California governor OKs ban on gay conversion therapy, calling it 'quackery'

[pnewton]

. However, if enough people tell someone that there is something wrong with them, if enough people suggest that what they feel about others of the same sex is perverted and abhorrent, if enough people talk of their sexuality in degrading and demeaning terms, then that person, if they realise that they cannot change what they feel, may well end up having a few psychological problems.

The preaching of half of the Gospel can pretty much screw up anyone, and has for many people. Talking about sin without holding out love and hope is not going to help anyone.

 

[pnewton]

Likewise someone who prefers sex with children.

But if the next generation decides that it is okay, will that make it okay? Those with a belief in absolute morality say “no”, that the moral law does not change with the times. Is morality decided by plurality, or majority?

 

[Slavonic]

It is not? Then should we also quit treating autism if the autisitic feels better curled up in a ball? Should we treat people who like having sex with children or let them have sex with children?

Even in a medical setting, sometimes pain is inflicted for long term healing, like re-breaking a nose to set it, or removing skin to graft it else where. The measure of success is functionality or wholeness, not feeling.

Being gay is not an illness or disorder. Comparisons to autism or pedophilia are pointless. I also don’t think we should conflate physical and mental illness for this discussion. If functionality and wholeness are the measure of success, as you say, Queer individuals are functional and whole without any conversion treatments.

 

[CopticChristian]

Being gay is not an illness or disorder. Comparisons to autism or pedophilia are pointless. I also don’t think we should conflate physical and mental illness for this discussion. If functionality and wholeness are the measure of success, as you say, Queer individuals are functional and whole without any conversion treatments.

Slavonic,

You make this statement as to disorder based on what?

Queer individuals are functional and whole as you say based on what? What if there are queer individuals that want to change, are they less whole if they do?

Your opinions do not express the teachings of any Catholic Church.

 

[Bradski]

American Academy of Pediatrics…The American Academy of Pediatrics issued its first statement on homosexuality and adolescents in 1983, with a revision in 1993.

You’ve linked to a couple of policy announcements where the AAP give their own independent reason for why homosexuality should not be treated as a problem. I’m not sure why you think that shows they have bias in any way.

If you could show that they made these decisions immediately after the APA made theirs then you might, just might, be able to draw some tenuous link between the two. But there was a 10 year separation. The fact that they mention the APA in the 1983 policy is inconsequential. I’d be astonished if they didn’t. They are in fact saying that they have come to their own decisions (check all the references at the end of the policy) and are in agreement with the APA.

The American Psychological Association is harder to pin down however you can read between the lines…NARTH…points out the issues with the APA.

Thanks, but we’ll pass on the that. ‘Reading between the lines’ especially when NARTH is doing the reading, does not constitute anything that can be used to show that the APA is not an organisation that can be used with confidence as one that rejects the notion that homosexuality is a disorder.

The National Association of Social Workers references the American Psychological Association as its support…clgs.org/official-statement-concerning-homosexuality-national-association-social-wor

The link that you gave is a reasonably comprehensive document (with references) as to why they, independently, arrived at the decision that homosexuality was not a disorder that needed treatment. The references to the APA is as follows:

Taken from The American Psychological Association Online Fact Sheet — Just the Facts About Sexual Orientation & Youth: A Primer for Principals, Educators and School Personnel.

You seem to think that indicates that they are taking their lead from the APA because of that. Whereas the document ‘Just the Facts…’ is not just an APA document but is one that they issued on behalf of the ‘Just The Facts Coalition’ which includes, wait for it, the National Association of Social Workers themselves.

So far from proving that they have taken their lead from the APA, you have shown that they arrived at their decisions independently and emphasised that fact by joining with the APA (plus 10 other organisations) in stating that homosexuality is not a disorder.

You seem to be doing a very good job of showing that these organisations can indeed be trusted in their findings.

Oh, and the WHO? Well they represent their member states and reflect the consensus of the member states who appoint delegates to its decision making body. It’s hardly surprising that if everyone (except NARTH) says that homosexuality is not a disorder, then they are going to reflect that view.

