View Full Version : Gay-To-Straight Research Published In APA Journal
I-RIGHT-I
09-10-2003, 10:22 PM
The American Psychological Association's prestigious journal Professional Psychology: Research and Practice has just published a comprehensive research paper on sexual-orientation change. Clients have the right to pursue change, the author says, because "sexual orientation, once thought to be an unchanging trait, is actually quite flexible for some people."
An article by Dr. Warren Throckmorton, "Initial Empirical and Clinical Findings Concerning the Change Process for Ex-Gays," has been published in the June 2002 issue of the American Psychological Association's publication Professional Psychology: Research and Practice.
"I'm pleased that this research summary will reach an audience of psychologists and mental health professionals that may not be aware of ex-gay issues," says Throckmorton, the director of college counseling at Grove City College.
"My literature review contradicts the policies of major mental health organizations because it suggests that sexual orientation, once thought to be an unchanging sexual trait, is actually quite flexible for many people, changing as a result of therapy for some, ministry for others and spontaneously for still others."
In professional circles, the debate over the development of sexual orientation centers around two viewpoints. The more prevalent of these, known as the essentialist view, argues that sexual orientation is innate, "in-born," and therefore not subject to change. The APA has supported this view, and therefore has influenced the approach many mental-health practitioners currently take.
The second, and less accepted viewpoint, known as the contructionist perspective, posits that sexual orientation is a socially-constructed product of a client's life experiences and can therefore be modified; people who modify orientation through counseling are known as "ex-gays." Throckmorton's research presents data consistent with this latter view.
MORE (http://www.narth.com/docs/throckarticle.html)
wendy
09-11-2003, 07:23 AM
When are you going to demonstrate this for us by becoming an ex-heterosexual?
I-RIGHT-I
09-11-2003, 07:40 AM
When are you going to demonstrate this for us by becoming an ex-heterosexual?
Are you volunteering to be in the film?
wendy
09-11-2003, 08:23 AM
Are you volunteering to be in the film?
You obviously have a difficult time directly answering questions.
I-RIGHT-I
09-11-2003, 08:36 AM
You obviously have a difficult time directly answering questions.
Ah, what was your question again? Oh yes, "Would I care to demonstrate that just as it's possible to go from sick to well it's also possible to go the other way." No, I don't think so. You are invited however to witness this weekend how it's possible to go from sober to slightly drunk and virginal to slightly less virginal. Not that I approve mind you but for the sake of medical science I might be persuaded to participate in that kind of study.
wendy
09-11-2003, 08:42 AM
No, I don't think so.
Why not? If sexual "orientation" is the equivalent of waking up in the morning and choosing what color of socks to wear you can prove it to us by deciding to be homosexual tomorrow. I'd be particularly interested in how you can suddenly "decide" that you will be sexually and emotionally attracted to men based on tomorrow being your "gay" day.
Don't you want to PROVE your position?
kathleen
09-11-2003, 08:46 AM
Don't you want to PROVE your position?
He'd rather just preach it.
I-RIGHT-I
09-11-2003, 09:45 AM
Why not? If sexual "orientation" is the equivalent of waking up in the morning and choosing what color of socks to wear you can prove it to us by deciding to be homosexual tomorrow. I'd be particularly interested in how you can suddenly "decide" that you will be sexually and emotionally attracted to men based on tomorrow being your "gay" day.
Don't you want to PROVE your position?
Recovered homosexuals have already "proved" it. What is lacking is the political will to encourage more people to seek help. Turning a healthy and straight individual into a homosexual has also been done and it's done every day. Victims of homosexual pedophilia often never recover from the psychological attack.
As you should already know because I've linked to the clinical studies, there are other psychological causes as well. Suggesting that I prove my own point is just another cynical way to dodge the question; "Can homosexuals be helped?". Isn't it fascinating how all of a sudden even suggesting such a thing is hateful? I know you're just pulling my leg but the fact is a lot of people have bought the lie of "Born That Way" hook line and sinker. I think it's the easy way out of dealing with the problem for most people who shrink at the possibility of ridicule. Ridicule and demonization are the number one weapons of the Homosexual Activists. Fortunately there's a small number left who are not intimidated. and the numbers are growing.
Now, if you'd like, kindly go to the thread of normalization of sexual disfunctions and tell me what you think about that and if you see any relation to the "normalization" of homosexuality. That should keep you busy for awhile.
HERE are two examples of the kind of discussion that goes on in the highest halls of science and academia regarding this issue. And people wonder why our country is so screwed up.
In a second article in the Archives, "The Dilemma of the Male Pedophile," Gunter Schmidt, D. Phil., makes a sympathetic case for the pedophile who, Schmidt says, must "remain abstinent for significant periods of time" and "lead a life of self-denial at significant emotional cost." Schmidt calls for a new, "enlightened discourse on morality" with the recognition that "in view of the pedophile's burden, the necessity of denying himself the experience of love and sexuality," he deserves society's respect.
Dr Robert Spitzer responded to the symposium as a discussant, urging that the paraphilias and gender-identity disorder be retained in the psychiatric manual.
Disagreeing, Psychiatrist Charles Moser of San Francisco's Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality and co-author Peggy Kleinplatz of the University of Ottawa presented a paper entitled, "DSM-IV-TR and the Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal." They argued that people whose sexual interests are atypical, culturally forbidden, or religiously proscribed should not, for those reasons, be labeled mentally ill.
I particularly like that one. It leaves the door open wide in the prisons and mental institutions.
wendy
09-11-2003, 10:56 AM
I am not interested in the past history of homosexual "conversions". I want to know if YOU could will yourself to be homosexual tomorrow. Could you make yourself be attracted to men? This is a very simple question and I wonder why you are dodging it.
After six months in the slammer, with ten years to go, it has been proven some men find other men 'attractive'. ;)
I am not interested in the past history of homosexual "conversions". I want to know if YOU could will yourself to be homosexual tomorrow. Could you make yourself be attracted to men? This is a very simple question and I wonder why you are dodging it.
Maybe in his case, there is no conversion necessary. :D
Oh now I get it, IRI is a conversion success story. ;D
I am not interested in the past history of homosexual "conversions". I want to know if YOU could will yourself to be homosexual tomorrow. Could you make yourself be attracted to men? This is a very simple question and I wonder why you are dodging it.
I do have to admit that a very large RED FLAG has gone up in IRI's not answering your questions.
I-RIGHT-I
09-11-2003, 02:03 PM
I am not interested in the past history of homosexual "conversions". I want to know if YOU could will yourself to be homosexual tomorrow. Could you make yourself be attracted to men? This is a very simple question and I wonder why you are dodging it.
I haven't been dodging the question I've been laying the groundwork so you could understand the answer. The answer is NO I could NOT WILL myself. But even with all this ground work you've still asked the wrong question. The question should be; Could you IRI prior to your achieving advanced age, MoralClarity™, and without the benefit of good parents who liberally applied the ClueBoot™ to enhance the already superior intellect they bequeathed you, fall prey at an early age to gender identity crisis brought on by an overly protective mother, an effeminate absentee father and the fabled Uncle Ernie from the Rock Opera "Tommy". If then, the answer is YES. I would be as queer as the truth on Hilary Clinton's lips.
Your question is based on a false premise. That being that homosexuality is somehow genetic or somehow present in a natural state in humans. It is not. I refuse to believe that in the light of falsified scientific method that's tried to prove it and in the face of decades of psychological evidence that it is in fact a mental disorder. But I'll tell you this. There's no doubt in my mind that some people who were straight and subjected to years of physical and psychological abuse could be turned into a flaming queen. Our prison system is capable of that. But it would be induced not self willed.
Therefore it follows that if something can be broken it can be fixed. Of course there are some things broken beyond repair and the human mind IS very fragile. And as you may know some addicts never recover, because the don't want to.
Evangelicals Concerned Inc (http://www.ecinc.org/Reviews/rvWntr_2003.htm)
Review of: “Initial Empirical and Clinical findings Concerning the Change Process for Ex-Gays” by Warren Throckmorton, Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, June 2002, Vol. 33, No. 3.
by Dr. Ralph Blair
(excerpts)
The director of counseling at politically and religiously conservative Grove City College [Throckmorton] presents his survey of reports of religiously-motivated and mediated “ex-gay” promise.
Acknowledging that “ex-gay is a term that often provokes extreme reactions,” he says it was introduced to the counseling professions by the Pattisons in 1980. They were husband and wife. He was a psychiatrist. She was not, though Throckmorton doesn't note this. Neither does he note that: (1) it was she who spoke with the 11 self-styled “ex-gays,” (2) they'd been selected for her as “best cases” by a ministry's two “ex-gay” leaders, and (3) these two men later fell in love and, as a couple, left “ex-gay” ministry. He says that “although some of the men reported homosexual fantasies postchange, Pattison and Pattison [sic] did not interpret this finding as evidence that the men had not changed. ... Thus, the basic shift was assumed.” He is probably unaware that, at a national meeting of evangelicals in mental health held a short time after their article appeared in the American Journal of Psychiatry's special issue on “folk healing,” Pattison was challenged on his too-easy dismissal of the continuing homosexual fantasies of these “ex-gays.” He shot back in anger: “Who doesn't have homosexual fantasies?!”
