I'm tired of the "Gay Priests Are Evil" stuff

[Lisa_N]

"

1. The dopamine that is fired off in the brain is so addictive that during this act the subject becomes addicted to the dopamine and therefore the act(s) that drive(s) its firing. This is a very, very real biological function and one that is in the addiction category, which as any Catholic who can read the CCC knows that addiction mitigates the sin.

FWIW, your statement actually points to a learned response. You are correct, dopamine creates pleasure. One can learn to respond to all manner of odd things, for example fetishists learn to be sexually stimulated by a particular object. I do not believe anyone is BORN with a sexual response to shoes for example.

This is one of the reasons such deviancy as pedophelia and sexual violence are so hard to ‘cure.’ One LEARNS to be sexually stimulated by either small children or violence and it is very hard to unlearn. I suggest that this is also why learned response to same sex attraction is difficult to overcome, particularly if as many believe, it is learned response at a young age.

dcmac:

1. There is evidence that a not insignificant number of subjects who suffer from SSA have a genetic predisposition to SSA and its acts. This is also a very real biological connection.

So, please, provide us with the evidence that SSA is NOT

a biological phenomenon in ANY manner.

Quite honestly there have been no studies that have been done with good methodology, statistical significance and replicated results that have pointed to a biological base to SSA. Most of the studies have been too small or with self selected subjects, both of which would be dismissed by any real scientific authorities.

While I suspect there may well be a tendency to SSA that runs in families, just as alcoholism and certain mental illnesses run in families. However regardless, it is the behavior and learned response that causes the real problems.

LIsa N

 

[Jennie]

Ryan,

Have you ever considered that maybe you don’t suffer from SSA? Many adolescents, especially in today’s society, mistake normal hormonal responses as “being gay”, or “same sex attraction”.

Adolescence is a time when the individual is experiencing those new “hormonal” feelings for the first time. After all, they are going through puberty, and their bodies are maturing into adulthood.

During this time, hormonal responses may be chaotic and easily triggered. For example, seeing two people kissing in the hall at school, or sex scenes on TV. For some teens the body doesn’t yet seem to care if it is a man kissing a woman, man kissing man, or woman kissing woman. The adolescent’s immature hormonal response can be triggered with the slightest brush of anything sexual.

When the adolescent recognizes that they felt “hormonal;” during an inappropriate occurrence, they may mistake or associate this feeling as “who they are”, rather than just an “inappropriate hormonal response”.

When an adolescent male recognizes that his hormones were triggered in relation to a homosexual situation, the adolescent male may think that he is “gay” or have a “same sex attraction”. (thanks to society)

When in fact, it has nothing to do with attraction, but everything to do with “immature hormones” and “overly active, inappropriate, trigger responses” to stimuli.
When the young adolescent finds themselves in this situation experiencing these feelings, he needs to rely on his moral teachings. He needs to look away and tell his mind that same sex acts are inappropriate and contrary to Gods will.

In time, the adolescent will train his “new hormones” to become triggered during more appropriate situations. The hormones will no longer be triggered during inappropriate ones, as he has trained his mind and body to recognize those occurrences as being unnatural and immoral.

When the male adolescent is mislead into thinking that these thoughts are “who he is”, and “it’s okay to be gay”, he will become very confused and frustrated. He will learn to follow his feelings for pleasure rather than follow the will of God.

Hence, homosexuality and same sex attraction are a “learned response”.

 

[Lisa_N]

Jennie:

When the male adolescent is mislead into thinking that these thoughts are “who he is”, and “it’s okay to be gay”, he will become very confused and frustrated. He will learn to follow his feelings for pleasure rather than follow the will of God.

Hence, homosexuality and same sex attraction are a “learned response”.

Great post Jennie. Thank you for weighing in on the subject. FWIW another related point is the case of a young man who is seduced or molested. Many of them think it means the ARE homosexual since they were preyed upon. We had a horrible sad situation where a young man hung himself after being repeatedly molested by his juvenile court caseworker. He was despondent thinking that it was ‘his fault’ or that he ‘must be gay’ But young men put in a position of being under the control of an older, predatory homosexual can have his self confidence and proper identification of his sexuality undermined by an incident or two.