If that’s all you’ve got, Coptic, then it clearly doesn’t come any way close to convincing a disinterested reader that, in just the few cases you’ve mentioned, the organisations cannot be used as expert opinion in reaching a decision about homosexuality being treated as a disorder.

In fact, the fact that you mentioned the WHO does nothing but kill any argument that you are attempting. To point out that they have been influenced by the ‘homosexual lobby’ is risible as they represent the individual views of their 194 members. To say they have been influenced is to say that all 194 member states, and all the individual organisations within those states, have been likewise influenced.

How much time do you have available to check them all?

 

[CopticChristian]

You’ve linked to a couple of policy announcements where the AAP give their own independent reason for why homosexuality should not be treated as a problem. I’m not sure why you think that shows they have bias in any way.

If you could show that they made these decisions immediately after the APA made theirs then you might, just might, be able to draw some tenuous link between the two. But there was a 10 year separation. The fact that they mention the APA in the 1983 policy is inconsequential. I’d be astonished if they didn’t. They are in fact saying that they have come to their own decisions (check all the references at the end of the policy) and are in agreement with the APA.

Thanks, but we’ll pass on the that. ‘Reading between the lines’ especially when NARTH is doing the reading, does not constitute anything that can be used to show that the APA is not an organisation that can be used with confidence as one that rejects the notion that homosexuality is a disorder.

The link that you gave is a reasonably comprehensive document (with references) as to why they, independently, arrived at the decision that homosexuality was not a disorder that needed treatment. The references to the APA is as follows:

Taken from The American Psychological Association Online Fact Sheet — Just the Facts About Sexual Orientation & Youth: A Primer for Principals, Educators and School Personnel.

You seem to think that indicates that they are taking their lead from the APA because of that. Whereas the document ‘Just the Facts…’ is not just an APA document but is one that they issued on behalf of the ‘Just The Facts Coalition’ which includes, wait for it, the National Association of Social Workers themselves.

So far from proving that they have taken their lead from the APA, you have shown that they arrived at their decisions independently and emphasised that fact by joining with the APA (plus 10 other organisations) in stating that homosexuality is not a disorder.

You seem to be doing a very good job of showing that these organisations can indeed be trusted in their findings.

Oh, and the WHO? Well they represent their member states and reflect the consensus of the member states who appoint delegates to its decision making body. It’s hardly surprising that if everyone (except NARTH) says that homosexuality is not a disorder, then they are going to reflect that view.

If that’s all you’ve got, Coptic, then it clearly doesn’t come any way close to convincing a disinterested reader that, in just the few cases you’ve mentioned, the organisations cannot be used as expert opinion in reaching a decision about homosexuality being treated as a disorder.

In fact, the fact that you mentioned the WHO does nothing but kill any argument that you are attempting. To point out that they have been influenced by the ‘homosexual lobby’ is risible as they represent the individual views of their 194 members. To say they have been influenced is to say that all 194 member states, and all the individual organisations within those states, have been likewise influenced.

How much time do you have available to check them all?

Bradski,

You may want to tune in to the California Courts that will review all of this nonsense and see how independent everyone is. Absent the American Psychiatric Association there is no independent thought. The legal teams will do a better job reviewing the history. You don’t like it. I understand. These opinions sway other than an informed Medical mind. You are a consumer.

I doubt that anything will sway your opinion as it appears to be formed.

 

[Bradski]

But if the next generation decides that it (sex with children) is okay, will that make it okay? Those with a belief in absolute morality say “no”, that the moral law does not change with the times. Is morality decided by plurality, or majority?

Are you going to decide yourself what the lower limit for sex with a young girl should be or do you go with what the church says? Is what the church says always been the ‘absolute morality’ in this regard?

 

[CopticChristian]

You’ve linked to a couple of policy announcements where the AAP give their own independent reason for why homosexuality should not be treated as a problem. I’m not sure why you think that shows they have bias in any way.

You seem to be doing a very good job of showing that these organisations can indeed be trusted in their findings.

