What the hell does that have to do with the validity of the conclusions by the American Medical Association,
Psst, it’s a different topic, try to keep up. You said you wanted answers, well so do I.
As if you weren’t trying to use the petitioning of the Red Cross as some kind of evidence that gay lobbying is the reason every major medical and mental health organization has drawn conclusions on homosexuality that oppose your personal views.
[/quote]
Forlife play nice now, it’s not my fault that you’re on the wrong end of this debate. It seems that there are indeed powerful forces within the homosexual movement that want things a certain way right from the APA to the Red Cross. As I’ve stated many times facts are the first victims of political correctness every single time!
Still trying to work out why people care about homosexuality at all.
If you aren’t gay then you can pretty easily ignore it. I live in an area with a high gay concentration of population, and the fact that they are gay just isn’t an issue. I’ve never seen it cause problems for anyone.
I’ve also met many gays who had a great upbringing, and no emotional problems. They form the large majority of gays I know, and this is probably higher than the number that the anti-gays on this site know.
Zeb, think for a minute. You’re arguing, but you’re not thinking.
Innate, immutable traits are beyond our control. If you can show a trait is innate and immutable (and there’s lots of evidence cited in this very long thread that homosexuality probably is) then that trait is beyond our control. To most of us, that’s as good as proving that the trait is morally neutral (how can you be blamed or praised for something beyond your control?) So, the medical and psychological authorities cited have de facto proven that homosexuality is morally neutral.
If you want to argue that something outside one’s control can be morally wrong, then go ahead, but you have to explain why because it’s an unusual claim.
[quote]AlisaV wrote:
Zeb, think for a minute. You’re arguing, but you’re not thinking.
Innate, immutable traits are beyond our control. If you can show a trait is innate and immutable (and there’s lots of evidence cited in this very long thread that homosexuality probably is) then that trait is beyond our control. To most of us, that’s as good as proving that the trait is morally neutral (how can you be blamed or praised for something beyond your control?) So, the medical and psychological authorities cited have de facto proven that homosexuality is morally neutral.
If you want to argue that something outside one’s control can be morally wrong, then go ahead, but you have to explain why because it’s an unusual claim.
[/quote]
Perhaps it’s you that is not thinking? It’s easy to toe the politically correct line.
I’m not so sure that it is outside of their control. I’ve read many studies which demonstrate that homosexuality has more to do with environment than genetics.
Domineering mother
Distant father
Feeling ostracized early in life
Sexual molestation
These are just four of the factors that most homosexuals share.
Now tell me why is it that these traits are so common among the male homosexual population? Have you thought this through already or have you simply discarded the information because it doesn’t fit into your politically correct world?
I’ve also read many documented first hand accounts of (male) homosexuals dropping their same sex attraction after therapy and becoming happily married to women. Tell me since you’re such a deep thinker how does that happen if it truly is out of their control?
While you’re at it answer all of the following questions for me as well oh deep thinker:
Tell me how is it possible for a true homosexual male (who must become aroused) to have sex with a woman? Yet, 87% of them do.
Tell me oh deep thinker are those who claim to be bisexual just oversexed or do you think there is there proof of a bisexual gene?
Also, tell me why the male gay population is almost totally responsible for the HIV epidemic? Is there something genetically wrong with them that prevents them from taking precautionary measures?
You can also tell me why the STD rate is higher among homosexual men than any other group.
Tell me why the depression, anxiety and suicide rate is highest among homosexual men in places like the Netherlands where gay marriage has been around for 10 years or so? And the practice is well accepted.
When you are able to answer these questions to my satisfaction I will then check my brain at the door and swallow the politically correct pill that you have taken.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I’ve also read many stories of (male) homosexuals dropping their same sex attraction after therapy and becoming happily married to women. Tell me since you’re such a deep thinker how does that happen if it truly is out of their control?
[/quote]
Link a single peer-reviewed study providing a shred of evidence for this phenomenon. Good luck.
[quote]quidnunc wrote:
ZEB wrote:
I’ve also read many stories of (male) homosexuals dropping their same sex attraction after therapy and becoming happily married to women. Tell me since you’re such a deep thinker how does that happen if it truly is out of their control?
Link a single peer-reviewed study providing a shred of evidence for this phenomenon. Good luck.
[/quote]
That’s funny I thought the very next post from you would be you admitting that you were wrong, but then that would take two things that don’t have, character and maturity.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
That’s funny I thought the very next post from you would be you admitting that you were wrong, but then that would take two things that don’t have, character and maturity.
