high quality, containing the responses of over 100,000 Americans.
The University of California at Los Angeles is one of the premiere universities in the world. I see that when you lack scientific evidence, you simply assert you are correct (without valid sources) and then attempt ad hominem attacks against my country's greatest State.
A certain insane Austrian called Jews a race
he then tried to wipe them out
thus its no longer legal in parts of Europe to call them one
correct (more or less)
Not so much
" a person practicing the Jewish faith OR having a Jewish mother"
(Quoting my friend Ruth who IS one(a Jewish mother))
Hebrew a language of the semitic grouping and the genetic decendants of Abrahams line
by his younger son
you technically can't convert to a race
ergo its legally considered a "cultural group"
William shatner believes only in William shatner
And frankly anyone who could not spot George as homosexual in the 1970's needs an eye test
I admit, I forgot to check the paper. The rulings turned out exactly as I expected they would. Congratulations to those who worked hard for equal rights. My fellow Californians will soon be able to have their marriages legally recognized in this State and my fellow service-members will soon have the same marriage benefits regardless of their orientation.
And still no one has given a clear and precise reason that 2% of the population is placed upon a pedestal.
Oops, there goes you're credibility.
Awoken Dead
Now shaddup about the queues, it's a BUG
I posted THE Definitions of three very old terms
all of which have recognised correct definitions
science uses our words so it uses them OUR way
we did you know
you mean someone whose job it is to pretend there are more than there are?
oh and in Dehli they speak a different language
the Australians speak English but frankly if they speak fast I have to ask them to repeat it sometimes
so you admit its bogus
chosen from among the wrong group and not globally applicable
Sorry ????
WHAT??
science and language
your arguing based on BAD social science
Im correcting based on actual language
example "universe" there is exactly ONE universe "uni" means ONE
BI means "two of" so Bisexual "two sexual interests" BIcycle "two wheeled cycle"
Look its clear you do not like the idea that TRIBBLE people are naturally occurring in a tiny fraction
but we need to tolerate them as we do any other minority
they are people just like everyone else (and less of a problem than some)
That definition only applies to Orthodox practitioners of Judaism and only refers to who is considered a Jew in the eyes of the Orthodox sects (and you forgot to include converts). The general use of the phrase Jew or Jewish is the one I provided.
No, it is not. Even if we accept that Abraham was truly a person, his "decendants" (id est the Hebrews) have spoken many Semitic languages (such as Aramaic, Assyrian, and Arabic) which are most certainly not Hebrew. Hebrew is the language and the primary alphabet of the Hebrew family of languages, primarily modern and ancient Hebrew.
People do not convert to the Jewish ethnicity; they convert to the Judaic religion.
I was not alive in the 1970's. But yes, William Shatner is a religion unto himself.:D
Which ironically funny that the voters of CA clearly voted 52.24% in favor of Prop 8. No sense in having democratic elections when courts just go against the voters wishes.
Scientists do not use words as the common lay people use them. To argue otherwise, you would have to argue that, for instance the common definition of a theory (someone's unproven idea) means the same as the scientific usage of a theory (a testable, falsifiable, natural explanation for observed phenomena).
Work, according to the dictionary, does not usually include the scientific definition of the position derivative of time(dx/dt * dt) multiplied by force and integrated over time (t1-t2). Just like physicists have a whole set of definition of work you would not find in Webster's, sexuality researchers have a whole set of definitions of sexuality that would not exist in a standard dictionary. Additionally, how such terms are defined is an ongoing debate and research that is still occurring today.
Also, the dictionary is hardly the clear arbiter you think it to be. For instance, Webster's defines homosexual as, 'Of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex".
Nowhere in that definition do they provide a clear delineation between what desires are homosexual and what are not. For instance, if you are sexually attracted to someone whom you believe is a woman but they are indeed a man, then are you are homosexual? According to Webster's, you fit the definition.