Bradski,

While some organizations have caved into the APA DSM fiasco, not all have…there are opposing opinions. You like those views. I like these views.

The gay community claimed a great victory when they prevailed upon the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality from the DSM-II listing of psychological disorders. This highly controversial action seems to fly in the face of the evidence of any common-sense definition of psychological well-being. Consider the following:

1. Homosexual men are six times more likely to have attempted suicide than heterosexual men.
2. Studies indicate that between 25 and 33% of homosexual men and women are alcoholics, compared to a 7% figure for the general population.
3. Statistics give evidence of widespread sexual compulsion among homosexual men.
4. A major Kinsey study revealed that 43% of the homosexual men surveyed estimated that they had had sex with 500 or more sexual partners; 28% with 1000 or more partners.

**Either the APA is ignorant of what homosexuality entails for vast numbers of men, or their view of healthy sexuality indicates a serious disorder among members of the APA.**The same Kinsey study revealed that homosexual men have to a great extent separated sexuality from relationship. The survey showed 79% of the respondents saying that over half of their sexual partners were strangers. Seventy percent said that over half of their sexual partners were people with whom they had sex only once. Surely this is an indication of either deep dissatisfaction, or else terribly destructive hedonism.

Not all Pediatricians adhere to the American Academy of Pediatrics opinions…

American College Of Pediatricians

acpeds.org/Sexuality-Issues.html

acpeds.org/Empowering-Parents-of-Gender-Discordant-and-Same-Sex-Attracted-Children.html

Parents have the right to make informed health care decisions for their children based on accurate and unbiased information, as do psychosocially mature adolescents themselves. While sexual attractions may not be consciously chosen, one can choose what to do with these attractions once recognized. No one is “born gay.” Biological and environmental influences may be fostered or foiled. Therefore, SSA is indeed preventable and changeable to varying degrees for many who desire these outcomes.

Finally, it is important to stress that while change is a choice - not everyone who attempts change succeeds. Regardless of what one believes about homosexual behavior, it is essential to stand in solidarity against all forms of unjust discrimination and violence.

Not all Psychiatric Associations agree with the APA…

By way of contrast, as of 1997, the Chinese Psychiatric Association still classified homosexuality as a mental disorder. Most professional therapists in that country regard sexual orientation as a curable illness.

While the homosexual community politics to get societies to agree with their agenda and attempt to silence NARTH in California…they cannot silence individual opinion and fact.

Dr. John Money, from his 1988 book ‘Gay, Straight and In Between’, states " Some people do change their sexual orientation. There is absolutely no harm in trying."

Dr, Reuben Fine, Director for the New York Centre for Psychoanalytic Training, says in his 1987 publication ‘Psychoanalytic Theory, Male and Female Homosexuality: Psychological Approaches’: “I have recently had occasion to review the result of psychotherapy with homosexuals, and been surprised by the findings. It is paradoxical that even though politically active homosexual groups deny the possibility of change, all studies from Schrenck-Notzing on have found positive effects, virtually regardless of the kind of treatment used…a considerable percentage of overt homosexuals became heterosexual…If the patients were motivated, whatever procedure is adopted, a large percentage will give up their homosexuality. In this connection, public information is of the greatest importance. The misinformation spread by certain circles that ‘homosexuality is untreatable by psychotherapy’ does incalculable harm to thousands of men and women.” (pp.84-86)

Dr. Robert Kronemeyer, in his 1980 book, ‘Overcoming Homosexuality’ says: “For those homosexuals who are unhappy with their life and find effective therapy, it is ‘curable’.”
“The homosexual’s real enemy is… his ignorance of the possibility that he can be helped.” says Dr. Edmund Bergler, in his book, 'Homosexuality: Disease or Way of Life?"
“The major challenge in treating homosexuality from the point of view of the patient’s resistance has, of course, been the misconception that the disorder is innate or inborn,” writes Dr. Charles Socarides, in his text, ‘Homosexuality’, in the American Handbook of Psychiatry.