[/quote]
Extraordinary claims (the entire psychological community is wrong) require extraordinary evidence. Unless you can provide it, you need to stop talking out of your ass.
[quote]quidnunc wrote:
ZEB wrote:
That’s funny I thought the very next post from you would be you admitting that you were wrong, but then that would take two things that don’t have, character and maturity.
Extraordinary claims (the entire psychological community is wrong) require extraordinary evidence. Unless you can provide it, you need to stop talking out of your ass. [/quote]
Yet one more post where you refuse to admit you were wrong by claiming that all of those illustrious organizations you listed made a claim regarding morality.
At this point, I’m less irritated by your position than by the fact that you can’t hold the thread of an argument. Please, for Chrissake, debate in an organized way.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Perhaps it’s you that is not thinking? It’s easy to toe the politically correct line.
I’m not so sure that it is outside of their control. I’ve read many studies which demonstrate that homosexuality has more to do with environment than genetics.
[/quote]
Okay, that’s what I thought you were getting at. A little bit ago you were claiming that innateness and immutability were NOT ENOUGH to demonstrate moral neutrality. The post of mine you quoted was quarreling with that idea. Now you’re saying something different.
I really have no idea if these are stereotypes, impressionistic rememberings of a partisan article, or something backed up by a study somewhere. I suspect it’s not the latter. If I’m wrong, just link to a goddamn source. Discussions are better when you have the habit of sourcing your claims.
I haven’t read these accounts, though I have read accounts of failed therapy (Ted Haggard doesn’t like women any more than he ever did.) The truth is, though, people are very capable of telling themselves they’re okay with a bad situation, especially if there’s tremendous social pressure to do so. I think that explains most “ex-gay” accounts.
Would you cool it with “oh deep thinker”? I’m a college kid, boneheaded enough to post on a message board like this, and I don’t mean to condescend. I’m sorry I said you weren’t thinking straight, if that offended you – I just think it’s a shame that we can’t carry on a discussion that can keep focus on the substance of the arguments.
The truth is, as I understand, that the answers to these questions don’t entirely fit the party line of “gays are exactly the same as straights except for a different gene.” (Please don’t interpret that as a concession to your entire agenda.) People experiment sexually. They try having sex with women because that’s the social norm; sometimes it doesn’t work out, sometimes it works out but they like men even better. Women are a bit more sexually fluid and bisexuality is more common. I’m willing to buy the hypothesis that changing culture has made gay experimentation and gay self-identification more common. I have no idea what the genetic research says on bisexuality.
The HIV epidemic started among gays because there was a marginalized, underground culture that was very promiscuous, and it became so terrible because the medical establishment was very slow to get involved in a “gay” disease. Men are more promiscuous than women; that’s why gay men on average have more partners than straight men or women, and lesbians have fewer. That says nothing, of course, against monogamous gays.
I assume you mean this:
Are you saying it’s higher in the Netherlands than in other countries, after controlling for overall suicide rates? That would surprise me and I’d like to see some numbers.
You don’t need to take that tone. I am not checking my brain at the door.
[quote]AlisaV wrote:
At this point, I’m less irritated by your position than by the fact that you can’t hold the thread of an argument. Please, for Chrissake, debate in an organized way.[/quote]
After discussing this issue with Zeb the past couple of years, his duck and run tactics have become crystal clear. I used to think he was interested in a genuine debate, but I now know otherwise. He has a blatant agenda, he thinks in very black and white terms, and he refuses to concede any point that might in any way compromise his view of gays.
Fortunately, we have the collective research and conclusions of every major medical and mental health organization on our side. Zeb has his bible, cherry picked statistics, and slippery tactics which become very stale after a while.
No amount of research will ever make a difference to someone like him. He is 100% convinced that he is right, so the best you can hope for is to do damage control for anyone else that might be following the thread.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Sometimes as adults we have to admit when we’re wrong, perhaps the high opinion that you have of yourself would take too much of hit?
Hey, don’t worry about it when I was 21 I thought I knew everything too.
[/quote]
[quote]ZEB wrote:
It seems that there are indeed powerful forces within the homosexual movement that want things a certain way right from the APA to the Red Cross.
[/quote]
At least you’re admitting that your Red Cross example was an attempt to tie in your claims about the political corruptness of the APA. Hardly a “new topic” like you claimed earlier.
None of which has anything to do with the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, the Surgeon General, etc.
You’re trying to create a smokescreen by dismissing every single one of these medical and mental health organizations as politically biased, dishonest, and untrustworthy in their conclusions on homosexuality.
Of course, if they agreed with you, I have no doubt that you would be crowing about their scientific credentials.
