[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I would be willing to bet that the majority of deviant sexual behavior (harmful sex like with kids and forced) comes from the Religious and not the the gay community.[/quote]
Um, most people are religious, so that would seem both logical and inconsequential. And the religious and gays aren’t separate groups.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I would be willing to bet that the majority of deviant sexual behavior (harmful sex like with kids and forced) comes from the Religious and not the the gay community.[/quote]
Um, most people are religious, so that would seem both logical and inconsequential. And the religious and gays aren’t separate groups.[/quote]
I have to disagree that most people are religious , I think most people believe in God but loath religion , I do how ever think that gays are equally involved with Religion
When I say Religious , I mean practicing a religion letting it alter the natural course of your life , Notice I did not say letting God alter the natural course of life
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I would be willing to bet that the majority of deviant sexual behavior (harmful sex like with kids and forced) comes from the Religious and not the the gay community.[/quote]
Um, most people are religious, so that would seem both logical and inconsequential. And the religious and gays aren’t separate groups.[/quote]
I have to disagree that most people are religious , I think most people believe in God but loath religion , I do how ever think that gays are equally involved with Religion
When I say Religious , I mean practicing a religion letting it alter the natural course of your life , Notice I did not say letting God alter the natural course of life [/quote]
“Religion is the belief in and worship of a god or gods, or a set of beliefs concerning the origin and purpose of the universe.”
I’m very religious, But don’t really like organized religions.
For good reason. People tend to screw it up when they start trying to Lord it over others.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
DoubleDuce is 100% correct, and in fact his points about the damage caused to gays by discrimination have been supported by the major medical and mental health organizations. I can provide direct quotes from these organizations (American Medical Association, National Association of Social Workers, American Psychological Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, etc.) based on 30 years of research on these issues.
According to Zeb, every single one of these organizations is politically biased, and their unanimous conclusions on homosexuality should be stubbornly ignored.
Right.[/quote]
I’ve already schooled you on the political climate of the APA which took the lead in the 70’s in declassifying homosexuality as a mental disease. Not through testing, or trials etc., but because the APA was hijacked by actual homosexuals who held offices and made this determination. I could repost the information for you, it’s rather lengthy but you obviously didn’t get it the first time around.
[/quote]
Do you believe that homosexuality is a mental illness? That puts you in some interesting company if you do…
Or it could just be that they were logical rather than it being ‘hijacked’ by homosexuals, of which there is no evidence (please provide if you have any)
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Have you been following this debate? I don’t want to discriminate against anyone for any reason. I’m merely pointing out health risks regarding homosexual behavior.
[/quote]
And I’ve directly pointed out how your haven’t backed up your claims.[/quote]
Please let me know which claim you would like more information and verification on. Nothing would please me more than to post that information.
Thanks
[quote]Bambi wrote:
Do you believe that homosexuality is a mental illness? That puts you in some interesting company if you do…
Or it could just be that they were logical rather than it being ‘hijacked’ by homosexuals, of which there is no evidence (please provide if you have any)
[/quote]
I can’t say one way or the other and I know it. You can’t say one way or the other either, but you don’t know it.
Here’s what happened:
"Exposed: The Myth That Psychiatry Has Proven That Homosexual Behavior Is Normal
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. 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.
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 yearsâ?¦”
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.” Dr. Socarides’ report is available from the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality: www.narth.com.
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DSM
The DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) is the most widely used diagnostic reference book utilized by mental health professionals in the United States.
It’s a manual by which all diagnostic codes are derived for diagnosis and treatment - every single physician (an estimated 850,000*) in the United States refers to this book in order to code for a diagnosis. In plain English, what does this mean? It means that for over 30 years physicians have been prevented from properly diagnosing homosexuality as an aberrant behavior and thus, cannot, recommend a course of treatment for these individuals.
Prior to that time, homosexuality had been treated as a mental disorder under section “302. Sexual Deviations” in the DSM-II. Section 302 said, in part: “This category is for individuals whose sexual interests are directed primarily toward objects other than people of the opposite sex, toward sexual acts â?¦ performed under bizarre circumstances. â?¦ Even though many find their practices distasteful, they remain unable to substitute normal sexual behavior for them.” Homosexuality was listed as the first sexual deviation under 302. Once that diagnostic code for homosexuality was removed, physicians, including psychiatrists, have been prevented from diagnosing homosexuality as a mental disorder for more than three decades."
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I would be willing to bet that the majority of deviant sexual behavior (harmful sex like with kids and forced) comes from the Religious and not the the gay community.[/quote]
Um, most people are religious, so that would seem both logical and inconsequential. And the religious and gays aren’t separate groups.[/quote]
I have to disagree that most people are religious , I think most people believe in God but loath religion , I do how ever think that gays are equally involved with Religion
When I say Religious , I mean practicing a religion letting it alter the natural course of your life , Notice I did not say letting God alter the natural course of life [/quote]
“Religion is the belief in and worship of a god or gods, or a set of beliefs concerning the origin and purpose of the universe.”