Here is what Dr. Irving Bieber and his colleagues conclude: "The therapeutic results of our study provide reason for an optimistic outlook. Many homosexuals become exclusively heterosexual in psychoanalytic treatment. Although this change may be more easily accomplished by some than others, in our judgement, a heterosexual shift is a possibility for all homosexuals who are strongly motivated to change. Bieber states seventeen years later: “We have followed some patients for as long as ten years who have remained exclusively heterosexual.”

 

[CopticChristian]

You’ve linked to a couple of policy announcements where the AAP give their own independent reason for why homosexuality should not be treated as a problem. I’m not sure why you think that shows they have bias in any way.

If you could show that they made these decisions immediately after the APA made theirs then you might, just might, be able to draw some tenuous link between the two. But there was a 10 year separation. The fact that they mention the APA in the 1983 policy is inconsequential. I’d be astonished if they didn’t. They are in fact saying that they have come to their own decisions (check all the references at the end of the policy) and are in agreement with the APA.

Thanks, but we’ll pass on the that. ‘Reading between the lines’ especially when NARTH is doing the reading, does not constitute anything that can be used to show that the APA is not an organisation that can be used with confidence as one that rejects the notion that homosexuality is a disorder.

The link that you gave is a reasonably comprehensive document (with references) as to why they, independently, arrived at the decision that homosexuality was not a disorder that needed treatment. The references to the APA is as follows:

Taken from The American Psychological Association Online Fact Sheet — Just the Facts About Sexual Orientation & Youth: A Primer for Principals, Educators and School Personnel.

You seem to think that indicates that they are taking their lead from the APA because of that. Whereas the document ‘Just the Facts…’ is not just an APA document but is one that they issued on behalf of the ‘Just The Facts Coalition’ which includes, wait for it, the National Association of Social Workers themselves.

So far from proving that they have taken their lead from the APA, you have shown that they arrived at their decisions independently and emphasised that fact by joining with the APA (plus 10 other organisations) in stating that homosexuality is not a disorder.

You seem to be doing a very good job of showing that these organisations can indeed be trusted in their findings.

Oh, and the WHO? Well they represent their member states and reflect the consensus of the member states who appoint delegates to its decision making body. It’s hardly surprising that if everyone (except NARTH) says that homosexuality is not a disorder, then they are going to reflect that view.

If that’s all you’ve got, Coptic, then it clearly doesn’t come any way close to convincing a disinterested reader that, in just the few cases you’ve mentioned, the organisations cannot be used as expert opinion in reaching a decision about homosexuality being treated as a disorder.

In fact, the fact that you mentioned the WHO does nothing but kill any argument that you are attempting. To point out that they have been influenced by the ‘homosexual lobby’ is risible as they represent the individual views of their 194 members. To say they have been influenced is to say that all 194 member states, and all the individual organisations within those states, have been likewise influenced.

How much time do you have available to check them all?

Continued…

Dr. Lawrence J. Hatterer says in ‘Changing Homosexuality in the Male’: “I’ve heard of hundreds of other men who have went from a homosexual to a heterosexual adjustment on their own.”(p.138)

Even Masters and Johnson report on their 1979 book, ‘Homosexuality in Perspective’, that the success rate in 81 gays desiring reorientation (after a six year follow-up), is 71.6% (p.402)

“No longer should the qualified psychotherapist avoid the responsibility of either accepting the homosexual client treatment or referring him or her to an acceptable treatment source.” (p.251)

I find independent opinion more credible than any society. No society speaks for this physician since I find the societies to be quasi political.

 

[Bradski]

Not all Pediatricians adhere to the American Academy of Pediatrics opinions…American College Of Pediatricians.

The American College Of Paediatricians is an impressive sounding name for a marginal group of like-minded conservative professional who are, in the first instance, opposed to homosexuality. Their world-wide numbers are barely in the three figures (as opposed to the millions of members of other organisations earlier mentioned just within the US)

They have constantly cited research by other paediatricians which has been described by the original authors themselves as ‘misleading and incorrect’ (Francis Collins, a leading geneticist who is also an evangelical Christian). Even Gary Ramfredi, a poster boy for the Christian right until his work with gay families was discredited, complained that: ‘it’s obvious that they didn’t even read my research’.