MADG: ***hehhehheh*** :D
… Throckmorton's six reports are based in self-reported testimonies of self-styled “ex-gays,” five from evangelical Christian groups and one from a Mormon group…
MADG: “The plural of ‘anecdote’ is not ‘data.’”
… Throckmorton's thrust is to push naïve and desperate Christian homosexuals into the arms of “ex-gay” practitioners. This is in spite of his frank admission that “the reports in this article do not provide proof that sexual orientation changes through religious mediation.” Indeed, he'd prefaced his review by stating: “This review does not answer the controversial question, Do ex-gay ministries help people change sexual orientation?”
Yet this is by-passed in the “ex-gay” movement's own abridged version of his review from what it touts is a “prestigious journal.” Contrary to his more careful words in the “prestigious journal,” he's quoted in the “ex-gay” publicity as saying: “My literature review contradicts the policies of major mental health organizations because it suggests that sexual orientation, once thought to be an unchanging sexual trait, is actually quite flexible for many people, changing as a result of therapy for some, ministry for others and spontaneously for still others.”
MADG: What? “Ex-gay” groups are DECEPTIVE in their propaganda?! Oh, say it isn’t so!!!
::)
Study bolsters idea that sexual orientation is flexible (http://thetimesonline.com/articles/2003/08/02/news/local_illinois/748049d53429ccdb86256d75007b169b.txt)
No reliable evidence exists that examines the long-term effects of conversion therapy. In fact, research on those therapies has indicated that in the overwhelming majority of cases, attempts to change a person's sexual orientation resulted in significant increases in levels of stress, anxiety, shame, depression and even suicidal thoughts.
Gay, lesbian and bisexual people who undergo conversion therapy usually do so as a desperate attempt to maintain connections with families, friends and religious communities that have rejected them for being homosexual.
Ex-Gay Watch (News and analysis of ex-gay politics) takes on Throckmorton. (The quoted statements are Throckmorton’s, the unquoted statements Michael Airhart’s)
=============
Prof. Throckmorton's Stereotypes (http://exgay.blogs.com/xgw/2003/09/prof_throckmort.html)
Warren Throckmorton, an antigay psychology professor at a small Pennsylvania conservative-Christian college, is a prolific writer on behalf of the ex-gay movement. (Google search.)
Unfortunately, Dr. Throckmorton sometimes bases his commentaries upon his own stereotypes about gay activists. He even gets their names wrong.
For example, on Sept. 1 he wrote an op-ed, quoted by an ex-gay Yahoo group, that begins with false assumptions about a D.C. gay activist group, the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance, and proceeds to issue further assumptions built from his original mistakes.
Gay activist groups must really want to avoid ex-gays. Now that's a bold statement but witness the new love of the First Amendment by some gay rights organizations and their supporters. For instance, the oldest gay activist group in the nation, the Gay Activists Alliance of Washington (GLAA) came out in support of the National Education Association's refusal to allow the Parents and Friends of Ex-Gay and Gays (PFOX) to exhibit at the NEA's national conventions.
Dr. Throckmorton ignores GLAA's solid record as a gay libertarian organization devoted to ensuring the First Amendment rights of private organizations -- and to ensuring that taxpayers are not compelled to subsidize private organizations, particularly when they discriminate.
This support is no surprise but the rationale is remarkable given the antipathy of most gay groups and the NEA towards those who wish to exercise their First Amendment rights to exclude gays from various private or religious functions.
No, the rationale is not remarkable. Dr. Throckmorton seems to be ignorant of several gay rights organizations that seek not to legislate tolerance at the Boy Scouts, but rather to cut off the flow of taxpayer money to private groups, such as the Boy Scouts, that violate community standards of tolerance. In other words, the Boy Scouts can be as discriminatory as they wanna be, but they may not cheat the taxpayers. And if the Boy Scouts do collect taxpayer handouts, then they must either refrain from discrimination or pay considerable fines for misusing taxpayer funds.
... What I don't understand is what the NEA gains by exercising its right to discriminate.
Dr. Throckmorton's claim not to understand is difficult to believe. He would surely object to PFOX being required to allow pro-tolerance and anti-bullying groups to distribute literature and videos at PFOX meetings. (In fact, PFOX already does this. It even bans advocates of tolerance and nonviolence from its e-mail discussion group.)
What the NEA believes it gains is simple: A clear message to teachers that -- contrary to the policies of PFOX -- bullying and religious proselytization have no legitimate place in the public schools.
If PFOX does not wish to be discriminated against by other private organizations, then it must refrain from promoting discrimination. In Christianese, PFOX must love thy neighbor, and treat thy neighbor as PFOX wishes to be treated. But neither PFOX nor Dr. Throckmorton subscribe to that particular Christian ethic.
Thus, what kids hear about sexuality in public schools may be influenced by NEA materials. With the NEA blatantly excluding any information about the flexibility of sexual orientation and options other than gay affirming, how will impressionable and confused school kids get a fair chance to evaluate all their options?
Dr. Throckmorton's argument is, again, disingenuous. PFOX propaganda, which is available from its Yahoo group, favors antigay discrimination, tolerates bullying in the schools, and strives to deny "confused school kids" opportunities to evaluate options other than discredited reparative therapies, even when their parents are gay-tolerant.
The PFOX message is that science has not proven the origins of sexual orientation to be genetic or inborn...
Not quite true. PFOX's officers and Yahoo group members maintain that sexual orientation is entirely environmental -- the result of bad fathers, homosexual "recruitment," and demonic possession.
... that people change their sexuality frequently ...
This is an untruth, and a trivialization of sexuality, that NEA rightly does not want preached at school children. Sexuality is somewhat fluid, but far from easy to change. Even ex-gay activists reject Dr. Throckmorton's misstatement.
... and that identifying as gay or lesbian too early can lead to risky sexual experimentation.
"Too early"? Again, this line of argument is factually erroneous and disingenuous. Dr. Throckmorton does not want people to EVER identify as gay or lesbian. Furthermore, risky experimentation results from sexual confusion and from the ignorant hostility of adult role models, such as parents. People who come to terms with their sexual attractions, with guidance from apolitical and respectful parents or other adults, have far less need to experiment.
Do the leaders of the NEA think there are no ex-gay teachers, ex-gay school counselors, ex-gay parents of school students or adolescents with same-sex attraction who refuse a gay identity? This is another good question for us to pose to the NEA.
No, it's a question to pose to PFOX and Dr. Throckmorton. Both refuse to come forward with public examples of the ex-gay teachers, counselors and parents that they claim exist.
It is the responsibility of PFOX and Dr. Throckmorton, not the NEA, to improve the tattered credibility of PFOX.
The First Amendment is a wonderful tool when applied consistently. Libertarian gays come close to achieving such consistency -- defending PFOX's freedom of speech while opposing its attempt to seize another organization's soapbox. Dr. Throckmorton, unfortunately, remains selective in his application of the First Amendment: He seeks carte blanche for PFOX to speak anywhere, while he seeks to limit the NEA's freedom to control its own message.
Haven't there been cases of heterosexual men "converting" to homosexuality? If that's the case, why can't the reverse happen?
Haven't there been cases of heterosexual men "converting" to homosexuality? If that's the case, why can't the reverse happen?
Have there?
Being gay is not a choice (http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/200309120035243.php)
Straight Male Talking
4:10pm Fri Sep 12th, 2003
[Malaysia]
I am a heterosexual male by sexual orientation and gender, and medical doctor by profession. I want to clarify a few issues in the recent debate on homosexuality.
First, homosexuality is not a mental or medical or surgical disorder. It was considered a mental disorder until about the 1950s when the failed experiments and disastrous treatments for homosexuality finally forced the psychiatric profession worldwide to face the reality of what-is instead of dreaming about what-should-be. The darker chapters in the history of modern psychiatry mentions ineffective adventures in drug and hormonal treatments, and disastrous adventures in brain surgery in the treatment of homosexuality.
This brings us to the second point I want to make. In the vast and overwhelming majority of cases, it is simply not possible to change a person's sexual preference with modern medicines or surgery. Whether you want to or should want to treat homosexuality in the first place is another vast issue that should be open to discussion.
Third, sexual preference is not a choice. You do not choose to be homosexual or heterosexual as the case might be. You either find Richard Gere and Keanu Reeves and Brad Pitt sexually attractive or not. You either find Cindy Crawford, Shakira and Charlize Theron sexually attractive or not. You do not choose to find Brad Pitt sexually attractive. You do not choose to find Cindy Crawford sexually attractive. It is not a matter of choice. Your sexual preferences are a given, and a reality you come to terms with.