I’m very religious, But don’t really like organized religions.[/quote]
I’m curious, when you say you are “Very religious” what does that mean? I’m not trying to start a fight with you. I really am curious as I do hear what you’re saying quite a lot and wondering what your definition of “very religious” means.
Thanks,
Zeb
[quote]forlife wrote:
For good reason. People tend to screw it up when they start trying to Lord it over others.[/quote]
Ha ha, lord it over? I love that one. I point out the health statistics for homosexuals and I’m “lording it over you.” Ha ha, you’re a funny little man.
Gay is OK
MODS: I’ve tried to post in this thread several times and nothing has shown up. Maybe I was clicking reset or something but I don’t think so.
ZEB straight question: What is wrong with a homosexual relationship in the absence of anal penetration?
[quote]Eli B wrote:
Gay is OK
MODS: I’ve tried to post in this thread several times and nothing has shown up. Maybe I was clicking reset or something but I don’t think so.
ZEB straight question: What is wrong with a homosexual relationship in the absence of anal penetration?[/quote]
That’s not a straight question it’s a gay question.
bigot
[quote]Eli B wrote:
bigot[/quote]
LOL, lighten up kid you’ll live longer.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I don’t blame you, it’s always easier to try to be funny than to actually refute a point. My only complaint, the next time actually be funny.
[/quote]
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Have you been following this debate? I don’t want to discriminate against anyone for any reason. I’m merely pointing out health risks regarding homosexual behavior.
[/quote]
And I’ve directly pointed out how your haven’t backed up your claims.[/quote]
Please let me know which claim you would like more information and verification on. Nothing would please me more than to post that information.
Thanks
[/quote]
I’ve pointed out that correlation between homosexuality and unhealthy problems is not the same thing as causation. So please, show me stats that illustrate causation.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I’m curious, when you say you are “Very religious” what does that mean? I’m not trying to start a fight with you. I really am curious as I do hear what you’re saying quite a lot and wondering what your definition of “very religious” means.
Thanks,
Zeb[/quote]
I believe in god. He’s a big part of my life and I try to live it in the way I think he intended. But I don’t buy into most organized religions mainly because I don’t claim revelation exists.
[quote]Eli B wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I don’t blame you, it’s always easier to try to be funny than to actually refute a point. My only complaint, the next time actually be funny.
[/quote]
[/quote]
I’m sorry it’s hard to take you seriously (and you might know why). But you can follow along as I talk to the other posters.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Have you been following this debate? I don’t want to discriminate against anyone for any reason. I’m merely pointing out health risks regarding homosexual behavior.
[/quote]
And I’ve directly pointed out how your haven’t backed up your claims.[/quote]
Please let me know which claim you would like more information and verification on. Nothing would please me more than to post that information.
Thanks
[/quote]
I’ve pointed out that correlation between homosexuality and unhealthy problems is not the same thing as causation. So please, show me stats that illustrate causation.[/quote]
I think I’ve had a few posts on this exact topic a few years back with my old pal forlife. I agree that one can be homosexual and not be unhealthy. One does not cause the other. However, when people become involved with unsafe sexual practices, and that can be hetero, or homo, then they can suffer. It seems that homosexuals have a much higher rate of disease in virtually every category (I could name them but I don’t think you’ll disagree). From my readings the reason for this is not just the incredible frequency of sex, but the reckless nature of it. This is what causes the problem and also keeps people like me (and about 67% of the general population)from thinking that as a group they should not be taken seriously. This could change once they begin to respect themselves and one another. That starts with letting their sexual partners know that they are HIV positive. This is hasn’t been done which leads to the incredibly high rate of HIV among homosexual men. As I’ve repeatedly quoted the CDC over half of new HIV cases in the US are from Homosexual men and they only comprise about 1.7 million people.
I guess that sums it up. Do you disagree with any of this?
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I’m curious, when you say you are “Very religious” what does that mean? I’m not trying to start a fight with you. I really am curious as I do hear what you’re saying quite a lot and wondering what your definition of “very religious” means.
Thanks,
Zeb[/quote]
I believe in god. He’s a big part of my life and I try to live it in the way I think he intended. [/quote]
Again, just curious, but how do you know what intends?
What do you mean when you say you don’t claim revelation exists? Are you stating that you don’t believe that one can have a religious experience directed by God? Or are you referring to something else?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I’m curious, when you say you are “Very religious” what does that mean? I’m not trying to start a fight with you. I really am curious as I do hear what you’re saying quite a lot and wondering what your definition of “very religious” means.
Thanks,
Zeb[/quote]
I believe in god. He’s a big part of my life and I try to live it in the way I think he intended. [/quote]
Again, just curious, but how do you know what intends?
[/quote]
I don’t claim to know. I guess at it.
The basis of most religion is revelation (divine inspiration imparting knowledge). I don’t know that he does this. At least not in a way that circumvents the physical rules of the universe.