Not all Psychiatric Associations agree with the APA.

By way of contrast, as of 1997, the Chinese Psychiatric Association still classified homosexuality as a mental disorder. Most professional therapists in that country regard sexual orientation as a curable illness.

Unfortunately for you, that’s not quite the situation right now. In fact, that hasn’t been the situation for the last 11 years. Someone should have mentioned it, but I guess that people thought it wasn’t mentioning.

In 1997, the Chinese government abolished the hooligan law, an act considered by most to be a decriminalization of homosexuality. In 2001, the Chinese Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its list. The association’s evidence included a 1999 study that followed the lives of 51 Chinese gays and lesbians over the course of a year. The group found that only six of the subjects had emotional disorders.

Another key difference is religion. In the United States, the debate against homosexuality is fueled by Christianity while in Southeast Asia, it’s Islam. However, China has no dominant religion and most Chinese are secular.
“Lack of religion means China in some ways is more accepting,” Williams says. uschina.usc.edu/w_usci/showarticle.aspx?articleID=14740&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

Not having much luck, I’m afraid. How about I make a few suggestions for countries that might back you up. Try Afghanistan to start and we’ll work through the alphabet as we go.

 

[CopticChristian]

The American College Of Paediatricians is an impressive sounding name for a marginal group of like-minded conservative professional who are, in the first instance, opposed to homosexuality. Their world-wide numbers are barely in the three figures (as opposed to the millions of members of other organisations earlier mentioned just within the US)

They have constantly cited research by other paediatricians which has been described by the original authors themselves as ‘misleading and incorrect’ (Francis Collins, a leading geneticist who is also an evangelical Christian). Even Gary Ramfredi, a poster boy for the Christian right until his work with gay families was discredited, complained that: ‘it’s obvious that they didn’t even read my research’.

Unfortunately for you, that’s not quite the situation right now. In fact, that hasn’t been the situation for the last 11 years. Someone should have mentioned it, but I guess that people thought it wasn’t mentioning.

In 1997, the Chinese government abolished the hooligan law, an act considered by most to be a decriminalization of homosexuality. In 2001, the Chinese Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its list. The association’s evidence included a 1999 study that followed the lives of 51 Chinese gays and lesbians over the course of a year. The group found that only six of the subjects had emotional disorders.

Another key difference is religion. In the United States, the debate against homosexuality is fueled by Christianity while in Southeast Asia, it’s Islam. However, China has no dominant religion and most Chinese are secular.
“Lack of religion means China in some ways is more accepting,” Williams says. uschina.usc.edu/w_usci/showarticle.aspx?articleID=14740&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

Not having much luck, I’m afraid. How about I make a few suggestions for countries that might back you up. Try Afghanistan to start and we’ll work through the alphabet as we go.

Bradski,

you negelected all the independent thinkers…

 

[Bradski]

Bradski,

you negelected all the independent thinkers…

I don’t think I need spend any more time in showing that what you are bringing to the table is either personal opinion, out of date, factually incorrect, inconsequential, biased or just plain, old fashioned wrong.

Thanks for your efforts, Coptic.

 

[pnewton]

Being gay is not an illness or disorder.

That is an opinion, not a fact. As a Catholic, I accept the teaching of the Church that it is intrinsically disordered. This is a forum on Catholic social justice. We shouldn’t be contradicting Church teaching.

 

[CopticChristian]

I don’t think I need spend any more time in showing that what you are bringing to the table is either personal opinion, out of date, factually incorrect, inconsequential, biased or just plain, old fashioned wrong.

Thanks for your efforts, Coptic.

Bradski,

Thank you for dialoguing about this. What you have here is a failure to communicate…

youtube.com/watch?v=1fuDDqU6n4o

I graduated college, spent 4 years in Medical School, spent 8 years in post graduate training, read science, understand controversy, see that within the field of medicine that there is always controversy and now I am told that I am to listen to societies that I never belonged to nor ever respected and I am wrong. I pray that the readership goes back and reviews and understands that this is exactly what the homosexual community has created…

ie…the educated community is wrong, does not understand, and cannot read and decipher the truth and must now spend time listening to societies to dictate my thinking.