I read a number of books on our terrible priest scandal. To a one the men stated that they were afraid that being molested “made” them homosexual or by definition meant they were homosexual because they had been picked out by the predatory priest.

Instead of being told to ‘embrace’ these feelings or their confusion, as you suggested they need to understand what has happened to them and that it’s neither their fault nor does it define them.

Lisa N

 

[rpstpa]

Jennie:

Ryan,

Have you ever considered that maybe you don’t suffer from SSA? Many adolescents, especially in today’s society, mistake normal hormonal responses as “being gay”, or “same sex attraction”.

Adolescence is a time when the individual is experiencing those new “hormonal” feelings for the first time. After all, they are going through puberty, and their bodies are maturing into adulthood.

During this time, hormonal responses may be chaotic and easily triggered. For example, seeing two people kissing in the hall at school, or sex scenes on TV. For some teens the body doesn’t yet seem to care if it is a man kissing a woman, man kissing man, or woman kissing woman. The adolescent’s immature hormonal response can be triggered with the slightest brush of anything sexual.

When the adolescent recognizes that they felt “hormonal;” during an inappropriate occurrence, they may mistake or associate this feeling as “who they are”, rather than just an “inappropriate hormonal response”.

When an adolescent male recognizes that his hormones were triggered in relation to a homosexual situation, the adolescent male may think that he is “gay” or have a “same sex attraction”. (thanks to society)

When in fact, it has nothing to do with attraction, but everything to do with “immature hormones” and “overly active, inappropriate, trigger responses” to stimuli.
When the young adolescent finds themselves in this situation experiencing these feelings, he needs to rely on his moral teachings. He needs to look away and tell his mind that same sex acts are inappropriate and contrary to Gods will.

In time, the adolescent will train his “new hormones” to become triggered during more appropriate situations. The hormones will no longer be triggered during inappropriate ones, as he has trained his mind and body to recognize those occurrences as being unnatural and immoral.

When the male adolescent is mislead into thinking that these thoughts are “who he is”, and “it’s okay to be gay”, he will become very confused and frustrated. He will learn to follow his feelings for pleasure rather than follow the will of God.

Jennie

Did you have ssa when you were Ryans age? Im sure you did. It must be a struggle for you every day to supress your feeling for the same sex. Am I right?

Hence, homosexuality and same sex attraction are a “learned response”.

 

[Jennie]

QUOTE]Jennie

Did you have ssa when you were Ryans age? Im sure you did. It must be a struggle for you every day to supress your feeling for the same sex. Am I right?

To be quite honest, I did NOT have SSA at Ryans age. However, when I was exposed to porn, (not until college age) I found myself aroused by inappropriate acts of others on film. It wasn’t until I visually saw same sex acts, that I discovered that anything sexual made me feel that “sexual feeling”.

Even though I felt the “sexual release of hormones”, I had no desires to “be with” anyone of the same sex in that way. Nor did I label myself based on hormonal responses. My morals overrode desires of pleasure.

I do not feel like I am supressing any “feelings”, because those “feelings” are not important to me. I’m not sure that I would even call them feelings, but more like a side effect to the hormones being released.

What is important to me are my feelings towards God’s will, my feelings towards my husband, and my feelings toward my children.

 

[Kevin_Walker]

fix:

They are not pedophiles.

Pedophile and Pedorast are both horns on the same homosexual devil!

 

[Kevin_Walker]

RomanRyan1088:

