'That's So Gay!'

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Well, post those things so I can find them since obviously you have read them. Maybe I do not believe in psychoanalysis.

P.S. Sorry for my grammar and spelling to all the editors out there. Sometimes, I copy and paste my stuff when editing and the meanings and spelling are off.[/quote]

Anyone can get in a hurry and make a spelling mistake every now and then. The point was that you have repeatedly mocked others for doing this, while doing exactly the same thing over and over again. I think you have more spelling/grammar errors in this thread than anyone else. You probably don’t even realize half of them. If you don’t want to be called out, then it’s a good idea to stop calling out others.

On your question, Quidnunc posted a few references. You can find dozens more with a simple Google search. Here are a couple to get you started:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/12/health/webmd/main938234.shtml

The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/118/1/349

[quote]
Civil marriage is a legal status that promotes healthy families by conferring a powerful set of rights, benefits, and protections that cannot be obtained by other means. Civil marriage can help foster financial and legal security, psychosocial stability, and an augmented sense of societal acceptance and support. Legal recognition of a spouse can increase the ability of adult couples to provide and care for one another and fosters a nurturing and secure environment for their children. Children who are raised by civilly married parents benefit from the legal status granted to their parents.

Gay and lesbian people have been raising children for many years and will continue to do so in the future; the issue is whether these children will be raised by parents who have the rights, benefits, and protections of civil marriage. Same-gender couples are denied the right to civil marriage in every state except Massachusetts and the right to civil union except in Connecticut and Vermont. The federal government and other state governments do not recognize those civil marriages and civil unions.

There is ample evidence to show that children raised by same-gender parents fare as well as those raised by heterosexual parents. More than 25 years of research have documented that there is no relationship between parents’ sexual orientation and any measure of a child’s emotional, psychosocial, and behavioral adjustment. These data have demonstrated no risk to children as a result of growing up in a family with 1 or more gay parents. Conscientious and nurturing adults, whether they are men or women, heterosexual or homosexual, can be excellent parents. The rights, benefits, and protections of civil marriage can further strengthen these families. [/quote]

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
What that gay marriage is wrong and that homosexual acts are sin? Okay, if they don’t believe in the Bible anymore.[/quote]

Are you denying that a hundred years ago, people used your bible to condone discrimination against blacks? Your holy book specifically condones slavery, and it was used to justify racism. People genuinely believed that their god considered whites to be superior to blacks. They genuinely believed it was a sin for a white man to marry a black woman. And they used their bible to back it up.

You are no different from them. Your holy book is no better than the holy book from any other religion, and in any case there should be a separation of church and state.

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Interesting since both use psychoanalysis.[/quote]

Dude, please educate yourself. Seriously. Psychoanalysis is a specific psychological theory/approach developed by Freud, which has fallen into disfavor with the large majority of practicing psychologists. You’re slapping at a strawman that doesn’t exist.

[quote]Gregus wrote:
Bullshit. Theres no way of knowing. Logic should tell you studies like this are impossible.[/quote]

I love how you casually dismiss 40 years of medical, social, and psychological research by ever major medical and mental health organization, insisting every one of these organizations is so politically biased that their consensual conclusions on homosexuality are worthless.

You then proceed to tell us how it really is, based on…what? Your compelling intelligence and ironclad logic?

Classic.

You are contemptuous of people and want to deny them civil rights because of an immutable, morally neutral characteristic.

Racism is bad because it involves showing contempt for people and denying them civil rights because of an immutable, morally neutral characteristic.

It’s quite understandable that you don’t like being confronted with the fact of your own ugliness and moral bankruptcy, but then, few bigots do.

[quote]Gregus wrote:
I don’t like how you call someone as being racist because they disagree with gays.[/quote]

Go back and read what I wrote. I said that people have used the bible to justify racism, in exactly the same way people have used the bible to justify homophobia.

More of that compelling intelligence and ironclad logic? Lol. Do you even know someone that is gay, beyond the surface level?

Tell you what. Try reading some of the research on reparative therapy and get back to me with your opinion. For example, a recent study found that gays trying to change their orientation through therapy were TWICE as likely to have suicidal thoughts, drug/alcohol abuse, and depression following the therapy. Do you really want to make people worse by selling them snake oil solutions?

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Take you for example, you left your two young children and your wife in order to play full time homo. [/quote]

Y’know, telling lies over and over again doesn’t magically make them true.