Here is reality. In the field of medicine there has always been controversy.

Is addiction a disease or is it not a disease. There are opposing views and both sides have opinions with the exception of no ability to prove that addiction is a disease yet this idea is promulgated. No society dictates what anyone thinks on this issue.

In spite of what is learned in College, as a Zoology major, Psychology minor…behavior I am now told is fixed and this is contrary to every form of teaching. All behavior is fluid however with one exception…Homosexuality the propagandists want everyone to believe is fixed.

Rather than adhering to General Semantics and Time Binding, taking information from the past and buidling on it…the Homosexual propagandists like you want all information to be discarded and a revisionist history to be accepted and societies to dictate thinking. This is absurdity and fails the test of sanity…as described in Science and Sanity by Korzybski.

You and othe Homosexual propagandists have no science only criticism and deny fact…You and the Homosexual propagandists do not understand Fixed Behavior and learning. You are essentially saying that we as humans are robots when it comes to sexuality…

mansfield.ohio-state.edu/~sabedon/campbl51.htm

(a) In the case of a FAP, the animals are behaving more like robots."
(i) However, the important thing to keep in mind is that the FAP under natural conditions typically represents the energetically minimal investment in the display of a behavior that otherwise is good enough (i.e., evolution is not just optimizing the outcome of the behavior but also optimizing the efficiency of the behavior such that behavioral outcome for energy invested is maximized)
(ii) “The ability to confront novel stimuli, learn about them, and adjust behavior is a hallmark of both intelligence and self-awareness. The evolution of intelligence is costly, in both the development of the neural tissue necessary to process the information and its metabolic maintenance. In addition, the evolution of intelligence requires dramatic changes in life history patterns, such as long juvenile phases and high parental investment per offspring. For most species, these costs, measured as reductions in reproductive fitness, far outweigh the costs of an occasional inappropriate use of FAPs, and extensive intelligence has not evolved in many animal groups.”

(2) Learning
(a) Learning is synonymous with behavioral modification such that, ideally, a behavior is further optimized by the change
(b) Learning can optimize behavior most obviously in a short term sense; however, for behavior to be truly optimized, it must be optimized in a Darwinian sense
(c) “Nearly all biologists today agree that most behavior is a consequence of genetic and environmental influences. Even though an animal may not have to witness a FAP because the basic behavior is innate, learning is still involved. Most FAPs improve with performance, as animals learn to carry them out more efficiently.”
(d) Learning may be differentiated into a number of different types and associated concepts:

TO BE CONTINUED…

 

[CopticChristian]

I don’t think I need spend any more time in showing that what you are bringing to the table is either personal opinion, out of date, factually incorrect, inconsequential, biased or just plain, old fashioned wrong.

Thanks for your efforts, Coptic.

CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF HOMOSEXUAL UNSANE PROPOGANDA…

Alfred Korzybski in General Semantics desribed the state of Unsanity…ie when the inside world of your mind does not correlate with what is out there in the real world…this causes unsanity…in other words all these thoughts about the paradigm of homosexuality as fixed ignoring reality causes unsanity…

While the Homosexual Propagandists propose fixed behavior they will have to silence many…as seen here…

renewamerica.com/columns/fischer/110914

In an astonishing column published in the winger-left publication, “The Atlantic,” openly “queer woman” (her words) Lindsay Miller says flatly, “In direct opposition to both the mainstream gay movement and Lady Gaga, I would like to state for the record that I was not born this way.”

“The life I have now is not something I ended up with because I had no other options. Make no mistake — it’s a life I chose.”