I AM SICK BY SOME PEOPLE IN HERE! MY DESIRE TO BE CATHOLIC ARE QUICKLY GOING AWAY. I SUFFER WITH SSA, AND I HAVE HEARD THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS THE WORK OF THE DEVIL, WE ARE GOING TO HELL, AND MANY OFFENCIVE THINGS. DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG I HAVE WANTED TO BE A PRIEST? SINCE THE 4TH GRADE, BEFORE I EVEN KNEW WHAT HOMOSEXUALLITY WAS!!! NOW I CANNOT SERVE MY LORD BECAUSE I MIGHT MOLEST “LITTLE BOYS”. COMMON PEOPLE, THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE DAUGHTERS THAT ARE AROUND THE AGE 14-16 , ASK HER HOW MANY OF HER FRIENDS (OR EVEN HER) GO OUT WITH MEN IN THE MID-20’S, EARLY 30’S. “OH BUT IT’S NOT CHILD ABUSE, IT’S TOTALLY SOMETHING DIFFRENT”, I SAY BULLS MONKEYS! WHAT DO YOU EXPECT ME TO DO, I HAVE NEVER HAD A B/F, OR EVEN DESIRED TO HAVE ONE!!! AHHHHHHHH!!! IT’S LIKE IF YOU HAVE SSA, YOU HAVING GAY SEX, NO QUESTIONS ASKED. COMMON PEOPLE GET A GRIP, I WOULDN’T WANNA TOUCH ON LITTLE BOYS, THAT IMO IS SOOOOOOO WRONG. Now that I got that out, what go you want me to do? You know I have wanted to be a priest since the 4th grade? What am I to do? What am I to do?

Dude,

If you’re anykind of homosexual just get used to the idea that the Catholic church frowns on homosexual Priests. And thanks to a toleration of homosexual infiltration into the Priesthood, the Catholic Church is now enjoying a crippling homosexual abuse scandal, a loss of worldwide moral credibility and prestige, and not to forget all the suffering of the victims at the hands of homosexuals. Pedophile and Pedorast are both horns on the same homosexual devil (whether you like it or not).

The Catholic Church defines homosexuality as “objectively disordered” and the Bible describes homosexuality as an “abomination”.

So if you are having reservations about continuing with the Catholic Church, why don’t you try the Episcopalian Church? They just recently ordained an openly homosexual minister up in New Hampshire - Bishop V. Eugene Robinson.

 

[rpstpa]

Jennie:

QUOTE]Jennie

Did you have ssa when you were Ryans age? Im sure you did. It must be a struggle for you every day to supress your feeling for the same sex. Am I right?

To be quite honest, I did NOT have SSA at Ryans age. However, when I was exposed to porn, (not until college age) I found myself aroused by inappropriate acts of others on film. It wasn’t until I visually saw same sex acts, that I discovered that anything sexual made me feel that “sexual feeling”.

Even though I felt the “sexual release of hormones”, I had no desires to “be with” anyone of the same sex in that way. Nor did I label myself based on hormonal responses. My morals overrode desires of pleasure.

I do not feel like I am supressing any “feelings”, because those “feelings” are not important to me. I’m not sure that I would even call them feelings, but more like a side effect to the hormones being released.

What is important to me are my feelings towards God’s will, my feelings towards my husband, and my feelings toward my children.

Well Jennie then you are not gay! This must make you very happy…But what about people who don’t feel like you do? The very ones who do have feelings about the same sex. The ones who’d feelings won’t “go away”. The ones whose same sex feelings are IMPORTANT to them. What should we do about them? Ostrasize them Jennie? Accept and love them for who they are? Or should we mis-lead them and tell them that their feelings are wrong? Are your feelings for your husband/ males “learned” or are they your natural feelings? Poor Ryan is struggling between his INATE feelings and pleasing a “group” of people who is telling him that " his feelings are abnormal" and “devient”. Think about it Jennie… What if one of your children comes to you and tells you they are gay? What would you do? Abandom them? Get them help? Or accept and love you child for who he/she is? Think long and hard about this Jennie… It may happen

 

[rpstpa]

Ryan

be who you are. DO NOT listent to anyone else but yourself. Do what you feel is right.

 

[BlindSheep]

rpstpa:

What if one of your children comes to you and tells you they are gay? What would you do? Abandom them? Get them help? Or accept and love you child for who he/she is? Think long and hard about this Jennie… It may happen

Why is it that some people cannot understand that “loving and accepting your child for who s/he is” doesn’t require considering all their actions, or even all their impulses, to be good and healthy? If my four year old has the impulse to hit her sister/strip naked in public/ throw food against the wall, am I lacking in parental love if I discourage her from acting on those impulses? I think i’s very sad that you equate a person’s sexual urges with their identity. Even as a straight, married woman, I do not consider my sexuality my identity, and it is demeaning to imply that of me, Ryan, or anybody else. After all, in the kingdom of God we will all be “like angels, neither marrying nor being given in marriage”.

