[quote]forlife wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
Four, now. Kidding aside, I have talked to more than just a few.
The numbers upon which you’re basing your conclusions are staggering. Contrast that with thousands of people that have gone through reparative therapy programs, and according to research have NOT changed their sexual orientation as a result. The people that do go through these programs are at DOUBLE the risk of suicidal thoughts, drug/alcohol abuse, anxiety, and depression following the therapy.
You can quote your confused friends that have turned to the Catholic church to help them with their evil sexual tendencies, but I’ll go with the unanimous conclusions of the medical and mental health organizations, as well as my own personal experience.[/quote]
They were not helped with the Catholic Church with their sexual tendencies. My specific church realises where medical and spiritual help needs to go its separate directions, where the church should leave it up to the medical community to deal with certain things. Just because you have experiences with churches thinking they are the all powerful do everything, does not mean all churches and congregations think and act that way.
I have asked numerous board members how gay marriage will effect their life. None, not even thunderbolt, who you apparently have man-crush on, can give an answer. That has been my argument from the beginning.
It isn’t a relevant question.
[/quote]
It has been one of my main arguments throughout this thread.
I guess you haven’t been paying attention?
The statement was used to point out the narrow-minded individuals in this thread like you and Troll28. We “get it” that marriage is a personal choice and it isn’t your business or the governments.
[quote]
I wish you had produced this airtight logic earlier - would have saved me the trouble. After all, there is nothing more I aspire to than joining the enlightened club who “gets it”. Whew.[/quote]
Too bad, our club discriminates against arrogant douche bags.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
They were not helped with the Catholic Church with their sexual tendencies. My specific church realises where medical and spiritual help needs to go its separate directions, where the church should leave it up to the medical community to deal with certain things. Just because you have experiences with churches thinking they are the all powerful do everything, does not mean all churches and congregations think and act that way.[/quote]
So you’re saying these people went through reparative therapy. Now explain to me how it is that your friends have been so amazingly transformed by therapy that they have zero same sex attraction, when the literature spanning 40 years says just the opposite? Even the ex-gay websites are honest enough to admit that people don’t typically change their attraction, only their outward behavior.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
They were not helped with the Catholic Church with their sexual tendencies. My specific church realises where medical and spiritual help needs to go its separate directions, where the church should leave it up to the medical community to deal with certain things. Just because you have experiences with churches thinking they are the all powerful do everything, does not mean all churches and congregations think and act that way.
So you’re saying these people went through reparative therapy. Now explain to me how it is that your friends have been so amazingly transformed by therapy that they have zero same sex attraction, when the literature spanning 40 years says just the opposite? Even the ex-gay websites are honest enough to admit that people don’t typically change their attraction, only their outward behavior.
[/quote]
Didn’t say that when you do something for the majority of your life you do not sometimes fall off the wagon. AA people take a drink, ex-smokers smoke once and awhile, people used to cuss let it slip, and people that did homosexual activities sometimes think about the same sex.
Well, from what you just said you just admitted that the homosexuals you have heard, from the horses mouth in a sense, they dealt with sexual identify their sexuality. Well, they could have gone heterosexual, but they choose homosexual. And from my horses mouth, both have said it was to rebel against either their father or ex-husband/boyfriends.
The struggle wasn’t with whether to be straight or gay, but moreso the repercussions of repressing their homosexuality vs living an open and honest life with who he/she really is despite social recoil.
So, you know these people?[/quote]
Well it’s an inner debate (refuse to use the word struggle, because then you’d just misconstrue what I’m saying) that most if not all homosexuals go through. Some choose to carry on an appearance of being straight for the sake of not dealing with the recoil (socially, family-wise, and/or religiously), while others “come out”, thus allowing themselves the chance to find happiness and love that straight people find with members of the opposite sex.
Because homosexuality (sexual preference) is not protected under the clause like race, gender, etc? I get all that but it is still discrimination, which you seem to agree apparently. These laws need to be amended.
If you are suggesting that these laws need to be “amended”, then says nothing about its constitutionality. Both a law restricting gays form marriage and ones permitting gay marriage are both constitutional, genius. You continue to demonstrate your blinding ignorance on the topic.
[/quote]
What did I type in the paragraph highlighted do you not understand? Kansas state laws denying gay marriage are “constitutuional” because the equal protection clause allows for “rational discrimination”, or whatever word you used. Sexual preference is not covered under the clause.
I said that the law is discriminatory and needs to be amended/changed by mob vote.
Laws allowing gay marriage are “constitutional” because they used your democratic (mob rule) process and had the state laws amended/changed.
I understood this whole time, but you felt the need to keep bringing it back as a point for debate.
You can delve into the nuances of Kansas state law all you want. It’s discrimination, no matter what they have written in their law books. Your policy reasons not to change the law boiled down to the end western civilization. Another fantastic argument by you.