This article can be read in its entirety here…

theatlantic.com/health/print/2011/09/queer-by-choice-not-by-chance-against-being-born-this-way/244898/

Queer by Choice, Not by Chance: Against Being ‘Born This Way’
By Lindsay Miller

Homosexuality is not fixed and this notion is found elsewhere…as seen here…

isreview.org/issues/37/gay_oppression.shtml

Gould’s historical materialist, or Marxist, perspective of sexuality leads us to conclude that gay identity is the result of a complex set of historical, cultural, and environmental factors. Sexuality, like other behaviors, is fluid and not fixed. It is worth quoting John D’Emilio at length here, because he captures the origins and potential future of gay sexuality in this passage:

32 D’Emilio, “Capitalism and Gay Identity,” 12.

In addition there are no solid views and there are opposing views and whevever in science there are opposing views there is no ethical reason to silence any view with the exception of the Gay agenda in California…

• There is no scientific data that substantiates a genetic or biologic basis for same-sex attraction. Anybody can change." Richard Cohen, at the year 2000 PFOX, (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays) convention.
• “Homosexuality & heterosexuality are likely to be the result of an interaction of several different factors, including genetics, hormonal & environmental factors. Psychological & social influences alone cannot cause homosexuality.” PFLAG Oakland - East Bay. 1
• “To date, all information and studies involving genetics have proven homosexuality to be environmental, not genetic.” PFOX web site.
• “Research suggests that the homosexual orientation is in place very early in the life cycle, possibly even before birth. It is found in about ten percent of the population, a figure which is surprisingly constant across cultures, irrespective of the different moral values and standards of a particular culture.” Statement on Homosexuality, American Psychological Association, 1994-JUL. 2

The problem that you and other Homosexual Propagandists are going to have is that there exist those that have chosen to change and want to be recognized…what do you do with them…How can you change thinking and expect people to listen to distorted society thinking when these people exist?

• “Why is my child Gay?” Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) at:
dynapolis.com/PFLAG/whygay.html
• “How PFOX can help,” Parents & Friends of Ex-Gays, at:

pfox.org/help.html

The Ex-gay movement explains this here…

pfox.org/about_us.html

What is the ex-gay movement?

Former homosexuals are the last invisible minority group in America. The ex-gay movement is a civil rights movement to ensure the safe and inclusion of former homosexuals in all realms of society, and supports the ex-gay community’s equal access to all public venues gays and their supporters should not have to be closeted for fear of other’s negative reactions or disapproval. They do not think something is wrong with them because they decided to fulfill their heterosexual potential. Nor do they believe others should condemn them for the personal decision they have made for their lives. Full diversity must include the ex-gay community.

 

[CopticChristian]

I don’t think I need spend any more time in showing that what you are bringing to the table is either personal opinion, out of date, factually incorrect, inconsequential, biased or just plain, old fashioned wrong.

Thanks for your efforts, Coptic.

CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF HOMOSEXUAL UNSANE PROPOGANDA…

So you and other Homosexual Propagandists that commenced with the unravelling of the DSM by Homosexuals, want me to listen to societies that were never any part of my medical education, that never expressed any opinions that influence practice, and only sent me information asking for money…these are your gurus and to that I say…oh oh…we have seen this before…

youtube.com/watch?v=8CtjhWhw2I8

The Homosexual Propagandists wants me to ignore what I know about behavior in general, dismiss that there have always been opposing views in the field of medicine and by some miracle we now have societies dictating that I should think and believe that we have discovered one fixed behavior…Homosexuality…even though gays say it is not fixed and there are ex-gays? Huh…it then causes me to realize that all that has been put forth by the Homosexual Propagandists…is a menagerie of think speak…

This should set the tone for conversations with Homosexual Propagandists…

youtube.com/watch?v=zjedLeVGcfE

For the more sophistacted crowd…

youtube.com/watch?v=sUe2OnXIBEg

and of course if you are a child of the 60’s then this may be more appealing.

youtube.com/watch?v=cIqx5_w-dnk

In the end Homosexual Propagandists cause me to step away and should cause others to step away and ask yourself if what they propose and what they want others to believe based on what some society says is any better than this…

youtube.com/watch?v=sShMA85pv8M

Homosexuality is not fixed behavior and can change in my opinion based on the fact that all behavior is subject to change.