Fourth, a homosexual man can choose to have sex with a woman in the same way that a heterosexual man can choose to have sex with another man. It is not at all physically impossible for either of the above to happen, but this does not mean you have changed that person's sexual orientation. A person's sexual orientation is very deeply entrenched no matter whether that person is straight or gay, and is not for all practical intents and purposes amenable to change.
It is certainly not a question of not wanting to be straight. Being gay is not a choice.
Keeping in view the lack of choice in the matter, I should point out that the only real choices we have open to us whatever our sexual preferences lie how we choose to behave:
1) Have sex with same sex individuals
2) Have sex with opposite sex individuals
3) Not have sex at all - that is, be celibate
This choice of behaviour whatever our sexual preferences is the same for both straight and gay individuals.
I would certainly consider gay individuals in our society to be oppressed and discriminated against. I do not think it is ideal for any individual to be criminalised for expressing their sexuality especially in the context of informed and consenting adults.
Our society consistently turns a blind eye to philandering husbands and dubious massage parlour activities but repeatedly threatens gay individuals with criminal charges for sexual relations between consenting adults.
It smacks of discrimination.
Have there?
Two made for TV movies from the 70's which were obviously meant to paint homosexuality in a good light certainly implied it. One subject was happily married until he found he had "a desire for other men", the origin of which was wholly unaccounted for.
Two made for TV movies from the 70's which were obviously meant to paint homosexuality in a good light certainly implied it. One subject was happily married until he found he had "a desire for other men", the origin of which was wholly unaccounted for.
Hmmm... I quote a doctor... you cite a made-for-TV movie. Hmmm... :)
Hmmm... I quote a doctor... you cite a made-for-TV movie. Hmmm... :)
Unless you can point me to anything you or this doctor has said which refutes the possibility that men who are heterosexuals can become homosexuals - other than unsupported assertion - I fail to see why I should be impressed.
I-RIGHT-I
09-12-2003, 03:27 PM
Study bolsters idea that sexual orientation is flexible (http://thetimesonline.com/articles/2003/08/02/news/local_illinois/748049d53429ccdb86256d75007b169b.txt)
No reliable evidence exists that examines the long-term effects of conversion therapy. In fact, research on those therapies has indicated that in the overwhelming majority of cases, attempts to change a person's sexual orientation resulted in significant increases in levels of stress, anxiety, shame, depression and even suicidal thoughts.
It depends on what you accept as reliable. The fact is and is undeniable that the APA tool homosexuality off the list of mental disorders without any, ANY verifiable scientific proof. They were blackmailed and threatened into submission.
And so what if they do suffer from "kicking the habit". Right now they lead the league in suicides, drug addiction, alcohol addiction and death by innumerable diseases. The median age for longevity is in the forties and very very few live to see retirement age. It looks to me that a little depression is a small price to pay. Let them eat Prozac.
Gay, lesbian and bisexual people who undergo conversion therapy usually do so as a desperate attempt to maintain connections with families, friends and religious communities that have rejected them for being homosexual.
Not a bad reason but the studies don't show that. They have an internal alarm that says something is wrong and of course there are those innumerable diseases and the constant thought of suicide. If nature had intended you to like the penis it would have given you the proper attitude and equipment. You can't fool Mother Nature. And if you screw with Her she'll slap you around like a red headed step child. If homosexuality were a normal state of being you guys wouldn't be having this problem. And don't throw out the psychological abuse issue by the straight crowd. Homo's today in San Francisco living among their own with all the media hype and tolerance they can stand still die in greater numbers from the above caused than the straight guy. Let's face it, homosexuals have some really bad karma.
I-RIGHT-I
09-12-2003, 03:44 PM
Being gay is not a choice
Neither is being a serial killer/rapist. Neither is being a bully and winding up in prison. Neither is being an alcoholic or drug addict. Shit happens. But a society with any brains doesn't make it an issue for special rights or enables the problem to continue. They find out what the cause is and fix it. Unfortunately the cause is one of a spiritual nature in all of the above cases. PARENTS don't know their ass from a hole in the ground. If there are more homo's today than one hundred years ago, and there are, that's the reason. We are educating generations of idiots.
"We are educating generations of idiots".
Hey that's right NC3, you're living proof.
truelies
09-12-2003, 03:49 PM
Ah, what was your question again? Oh yes, "Would I care to demonstrate that just as it's possible to go from sick to well it's also possible to go the other way." No, I don't think so. You are invited however to witness this weekend how it's possible to go from sober to slightly drunk and virginal to slightly less virginal. Not that I approve mind you but for the sake of medical science I might be persuaded to participate in that kind of study.
Is this the sort of comment a Fundie Christian should be making? WWJD?????????
I-RIGHT-I
09-12-2003, 03:56 PM
Is this the sort of comment a Fundie Christian should be making? WWJD?????????
True, I've been through this with you before. But if you put the statement in context and know the relationship W and I have on this forum you'd understand that it is harmless. WWJD? Well, if you are the LIVING GOD that's one thing. But if you are a sinner with the remains of an old nature still trying to cling to life and your name isn't St. Paul or St. John then you do what you do. Thanks for reminding me though. There's nothing at all wrong with one Christian gently nudging another if he feels that it's appropriate, and of course you are right, it was appropriate. Now, be a good bud and see if there's any beer left in the fridge. Mine is almost empty....thanks.
I-RIGHT-I
09-12-2003, 04:00 PM
"We are educating generations of idiots".
Hey that's right NC3, you're living proof.
This might not be a good night for you to fuck with me LS. I don't want to do any permanent damage to your ego if I don't have to.
NorNec
09-12-2003, 04:01 PM
Study bolsters idea that sexual orientation is flexible (http://thetimesonline.com/articles/2003/08/02/news/local_illinois/748049d53429ccdb86256d75007b169b.txt)
No reliable evidence exists that examines the long-term effects of conversion therapy. In fact, research on those therapies has indicated that in the overwhelming majority of cases, attempts to change a person's sexual orientation resulted in significant increases in levels of stress, anxiety, shame, depression and even suicidal thoughts.
Gay, lesbian and bisexual people who undergo conversion therapy usually do so as a desperate attempt to maintain connections with families, friends and religious communities that have rejected them for being homosexual.
So those addicted to homosexuality do not care about familly, friends etc.... Choices are to be made in life.
This might not be a good night for you to fuck with me LS. I don't want to do any permanent damage to your ego if I don't have to.
::)
wendy
09-12-2003, 05:06 PM
::)
I liked it better before you edited it. ;D
I liked it better before you edited it. ;D
;D LOL
I-RIGHT-I
09-12-2003, 05:11 PM
;D LOL
Uh huh....probably a smart move on your part.
wendy
09-12-2003, 05:12 PM
Uh hun....probably a smart move on your part.
Oh...he's just soooooo afraid of you. ::)
I-RIGHT-I
09-12-2003, 05:16 PM
Oh...he's just soooooo afraid of you. ::)
You are always so sweet. But you tempted him to to reproduce his original mistake...bad girl. Don't worry LS, I'm not going to leave any permanent scars.
Uh huh....probably a smart move on your part.
I have no doubt you would go to any extreme to cause me any embarrassment you could think of. I find it humorous that I've managed to be a pain in your ass. ;D I just thought about it twice and decided you're not worth getting into a tizzy over.
I-RIGHT-I
09-12-2003, 05:38 PM
I have no doubt you would go to any extreme to cause me any embarrassment you could think of. I find it humorous that I've managed to be a pain in your ass. ;D I just thought about it twice and decided you're not worth getting into a tizzy over.
You've got it all wrong Sugar. I love it when you talk dirty to me.
You've got it all wrong Sugar. I love it when you talk dirty to me.
Uh oh
I-RIGHT-I
09-12-2003, 05:41 PM
Uh oh
:P
Unless you can point me to anything you or this doctor has said which refutes the possibility that men who are heterosexuals can become homosexuals - other than unsupported assertion - I fail to see why I should be impressed.
… heh…
…
… heh heh…
…
… hehhehheh…
…
… you’re kidding… right?
Let me get this straight…
***ba-dump, bump***
YOU are asking ME to provide the evidence that DEBUNKS your “1970’s made-for-TV movie” opinion? Is that it? Am I understanding you correctly? Hmmm?
Okay… please relay to us the details of your “1970’s made-for-TV movie” perspective… go ahead… I’m all ears…
... (Oh GOD... THIS should be good!)
:P
Really ... at least we agree on something.
Satan
09-12-2003, 07:06 PM
Really ... at least we agree on something.
You sure about that? It looked like a proposition to me. ;D
You sure about that? It looked like a proposition to me. ;D
The little tongue thing :P ? ;D
The chances of turning an exclusive homosexual into and exclusive heterosexual… are roughly 0.0%.
