'That's So Gay!'

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
161

It really is a shame that on a forum filled with great ideas on so many other topics that there are narrow-minded, hate-filled assholes like those who have blatantly declared that Jeebus has come down from the clouds and told them that they need to spend an inordinate amount of time each day concerned with what two consensting male adults are doing with their dicks.

There is a long record of homosexuality/bisexuality going back into antiquity. Homosexuality is not a recent development.

Finally, for morons like Brother Chris, the Bible contains mandates from “god” (who actually doesn’t exist, but that’s another thread) on MANY things that I can guarantee you don’t follow. So, if you’re going to try and force your bible on other people, at least stop being a hypocritical ass and start following the shit in it. You might want to start with some of that “love your neighbor” stuff.

162

[quote]ZEB wrote:
A reminder, you stated that I gleaned my information from Narth. In response I accurately pointed out that I got the information from the CDC (government) web site. Before we roll this into something that it’s not are you willing to admit that the information that I posted is accurate?
[/quote]

Sure, as long as you are willing to admit that the information I’ve posted from the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, Surgeon General, and National Association of Social Workers is also accurate.

Fair enough?

163

[quote]forlife wrote:
ZEB wrote:
A reminder, you stated that I gleaned my information from Narth. In response I accurately pointed out that I got the information from the CDC (government) web site. Before we roll this into something that it’s not are you willing to admit that the information that I posted is accurate?

Sure, as long as you are willing to admit that the information I’ve posted from the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, Surgeon General, and National Association of Social Workers is also accurate.

Fair enough?[/quote]

Glad you finally admitted that I was posting accurate information. What exactly did you post? If it’s accurate I have no problem admitting that.

164

[quote]StonesAreFun wrote:
It really is a shame that on a forum filled with great ideas on so many other topics that there are narrow-minded, hate-filled assholes like those who have blatantly declared that Jeebus has come down from the clouds and told them that they need to spend an inordinate amount of time each day concerned with what two consensting male adults are doing with their dicks.

There is a long record of homosexuality/bisexuality going back into antiquity. Homosexuality is not a recent development.

Finally, for morons like Brother Chris, the Bible contains mandates from “god” (who actually doesn’t exist, but that’s another thread) on MANY things that I can guarantee you don’t follow. So, if you’re going to try and force your bible on other people, at least stop being a hypocritical ass and start following the shit in it. You might want to start with some of that “love your neighbor” stuff. [/quote]

It seems that you too carry more than a tiny bit of hate of your own.

165

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Glad you finally admitted that I was posting accurate information. What exactly did you post? If it’s accurate I have no problem admitting that.
[/quote]

Let’s start with:

  1. Homosexuality is not a psychological disorder

  2. People don’t choose their sexual orientation, and attempting to change one’s sexual orientation can be damaging

The major mental health and medical organizations have concluded the above, based on 40 years of research. I’ll be happy to admit that your CDC information is valid, if you will honestly admit that this information is valid. Seems only fair, right?

166

[quote]ZEB wrote:
It seems that you too carry more than a tiny bit of hate of your own.

[/quote]

You’re right. But where some people’s hate is driven by their inability to understand or accept something that is as much an immutable characteristic of a person as their skin color, mine is driven by people who CHOOSE to take ignorant and small-minded positions.

167

Like I said before, homosexuality is not any more of a problem in biological terms than someone who never wants to have children. Therefore it doesn’t really matter what it’s classified as.
I don’t care if it’s the most dangerous practice ever and sprays AIDS on anyone who partakes in it. It’s up to them to assess the risk for themselves, not me.

168

[quote]StonesAreFun wrote:
the Bible contains mandates from “god”[/quote]

So God supports homosexuality.

:slight_smile:

169

[quote]StonesAreFun wrote:
the Bible contains mandates from “god”[/quote]

So God supports homosexuality.

:slight_smile:

170

[quote]StonesAreFun wrote:
ZEB wrote:
It seems that you too carry more than a tiny bit of hate of your own.

You’re right. But where some people’s hate is driven by their inability to understand or accept something that is as much an immutable characteristic of a person as their skin color, mine is driven by people who CHOOSE to take ignorant and small-minded positions. [/quote]

First of all one can take a position which opposes gay marriage and not hate anyone. Secondly, you have no proof that homosexuality is something that is genetic such as skin color. Finally, I don’t think you should associate your stance with taking the high road, you are just as set in your unproven opinion as someone who takes the opposition.

