Are those who demand proof of God's existence fair and equal enough to ask for proof that homosexuals were born that way?

[ManOnFire]

Here’s a summary for those who appreciate honest thought instead of the promotion of the unelected liberal media’s beliefs which are an artificial attempt to force one view on the public. People don’t want to be forced to believe “born that way” since the science instead supports a combination of developmental factors as the cause for many individuals. The liberal media propaganda only obstructs an understanding of the truth and takes people farther away from understanding. True understanding gives us the best chance to bring people together.

str.org/site/PageServer?pagename=PL_article_are_homosexuals_born_that_way

 

[danserr]

Here’s a summary for those who appreciate honest thought instead of the promotion of the unelected liberal media’s beliefs which are an artificial attempt to force one view on the public. People don’t want to be forced to believe “born that way” since the science instead supports a combination of developmental factors as the cause for many individuals. The liberal media propaganda only obstructs an understanding of the truth and takes people farther away from understanding. True understanding gives us the best chance to bring people together.

str.org/site/PageServer?pagename=PL_article_are_homosexuals_born_that_way

It is a bit strange that the debate is still often framed in terms of “born that way” or “it’s a choice,” since we’re now finding that is a false dichotomy.

“Born that way” is favored by people who support homosexual practice because they think it would justify homosexual practice. That doesn’t follow though since explanation is not the same as justification. Or as CS Lewis said “explanation by cause is not justification by reason.” A genetic disposition to alcoholism may explain (at least partly) why a man becomes an alcoholic, but it does not therefore justify it.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Here’s a summary for those who appreciate honest thought instead of the promotion of the unelected liberal media’s beliefs which are an artificial attempt to force one view on the public. People don’t want to be forced to believe “born that way” since the science instead supports a combination of developmental factors as the cause for many individuals. The liberal media propaganda only obstructs an understanding of the truth and takes people farther away from understanding. True understanding gives us the best chance to bring people together.

str.org/site/PageServer?pagename=PL_article_are_homosexuals_born_that_way

I dont see the relationship

 

[DihydrogenOxide]

Money talks.

That’s why homosexual garbage has gotten so much acceptance.

 

[GEddie]

Money talks.

That’s why homosexual garbage has gotten so much acceptance.

While I’m sure that that is a factor, there’s also the basic issue that Sex is the new idol. People have no right to life in this society, but you better not DARE interfere with anybody’s pursuit of sexual happiness.

 

[DihydrogenOxide]

While I’m sure that that is a factor, there’s also the basic issue that Sex is the new idol. People have no right to life in this society, but you better not DARE interfere with anybody’s pursuit of sexual happiness.

True. Sex has always been more of a hidden idol here.
Yes, I agree, especially since the sexual revolution, it has been much more of an openly accepted societal evil.

You have to agree that the child’s first teachers, when they neglect to show love to the child, especially in discipline and teaching( as the child’s first teachers), the child is more likely to choose some other teacher, which is usually, more than likely society.

Homosexuality was a psychological disorder removed from the list of APA disorders several years ago because of the push for acceptance by homosexuals.

In psychological studies, though, most homosexuals were found to have had a background of physical, sexual, and/or psychological abuse from one of their parents. Another factor is the lack of one parent, but the vast majority involve the first reason.

 

[inocente]

Money talks.

That’s why homosexual garbage has gotten so much acceptance.

I don’t understand - gays are around 4% of society, are you’re saying they have more money than the other 96%?

 

[DihydrogenOxide]

I don’t understand - gays are around 4% of society, are you’re saying they have more money than the other 96%?

Do gays spend money on kids?

Plus, they are complicit in one of the most grievous of sins and promoting it.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Do gays spend money on kids?

I would imagine that homosexuals with children would most certainly spend money on their children. Those without children may still spend money on offspring of friends and family members.

 

[inocente]

Do gays spend money on kids?

So in your neck of the woods all 96% of straights are married with children? There are no single people or childless couples at all?

For your argument to work, gays would on average need to earn 24 times more than straights, making gays incredibly able, intelligent and talented compared with straights, and meaning that society would collapse overnight without them.

Is that what you’re saying, or do you think your case is just a bit overstated?

Plus, they are complicit in one of the most grievous of sins and promoting it.

So 4% of society have taken over the media when the other 96% weren’t looking, and we’re all helpless? Does this include gays in your Church?

Please cite your evidence for this world gay conspiracy.

 

[danserr]

I suggest people (on both sides) drop this idea about homosexual money and acceptance of their lifestyle. There are more interesting points to make.

 

[GEddie]

Young gay couples tend to have more discretionary income because they normally do not raise families. As such, they are aggressively sought after by the commercial sector, vacation venues, etc.

This effect still would not offset the 96 -4 imbalance in numbers.

ICXC NIKA

 

[ManOnFire]

I dont see the relationship

I’m trying to draw a parallel: Do atheists/agnostics who argue for proof of God’s existence in order to believe in God also demand proof that homosexuals were born that way before accepting it?