My wife and I mutually decided to divorce. She felt just as strongly about it as I did. We continue to be friends, and I am very close to my children.

Your trolling is losing its edge, need new material.

Ever hear of ex-ex-gays? Some of the biggest poster boys for the ex-gay movement have been caught in gay bars, or have openly embraced their sexual orientation following their “conversion” to heterosexuality. Marrying a woman doesn’t make you straight.

Not only are you lying again, but even if you weren’t, don’t you think that it would be better not to DOUBLE the risk of suicide by telling gays they can change their orientation through snake oil therapy? Brilliant!

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
The APA was hijacked by homosexual interests…[/quote]

Where is your proof that EVERY MAJOR MEDICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH ORGANIZATION IN THE WORLD has been “hijacked by homosexual interests”, and thus their conclusions based on 40 years of research are worthless?

Prove that the American Academy of Pediatriacs was hijacked by homosexual interests.

Prove that the American Medical Association was hijacked by homosexual interests.

Prove that the National Association of Social Workers was hijacked by homosexual interests.

Prove that the Surgeon General was hijacked by homosexual interests.

You can’t, and you know it as well as I do.

Ok, enough feeding the troll for now…back to our regularly scheduled debate.

Forlife,

Not a fan of certain posters who seem mean spirited but there certain truths that cannot be denied.

The APA was in fact hijacked by powerful homosexual lobby groups. Homosexuality would indeed still be considered a mental disease had this not happened.

I’ve posted this before and it should be no surprise to you.

"when the APA fell to the powerful gay lobby efforts, that did not mean that homosexuality was a perfectly healthy lifestyle. It simply meant that the people in charge at the time did nto want to endure the political pressure that they would have had to bear.

READ THIS

"In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed homosexuality as a mental disorder from the APA’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II).

This decision was a significant victory for homosexual activists, and they have continued to claim that the APA based their decision on new scientific discoveries that proved that homosexual behavior is normal and should be affirmed in our culture.

This is false and part of numerous homosexual urban legends that have infiltrated every aspect of our culture. The removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder has given homosexual activists credibility in the culture, and they have demanded that their sexual behavior be affirmed in society.

What Really Happened?

Numerous psychiatrists over the past decades have described what forces were really at work both inside and outside of the American Psychiatric Association-and what led to the removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder.

Dr. Ronald Bayer explains how homosexual activists captured the APA for political gain.
Dr. Ronald Bayer, a pro-homosexual psychiatrist has described what actually occurred in his book, Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis. (1981)

In Chapter 4, “Diagnostic Politics: Homosexuality and the American Psychiatric Association,” Dr. Bayer says that the first attack by homosexual activists against the APA began in 1970 when this organization held its convention in San Francisco. Homosexual activists decided to disrupt the conference by interrupting speakers and shouting down and ridiculing psychiatrists who viewed homosexuality as a mental disorder."

(These tactics sound familiar)

In 1971, homosexual activist Frank Kameny worked with the Gay Liberation Front collective to demonstrate against the APA’s convention. At the 1971 conference, Kameny grabbed the microphone and yelled, “Psychiatry is the enemy incarnate. Psychiatry has waged a relentless war of extermination against us. You may take this as a declaration of war against you.”

Homosexuals forged APA credentials and gained access to exhibit areas in the conference. They threatened anyone who claimed that homosexuals needed to be cured.

Kameny had found an ally inside of the APA named Kent Robinson who helped the homosexual activist present his demand that homosexuality be removed from the DSM. At the 1972 convention, homosexual activists were permitted to set up a display booth, entitled “Gay, Proud and Healthy.”

Kameny was then permitted to be part of a panel of psychiatrists who were to discuss homosexuality. The effort to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM was the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation, not scientific discoveries.

Prior to the APA’s 1973 convention, several psychiatrists attempted to organize opposition to the efforts of homosexuals to remove homosexual behavior from the DSM. Organizing this effort were Drs. Irving Bieber and Charles Socarides who formed the Ad Hoc Committee Against the Deletion of Homosexuality from DSM-II.

The DSM-II listed homosexuality as an abnormal behavior under section “302. Sexual Deviations.” It was the first deviation listed.

After much political pressure, a committee of the APA met behind closed doors in 1973 and voted to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM-II. Opponents of this effort were given 15 minutes to protest this change, according to Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, in Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth. Satinover writes that after this vote was taken, the decision was to be voted on by the entire APA membership. The National Gay Task Force purchased the APA’s mailing list and sent out a letter to the APA members urging them to vote to remove homosexuality as a disorder. No APA member was informed that the mailing had been funded by this homosexual activist group."