(That’s not a typo… I said: “zero point zero percent.”
(Go ahead… prove me wrong…)
:-X
YOU are asking ME to provide the evidence that DEBUNKS your “1970’s made-for-TV movie” opinion? Is that it? Am I understanding you correctly? Hmmm?
Not quite.
I haven't expressed an opinion on the matter yet, only posited a hypothesis based on a premise which is possibly true. It is an obvious question prompted by the movies, which I've never heard addressed.
Okay… please relay to us the details of your “1970’s made-for-TV movie” perspective… go ahead… I’m all ears…
I already have. Such films suggest the possibility that some homosexuals DIDN'T know from the time they were five or six that they were "gay". That there are no open homosexuals who will admit anything to the contrary (at least not in the presence of news media) is certainly not compelling from an empirical perspective. If we are really interested in whether homosexual inclinations are as immutable as eye color, it behooves us to address the question.
Watch it arod, he's fucking with your head. ;)
Watch it arod, he's fucking with your head. ;)
He is certainly welcome to try. If he does, of course, I'll drive him right out of his mucking find. :)
Watch it arod, he's fucking with your head. ;)
And winning.
He is certainly welcome to try. If he does, of course, I'll drive him right out of his mucking find. :)
Wait a minute. The "source" of your dictates is an unnamed fictional television sitcom from the '70's...well, mmmmmmmmkay. ::)
He is certainly welcome to try. If he does, of course, I'll drive him right out of his mucking find. :)
Did you read his sig line? ;D
Wait a minute. The "source" of your dictates is an unnamed fictional television sitcom from the '70's...well, mmmmmmmmkay. ::)
That's not the source. It's what triggered the question.
Like so many people, you harbor assumptions you don't even know you have. You've swallowed the idea that homosexuality is an immutable trait just as so many swallowed Aristotle's assumption that objects of differing mass fall at differing speeds.
And winning.
Don't be absurd. I'm unbeatable. Only chance he has is to drag Suth into it. 8)
I-RIGHT-I
09-13-2003, 05:57 AM
The chances of turning an exclusive homosexual into and exclusive heterosexual… are roughly 0.0%.
(That’s not a typo… I said: “zero point zero percent.”
(Go ahead… prove me wrong…)
:-X
That sounds more like a cry for help than a challange but OK, here goes...
There are literally hundreds (http://www.narth.com/menus/reso.html) of examples of men, exclusive homosexual men, who desiring a change in their sexual orientation that have succeeded or making substantial progress.
Considering what has been described as "the dark, intolerant, abusive side of the gay community" (http://www.narth.com/docs/defends.html) that almost succeeded in banning sexual reorientation therapy by boycotts, threats against careers, "and worse" this fact stands in stark contrast to your ridiculous assertion that the rate is 0.0%.
"But of still greater importance in this discussion, Epstein continued, "is a new study by Robert Spitzer, M.D. of Columbia University." Epstein notes that "even though he has been under tremendous pressure by gay activists to repudiate his findings, Spitzer has concluded that sexual conversion therapy can produce significant, positive and lasting changes."
Throughout the unfolding controversy--including an "O'Reilly Factor" TV interview in December with book author Joseph Nicolosi, in which host Bill O'Reilly vehemently defended Nicolosi's right to publish and advertise--editor Epstein refused to back down.
"Stay tuned," he advises his readers in an editorial in the January issue of Psychology Today. Because it's time, he says, to review the sexual conversion issue again in his magazine.
"We'll soon offer and objective, comprehensive look at the ex-gay issue, " he says, "and also give the factions space to vent."
But despite the vicious attacks on dedicated individuals progress is undeniable and unstoppable. The truth about reorientation therapy will be allowed out of the closet and because of that children will begin to get treatment instead of getting "the treatment" from a homosexual community that is desperately looking to legitimize and propigate itself at any and all costs.
HERE, (http://www.narth.com/menus/interviews.html) there are not one, but,several testimonials by men and women who have won and continue to win the fight against homosexuality. If you ever decide to look into the possibility for change in yourself you will find that you are in very good company. (http://www.narth.com/docs/givesup.html)
Repeating… with emphasis…
The plural of anecdote is NOT “data.” The plural of anecdote is NOT “data.” The plural of anecdote is NOT “data.”
I-RIGHT-I
09-15-2003, 06:51 PM
Repeating… with emphasis…
The plural of anecdote is NOT “data.” The plural of anecdote is NOT “data.” The plural of anecdote is NOT “data.”
Remember that next time you hear the words, "it's OK, I tested negative and the last fifty guys I poked did too."
But the fact is, those testimonials are worth more than any data you can come up with that prove ZERO results. As there has been NO "data" collected". In other words you are talking out of your ass again. As Bad would say....Pffft.
arod: I haven't expressed an opinion on the matter yet, only posited a hypothesis based on a premise which is possibly true. It is an obvious question prompted by the movies, which I've never heard addressed.
Apparently, it’s not as “obvious” as you would like us to believe. Folks do not always “behave” in a manner that is consistent with their sexual orientation. That’s fact.
I already have. Such films suggest the possibility that some homosexuals DIDN'T know from the time they were five or six that they were "gay". That there are no open homosexuals who will admit anything to the contrary (at least not in the presence of news media) is certainly not compelling from an empirical perspective. If we are really interested in whether homosexual inclinations are as immutable as eye color, it behooves us to address the question.
Are there not? You cannot possibly prove that. Personally, I deluded myself into my twenties that I was not gay. I was tragically WRONG, of course… how else can one explain never ever EVER having had an erotic thought about the opposite sex? And I can assure you that that mattered not one whit whether or not the “news media” was “present.” That’s a ridiculous assertion… I have never given a rodent’s hirsute hindquarters about “the media”… nor has any gay person that I have ever met. With your focus on “70s movies,” “the media,” and the like… you have completely dehumanized gay folks.
If asked: “When did you realize that you were gay?”… most folks begin to answer with: “I always knew I was ‘different.’” (As did I, in retrospect.) That and… more importantly… the mounting scientific evidence of biological influences on sexual orientation… suggests that your “turned gay” scenario is nothing more than late-life enlightenment.
Or maybe it’s just str8 guys getting their rocks off. Email me for details…
That's not the source. It's what triggered the question.
And the tabloids “suggest” that J-Lo left Ben to smootch Madonna… do you expect THAT to be the basis of an intelligent discussion?
Like so many people, you harbor assumptions you don't even know you have. You've swallowed the idea that homosexuality is an immutable trait just as so many swallowed Aristotle's assumption that objects of differing mass fall at differing speeds.
Invalid simile.
How about mustering up some facts… film boy?
Folks do not always “behave” in a manner that is consistent with their sexual orientation. That’s fact.
I fail to see the relevance of this statement.
Are there not? You cannot possibly prove that.
Why would I want to, since any admission of homosexual impulses cropping up later in life would tend to mitigate against the idea that they are immutable?
Personally, I deluded myself into my twenties that I was not gay. I was tragically WRONG, of course… how else can one explain never ever EVER having had an erotic thought about the opposite sex? And I can assure you that that mattered not one whit whether or not the “news media” was “present.” That’s a ridiculous assertion… I have never given a rodent’s hirsute hindquarters about “the media”… nor has any gay person that I have ever met.
Whether the media mattered to you is beside the point. They are the means by which most of my persuasion would hear of
With your focus on “70s movies,” “the media,” and the like… you have completely dehumanized gay folks.
Non-sequitur. Stating an opinion about what motivates homosexuals doesn't dehumanize anyone.
If asked: “When did you realize that you were gay?”… most folks begin to answer with: “I always knew I was ‘different.’” (As did I, in retrospect.)
Kids who are molested feel "different" too. I'm not saying you were, I'm just saying maybe something happened to you to make you different that was not benign.
That and… more importantly… the mounting scientific evidence of biological influences on sexual orientation… suggests that your “turned gay” scenario is nothing more than late-life enlightenment.
Scientific evidence? Lay it on me, blood. Hit me with the best of it. Likely it amounts to equating correlation with causation.
And the tabloids “suggest” that J-Lo left Ben to smootch Madonna… do you expect THAT to be the basis of an intelligent discussion?
That would only be a valid comparison if the films in question had not been obviously designed as pro-homosexual propaganda vehicles.
Invalid simile.
I think not. Otherwise, homosexuals would have been able to justify the claim of immutability with something more than intimidation and propaganda.
How about mustering up some facts… film boy?
It is you who is decidedly lacking in facts which justify the claim of immutability.
Have I made any claims of "immutability?" You're the one casting the aspertions, how about backing up your own claims instead of just repeatedly insisting that I prove something I never claimed.
Have I made any claims of "immutability?" You're the one casting the aspertions, how about backing up your own claims instead of just repeatedly insisting that I prove something I never claimed.