 

[dcmac]

“FWIW, your statement actually points to a learned response.”
Learned responses are different and do not include any biological methodology. You are arguing apples and oranges. Though I have said on other threads that some of the homosexuality one sees is a learned response and in these cases the subjects are almost always victims of sexual abuse.

“You are correct, dopamine creates pleasure.”
No, that is not correct. Dopamine does not “create” pleasure. Rather it gives pleasure. Very different things my dear.

“One can learn to respond to all manner of odd things, for example fetishists learn to be sexually stimulated by a particular object.”
Again, I refer you to the distinction between a learned and a biological methodology.

“I do not believe anyone is BORN with a sexual response to shoes for example.”
OK.

“This is one of the reasons such deviancy as pedophelia and sexual violence are so hard to ‘cure.’”
They are hard, if not impossible to cure in adults for a host of reasons. Not the least of which is that they are not sexual in nature. Being rather a manifestation of repression, anger and often abuse as well.

“One LEARNS to be sexually stimulated by either small children or violence and it is very hard to unlearn.”
There is evidence that suggests that this problem is not always a learned action. There is evidence to suggest that it is a mixed bag and can be either learned or inherent by/to the individual.

“I suggest that this is also why learned response to same sex attraction is difficult to overcome, particularly if as many believe, it is learned response at a young age”
And in some cases this is absolutely correct. However, it is not the rule, nor is a biological connection either. What both extremes of this debate seem to fail to recognize, for reasons that are obvious, is that SSA is a mixed bag as well. There is evidence to suggest that some are predisposed to such activity (homosexual tendencies from a very young age), some learn it (via abuse), some are addicted to it via dopamine (usually the bi-sexual lot), et cetera.

“Quite honestly there have been no studies that have been done with good methodology, statistical significance and replicated results that have pointed to a biological base to SSA.”
Yes, there have. But since you made these assertions first I have correctly asked you to provide the evidence to support your theory first.

“Most of the studies have been too small or with self selected subjects, both of which would be dismissed by any real scientific authorities.”
Some have been, but certainly not most. I agree, however, that there is a major problem with the selection of subjects for studies and that even the methodology of some studies is very poor indeed. However, most are not in this category.

“While I suspect there may well be a tendency to SSA that runs in families, just as alcoholism and certain mental illnesses run in families.”
This is a pre-disposition and that is… biological … though not exclusively so, as learned activity finds a home in some such cases.

“However regardless, it is the behavior and learned response that causes the real problems.”
Not exclusively – It is a problem, but not exclusively so.

 

[BlindSheep]

rpstpa:

Ryan
be who you are. DO NOT listent to anyone else but yourself. Do what you feel is right.

http://members.fortunecity.com/dbard/snake1.gif

 

[Lisa_N]

rpstpa:

Ryan

be who you are. DO NOT listent to anyone else but yourself. Do what you feel is right.

Oh my. Would you suggest then that EVERYONE do what 'they think is right?" Let’s see, pedophiles if you think it’s ok to molest little children then by golly go right ahead. You only need to worship the god of self gratification right? Oh and robbers, if you think it’s right to knock off a jewelry store because you need the money more than some rich guy well go on and follow your heart. Homocide bombers? Are you out there? Our friend rpstpa thinks you should do what you feel is right to go on and drive that rolling bomb into a school yard and detonate it!

I’m sorry but that is a ridiculous statement. Do you understand what you are suggesting?

Lisa N

 

[Lisa_N]

dcmac:

Learned responses are different and do not include any biological methodology. You are arguing apples and oranges. Though I have said on other threads that some of the homosexuality one sees is a learned response and in these cases the subjects are almost always victims of sexual abuse.

Of course there is some biology behind any learned response. If we were not born with a capacity to LEARN we couldn’t LEARN.

Do you have any evidence that all ‘learned’ homosexuality is a result of abuse? I guess it depends on how you define abuse. However say a young man is confused and an older man woos and seduces him (something I’ve seen occur). He is so wrapped up in his admiration of the man that he then self describes as homosexual following the seduction. It also helps him justify what he knows is non life affirming and deviant behavior.

dcmac:
No, that is not correct. Dopamine does not “create” pleasure. Rather it gives pleasure. Very different things my dear.