In this case hate is hate.

171

[quote]forlife wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Glad you finally admitted that I was posting accurate information. What exactly did you post? If it’s accurate I have no problem admitting that.

Let’s start with:

  1. Homosexuality is not a psychological disorder[/quote]

According to the APA which was unduly influenced by homosexual groups and members you are correct. However, keep in mind there was no NEW science behind the reversal of their long standing position regarding homosexual.

You and I have no idea why someone becomes homosexual. There are many very high quality studies which demonstrate that one is more likely to become gay for the following reasons:

  1. A domineering mother figure
  2. A distant father figure
  3. Molested as a child
  4. Being ostracized as a child.

With this stated I don’t think it’s any easier to walk away from what you have become. However, many people have changed from homosexual to heterosexual and I’ve posted their stories in the past. These men are not only NOT damaged they are living happy lives married to women.

I understand that you tried and failed, but that doesn’t mean that others have not succeeded.

Not at all true as in the case of the APA which did ZERO research before changing their position on the subject. If you have any other specific information regarding any other major medical organizations please repost it. Thank you.

The CDC gathers facts you can agree with those facts or not it doesn’t really matter does it? My original point is still valid which you’ve already admitted to, that is I DID NOT use Narth information in debating my point. My information came from reputable web sites such as the CDC.

172

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Let’s start with:

  1. Homosexuality is not a psychological disorder

According to the APA which was unduly influenced by homosexual groups and members you are correct. However, keep in mind there was no NEW science behind the reversal of their long standing position regarding homosexual.

  1. People don’t choose their sexual orientation, and attempting to change one’s sexual orientation can be damaging

You and I have no idea why someone becomes homosexual. There are many very high quality studies which demonstrate that one is more likely to become gay for the following reasons:

  1. A domineering mother figure
  2. A distant father figure
  3. Molested as a child
  4. Being ostracized as a child.

With this stated I don’t think it’s any easier to walk away from what you have become. However, many people have changed from homosexual to heterosexual and I’ve posted their stories in the past. These men are not only NOT damaged they are living happy lives married to women.

I understand that you tried and failed, but that doesn’t mean that others have not succeeded.

The major mental health and medical organizations have concluded the above, based on 40 years of research.

Not at all true as in the case of the APA which did ZERO research before changing their position on the subject. If you have any other specific information regarding any other major medical organizations please repost it. Thank you.

I’ll be happy to admit that your CDC information is valid,

The CDC gathers facts you can agree with those facts or not it doesn’t really matter does it? My original point is still valid which you’ve already admitted to, that is I DID NOT use Narth information in debating my point. My information came from reputable web sites such as the CDC.

[/quote]

In other words, you’re not going to man up and admit that the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Medical Association, etc. are correct, while whining about how nobody is willing to acknowledge your CDC statistics. Nice.

You keep harping about the APA, but you continue to ignore all the other major medical and mental health organizations that have done their own research and drawn identical conclusions to the APA. Maybe you’ll finally answer this question:

Where is your evidence that every single one of these professional organizations (American Academy of Pediatrics, Surgeon General, American Medical Association, National Association of Social Workers, etc.) is so politically biased that their conclusions on homosexuality are worthless?

I’m not asking about the APA. My case doesn’t depend on it. You don’t have an ounce of evidence that every one of these organizations is corrupt and dishonest in their conclusions on homosexuality.

And your assertion that there has been no additional research since the original removal of homosexuality from the DSM III is flat out wrong. There have been 30 additional years of research since then.

Tell you what, let’s keep this simple. I’ll be happy to acknowledge as valid and discuss your CDC link if you will similarly acknowledge as valid and discuss this link from the major medical and mental health organizations:

http://www.clgs.org/official-statement-concerning-homosexuality-american-academy-pediatrics

The above document was a joint statement from the following organizations:

American Academy of Pediatrics
American Association of School Administrators
American Counseling Association
American Federation of Teachers
American Psychological Association
American School Counselor Association
American School Health Association
Interfaith Alliance Foundation
National Association of School Psychologists
National Association of Secondary School Principals
National Association of Social Workers
National Education Association
School Social Work Association of America

A simple acknowledgment that this publication is accurate will show your good faith. If you do so, I’m happy to offer the acknowledgment that your CDC link is accurate. If you don’t, it’s obvious that you are only here to push a preexisting agenda, and no amount of objective evidence will make any difference.