Then I don't know what the point of the debate is. If homosexuality is not an immutable trait, it can be eliminated. Moreover, mutability means it is not equivalent to race, and the claim by homosexuals that discrimination against them is equivalent to racism is obviously false.
the bib
09-16-2003, 10:55 AM
Nature vs. nurture .... nature and nurture?
Really doesn't matter.
Each person on the face of this earth has (IMHO) a manifest right to BE ACCEPTED for whom and what they are.
.............. PROVIDING the who and what does not harm another.
Insofar as homosexuals .... and I'm sure I'm not articulating precisely BUT
I think that the major problem is that as a "group," they LEAD with their homosexual identification.
By this I mean that oft times we are expected to deal with their homosexuality as an intrinsic and important, even overriding component in relating to them.
Heteros don't, as a rule do this.
I do not look at gay friends AS gay first ... or even gay at all.
Other than significant other type relationships ... heteros never think of their friends', associates', co-workers', teamates', etc. sex lives as the basis of the association ...
but it seems that gays insist on being defined by what they do behind closed doors.
I think this not only silly, not only self limiting but offense by oppression to the rest of us who do not want or need to consider any other person's worth by how they prefer to spend their intimate moments.
IMHO
lgllady
09-16-2003, 11:04 AM
I agree with most of what you say. The one question that I have is about a manifest right to be accepted for whom and what they are.
What right would this be? To be accepted by who, exactly. If I do not accept a homosexual in my personal circle of associates then have I violated their rights????
This is where I'm afraid the homosexual agenda wants to go. There is no manifest right to be accepted by anyone for anything.
the bib
09-16-2003, 11:16 AM
I agree with most of what you say. The one question that I have is about a manifest right to be accepted for whom and what they are.
What right would this be? To be accepted by who, exactly. If I do not accept a homosexual in my personal circle of associates then have I violated their rights????
You have the inalienable right of free association ....
another's right to be accepted does not mean to be entitled to force others' associatION.
"Accepted" in this context is meant in the "Live and let live" POV ... does not mean that anyone has to embrace another.
This is where I'm afraid the homosexual agenda wants to go. There is no manifest right to be accepted by anyone for anything.
I do not dispute that this may be their intent .... I don't see this group as very different than so many other groups' intentions ...
There seems somehow to have developed a trend that one's rights to personal choices and freedom from harm from others,
has of late translated to freedom from being offended by others' POV's.
I-RIGHT-I
09-17-2003, 12:09 PM
You have the inalienable right of free association ....
another's right to be accepted does not mean to be entitled to force others' associatION.
"Accepted" in this context is meant in the "Live and let live" POV ... does not mean that anyone has to embrace another.I do not dispute that this may be their intent .... I don't see this group as very different than so many other groups' intentions ...
Possibly what the homo's are up to in Government, Colleges, Grade Schools, and Churches just doesn't interest you. If it did you'd know that they do not want to just be accepted. They want to be approved and hugged and invited into every aspect of your life with every aspect of their insanity and deviancy and disease and hatred. For some reason I thought you were a Catholic and had at least a rudimentary knowledge of what's going on. If you don't see the difference in this group and the others then I just don't know what to say.
Possibly what the homo's are up to in Government, Colleges, Grade Schools, and Churches just doesn't interest you. If it did you'd know that they do not want to just be accepted. They want to be approved and hugged and invited into every aspect of your life with every aspect of their insanity and deviancy and disease and hatred. For some reason I thought you were a Catholic and had at least a rudimentary knowledge of what's going on. If you don't see the difference in this group and the others then I just don't know what to say.
What, there's 3 or 4 million gays in this country and you're scared? "their insanity and deviancy and disease and hatred", are you saying there's less or none of these things in the hetro communities?
What I think is, you would have bit into the Jew thing in Nazi Germany in 1930. You need something to hate and fear, you need a scapegoat something that makes you feel superior in some way.
They want to be approved and hugged and invited into every aspect of your life with every aspect of their insanity and deviancy and disease and hatred.
Yeah, right. Like that's gonna happen. They'd have to suck my dick before I'd let them do that.
Oh...wait....
You know what? Fuck the homos!
You know what? Fuck the homos!
Isn't that what they're all about? ;)
I-RIGHT-I
09-17-2003, 03:18 PM
What, there's 3 or 4 million gays in this country and you're scared? "their insanity and deviancy and disease and hatred", are you saying there's less or none of these things in the hetro communities?
That's the point LS. There are three or four million and somehow they have managed to get homosexuality removed from the list of disorders from every major medical society. They've managed to pass laws that give them special rights, they are teaching their doctrine in grade schools, they have become part of the churches, are trying to redefine marriage and make the Bible illegal. If you'd read some of the material I've posted you know that it isn't stopping there. The "experts" are now saying that sex with children is normal and health and if you disagree with any of this it is YOU that is sick. Let's not even mention the diseases and the costs to keep these fucking losers alive that's coming out of our pocket. Am I scared? Damn right I'm scared. This all took less than thirty years.
What I think is, you would have bit into the Jew thing in Nazi Germany in 1930. You need something to hate and fear, you need a scapegoat something that makes you feel superior in some way.
You don't get it. Homo's are not victims. You're the victim.
they are teaching their doctrine in grade schoolss.
If homosexuals were teaching their "doctrine" (whatever in the hell that means), don't you think I, as a parent and as a heterosexual would be at the front of the mob protesting this?
It's the absurdity that you bring into this subject that renders the rest of your opinions moot...suspect at best.
That's the point LS. There are three or four million and somehow they have managed to get homosexuality removed from the list of disorders from every major medical society. They've managed to pass laws that give them special rights, they are teaching their doctrine in grade schools, they have become part of the churches, are trying to redefine marriage and make the Bible illegal. If you'd read some of the material I've posted you know that it isn't stopping there. The "experts" are now saying that sex with children is normal and health and if you disagree with any of this it is YOU that is sick. Let's not even mention the diseases and the costs to keep these fucking losers alive that's coming out of our pocket. Am I scared? Damn right I'm scared. This all took less than thirty years.
You don't get it. Homo's are not victims. You're the victim.
Personally I think homosexuality is a dead end street going nowhere and don't even get me started on pedophiles, those SOB's need to be executed.
As much as I hate to admit this to you IRI, I agree it's getting to be a problem in the sense traditional institutions are being challenged, like marriage. I don't care what they do in their bedrooms but I have issues with considering them 'normal' or a 'third sex' or they can't help it, they were born that way. I think it's a sign of the times we live in, the only thing I would oppose is any violence directed towards them for their life style but I will never except them as 'equal' in that lifestyle because I think it's a bad choice that they have made and no one ever has convinced me they can't help it, they're gay because they want to be gay.
I think homosexuals should get the exact same recognition of their sexuality as do heterosexuals get...which is, btw, none.
Who cares whether some guy blows his wad? No one except the guy doing the blowing. (No pun intended.)
I-RIGHT-I
09-17-2003, 03:55 PM
I take back all the underwear jokes. Only one thing about what you said. They do not want to be gay. They have said time and time again that they wish it were different. The problem is there is none to help but a few doctors outside the PC mainstream.
The real problem isn't the homo's. It's the straight LIBERAL God haters that use these people as a way to destroy the foundations of our country. Can there be ANY DOUBT that without some very powerful help what has gone on since 1972 could not have happened so quickly? Who but nutcases backed up by big money and real power has the balls to write in the APA Journal that pedophilia is a healthy and normal thing?
I'm going to tell you something buddy and this is straight up. We are in a heap of trouble and by the time all the dots are connected it's going to be too late. Look to your LEFT and you'll see the light of the train. We are Athens, Ephesus and Rome. We are Sodom and we are screwed if more people don't get damn mad about it.
The Guardian
09-17-2003, 07:33 PM
The way I see it, is all that the gays want is equality, not special rights. Personally, I do not think the government should be involved in granting special recognition/permission for marriages. I see three aspects to "marriage":
1. The relationship between the people involved. And I really do not care if this is M/M, M/F, or some kind of polygamy gig. It is up to them to decide what works for them. NOT me. Not some self-righteous SOB who thinks he has all the answers.
2. The legal aspect of it, mostly provided by government. A marriage is a contract for starters. Secondly, spouses have benefits such as insurance and right of inheritance. It should not matter the sex or orientation of the spouse.
3. The religious aspect of it. Which should also be completely up to the people involved.
As to the bible being "hate speech", it most certainly is. From the way I see it, if christians had kept it to themselves, most of the decent human beings would have had a chance at heaven. Now that they've shared it, according to their theology, most will not. Thats really really being nice... ::)
But I also think a nutcase should be able to preach what he wants. Just because you do not agree, does not make it hate speech. I do think it crosses the line if you go where Martin Luther went and incite followers to violence. It is my right to ignore this crap. Which is why I resent it being pushed on us in the public sphere.