Hair splitting alert! OK would you be happier if I said dopamine is the chemical that creates a feeling of pleasure? And btw I am not your dear. Is Katherine2 back in disguise?

dcmac:
Again, I refer you to the distinction between a learned and a biological methodology. .

More hair splitting. We have a biological capacity to LEARN and to learn a response to a specific stimulus. That doesn’t mean the response itself is simply a biological process.

“I do not believe anyone is BORN with a sexual response to shoes for example.”
OK.

Gald we can agree on something.

dcmac:
They are hard, if not impossible to cure in adults for a host of reasons. Not the least of which is that they are not sexual in nature. Being rather a manifestation of repression, anger and often abuse as well…

It’s irrelevant what may or may not have originally caused the response. The reality is that once the ‘pathway’ is created that would allow certain individuals to receive sexual satisfaction from violence these people can’t be cured. I don’t CARE if Ted Bundy or Gary Ridgeway are taking out anger at their mothers by killing women. The reality is that they have LEARNED to become sexually aroused by this violent behavior. And it’s almost impossible to unlearn. Hence we must be protected from them.

dcmac:
There is evidence that suggests that this problem is not always a learned action. There is evidence to suggest that it is a mixed bag and can be either learned or inherent by/to the individual…

So you believe a Ted Bundy is born not made? Baloney.

dcmac:
And in some cases this is absolutely correct. However, it is not the rule, nor is a biological connection either. What both extremes of this debate seem to fail to recognize, for reasons that are obvious, is that SSA is a mixed bag as well. There is evidence to suggest that some are predisposed to such activity (homosexual tendencies from a very young age), some learn it (via abuse), some are addicted to it via dopamine (usually the bi-sexual lot), et cetera…

I have never denied SSA is a ‘mixed bag.’ But I think too many homosexual activists try to play the biological card to justify perverted, dangerous and unhealthy behavior as something that is hardwired in. I disagree with that attitude.

Please provide your evidence. There are very few studies at all. Several times we’ve seen the famous “twin” studies posited as proof. However those have been totally debunked. THere was some ‘homosexual fruit fly’ study where they manipulated a certain gene and created homosexual fruit flies. Gee doesn’t that sound significant? I’d love to be considered on par with a bug.

dcmac:
This is a pre-disposition and that is… biological … though not exclusively so, as learned activity finds a home in some such cases.

"Not exclusively – It is a problem, but not exclusively so.

Again we don’t know if there is ANY biological basis or ‘gay gene.’ We do know that the problem is not in HAVING SSA but in acting on it. If a person has a conflicted mind on this subject it’s considered a cross to bear and something to fight. It’s when the person acts on this desire that problems arise.

Lisa N

 

[Lisa_N]

Due to length this had to be two posts:

dcmac:
Yes, there have. But since you made these assertions first I have correctly asked you to provide the evidence to support your theory first…

Correctly? No you stated that there were studies that indicated a biological basis. I asked you to provide them. You declined and tossed the ball back. Check this board for past threads. This is quite well ploughed ground. Actually the CA homepage has a good discussion as well. Check it out and get back to me

dcmac:
Some have been, but certainly not most. I agree, however, that there is a major problem with the selection of subjects for studies and that even the methodology of some studies is very poor indeed. However, most are not in this category.

Again please provide a list of studies that are a) properly done b) statistically significant c) published in a respected journal and d) replicated by independent sources.

I grew up with research scientists and understand proper methodology.

LIsa N

 

[Jennie]

Well Jennie then you are not gay! This must make you very happy…But what about people who don’t feel like you do? The very ones who do have feelings about the same sex. The ones who’d feelings won’t “go away”. The ones whose same sex feelings are IMPORTANT to them. What should we do about them?

I would be curious as to know why it is so “important” for them to reinforce those “feelings” of theirs. Is it the “high” that they crave?
Are the body’s endorphines over powering one’s will?