(Gay politics won this one-Not science)

According to Satinover, “How much the 1973 APA decision was motivated by politics is only becoming clear even now. While attending a conference in England in 1994, I met a man who told me an account that he had told no one else. He had been in the gay life for years but had left the lifestyle. He recounted how after the 1973 APA decision, he and his lover, along with a certain very highly placed officer of the APA Board of Trustees and his lover, all sat around the officer’s apartment celebrating their victory. For among the gay activists placed high in the APA who maneuvered to ensure a victory was this man-suborning from the top what was presented to both the membership and the public as a disinterested search for truth.”

Dr. Socarides Speaks Out

Dr. Satinover shows how APA’s policies were influcenced by closeted homosexual APA leaders.
Dr. Charles Socarides has set the record straight on how homosexuals inside and outside of the APA forced this organization to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder. This was done without any valid scientific evidence to prove that homosexuality is not a disordered behavior.

Dr. Socarides, writing in Sexual Politics and Scientific Logic: The Issue of Homosexuality writes: “To declare a condition a ‘non-condition,’ a group of practitioners had removed it from our list of serious psychosexual disorders. The action was all the more remarkable when one considers that it involved an out-of-hand and peremptory disregard and dismissal not only of hundreds of psychiatric and psychoanalytic research papers and reports, but also a number of other serious studies by groups of psychiatrists, psychologists, and educators over the past seventy years?”

Socarides continued: "For the next 18 years, the APA decision served as a Trojan horse, opening the gates to widespread psychological and social change in sexual customs and mores. The decision was to be used on numerous occasions for numerous purposes with the goal of normalizing homosexuality and elevating it to an esteemed status.

“To some American psychiatrists, this action remains a chilling reminder that if scientific principles are not fought for, they can be lost-a disillusioning warning that unless we make no exceptions to science, we are subject to the snares of political factionalism and the propagation of untruths to an unsuspecting and uninformed public, to the rest of the medical profession, and to the behavioral sciences.”

Zeb, sorry but I’m only seeing the APA in your quotes. How about:

Prove that the American Academy of Pediatriacs was hijacked by homosexual interests.

Prove that the American Medical Association was hijacked by homosexual interests.

Prove that the National Association of Social Workers was hijacked by homosexual interests.

Prove that the Surgeon General was hijacked by homosexual interests.

[quote]forlife wrote:
Zeb, sorry but I’m only seeing the APA in your quotes. How about:

Prove that the American Academy of Pediatriacs was hijacked by homosexual interests.

Prove that the American Medical Association was hijacked by homosexual interests.

Prove that the National Association of Social Workers was hijacked by homosexual interests.

Prove that the Surgeon General was hijacked by homosexual interests. [/quote]

Don’t you get it? When gay rights group lobby for something, and that thing happens, it means that the situation was “hijacked by homosexual activists.”

Just like the colored activists who hijacked the Supreme Court in 1954, reversing OVER A CENTURY OF ESTABLISHED, STATE SUPPORTED, SCIENTIFICALLY BACKED segregated schools.

Oh, I get it…just waiting for all the quotes proving that every other medical and mental health organization in the country was also hijacked by homosexual activists, so I can feel better about dismissing all of their scientific conclusions as well.

[quote]forlife wrote:
Zeb, sorry but I’m only seeing the APA in your quotes. How about:

Prove that the American Academy of Pediatriacs was hijacked by homosexual interests.

Prove that the American Medical Association was hijacked by homosexual interests.

Prove that the National Association of Social Workers was hijacked by homosexual interests.

Prove that the Surgeon General was hijacked by homosexual interests. [/quote]

I can prove that Hitler was evil. Do I now need to prove that Heydrich, Bormann, and Madame Blavatsky were evil too?

i wonder how many of you guys wear cloth with two different threads

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
quidnunc wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
quidnunc wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
quidnunc wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
forlife wrote:
GrandpaButch wrote:
However, as one Christian expert has said:

“Gender, race and impairment all relate to what a person is, whereas homosexuality relates to what a person does.”

Grandpa, the copy-and-paste warrior!

What I find funny about this “Christian expert” is that discrimination against gender and race is condemned, while discrimination against homosexuality is condoned.

HOWEVER

If this “Christian expert” bothered to read his holy book, he would find that the bible blatantly advocates slavery and misogeny. Oops.