I-RIGHT-I
09-18-2003, 05:07 AM
The way I see it, is all that the gays want is equality, not special rights. Personally, I do not think the government should be involved in granting special recognition/permission for marriages. I see three aspects to "marriage":
Equality? No. What they want is to be considered 'normal" even if it means forcing the general population to not only accept but embrace a completely new and ever degenerating meaning of the word. I've outlined the main points of the reality of the situation that began with the "normalizing" of homosexuality by the APA in the seventies to the move to do the same with pedophilia today thirty years later by the very same groups and in some cases, individuals. It' my opinion that possibly you've equated Liberty with license and at the same time rejected our culture's traditional understanding of morality and personal responsibility. A good example of this is your concept of "marriage" highlighted by the "scare" quotes you put around the word.
1. The relationship between the people involved. And I really do not care if this is M/M, M/F, or some kind of polygamy gig. It is up to them to decide what works for them. NOT me. Not some self-righteous SOB who thinks he has all the answers.
2. The legal aspect of it, mostly provided by government. A marriage is a contract for starters. Secondly, spouses have benefits such as insurance and right of inheritance. It should not matter the sex or orientation of the spouse.
3. The religious aspect of it. Which should also be completely up to the people involved.
This isn't a thread about marriage but one has to wonder what your wife would have thought about "marrying" you had she known you have this kind of contempt for the institution. Marriage is more than a contract in the legal sense and teaching otherwise is exactly why there are so many kids out there living in single family homes. The "self-righteous SOB's who disagree with your Johnny come lately Leftist view would argue that an attack on traditional concepts of marriage are actually an attack on our country. You will not find ANY great man in the history of the entire planet, let alone our country that held such a low view of marriage.
As to the bible being "hate speech", it most certainly is. From the way I see it, if Christians had kept it to themselves, most of the decent human beings would have had a chance at heaven. Now that they've shared it, according to their theology, most will not. Thats really really being nice... ::)
This isn't a theological debate either but I understand your point. The fact is, every heathen that ever lived will be judged perfectly by God according to the heart and conscience of the individual. The fact that some have heard the Gospel and rejected it is the proof that they are not "decent" individuals. Your view of marriage and homosexuality is "proof" that you are in no position to pass judgment on the method or mercy of the Ultimate Intellect.
But I also think a nutcase should be able to preach what he wants. Just because you do not agree, does not make it hate speech. I do think it crosses the line if you go where Martin Luther went and incite followers to violence. It is my right to ignore this crap. Which is why I resent it being pushed on us in the public sphere.
Actually, you don't understand at all why you resent Christians. It is in your very nature to oppose God. You are in effect a slave to those things that make you a human being; your intellect, your emotions, your appetites and your will. Fortunately those are the very attributes that God uses to make Himself known to us. Hang in there. It ain't over until it's over.
truelies
09-18-2003, 06:41 AM
As to the bible being "hate speech", it most certainly is. From the way I see it, if christians had kept it to themselves, most of the decent human beings would have had a chance at heaven. Now that they've shared it, according to their theology, most will not. Thats really really being nice... ::)
It is truth that the picture the Bible paints of God (at least as seem thorough the filter of orthodox theology is not that of a Nice Guy by modern western standards. He apparently according to orthodox theology Creates Souls with the express Purpose that they violate His Law and suffer Eternal Punishment as a result. Kinda like you acquire a puppy, allow and encourage its natural bend to chase cattle and then condemn it to death when it catches one since that is against the rules. But you just don't shoot it, you torture it to death. someone who does that is obviously a deranged SOB, but at least the dog dies after a few hours/days rather than suffering Forever. I suppose that it is possible that such is the real Nature of God in which case the universe is truly a fearful place. Or perhaps it is the trend in orthodox theology that is in error- reflecting the mile wide mean streak in human nature and badly distorting the Truth abot God underlying the Bible. Martin Luther is a perfect example- at times having excellent insight on the Divine, but that coupled with lapses inro the worst prejudices of his cultural milleu. One of the reasons that I think the Bible to be Truth is that it does capture the essence of what we humans are really like so well. Why were we made this way- I honestly have no idea.
I-RIGHT-I
09-18-2003, 07:23 AM
If homosexuals were teaching their "doctrine" (whatever in the hell that means), don't you think I, as a parent and as a heterosexual would be at the front of the mob protesting this?
It's the absurdity that you bring into this subject that renders the rest of your opinions moot...suspect at best.
I understand that if you've not read this kind of news yourself and kept up with the issue (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=grade+school+homosexual+education&btnG=Google+ Search) you wouldn't believe it. That's why the LIBERALS don't print it. My mother was a grade school teacher for over thirty years. I mentioned it to her once and she thought I was nuts. It just so happened she had received a recent booklet from the national NEA that among other study topics included the New B Resolution (http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/2001/aug01/gay-resolution.shtml). Though through protests at the state level by teachers and pro-family groups the resolution was tabled it is still being pushed. (http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/2001/aug01/gay-resolution.shtml) My mom has since gone into a state of shock and denial and won't discuss it.
The campaign in the nation's schools to push for homosexual, bisexual, and "transgenderism" tolerance continues to grow, but it faces sustained opposition from pro-family groups who say their core moral and religious beliefs are being redefined as "hate." (http://www.worldandi.com/specialreport/2002/july/Sa22371.htm)
The homosexual effort is being led by the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) and Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG), which reported projected annual budgets of $3.5 million and $2 million, respectively, for 2001. An imposing array of professional organizations and unions have joined these homosexual organizations in supporting gay-affirming programs in the classroom, including the National Education Association, the nation's largest and most powerful teachers union; the American Federation of Teachers; the National Association of Secondary School Administrators; the American Psychological Association; the National Association of Social Workers; the National School Boards Association; the National Middle School Association; the National Association of State Boards of Education; the American Medical Association; the American Psychiatric Association; the American Academy of Pediatricians; and the American Library Association.
Of course, each of these organizations has members who dissent from the official progay line. But this list suggests a consensus among professional groups that belies the deep discord that prohomosexual programs have stirred in the nation's schools. In towns from California to Maine, the discovery of homosexual-positive school activities has touched off protests from parents who claim that students are being subjected to politically correct lesson plans that undermine the values the youngsters are taught at home.
So far, the grade-school programs have been instituted mainly in major urban jurisdictions with relatively significant homosexual populations, such as New York City, San Francisco, Seattle, and Madison, Wisconsin. Parents who question progay activities in their children's schools often feel intimidated when told, as they usually are, that their views run counter not only to school authorities but to professional and scholarly opinion.
'SAFE SCHOOLS' AND A VICTIM STRATEGY
Most adults are unaware of the sophisticated terminology and strategies used to mobilize support for prohomosexual programs in schools, and to fend off those who ...
Homosexual convention targets grade-school kids
Curriculum to make kindergarteners comfortable with 'gay and lesbian families'
(http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=17668)
...
Gay elementary social studies
At a workshop at the GLSEN conference titled "Appreciating a Broader Canvas: How Teachers Understand Gay and Lesbian Content Integration in Elementary Social Studies," participants were instructed on ways to incorporate pro-gay content into family studies for grades K-3 and into U.S. immigration history for grades 4-6.
The K-3 lesson plan advised educators to help students "recognize diverse family constellations" by encouraging discussion of individual family differences and similarities and by showing photographs from a book entitled "Celebrating Families," which includes "lesbian mothers/adopted daughters."
The lesson plan for grades 4-6 told teachers to integrate homosexual-affirming curricula into U.S. immigration studies by interspersing stories of homosexual migration from small towns to large cities amongst traditional immigration studies of other groups who came to America to escape persecution, such as the Pilgrims and Chinese and Hispanic immigrants.
In another session, the film "That's a Family!" was shown. The movie is the second by lesbian activists Debra Chasnoff and Helen Cohen, creators of the controversial film "It's Elementary," which showed instructors giving pro-homosexual classroom lessons to young children. According to a promotional flyer, "That's a Family!" is a highly entertaining half hour documentary for elementary school children, featuring kids from a wide variety of family structures. Family portraits include multi-racial families, grandparent-headed families, gay and lesbian families, single-parent families, and others."
One of the books distributed by GLSEN is “Celebrating Families,” featuring lesbian mothers with adopted daughters. The GLSEN-distributed movie “That’s a Family” depicts homosexual couples as normal, healthy “families.” The proposed lesson plan for grades 4-6 describes anti-homosexual thinking as persecution and compares it with Christians who are persecuted for their faith.
A “Visitor’s Companion” distributed at the GLSEN conference advertised homosexual bars and sex clubs in the Chicago area.
One of the seminars taught public school teachers how to “come out of the closet” and declare their homosexuality to the students and faculty.
Another seminar was titled “Responding to the Right Wing.” The leader of the seminar, Barbara Miner, expressed fear of school vouchers, because “vouchers and private schools will do an end-run around 20 to 30 years of rights gains.” These homosexual activists know that the average person is against them and the only way they can gain power is by using the government-controlled education monopoly and the decree of ungodly judges who subvert the constitution.
NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION SUPPORTS HOMOSEXUAL ORGANIZATION
NEA President Robert Chase told the conference he did not care what “right wing” Christians think about his support of the homosexual agenda. The Family Research Council had launched a campaign urging people to write to Chase to discourage him from attending the conference, but Chase laughed about it and said he was happy they “are coming after me.”
Don't feel bad, Bad. You're not the only mushroom being kept in the dark and fed a ration of shit. I'm pretty sure if you looked into the situation you'd stop with the blowjob jokes and clean your gun. Of course you might decide that siding with the pro-family Christian groups isn't your cup of tea. In that case just remember that you are known by the company you do keep but they won't appreciate your blowjob jokes either.
I don't post anything on this board I can't back up. If you think I lack credibility it's because you, like my mom, are in a state of shock and denial. Don't blame you either, freakshows have a way of doing that to people. The Queer Party is most certainly a freakshow.
I-RIGHT-I
09-18-2003, 07:29 AM
It is truth that the picture the Bible paints of God (at least as seem thorough the filter of orthodox theology is not that of a Nice Guy by modern western standards. He apparently according to orthodox theology Creates Souls with the express Purpose that they violate His Law and suffer Eternal Punishment as a result. Kinda like you acquire a puppy, allow and encourage its natural bend to chase cattle and then condemn it to death when it catches one since that is against the rules. But you just don't shoot it, you torture it to death. someone who does that is obviously a deranged SOB, but at least the dog dies after a few hours/days rather than suffering Forever. I suppose that it is possible that such is the real Nature of God in which case the universe is truly a fearful place. Or perhaps it is the trend in orthodox theology that is in error- reflecting the mile wide mean streak in human nature and badly distorting the Truth abot God underlying the Bible. Martin Luther is a perfect example- at times having excellent insight on the Divine, but that coupled with lapses inro the worst prejudices of his cultural milleu. One of the reasons that I think the Bible to be Truth is that it does capture the essence of what we humans are really like so well. Why were we made this way-
This isn't a theology thread but it is especially not a sloppy theology thread. You don't know your orthodox from a hole in the ground.
I honestly have no idea.
precisely
Then I don't know what the point of the debate is. If homosexuality is not an immutable trait, it can be eliminated. Moreover, mutability means it is not equivalent to race, and the claim by homosexuals that discrimination against them is equivalent to racism is obviously false.
Then I don't know what the point of the debate is.
Nor I… frankly, there IS no debate… “reparative therapy” does not work in any meaningful manner… and a 100+ year history of dismal failure amply demonstrates that. Castration, testicular transplants, artificial testosterone implants (the Nazis at Buchenwald), electric shock therapy, group therapy, aversion therapy, drug therapy, prayer… cash rewards… all of these (et al) have an unbroken history of utter failure.
The “ex-gay” Industry is the used-car salesman of sexuality. Let the buyer beware…
If homosexuality is not an immutable trait, it can be eliminated.
That’s not true. Someone’s sexual orientation can spontaneously change over time. (Rare, but it can happen.) That does not necessarily mean that such change can be FORCED by the methods described above. History, data, and LOGIC suggest that it cannot.
Moreover, mutability means it is not equivalent to race, and the claim by homosexuals that discrimination against them is equivalent to racism is obviously false.
There are most certainly similarities in these quests for equal civil rights. That’s undeniable.
And… whoopsie… your slip is showing. You just demonstrated why the current “ex-gay” Industry exists… pure, unadulterated POLITICS!
Exodus Intl existed quietly for a quarter-century… not bothering anyone… just being there for those that sought out that type of quackery. Then came the coalition of Radical Right “public policy” action groups… and their six-figure ADVERTISING campaign… claiming that gays can… and SHOULD… “change.”
(A representative admitted that they launched the campaign in Washington DC… “… because that’s where the policymakers are.” “Truth in Love” my hirsute hindquarters.)
Frankly… I feel sorry for real so-called “ex-gays”… (not just employees of the Industry)… those that desperately try to battle their “same-sex attraction” (their term) in order to satisfy their own Faith. These genuinely (but unnecessarily) struggling folks are having their heartfelt efforts exposed to ridicule by those that should be their allies…
The nonexistent “success” rate… the constant and embarrassingly high-profile defections… the complete absence of genuine scientific data… condemnation by all bona fide professional scientific and medical organizations… they’ve got a tough row to hoe… and few rewards for denying their own nature.
“So you’re not having gay sex anymore… whoop-de-whoo… but you’re still gay as a field of daisies.”
It’s really sad.
Thunder Bay
09-23-2003, 06:52 PM
This might not be a good night for you to fuck with me LS. I don't want to do any permanent damage to your ego if I don't have to.
Bwahahahaaahahahaha...the little fella went out and rented half a testicle; I bet LS is scared to death. ::) :o ::)
Nor I… frankly, there IS no debate… “reparative therapy” does not work in any meaningful manner…
Since I have never addressed the merits of any sort of therapy, I am mystified as to the relevance of this statement to the discussion.
That’s not true. Someone’s sexual orientation can spontaneously change over time. (Rare, but it can happen.) That does not necessarily mean that such change can be FORCED by the methods described above. History, data, and LOGIC suggest that it cannot.
Again, I haven't espoused any particular methodology.
There are most certainly similarities in these quests for equal civil rights. That’s undeniable.
Sure. Likewise, there are similarities between Benjamin Franklin and Joseph Mengele. So what?
And… whoopsie… your slip is showing. You just demonstrated why the current “ex-gay” Industry exists… pure, unadulterated POLITICS!
GLAAD, PFLAG and Lambda Legal exist independently of politics?
Exodus Intl existed quietly for a quarter-century… not bothering anyone… <snip>
I'm sure that is all interesting to someone, but it doesn't seem to relate to anything I've said.
Since I have never addressed the merits of any sort of therapy, I am mystified as to the relevance of this statement to the discussion…
See opening post… you know… the TOPIC?
Again, I haven't espoused any particular methodology
(See topic.)
.Sure. Likewise, there are similarities between Benjamin Franklin and Joseph Mengele. So what?
Invalid simile.
GLAAD, PFLAG and Lambda Legal exist independently of politics?
Of course not… but, unlike my political opponents… I’m willing to admit it.
I'm sure that is all interesting to someone, but it doesn't seem to relate to anything I've said.
I’m sorry for troubling you… just tuck your head under your wing… and go back to sleep.
See opening post… you know… the TOPIC?
(See topic.)
I have never made a pretense of addressing the topic directly, and I am under no obligation to do so.
Invalid simile.
Why?
You two are so cute. ;D
I'm the cute one... he got thrown over the handlebars of his bicycle...
8)
I have never made a pretense of addressing the topic directly, and I am under no obligation to do so.
If you don't want to talk... feel free to ignore me...
Why?
Are you kidding?
If you don't want to talk... feel free to ignore me...
You're the one doing the ignoring, sport. :)
Are you kidding?
Not in the least. You implicit claim is that there are similarities between racism and "homophobia" which would compel a reasonable person to view them in a similar light. I say the similarities are of no more consequence than those between Franklin and Mengele.
Whenever the topic turns to the so-called “ex-gay” phenomenon, one word springs immediately to mind:
DECEPTION
Note the following two recent examples:
=====================
MS. BEHAVIOR (http://www.washblade.com/2003/11-28/view/behavior/behavior.cfm)
Dear Ms. Behavior:
I’m a 28-year-old male and I used to be gay but decided to give it up a few years ago. I’m not a homophobe; I just wanted an easier life.
I’m engaged to marry Gretchen, a woman I do love. Our sex life isn’t thrilling, but I am able to perform sexually and everything’s been going OK.
A few days ago, out of nowhere, Gretchen asked me if I’ve ever been with a man. I was shocked that she asked, so I denied it. She seemed reassured, but I feel guilty for having lied to her.
Since then, I’ve been thinking about my sexual experiences with men. In all honesty, they were much more exciting than my experiences with women.
I think I can live with a not-so-exciting sex life in exchange for marriage and children, but is it wrong for me to not tell Gretchen about my gay past? I rationalize it by telling myself that if I’m not acting on it, there’s no reason to mention it. What do you think?
Formerly Gay
Dear Formerly Gay:
If you were comfortable with yourself in your new “straight” life, you probably wouldn’t need to lie about the past or feel ashamed about it. The idea that being queer is just about “acting on it” is probably bound up in religious ideas about sinning.
But sexual orientation is not just about who you screw. If you love men and long to be near them and are attracted to their scents and think about sucking their dicks, can you really think of yourself as “straight”?
You say you want an “easier life,” but in reality, it’s only easier to be straight if you really are straight. Pretending to be straight or trying to “decide” to be straight sounds like a sad, and/or lazy alternative to self-acceptance and being proud of who you are.