173

[quote]ZEB wrote:
you have no proof that homosexuality is something that is genetic such as skin color.
[/quote]

Why do you continue to say this, when I have provided abundant evidence for a genetic COMPONENT of sexual orientation (Bailey’s twin studies, etc.)? I am more than willing to admit that BOTH genetics and environment can play a role in the development of sexual orientation. Why is it so hard for you to similarly be honest about this?

174

[quote]forlife wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Let’s start with:

  1. Homosexuality is not a psychological disorder

According to the APA which was unduly influenced by homosexual groups and members you are correct. However, keep in mind there was no NEW science behind the reversal of their long standing position regarding homosexual.

  1. People don’t choose their sexual orientation, and attempting to change one’s sexual orientation can be damaging

You and I have no idea why someone becomes homosexual. There are many very high quality studies which demonstrate that one is more likely to become gay for the following reasons:

  1. A domineering mother figure
  2. A distant father figure
  3. Molested as a child
  4. Being ostracized as a child.

With this stated I don’t think it’s any easier to walk away from what you have become. However, many people have changed from homosexual to heterosexual and I’ve posted their stories in the past. These men are not only NOT damaged they are living happy lives married to women.

I understand that you tried and failed, but that doesn’t mean that others have not succeeded.

The major mental health and medical organizations have concluded the above, based on 40 years of research.

Not at all true as in the case of the APA which did ZERO research before changing their position on the subject. If you have any other specific information regarding any other major medical organizations please repost it. Thank you.

I’ll be happy to admit that your CDC information is valid,

The CDC gathers facts you can agree with those facts or not it doesn’t really matter does it? My original point is still valid which you’ve already admitted to, that is I DID NOT use Narth information in debating my point. My information came from reputable web sites such as the CDC.

In other words, you’re not going to man up and admit that the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Medical Association, etc. are correct, while whining about how nobody is willing to acknowledge your CDC statistics. Nice.

You keep harping about the APA, but you continue to ignore all the other major medical and mental health organizations that have done their own research and drawn identical conclusions to the APA. Maybe you’ll finally answer this question:

Where is your evidence that every single one of these professional organizations (American Academy of Pediatrics, Surgeon General, American Medical Association, National Association of Social Workers, etc.) is so politically biased that their conclusions on homosexuality are worthless?

I’m not asking about the APA. My case doesn’t depend on it. You don’t have an ounce of evidence that every one of these organizations is corrupt and dishonest in their conclusions on homosexuality.

And your assertion that there has been no additional research since the original removal of homosexuality from the DSM III is flat out wrong. There have been 30 additional years of research since then.

If you have any other specific information regarding any other major medical organizations please repost it. Thank you.

Tell you what, let’s keep this simple. I’ll be happy to acknowledge as valid and discuss your CDC link if you will similarly acknowledge as valid and discuss this link from the major medical and mental health organizations:

http://www.clgs.org/official-statement-concerning-homosexuality-american-academy-pediatrics

The above document was a joint statement from the following organizations:

American Academy of Pediatrics
American Association of School Administrators
American Counseling Association
American Federation of Teachers
American Psychological Association
American School Counselor Association
American School Health Association
Interfaith Alliance Foundation
National Association of School Psychologists
National Association of Secondary School Principals
National Association of Social Workers
National Education Association
School Social Work Association of America

A simple acknowledgment that this publication is accurate will show your good faith. If you do so, I’m happy to offer the acknowledgment that your CDC link is accurate. If you don’t, it’s obvious that you are only here to push a preexisting agenda, and no amount of objective evidence will make any difference.[/quote]

What I originally asked you was what do they specifically say? I’ve read your laundry list of names in the past, yet I’ve never read exactly what they say as I don’t think you’ve posted it. I could be wrong as you’ve posted a great deal on the topic. But I just don’t recall what they specifically state about homosexuality.

Would you mind?

175

[quote]forlife wrote:
ZEB wrote:
you have no proof that homosexuality is something that is genetic such as skin color.

Why do you continue to say this, when I have provided abundant evidence for a genetic COMPONENT of sexual orientation (Bailey’s twin studies, etc.)? I am more than willing to admit that BOTH genetics and environment can play a role in the development of sexual orientation. Why is it so hard for you to similarly be honest about this?[/quote]

I am being honest, homosexuality has not been proven to be caused by genetics. I think you are saying the same thing above.