I have made that argument. You know the comment about mob voting to have the laws amended? It’s there for anyone to see. I haven’t confused any issues. But keep cherry picking my argument. You’re quite good at that.
It is relevant to your ridiculous contention that, “it’s the law for reason”. Did you forget that you made that statement?
Whatever you say thunder.
Coloring book? Could you be more condescending? No need to help me, I understood, hence my highlighted paragraph.
One of your worst arguments ever! Awesome that you are making all the decisions for society and gay people. I’m sure everyone appreciates it.
It has nothing to do with anarchism. It’s about personal freedom and the government staying out of peoples’ lives. Why are you so against that?
Says the guy who’s known for being one of most arrogant, condescending motherfuckers on this board. The irony in your statement is astounding.
This has nothing to do with nine year olds. I never mentioned anything of the sort.
We’re discussing consenting adults who happen to be gay.
It does inform the debate. Gay marriage is a “victimless action”, for lack of a better term. It doesn’t bother anyone and it won’t lead to the end of the world. OBoile has posted several times stating that Canada is still functioning despite allowing gay marriage. You conveniently
ignore that.
In the world of the statist, they have the right, because it is written. In reality, they don’t, or should not, because it is blatant discrimination.
The slippery slope, what if questions. I don’t believe the government should decide or dictate who can get married at all. That’s a separate debate, however. Start a new thread about it if you want.
[quote]
Bigamy? Polygamy? Any kind of polyandry? Can a man marry ten wives? Can a wife marry another wife and a husband? Remember, the state can’t discriminate as long as the adults are consenting!
Burden is on you, but, to be fair, expectations are low.[/quote]
Start a new thread, the topic was gay marriage. I don’t have the time right now to get too deep into it.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Didn’t say that when you do something for the majority of your life you do not sometimes fall off the wagon. AA people take a drink, ex-smokers smoke once and awhile, people used to cuss let it slip, and people that did homosexual activities sometimes think about the same sex.[/quote]
If they are still attracted to people of the same sex, obviously they haven’t been “cured”. They’ve only repressed their sexual orientation by telling themselves how repulsive it is, and how god is going to punish them severely unless they comply.
The research has clearly shown that going through reparative therapy DOUBLES your risk of suicidal thoughts, anxiety, depression, and drug/alcohol abuse. This kind of repression is unhealthy, and it is tragically unnecessary. It exemplifies the negative consequences that can result from believing in fairy tales rather than facts. Religion does a lot of good, but this is one case where it does a lot of evil as well.
The research has clearly shown that going through reparative therapy DOUBLES your risk of suicidal thoughts, anxiety, depression, and drug/alcohol abuse. This kind of repression is unhealthy, and it is tragically unnecessary. It exemplifies the negative consequences that can result from believing in fairy tales rather than facts. Religion does a lot of good, but this is one case where it does a lot of evil as well.[/quote]
I understand that this post is not directed at me but I can’t help but respond. You have once again crossed the line between what you feel was bad for you as opposed to what is true and correct.
I pointed out in another thread that the APA does in fact state that reparative therapy can do no harm. I further posted evidence from some former homosexuals who have been through reparative therapy and have left the homosexual lifestyle and are now happily married to people of the opposite sex.
That you don’t want to accept this as truth does not mean that it isn’t truth.
Really forlife you need to separate your personal feelings from reality.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
Didn’t say that when you do something for the majority of your life you do not sometimes fall off the wagon. AA people take a drink, ex-smokers smoke once and awhile, people used to cuss let it slip, and people that did homosexual activities sometimes think about the same sex.
If they are still attracted to people of the same sex, obviously they haven’t been “cured”. They’ve only repressed their sexual orientation by telling themselves how repulsive it is, and how god is going to punish them severely unless they comply.
The research has clearly shown that going through reparative therapy DOUBLES your risk of suicidal thoughts, anxiety, depression, and drug/alcohol abuse. This kind of repression is unhealthy, and it is tragically unnecessary. It exemplifies the negative consequences that can result from believing in fairy tales rather than facts. Religion does a lot of good, but this is one case where it does a lot of evil as well.[/quote]
I do not think I have made myself clear, it is not about not sinning, it is about having faith in Jesus and what he did for us. And have the respect to at least try and do things right. We are not the Jews, we do not have a reward/punishment system. We have an all or nothing system, so did the Jews, but they see it different. Prove it doubles your risk.
The research has clearly shown that going through reparative therapy DOUBLES your risk of suicidal thoughts, anxiety, depression, and drug/alcohol abuse. This kind of repression is unhealthy, and it is tragically unnecessary. It exemplifies the negative consequences that can result from believing in fairy tales rather than facts. Religion does a lot of good, but this is one case where it does a lot of evil as well.
