Can we really trust modern studies on homosexuality and related issues?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Holly3278
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No, you have to read the conclusion to look for words like…

“this may mean…”

“based on these findings further studies should be directed…”

“We believe that this…”

rather than this…

“This study confirms…”

“This study is conclusive for…”

You also have to look for what the introduction says as to what it is the purpose is and if it makes sense to what you know and what is known. Many of the articles that are provided by the brain scan/homosexual crowd proving that brains are different are typical of reading into something that is not there. Most don’t know what can and cannot be done with Nuclear medicine and what specificity is and sensitivity is as it regards these studies.

anyone that brings some journal article as proof of something, not having read the conclusion is reading into support for thier point of view and not trying to truly understand transfer of information and knowledge…

Ok…
Thank you for explaining this CopticChristian. I really appreciate it. 🙂

LivingWordUnity, I did not quote your post because it is long but I do want to address a question to you. Are you saying that when trying to convince someone of what the science says on the matter of homosexuality that we should try to use studies from left-wing leaning organizations and agencies so as to avoid being accused of being biased?
 
Thank you for explaining this CopticChristian. I really appreciate it. 🙂

LivingWordUnity, I did not quote your post because it is long but I do want to address a question to you. Are you saying that when trying to convince someone of what the science says on the matter of homosexuality that we should try to use studies from left-wing leaning organizations and agencies so as to avoid being accused of being biased?
and if you are looking for accurate information that is published on Homosexuality…realize that the APA owns 20 publications and has the right to refuse to publish anything they wish…you may want to look at the Journal of Human Sexualilty…you can read it online free.
 
Although it’s easy for a study to be biased as in when it’s sponsored by the “gay” activists, there are ways to counter biases such as how I did with the following:

The intention of this post is to show fast facts and to do so using quotes from left-leaning authoritative sources so as not to be accused of having data that is skewed to the right. The quotes speak for themselves since they all say the same thing which is that actively “gay” and bisexual men are by far at highest risk for HIV/AIDS. This is news to those who want to teach homosexual behavior in schools as the “new normal” calling it “marriage”. Using these statistical facts from these authoritative sources who we can be sure are not biased against “gays”, we can raise people’s awareness of the high risks and dangers of living an active homosexual life.

Fast Facts about AIDS

“Gay and bisexual men are more severely affected by HIV than any other group in the United States .” - CDC

“Among all gay and bisexual men, blacks/African Americans bear the greatest disproportionate burden of HIV.” – CDC

“From 2008 to 2010, HIV infections among young black/African American gay and bisexual men increased 20%.” – CDC

“Fighting HIV among African Americans is not mutually exclusive with fighting HIV among gay and bisexual men. Efforts to reduce HIV among Blacks must confront the epidemic among Black gay and bisexual men as forcefully as existing efforts to confront the epidemic among other groups.” - Obama

“Roughly three-fourths of HIV/AIDS cases in the United States are among men, the majority of whom are gay and bisexual men.” - Obama

“Gay and bisexual men have comprised the largest proportion of the HIV epidemic in the United States since the first cases were reported in the 1980s, and that has not changed. They still comprise the greatest proportion of infections nationally.” - Obama

“CDC reports that HIV diagnoses among young gay men (ages 13-24) of all races and ethnicities rose between 2001 and 2006.” – Obama

Objection:
“But that’s not fact with AIDS/HIV worldwide where most of the cases are heterosexual.”

Answer :
That’s ignoring the proportions. There are more heterosexuals with AIDS because there are more heterosexuals. Homosexuals only make up about 2% of the population. One of the primary ways AIDS got into the heterosexual population is because of bisexual men. According to the CDC and President Obama…

“Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) represent approximately 2% of the US population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV. In 2010, MSM accounted for 63% of all new HIV infections” – CDC

“Given the starkness and the enduring nature of the disparate impact on gay and bisexual men, it is important to significantly reprioritize resources and attention on this community. The United States cannot reduce the number of HIV infections nationally without better addressing HIV among gay and bisexual men…Even though gay and bisexual men comprise only two percent of the U.S. population (4 percent of men)” – Obama (bold emphasis given in Obama’s 2010 Whitehouse report)

“Disparities in HIV infection also exist between gay and bisexual men and heterosexual populations. Recently, the CDC announced that gay and bisexual men in the United States are 44 to 86 times more likely to become infected with HIV than heterosexual men, and 40 to 77 times more likely to become infected than women.” – Obama

“Gay and bisexual men comprise the majority of people with HIV who have died in the United States.” - Obama

“1 in 5 Gay/Bi Men Have HIV, Nearly Half Don’t Know” - WebMD

Objection: “But aren’t they were born that way?”