Why don’t you start by coming out as “formerly gay” to a therapist and then move on to telling the woman you plan to marry? Whether you and Gretchen decide to stay together, at least you’ll be making a decision that’s based on the truth.
======================
Credentials of International Ex-Gay Therapist Challenged (http://www.exgaywatch.com/xgw/2003/11/potential_fraud.html)
(pertinent excerpt)
To Whom It May Concern:
This letter is to alert the public to serious ethical and scientific concerns about the "reparative therapy" seminar to be presented by Melvin Wong, Ph.D, in Singapore, 25-28 November 2003 (see attached copy of the email announcement of this event). Dr. Wong, under the auspices of James Dobson's group "Focus on the Family," apparently is importing a highly controversial, ethically and scientifically questionable "treatment" to Singapore, playing on the public confusion and prejudices as Singaporean laws regarding homosexuality are changing. Contrary to misleading representations of his qualifications in published announcements, Dr. Wong is not a member of the American Psychological Association, nor is he on staff of the University of California at San Francisco. His approach to working with homosexual clients is not congruent with that of mainstream American psychologists or psychiatrists. Indeed, "reparative therapy" has been largely discredited in America as discriminatory, disrespectful, ineffective, and often harmful to the patient.
There are three serious problems with this seminar, of which the Singaporean public should be aware if they are considering attendance at this event:
First, the description of Dr. Wong's qualifications is misleading. The announcement states that Dr. Wong is "affiliated with" the American Psychological Association (APA). In fact, Dr. Wong is not a member of the APA, and is not even eligible to become a member, because he did not graduate from an APA-accredited institution. Although Melvin W. Wong is licensed as a psychologist in California, his degree is from the "Center for Psychological Studies" in Berkeley, CA, an educational institution that is not regionally accredited and not even eligible for APA accreditation as a doctoral program in psychology. He is not on the staff of the University of California.
Second, Dr. Wong's advocacy of "reparative therapy" is highly questionable in light of the APA Code of Ethics to which all psychologists licensed in California are expected to conform, whether or not they are APA members. The APA Code of Ethics states:
"Psychologists are aware of and respect cultural, individual, and role differences, including those based on ..sexual orientation.. and consider these factors when working with members of such groups. Psychologists try to eliminate the effect on their work of biases based on those factors, and they do not knowingly participate in or condone activities of others based upon such prejudices."
Third, there are serious scientific as well as ethical concerns about "reparative therapy" that have been raised by organizations such as the American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association (see postscript below). It is ineffective, provides no demonstrated benefit, and can be harmful.
It is to be hoped that Dr. Wong will become aware of these ethical and scientific problems and work towards eliminating his apparent biases and prejudice, and towards putting his energy into treatments that actually work to relieve psychological suffering, instead of those that create psychological harm.
Sincerely Yours,
The AFFIRM Network Advocacy Committee
Miriam Ehrenberg, Ph.D.
Marvin R. Goldfried, Ph.D.
Norman Weissberg, Ph.D., Chair
Karen Wills, Ph.D.
Karen E. Wills, Ph.D., LP, ABPP
Pediatric Neuropsychology
Department of Psychology
Children's Hospitals and Clinics
2525 Chicago Avenue South (mailcode 17-301)
Minneapolis, MN 55404
(612) 813-6344
======================
From individual “ex-gays” deceiving themselves and those around them about who they are… to proponents and “experts” deceiving the public about everything from effectiveness to credentials, the ENTIRETY of the “ex-gay” industry seems rooted in deceptiveness.
Giancarlo
12-01-2003, 12:36 PM
Thanks for that well thought out post MADG. I always find the articles you post interesting and I might end up using them for a research paper. Ex-gays do nothing but supress natural feelings, and they do this by going to Christian fundie endorsed witch doctors who are more interested in the money in deceiving people. I saw they should be investigated for fraud.
I-RIGHT-I
12-01-2003, 12:44 PM
link=board=18;threadid=3934;start=msg160243#msg160 243 date=1070303794]
Thanks for that well thought out post MADG. I always find the articles you post interesting and I might end up using them for a research paper. Ex-gays do nothing but supress natural feelings, and they do this by going to Christian fundie endorsed witch doctors who are more interested in the money in deceiving people. I saw they should be investigated for fraud.
Just the opposite. The homo charlatans noted above that refuse to give guys like you a chance for recovery should be put in prison.
I-RIGHT-I
12-01-2003, 12:45 PM
The Erosion Of Normalcy
By Charles W. Socarides, M.D.
The author is a clinical professor of psychiatry at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center in New York. He is president of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality.
"A significant portion of society today holds the belief that homosexuality is a normal form of sexual behavior... This revolutionary change in our sexual mores and customs has been ushered in by a single act of considerable consequence: The removal of homosexuality from the category of aberrancy by the American Psychiatric Association in 1973. This act... created injustices for the homosexual and his family, as it belied the truth and prevented the homosexual from seeking and receiving help... This amounted to a full approval of homosexuality and an encouragement to aberrancy by those who should have known better, both in the scientific sense and in the sense of the social consequences of such removal.
To many American psychiatrists, this action remains a chilling reminder that if scientific principles are not fought for they can be lost... unless we make no exceptions to science, we are subject to the snares of political factionalism and to the propagation of untruths to an unsuspecting and uninformed public, to the rest of the medical profession, and to the behavioral sciences.
Those who would prefer to retain homosexuality as a valid diagnosis have been essentially silenced in lectures, meetings, and publications... The press has been influenced in addition to the electronic media. Television and movies promote homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle and censor movies that might show homosexuality as a disorder. Homosexual sex education has entered our schools and colleges; pro-gay activists -- homosexual or otherwise - portray their way of life as normal and as "American as apple pie," while intimidating those with different views.
In essence, this movement has accomplished what every other society, with rare exceptions, would have trembled to tamper with: a revision of the basic code and concept of life and biology, that men and women normally mate with those of the opposite sex and not with each other.
This psychiatric nonsense and social recklessness bring with it many individual tragedies, as men and women who no longer appreciate their own appropriate sexual roles create confusion in the very young for generations to come. Gender identity disturbance is bound to increase, and more true homosexual deviations result as parents distort the maleness or femaleness of their infants and children.
Currently, homosexuals who are in therapy have developed tremendous resistance, which retards their progress, while others are dissuaded even from seeking appropriate help... , it is the individual homosexual wishing to change who suffers the most.
Adolescents, nearly all of whom experience some degree of uncertainty as to sexual identity, are discouraged from assuming that one form of gender identity is preferable to another. Those persons who already have a homosexual problem are discouraged from finding their way out of self destructive fantasy - discouraged from learning to accept themselves as male or female, discouraged from following those often painful but necessary courses that allow people to function as reasonable and participating individuals in a cooperating society.
Psychoanalysis reveals that sexual behavior is not an arbitrary set of rules... At the individual level, these patterns create a balance between the demands of sexual instinct and the external realities surrounding each of us.
Some behaviors are universally deviant and every society considers them destructive. Incest, rape, and psychopathic (apparently unmotivated) violence are considered taboo in all societies. So is predominant or exclusive homosexuality or even bisexuality. While homosexuals can and should be protected by all the laws of society, homosexuality should not be encouraged.
Charges of being "undemocratic," "cruel and inhuman," or "irresponsible, homophobic, and prejudiced," are leveled at those who would question the normality of homosexuality. These accusations are then reinforced by the media and motion pictures."
Giancarlo
12-01-2003, 12:46 PM
Just the opposite. The homo charlatans noted above that refuse to give guys like you a chance for recovery should be put in prison.
Nope it is actually your kind that should be charged with fraud, extortion and possibly racketeering.
Also if you want the real story about gay adolescence like me, read XY magazine.
Giancarlo
12-01-2003, 12:48 PM
The Erosion Of Normalcy
By Charles W. Socarides, M.D.
*bullshit sniped*
Just another spin doctor influenced by big bucks from Christian fundie groups. ::)
link=board=18;threadid=3934;start=msg160250#msg160 250 date=1070304517]
Just another spin doctor influenced by big bucks from Christian fundie groups. ::)
When the APA committee met thirty years ago to consider the scientific evidence regarding homosexuality as a pathology… the research of Socarides was considered… and dismissed.
He was pissed… and helped FORCE the membership vote… that gave him and his ilk the big loss.
He then went on to co-found tiny NARTH with Joe Nicolosi… a rather blatant reactionary attempt to salvage and rehabilitate the “gays are sick” mantra… and industry. After all… aside from “curing” gays… he knew of no other way to make the big bucks. (He’s since removed himself from active NARTH administration.)
Ironically, Charlie Socarides has a gay son…. a gay activist. When asked how his “blame the parents” scientific theory fit with his personal situation, Charles Socarides said:
***homina homina homina***
Oh yeah… now THERE’S a good source…
::)
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.