 

[pnewton]

Are you going to decide yourself what the lower limit for sex with a young girl should be or do you go with what the church says? Is what the church says always been the ‘absolute morality’ in this regard?

Yes. Yet the fact of this question shows that a slippery slope to pedophilia does exist.

Whether such and age is 18 or 14 is subject to change based on the way society raises children. What does not change (in the moral law) is that one who is too young to consent to sex should be protected. I guess this may be open to change in civil law now that our country has started opening new fronts in the sexual revolution in the name of tolerance.

 

[pnewton]

A plethora of opinions do not create fact.

 

[SamH]

Therapy aimed at turning gay kids straight will soon be illegal in California, with the state’s governor declaring he hopes a new law will relegate such efforts “to the dustbin of quackery.”

The legislation – which the state Senate passed in May, Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law this weekend and will take effect January 1 – prohibits attempts to change the sexual orientation of patients under age 18.

“This bill bans non-scientific ‘therapies’ that have driven young people to depression and suicide,” Brown tweeted. “These practices have no basis in science or medicine.”

But practitioners of so-called “reparative therapy” say the assertions of the governor and gay rights advocates “just are not true,” according to David Pickup, a spokesman for the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality.

Didn’t the Supreme Court rule in 1973 that a person has a right to privacy in their medical treatment? Or does that only apply when you want to kill an infant?

 

[CopticChristian]

Didn’t the Supreme Court rule in 1973 that a person has a right to privacy in their medical treatment? Or does that only apply when you want to kill an infant?

Sam,

Yes, and they have used this right for other things as well…

The Supreme Court, in two decisions in the 1920s, read the Fourteenth Amendment’s liberty clause to prohibit states from interfering with the private decisions of educators and parents to shape the education of children.

The privacy doctrine of the 1920s gained renewed life in the Warren Court of the 1960s when, in Griswold v Connecticut (1965), the Court struck down a state law prohibiting the possession, sale, and distribution of contraceptives to married couples.

In 1969, the Court unanimously concluded that the right of privacy protected an individual’s right to possess and view pornography (including pornography that might be the basis for a criminal prosecution against its manufacturer or distributor) in his own home.

The Burger Court extended the right of privacy to include a woman’s right to have an abortion in Roe v Wade (1972), but thereafter resisted several invitations to expand the right.

The Supreme Court said in the 1977 case of Moore v. East Cleveland that “the Constitution protects the sanctity of the family precisely because the institution of the family is deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition.”

In more recent decades, the Court recognized in Cruzan v Missouri Department of Health (1990) that individuals have a liberty interest that includes the right to make decisions to terminate life-prolonging medical treatments (although the Court accepted that states can impose certain conditions on the exercise of that right).

The most frequently quoted statement by a Supreme Court justice on the subject of privacy comes in Justice Brandeis’s dissent in Olmstead v. U. S. (1928):

“The makers of our Constitution understood the need to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness, and the protections guaranteed by this are much broader in scope, and include the right to life and an inviolate personality – the right to be left alone – the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men. The principle underlying the Fourth and Fifth Amendments is protection against invasions of the sanctities of a man’s home and privacies of life. This is a recognition of the significance of man’s spiritual nature, his feelings, and his intellect.”

It may well be that this right to privacy may be the undoing of this case. If the sancity of the home is key and the education of children is key…it is easy to see that the Homosexual agenda and this law strikes at the heart of the sanctity of the home and the right and privelege to educate children. This includes all education including sexual education. This may in fact cause controversy for the Homosexuals that want to adopt…because if the heterosexual family can be invaded by the Homosexuals then that leaves their homes open as well…

The right to the sanctity of the home may be the key to the undoing of this case.

In the meantime there will be contention with the Homosexual Propagandists telling us that Medical Societies dictate care and thinking that is tantamount to…

youtube.com/watch?v=lDjWXf1QZ4E

or

youtube.com/watch?v=nm9o6DH_uzE

Off with their heads, off with their heads…patience and truth will prevail…