 

[GEddie]

I suggest people (on both sides) drop this idea about homosexual money and acceptance of their lifestyle. There are more interesting points to make.

Oh come on!!! You forget the natural human interest in the seamy sides of life

ICXC NIKA

 

[inocente]

I’m trying to draw a parallel: Do atheists/agnostics who argue for proof of God’s existence in order to believe in God also demand proof that homosexuals were born that way before accepting it?

I think maybe your logic is back to front. If you believe in God then you’re not going to worry about proof of His existence. In the same way, if you accept homosexuals then you’re not going to worry about whether they are born that way.

 

[atheistgirl]

Homosexuality was a psychological disorder removed from the list of APA disorders several years ago because of the push for acceptance by homosexuals.

It was removed from the list because there was no evidence to show homosexuality was a mental disorder. It was removed because there was no scientific evidence to back up the position, not because of a push for acceptance by homosexuals:

After thoroughly reviewing the scientific data, the American Psychological Association adopted the same position in 1975, and urged all mental health professionals “to take the lead in removing the stigma of mental illness that has long been associated with homosexual orientations.” The National Association of Social Workers has adopted a similar policy.

Thus, mental health professionals and researchers have long recognized that being homosexual poses no inherent obstacle to leading a happy, healthy, and productive life, and that the vast majority of gay and lesbian people function well in the full array of social institutions and interpersonal relationships.[2]

”

[68] The longstanding consensus of research and clinical literature demonstrates that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality.[69] There is now a large body of research evidence that indicates that being gay, lesbian or bisexual is compatible with normal mental health and social adjustment.[68] The World Health Organization’s ICD-9 (1977) listed homosexuality as a mental illness; it was removed from the ICD-10, endorsed by the Forty-third World Health Assembly on May 17, 1990.[70][71] Like the DSM-II, the ICD-10 added ego-dystonic sexual orientation to the list, which refers to people who want to change their gender identities or sexual orientation because of a psychological or behavioral disorder (F66.1). The Chinese Society of Psychiatry removed homosexuality from its Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders in 2001 after five years of study by the association.[72] According to the Royal College of Psychiatrists "This unfortunate history demonstrates how marginalisation of a group of people who have a particular personality feature (in this case homosexuality) can lead to harmful medical practice and a basis for discrimination in society

Sarah x

 

[atheistgirl]

Do gays spend money on kids?

Yes. Homosexual couples have children and as any who has children knows, children cost a fortune

Homosexuals do not exist in a vaccum; they have family, relatives and friends, some of whom are more than likely to have kids, some of whom are bound to be their nieces and nephews. Why wouldn’t they spend their money on them

Sarah x

 

[atheistgirl]

In psychological studies, though, most homosexuals were found to have had a background of physical, sexual, and/or psychological abuse from one of their parents. Another factor is the lack of one parent, but the vast majority involve the first reason.

I havent been able to find such studies - do you have a link?

Sarah x

 

[InSearchofGrace]

It was removed from the list because there was no evidence to show homosexuality was a mental disorder. It was removed because there was no scientific evidence to back up the position, not because of a push for acceptance by homosexuals:

That’s not accurate. If you really want to know what transpired that led to the removal of said diagnosis, you can listen to this American Life public radio episode.

81 WORDS
Originally aired 01.18.2002
The story of how the American Psychiatric Association decided in 1973 that homosexuality was no longer a mental illness.

PROLOGUE.
Host Ira Glass explains that the show this week consists of one long story, the story of something very small that was part of something very large in the history of our country. (2 minutes)

ACT ONE.
In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) declared that homosexuality was not a disease simply by changing the 81-word definition of sexual deviance in its own reference manual. It was a change that attracted a lot of attention at the time, but the story of what led up to that change is one that we hear today, from reporter Alix Spiegel. Part one of Alix’s story details the activities of a closeted group of gay psychiatrists within the APA who met in secret and called themselves the GAYPA…and another, even more secret group of gay psychiatrists among the political echelons of the APA. Alix’s own grandfather was among these psychiatrists, and the president-elect of the APA at the time of the change. (24 minutes)

ACT TWO.
Alix Spiegel’s story continues, with a man dressed in a Nixon mask called Dr. Anonymous, and a pivotal encounter in a Hawaiian bar. (30 minutes)

As to the reliability of the Evelyn Hooker’s study, here is a professional opinion by educator and policy analyst Dr. Thomas Landess: THE EVELYN HOOKER STUDY AND THE NORMALIZATION OF HOMOSEXUALITY

A thoughtful analysis here: NOT SICK: THE 1973 REMOVAL OF HOMOSEXUALITY FROM THE DSM
,

 

[atheistgirl]

That’s not accurate. If you really want to know what transpired that led to the removal of said diagnosis, you can listen to this American Life public radio episode.,

What a fascinating back story.

Thanks for those links - they were incredibly interesting reading.

The bottom line though, when one leaves out all the internal and external politics and social norms, is the scientific/medical evidence just wasnt there to sustain a credible claim of mental illness in relation to homosexuality.

Sarah x