So much for it being wrong to discriminate based on “what a person is”.

Until 1975, homosexuality was defined by the APA as a mental illness. Then $$$$$ came in and changed the tune.

If this was the 1950’s, you’d probably not be gay. Only when perversion got mainstreamed did people with a slight case of the mental illness feel free to get into these things.

Give me an explanation of why you hate homosexuality that doesn’t quote the Bible or commit the naturalistic fallacy.

Prove homosexuality is normal without quoting modernistic science, or commit non-tradition folly. Go away '09

What do you even mean? Obviously, the great majority of people aren’t gay, but then, the great majority of people aren’t stamp collectors or hockey fans or weightlifters, yet there’s nothing wrong with being any of these things.

Perhaps you meant “prove that it’s not bad?” It’s an immutable trait that has no effect on third parties, like race or blood type or height. In every moral system I’m aware of, traits like these are accepted.

I said normal, not common. And god does not hate gay’s, he hates sin. And men laying with men as they would lay with women, is a sin.

Again, explain why you hate gays (or the defining characteristic of gays) without resorting to religious babble. You haven’t yet.

Hmm, yet you have not followed what I have said, you must be short because it was definitely not meant to go over your head.

Well, I’m not a sociologist, but sociology explains that the corner stone of the survival of a country is the institute of marriage. Committing acts of adultery, and sexual acts outside wedlock deteriorate that institute.

Is this the institute to which you refer? http://www.nationalmarriage.com/

Talking of institutes I get the growing feeling from your posts that you should be institutionalised.

Why, because I believe that same-sex marriages should not be allowed, and that I believe that homosexual acts are a sin. I think you’d have to lock up a lot of people if that’s the criteria.[/quote]

No because you rant on using badly formed sentences, totally miss using words and totally oblivious to how stupid it (and your profile picture) makes you look.

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
forlife wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
I know you’re gay, obvious from your avatar, but with one of your modernistic fad’s it is said that homosexuals raising a child have produced a harder life for that child. This is of course caused by the child’s of the up bringing and views of the child after being raised by homosexuals as well as the child usually being anti-social.

Go read up. Every major medical and mental health organization has actually done the research, and concluded that children raised by gay parents are on equal footing with children raised by straight parents, on all measures of psychological health. You couldn’t be more wrong.

Well, post those things so I can find them since obviously you have read them. Maybe I do not believe in psychoanalysis.

P.S. Sorry for my grammar and spelling to all the editors out there. Sometimes, I copy and paste my stuff when editing and the meanings and spelling are off.[/quote]

That is cool, it happens to everyone but you should probably avoid jumping on other people’s typos. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone and all that.

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
forlife wrote:
Gregus wrote:
I don’t like how you call someone as being racist because they disagree with gays.

Go back and read what I wrote. I said that people have used the bible to justify racism, in exactly the same way people have used the bible to justify homophobia.

You are truly a fucking moron forliar.

People can use anything to rationalize their actions. Take you for example, you left your two young children and your wife in order to play full time homo. Now I ask you is that right? But you rationalized none the less.

All that being said, just about every Gay person know deep in their soul they’d rather be straight. The current Political Correctness is harming the gay population. The thought of treatment is banished and they have no recourse now but to remain gay. Help to is hard to come by.

Another lie by forliar. Hundreds of male homosexuals have been through therapy and are now happily married to women. But you deny this because you want to rationalize what you did to your wife and two kids.

Tell you what. Try reading some of the research on reparative therapy and get back to me with your opinion. For example, a recent study found that gays trying to change their orientation through therapy were TWICE as likely to have suicidal thoughts, drug/alcohol abuse, and depression following the therapy. Do you really want to make people worse by selling them snake oil solutions?

You horses ass (sorry didn’t mean to arouse you) the rate of suicide among homosexuals is the highest of any group…and that statistic is true even in places where gay marriage is allowed. Now do you want to talk about the rates of depression, anxiety, STD’s HIV, and all the other shit that gays contract because their sexual practices.

You can type until your fingers are bloody but all you’re doing is turning people away from the very thing you want to encourage.

You’re BAD for your cause forliar.

.
[/quote]

I think you will find that the highest rate of suicide is amongst Swedish vets.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I can prove that Hitler was evil. Do I now need to prove that Heydrich, Bormann, and Madame Blavatsky were evil too?
[/quote]

As a general rule, if you’re going to claim something, it is a good idea to be able to support it with objective facts.