I understand that this post is not directed at me but I can’t help but respond. You have once again crossed the line between what you feel was bad for you as opposed to what is true and correct.
I pointed out in another thread that the APA does in fact state that reparative therapy can do no harm. I further posted evidence from some former homosexuals who have been through reparative therapy and have left the homosexual lifestyle and are now happily married to people of the opposite sex.
That you don’t want to accept this as truth does not mean that it isn’t truth.
Really forlife you need to separate your personal feelings from reality.
[/quote]
I think that it’s impossible for anyone except those people to know exactly how effective that “treatment” is. I could easily move to another city and start life over again with the role straight male by shoving myself back into the closet, find a woman to fall in love with me and play the role. I could, but I would never, as it wouldn’t be fair to her or me.
I do not think I have made myself clear, it is not about not sinning, it is about having faith in Jesus and what he did for us. And have the respect to at least try and do things right. We are not the Jews, we do not have a reward/punishment system. We have an all or nothing system, so did the Jews, but they see it different. Prove it doubles your risk.
Brother[/quote]
So being in love with someone is not “do[ing] things right”?
Well, from what you just said you just admitted that the homosexuals you have heard, from the horses mouth in a sense, they dealt with sexual identify their sexuality. Well, they could have gone heterosexual, but they choose homosexual. And from my horses mouth, both have said it was to rebel against either their father or ex-husband/boyfriends.
The struggle wasn’t with whether to be straight or gay, but moreso the repercussions of repressing their homosexuality vs living an open and honest life with who he/she really is despite social recoil.
So, you know these people?
Well it’s an inner debate (refuse to use the word struggle, because then you’d just misconstrue what I’m saying) that most if not all homosexuals go through. Some choose to carry on an appearance of being straight for the sake of not dealing with the recoil (socially, family-wise, and/or religiously), while others “come out”, thus allowing themselves the chance to find happiness and love that straight people find with members of the opposite sex.[/quote]
I know what struggle is, I struggle every day of my life. Just because people are not gay does not mean they do not see their decisions in life as important as your own. Some receive recoil, others receive help and offering, and some recoil in disgust themselves because of pride.
I know these people personally, I am the last one to judge them. They know this, man. Any given night you can catch me drinking, smoking, a lip full of tobacco, betting, playing cards, cursing, and/or taking a woman home to entertain her. These people and most people know this about me, I have been called out by the church many times because of it, more times than any member I know. I have had my status threatened in the church. So, if anyone in the church they could tell the truth about slipping, it would be me. At the beginning for one of them, I was the person they came to when they came out. I asked them if they were fine with it, and unless they are a self-hating hypocrite. Why would they have told me they are not? They wish to try and respect what Jesus has done for them and try to curb their temptations.
That is all I ask of people is to believe in Jesus, and if something is in your way of doing that try to curb your temptation.
I do not think I have made myself clear, it is not about not sinning, it is about having faith in Jesus and what he did for us. And have the respect to at least try and do things right. We are not the Jews, we do not have a reward/punishment system. We have an all or nothing system, so did the Jews, but they see it different. Prove it doubles your risk.
Brother
So being in love with someone is not “do[ing] things right”?[/quote]
No, being in love with someone is fine, but I am in love with Pamela Anderson. But if I have sex with her that would be not doing things right.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
TKDCadet04 wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
I do not think I have made myself clear, it is not about not sinning, it is about having faith in Jesus and what he did for us. And have the respect to at least try and do things right. We are not the Jews, we do not have a reward/punishment system. We have an all or nothing system, so did the Jews, but they see it different. Prove it doubles your risk.
Brother
So being in love with someone is not “do[ing] things right”?
No, being in love with someone is fine, but I am in love with Pamela Anderson. But if I have sex with her that would be not doing things right.[/quote]
You love her or you lust her? HUGE difference. When you find the woman you end up marrying, that’ll be love. It’s not just about sex, not for you, not for me, not for anyone. Everyone is looking for their other half in this world where, at times, we feel so alone. Why is it that you can have yours, but I can’t have mine?
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
I do not think I have made myself clear, it is not about not sinning, it is about having faith in Jesus and what he did for us. And have the respect to at least try and do things right. We are not the Jews, we do not have a reward/punishment system. We have an all or nothing system, so did the Jews, but they see it different. Prove it doubles your risk.
Brother[/quote]
So you think people should have double the risk of suicidal thoughts, drug/alcohol abuse, anxiety, and depression on the whim that maybe their belief system will one day prove to be true, although there is admittedly no evidence for it at the present time? Seriously? I can maybe understand having “faith” in something for which there’s no evidence, if it does good things for your life, but this is not one of those cases. Many believers from my former religion, and from other religions, have actually committed suicide because they were unable to reconcile their sexual orientation with their “faith” that they were inherently flawed, perverse, and bound for hell.