In all of my years I have not known even one homosexual man who has had a what I would call a normal upbringing, that is a good and natural relationship with his mother and father, siblings etc.

Granted, I’m sure they are probably out there I’ve just never seen or even read of any.

That doesn’t PROVE anything, but as even you say there is an environmental factor. I see that environmental factor all the time.

One more thing, what’s the difference HOW one becomes homosexual? I accept people as they are and do not judge them good or evil based upon their legal sexual interests. In fact, I’ve said many times that I thought you were a very smart guy, stubborn but smart :slight_smile:

I think our major differences come at the point where the discussion heads into gay marriage, or adoption (since we don’t know why people are gay). Other than that in my opinion there should be no discrimination against anyone gay and in fact I tend to be very harsh with those who have found to be judgmental toward this group of people.

Oh well, I guess we’ll never agree my friend.

176

I gave you a nutshell summary of what they say (my two points earlier), and I gave you a direct link so you can read their statements for yourself.

So how about it? Mutual acknowledgment of the validity of your CDC link and my link to an official statement from the medical and mental health organizations?

177

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I am being honest, homosexuality has not been proven to be caused by genetics. I think you are saying the same thing above. [/quote]

No, I’m saying that there is a proven genetic COMPONENT for sexual orientation. That is, we know for a fact that genetics plays an important role, although it is unlikely that sexual orientation is 100% due to genetics. Environment probably also plays a role. Not surprisingly, genetics and environment also account for pretty much every other human characteristic.

I guess I don’t qualify since my mom divorced and later remarried. Technically, I had an “absent father” for a couple of years. Of course, so did a lot of straight men and women.

I have many gay friends that had a completely “normal upbringing”. I also have straight friends that fit your criteria (dominating mother, absent father, etc.), yet are 100% heterosexual. Obviously, environment cannot and does not account 100% for sexual orientation.

So again, I’ll ask:

Why is it that you find it so difficult to acknowledge a genetic component to sexual orientation? I don’t pretend that environment is irrelevant, so why do you do this when it comes to genetics? Can’t we both be honest, and acknowledge the research showing that BOTH factors contribute to sexual orientation?

178

[quote]forlife wrote:
I gave you a nutshell summary of what they say (my two points earlier), and I gave you a direct link so you can read their statements for yourself.

So how about it? Mutual acknowledgment of the validity of your CDC link and my link to an official statement from the medical and mental health organizations?[/quote]

What exactly are you saying that they are saing? Some of the stuff touted on this thread by others regarding what they have said is nonsense.

179

[quote]forlife wrote:
ZEB wrote:
I am being honest, homosexuality has not been proven to be caused by genetics. I think you are saying the same thing above.

No, I’m saying that there is a proven genetic COMPONENT for sexual orientation. That is, we know for a fact that genetics plays an important role, although it is unlikely that sexual orientation is 100% due to genetics. Environment probably also plays a role. Not surprisingly, genetics and environment also account for pretty much every other human characteristic.

In all of my years I have not known even one homosexual man who has had a what I would call a normal upbringing, that is a good and natural relationship with his mother and father, siblings etc.

I guess I don’t qualify since my mom divorced and later remarried. Technically, I had an “absent father” for a couple of years. Of course, so did a lot of straight men and women.

I have many gay friends that had a completely “normal upbringing”. I also have straight friends that fit your criteria (dominating mother, absent father, etc.), yet are 100% heterosexual. Obviously, environment cannot and does not account 100% for sexual orientation.

So again, I’ll ask:

Why is it that you find it so difficult to acknowledge a genetic component to sexual orientation? I don’t pretend that environment is irrelevant, so why do you do this when it comes to genetics? Can’t we both be honest, and acknowledge the research showing that BOTH factors contribute to sexual orientation? [/quote]

There could be a genetic factor, I never said otherwise. But, I’m not sure how much that plays into it as compared to environmental.

I think if there was a large genetic factor we wouldn’t see even one gay male getting therapy and ending up happily married to a woman. And they are out there let’s be honest.

180

[quote]ZEB wrote:
What exactly are you saying that they are saing? Some of the stuff touted on this thread by others regarding what they have said is nonsense.[/quote]

Why not read it for yourself?

http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/justthefacts.pdf