Answer: There’s no such thing as a “gay gene”.

Unlike being able to know what race a baby is, there’s no way to look at a room full of babies and say that any of them are “gay”. Also, people who are born “intersex” are extremely rare and are typically asexual. So they should not even be in the same category as homosexual.

Except for the possibility of a hormonal imbalance, studies suggest it’s more likely caused by social factors such as a sexual or emotional trauma that influenced them to believe they are homosexual. For example, a baby gets molested, and no one in the family ever finds out. Later, the kid starts to think he’s “gay” but doesn’t make the connection to this repressed memory. Most people will admit that they can’t remember anything earlier than 2 or 3 years old.

“In research with 942 nonclinical adult participants, gay men and lesbian women reported a significantly higher rate of childhood molestation than did heterosexual men and women. Forty-six percent of the homosexual men in contrast to 7% of the heterosexual men reported homosexual molestation. Twenty-two percent of lesbian women in contrast to 1% of heterosexual women reported homosexual molestation. This research is apparently the first survey that has reported substantial homosexual molestation of girls. Suggestions for future research were offered.” - California School of Professional Psychology

Sources:
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
President Obama’s National HIV/AIDS Strategy for the the the United States 2010 White House Report
WebMD
California School of Professional Psychology
I have never heard of left leaning sources, in particular WebMD …how is this left leaning…?
 
Thank you for explaining this CopticChristian. I really appreciate it. 🙂

LivingWordUnity, I did not quote your post because it is long but I do want to address a question to you. Are you saying that when trying to convince someone of what the science says on the matter of homosexuality that we should try to use studies from left-wing leaning organizations and agencies so as to avoid being accused of being biased?
Being able to quote from a left-leaning source that agrees with you on a certain point can be very useful in presenting to a hardline leftist who is inclined to always accuse you of being biased or of having sources that are biased to the right. Since no sane person can accuse the current White House admin of being biased to the right, I considered it a virtual gold mine when I discovered the official White House document on HIV/AIDS with all those places in it where I can quote the president telling it like it is. This can give you the element of surprise where you catch the other flat-footed in the debate. 🙂
 
Being able to quote from a left-leaning source that agrees with you on a certain point can be very useful in presenting to a hardline leftist who is inclined to always accuse you of being biased or of having sources that are biased to the right. Since no sane person can accuse the current White House admin of being biased to the right, I considered it a virtual gold mine when I discovered the official White House document on HIV/AIDS with all those places in it where I can quote the president telling it like it is. 🙂
30 years of reading medical journals and other journals I have never heard of a left leaning source. I still don’t understand how you came up with this. Explain this.
 
30 years of reading medical journals and other journals I have never heard of a left leaning source. I still don’t understand how you came up with this. Explain this.
In the sources I gave in post #18, such as with the CDC or the White House, they lean to the left in how, after giving a statistic about HIV/AIDS, they then try to apologize for the statistic because they don’t want to offend anyone that’s “gay”. And U.S. government website sources can be considered left-leaning since today the U.S. government in general leans to the left. 🙂
 
In the sources I gave in post #18, such as with the CDC or the White House, they lean to the left in how, after giving a statistic about HIV/AIDS, they then try to apologize for the statistic because they don’t want to offend anyone that’s “gay”. 🙂
Ok,

I understand. The CDC has data and commentary and if you take the data as it is then you can ignore the commentary and recognize it for what it is. I am not familiar with the White House link and have never used it.
 
I tried to research FEMEN by going to Wikipedia. I couldn’t do it. There are too many grossly immodest pictures.
 
There are people who don’t have others to discuss such things with, but you can do your own research. Really. Too many have been conditioned to fall into a receptive state and allow themselves to be mentally spoon-fed. That has to stop regarding important issues like this.
And spoon feeding yourself from your own choice of “cereals” will invariably lead someone back to their pre-determined conclusions.

Independent learning usually leads to incompetent understanding of complex issues.

People need other people to learn effectively. Sitting in front of the computer and perusing articles doesn’t cut it.
 
And spoon feeding yourself from your own choice of “cereals” will invariably lead someone back to their pre-determined conclusions.

Independent learning usually leads to incompetent understanding of complex issues.

People need other people to learn effectively. Sitting in front of the computer and perusing articles doesn’t cut it.
This is true for some, not all…Einstien having been educated worked in a patent office and continued to study and formulate ideas…

Understanding not expertise can come from self study for some and the question then is who do you rely on to learn effectively?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top