Very basic stuff.

Sorry, I converted formats and it seems the sync is off... it doesn't affect the vid much since you can't see his mouth clearly....

"Since 1992 Corvino has been challenging audiences to confront this very question: What is wrong with homosexuality, if anything (and if nothing, then what's all the fuss about)? With a rare combination of humor, sensitivity, and intellectual rigor, he examines and dismantles the most common arguments against homosexual conduct—including those based on nature, harm, and religion. Whatever your sexual orientation, moral perspective, or religious convictions, this program will invite you to rethink some of the "easy assumptions" that often characterize the debate over homosexuality."

http://www.kirklandproductions.com/ARTISTS/Dr_John_Corvino-bio.html

Every homophobe in this country needs to see this.
(That's assuming, of course, they're open to rational argument.)

I guess since I think this guy is a quack, I'm a homophobe not open to rational debate. Well, I can get past the name calling. Try this for rational: This video is woefully inadequate and has a logic level unbecoming to elementary school students. If this is a good sample of his proofs, then this is a good sample of how not to argue in favor of homosexuality. I'll just attack one of his first arguments for space sake ... it's inadequate to argue that the "parts fit" so it must be okay to be gay. One: Because something is physically possible doesn't make it morally acceptable; they are unrelated subjects. Two: Because it fits, doesn't mean it's supposed to function together. An erect penis fits inside a person's rectum, as well as a mouth and in some cases even ears or an empty eye socket. (Forget homosexuality, heteros can do this too.) The wall of the anus and rectum is only one cell thick, meaning it rips easily and is an easy way for STDs to be transmitted. Nature didn't design a penis and an anus to work together; the insertion of a penis in an anus belies rationality. Moreover, anal disfunction is a very big problem in gay men--just check out the Center for Disease Control manual on gay sex.

Yes, you can fit a bullet in a pellet gun, but it won't work. In fact, it could cause serious problems. I could argue for moral acceptance of homosexuality without the sad, very sad tactics and misdirection this guy uses.

angelsvn, the problem isn't homosexuality. It's fear of homosexuality that's the problem. Otherwise, who would care what two people do together? Or who would care who sticks what where, male or female?

I eagerly looked for the CDC "manual on gay sex". Thought I might find some good, new ideas. No such thing exists on their site, of course. (btw, CDC doesn't use the term "gay", they use MSM for "men who have sex with men" -- a LOT of MSM are not "gay". "Gay" describes an identity, MSM describes behavior. Many men who have sex with men do not consider themselves gay, and may in fact be married, have kids, etc. I wonder how their rectums are holding up.)

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Homophobes should see this too:
http://www.videosift.com/story.php?id=1308

Wow... (I see a flame war coming) This video is a bunch of clips cut for size and doesn't answer the questions clearly. "Animals Don't Do it" - is incorrect. There's homosexuality (or males having sex with other males) in all kinds of species of animals.

"Is Homosexuality Immoral?" - Is our trusted government lying to us immoral? Better yet, What today in our society is still moral and is being practiced? 50% of hetero marriages end in Divorce... Isn't that the pot calling the Kettle black?
"Doesn't Homosexuality Cause Aids?" - No, Unfaithful partners having UnSafe Sex causes Aids. Being Homosexual doesn't spontanously give you Aids. Sharing Infected Needles, Bad blood transfusion... - It's important that people educate themselves instead of trust what they see. I'm neither Pro or Against Gay people, but believe people should get their facts straight before they make a decision of what they are for or against.

Hey Angelsvn: I got news for ya, babe. "God" didn't design the penis or the anus, cuz there ain't no god up there. And if everyone who ever stuck a penis in an anus is going to hell, then just about every straight guy in the world is probably going there, too (except your old man, I suppose...unless he did it with someone less uptight before he was cursed with you).

Take your "morals" back to your pathetic church and shut up. The majority of Americans are AGAINST theocracy, and no one care what you think.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Also, angelsvn, it's bad form to revise your comments to take out points that you were called out on. ie. the CDC manual on gay sex thing. That's not what the edit feature is for.

I don't like this all that much, but its okay. He talks like a youth minister. I do like your comments, bnsa. And angelsvn actually starts with a good comment, because the parts fitting is a silly, throw-away point.

Go to a zoo with Bonobo monkeys. They look very similar to chimps (sometimes called pygmy chimpanzees), but a larger part of their social interactions revolve around sex (hetero and homo) and masturbation than with chimps. I'm talking they spend like 50% of their day doing it. They're kinda gross animals,... but resolving conflicts with sex instead of fighting is pretty damn advanced if you ask me.

I agree this video is pretty bad. Saying this does not mean that I'm a homophobe (which I'm not anyway), nor that I should go back to church--the problem with the video is that it is mainly smarmy responses to attacks that are admittedly not that well-thought out in their own right. But, smart ass responses to stupid claims doesn't make a convincing argument, especially as regards an issue as intractable as morality.

For a second example--"Biblical condemnation?" He points to other moral dictates of the Bible that are no longer observed. The Bible being wrong about slavery does not mean it's wrong about homosexuality unless you accept that the Bible is either right about everything or wrong about everything. Of course the Bible isn't wrong about every moral principle (think the blessed-are-the-merciful parts.

And to prevent any misreading of this post, let me be perfectly clear that challenging the arguments made in this video is not in any way equivalent to arguing that homosexuality is immoral.

Most of his arguments are responses to criticisms, so it seems he is directly addressing those critics. After all, the homophile stance, if you will, is only made in reaction to homophobic pressure and oppression. Ultimately, homosexuality is no more moral or immoral than being black or liking ice cream. Or perhaps liking shellfish, another biblical taboo, would be a better example. How would you argue against those who tell you that you are immoral because you like shrimp? One argument would be to point out the fallacy in your critics' reasoning. It is not a form of logical proof, nor does it set out to be. It does, however, show the weakness in your critics' thinking. This is not meant to be an exercise in logical proof. It is more an illumination of irrationality and implicit bias in those who condemn gays.

Personally, I do not believe in basing ANY judgements on the dictates of a fairy tale (i.e, the bible). Perhaps one day that damned book will stop bringing more misery into this world. I guess that was a provocative comment. But heartfelt.

And what of the pomosexuals?
http://www.videosift.com/story.php?id=4403

*dead

This published video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by gorgonheap.

twiddles has fixed this video's dead embed code - no star awarded because twiddles was awarded too recently.

*length=7:15

The duration of this video has been updated from unknown to 7:15 - length declared by bareboards2.