[quote]forlife wrote:
AlisaV wrote:
At this point, I’m less irritated by your position than by the fact that you can’t hold the thread of an argument. Please, for Chrissake, debate in an organized way.
After discussing this issue with Zeb the past couple of years, his duck and run tactics have become crystal clear. [/quote]
Spoken by the man who wrote the book on duck and run. Still waiting for you comments on the Red Cross. Still waiting on your complete explanation on why 87% of all those claiming to be homosexual (men) have had and do have sex with women. Still waiting for your comment on why the APA says that reparative therapy is not dangerous when you claim it is.
Still waiting for a host of things which you are running away from.
[quote]forlife wrote:
ZEB wrote:
It seems that there are indeed powerful forces within the homosexual movement that want things a certain way right from the APA to the Red Cross.
At least you’re admitting that your Red Cross example was an attempt to tie in your claims about the political corruptness of the APA. Hardly a “new topic” like you claimed earlier.[/quote]
It was a new piece of evidence brought in to point out how your bullys operate. And I think it worked rather well. You have no legitimate response to the Red Cross argument. Then again what can you say?
Still waiting for you comments on the Red Cross. Still waiting on your complete explanation on why 87% of all those claiming to be homosexual (men) have had and do have sex with women.
[/quote]
ZEB my dear boy, you seriously need an answer to this? A man will stick his dick in anything warm and wet under the right circumstances. Since women are “acceptable” for men to have sex with in society, it is hardly an indication of straightness that a man would sleep with a woman. If a gay person is promiscuous, and is horny and there is a woman willing to fuck him but no men, he is sure as hell not going to go home and jerk it because he is gay. Also you are discounting the huge percentage of gays who started thier life out following societies plan and dated in HS or even college and had some sex with women.
Hey Zeb, if you want answers maybe you can set an example by providing a few yourself. You’re not getting anything more out of me until you man up and show a little integrity and sincerity in all of this.
I am not trying to be insulting, but I have been over these things many, many times and it’s pointless to go over them again and again especially with someone who is caught in the politically correct mind set.
I’ve posted in many threads to verify my positions on the topic of homosexuality, and am not going to repost them for every college kid who jumps on this thread spouting off more politically correct crap. I know who you are, I’ve debated with you and your ilk for years and I’m NOT impressed. It’s the same old nonsense. All you know is what you were told.
You’ve been indoctrinated into our great liberal college mind (and think) speak. You have indeed checked your brain at the door (unknowingly). You are not even trying to think outside the box. You are here to toe the politically correct line relative to how they’ve told you to think, which is by the accepted standard of the day. All of your pathetic half attempts at answers fall very short of satisfying me or anyone who actually tries to think through the garbage handed down by the media elite and the ivory tower politically correct. This should bother you but you’ve been pre programmed to dismiss people like myself. You will continue to think and speak as you were told and you will resent anyone who challenges those beliefs. All you really have left is name calling and other such nonsense, I’m not interested.
Do yourself a favor, if you really are open minded and different from the rest do some research into the following topics:
Reparative therapy. The APA says that it does not hurt to try it. They are saying that because many have dropped their same sex attraction. How do you live happily ever after married to a woman when you were once a gay man? It has happened many. many times. Tell me how can genetics play a major role when this occurs?
The high rate of STD’s and the total disregard for safe sexual practices among the majority of gay men. Don’t dismiss this with a flippant answer actually figure it out, if you can, I have and it’s not a pleasant answer.
Why do 87% males who claim they are gay have sex with both men and women? Think about this, how many men who claim to be heterosexual have sex with other males? And don’t give me that prison nonsense no one is locking up gays in order for them to have sex with women. If they are genetically programmed to be attracted to other men then how can so many of them become aroused with a woman?
Do some research and come up with an answer as to why homosexuality has never been proven to be genetic. Once again, tell me where is the proof that bisexuality is genetic?
In short, if you are going to jump into the middle of a heated debate such as this GET YOUR FACT STRAIGHT. Don’t jump in with the same old spoon fed crap that’s been shoved down your throat for 19 or 20 years, I’ve already read it, and have proven it wrong.
This will be my last post to you unless you have shown me that you are actually trying to think outside of the box that you’'ve been shoved into.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Hey Zeb, if you want answers maybe you can set an example by providing a few yourself. You’re not getting anything more out of me until you man up and show a little integrity and sincerity in all of this.[/quote]
From the bottom of my heart forlife I don’t think that you have shown any integrity relative to this debate. I think your passions run too deep for you to have such integrity.