[quote]In 2001, Dr. Ariel Shidlo and Dr. Michael Schroeder found that 88% of participants in reparative therapy failed to achieve a sustained change in their sexual behavior and 3% reported changing their orientation to heterosexual. The remainder reported either losing all sexual drive or struggling to remain celibate. Schroeder said many of the participants who failed felt a sense of shame. Many had gone through reparative therapy programs over the course of many years. Of the 8 respondents (out of a sample of 202) who reported a change in sexual orientation, 7 were employed in paid or unpaid roles as ‘ex-gay’ counselors or group leaders, something which has led many to question whether even this small ‘success’ rate is in fact reliable.
Schroeder and Shidlo found that the large majority of respondents reported being left in a poor mental and emotional state after the therapy, and that rates of depression, anxiety, alcohol and drug abuse and suicidal feelings were roughly doubled in those who underwent reparative therapy.[/quote]
The research has clearly shown that going through reparative therapy DOUBLES your risk of suicidal thoughts, anxiety, depression, and drug/alcohol abuse. This kind of repression is unhealthy, and it is tragically unnecessary. It exemplifies the negative consequences that can result from believing in fairy tales rather than facts. Religion does a lot of good, but this is one case where it does a lot of evil as well.
I understand that this post is not directed at me but I can’t help but respond. You have once again crossed the line between what you feel was bad for you as opposed to what is true and correct.
I pointed out in another thread that the APA does in fact state that reparative therapy can do no harm. I further posted evidence from some former homosexuals who have been through reparative therapy and have left the homosexual lifestyle and are now happily married to people of the opposite sex.
That you don’t want to accept this as truth does not mean that it isn’t truth.
Really forlife you need to separate your personal feelings from reality.
I think that it’s impossible for anyone except those people to know exactly how effective that “treatment” is. I could easily move to another city and start life over again with the role straight male by shoving myself back into the closet, find a woman to fall in love with me and play the role. I could, but I would never, as it wouldn’t be fair to her or me. [/quote]
If that were the case I’d agree, but it wasn’t. In one particular study (from memory) the former homosexuals, who were married claimed to be very happy and only a very low percentage of them stated that they’d ever had sexual thoughts about someone of the same sex. Are they all liars? I don’t think that’s the case.
Reparative therapy works, that’s a fact. It’s just that it doesn’t work for everyone. But if you think about it there is no therapy regarding any problem from alcoholism to phobias that works for everyone.
I appreciate the fact that forlife tried to change and couldn’t. But that doesn’t mean that others cannot. There could be a multitude of reasons that forlife could not change. I don’t ever remember him claiming that he underwent reparative therapy.
As I’ve stated in the past this is not an easy problem, but others have in fact conquered it. It isn’t fair to belittle their accomplishment for any reason.
So you think people should have double the risk of suicidal thoughts, drug/alcohol abuse, anxiety, and depression on the whim that maybe their belief system will one day prove to be true[/quote]
That is not the case. The APA says that reparative therapy can do no harm. Also, if you want to see a high risk of suicide and drug and alcohol abuse just look at the statistics from the CDC on homosexual men.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Any given night you can catch me drinking, smoking, a lip full of tobacco, betting, playing cards, cursing, and/or taking a woman home to entertain her. [/quote]
Yea really. That’s probably the most ridiculous, unprovable statement old Thunder has ever made.
I wish I had the power to just define natural rights like that.[/quote]
A Natural Right is one that is so fundamental that it does not depend on agreement from other citizens to have force. As in, they cannot be revoked by democratic action - they exist as rights even if the law says otherwise, because they are not privileges.
One of these fundamental rights is the right to Life, your own Life - which slavery violates because it denies you your right to your own life. It is also a negative right in that you are entitled to be free of the coercion of being someone else’s property.
Marriage - as gay marriage advocates prefer - is not a natural right, it is a positive right. Marriage doesn’t grant you freedom - it grants you a privilege: a recognized status that affords you entitlements. It is like welfare - by virtue of being in a certain class, society grants you an entitlement.
Slavery is a violation of one of the most fundamental natural rights you can conceive of. Gay marriage is not, and has never been, in the same class, or even in the same universe as a “right” - primarily because it isn’t a “right” at all.
Here is the fun part - this Natural Rights discourse I provided is not some wacky, right-wing argument created to be mean to gays. It is the argument used to denounce slavery and highlight its irreconciliation with the Declaration of Independence, and…
…the best part, one of the biggest proponents of the Natural Rights theory was none other than Thomas Paine. You know, your hero - Tom Paine. Also turns out that the “most ridiculous and unprovable statements” I ever made - natural law? How can there be such a thing? - was the political lodestar of who you claim to be one of your leading political lights.
Now, here it was I thought you read Paine - turns out you just want people to think you do.