Ostrasize them Jennie? Accept and love them for who they are? Or should we mis-lead them and tell them that their feelings are wrong?

No, don’t ostrasize them. Yes, accept and love them for who they are and not for what they do. Sometimes a person’s feelings are wrong. It’s called selfdeception.

Think about it Jennie… What if one of your children comes to you and tells you they are gay? What would you do? Abandom them? Get them help? Or accept and love you child for who he/she is? Think long and hard about this Jennie… It may happen

I would most certainly love them for who they are, and would never abandom them. And I would certainly correct their behavior, and not allow them to embrace anything that was contrary to God’s will.

• If Ryan finds himself repeatedly walking down the hallway at school where same sex couples are making out, seeks SS internet chats, SS adult web sites, and or SS bars, HE IS only reinforcing this behavior to exist.

As so long as this behavior exists, I do not think it would be in the best interest of the Church or in the best interest of Ryan to pursue the priesthood.

One needs to be in FULL Communion with the church to fullfill the role of a priest.

I like this quote:

When a heterosexual man gives up the opportunity to marry and have children to become a priest, he is sacrificing a good. When a homosexual gives up acting on his desires to become a priest, he is giving up a sin. Lisa N

 

[dcmac]

I was trying to be as cordial as I could be, however if you want the gloves off… so be it.

For the record, LisaN, I was responding to the post in which Dj Roy Albert advised us, “What the world refuses to realize is that homosexuality (whether in thought or in action) is a SPIRITUAL DISEASE (sin basically) & is not biological.” As it was Dj Roy Albert who asserted the case without any evidence to support it, it is his - and yours as you have taken up his cause - to burden the proof. Or did you forget that in university debate/speech/public speaking class at the undergraduate level?

“Of course there is some biology behind any learned response. If we were not born with a capacity to LEARN we couldn’t LEARN.”
Then you agree there is a biological component where Dj Roy Albert advised us, and you previously supported, there wasn’t any?! You can’t have it both ways and maintain credibility.

“Do you have any evidence that all ‘learned’ homosexuality is a result of abuse?”
Yes, as would any Psy.D., or M.S., or B.S. who has actually made the study of the psyche their pride and joy in university… a not insignificant number of abused boys grow up and live a lifestyle of homosexuality and promiscuity as well.

“I guess it depends on how you define abuse.”
You need to have the definition of abuse defined for you in light of the conversation and the previous posts of others and mine on it? Do you actually read the posts in a thread or the ones you respond to at least? If you did you’d have your definition of abuse in this case… ah, shades of Clinton’s “definition of IS is”…

“However say a young man is confused and an older man woos and seduces him (something I’ve seen occur). He is so wrapped up in his admiration of the man that he then self describes as homosexual following the seduction.”
Very, very doubtful without a predisposition to such a thing, but lets not let the facts get ion the way of a good analogy…

“It also helps him justify what he knows is non life affirming and deviant behavior.”
And now you are arguing it is escape and justification???

“Hair splitting alert!”
The pot calling the kettle black…

“And btw I am not your dear.”
Forgive me, for I was employing a playful nature in our debate. “My dear” is akin to “My good man” in rhetorical debate of this nature. A first year student in rhetorical debate knows this. Rest assured, however, that I will not make that mistake with you again. In this and in any future posts to you I will be as crass, rude, sarcastic and condescending as you have been.

“Is Katherine2 back in disguise?”
I have no idea who this person is. If you had taken a moment to investigate me as a poster you’d see I am not “Katherine2” This, by the way, goes a long way in illustrating your serious lack of research. Indeed in light of such a gross negligence and your previous responses one could reasonably surmise that you employ such a substandard level of investigation into all matters you post on…

“More hair splitting. We have a biological capacity to LEARN and to learn a response to a specific stimulus.”
Again, in reference to Dj Roy Albert above I responded to his assertion – and now your cri-de-guere – that it is, “not biological” in any manner.

“Gald we can agree on something.”
I am glad as well, for in agreeing to the point I made to the initiator of that response you acknowledge its absolute absurdity.
** cont on next post **

 

[dcmac]

“It’s irrelevant what may or may not have originally caused the response.”
In this case Ms. LisaN it does, for you made the false assertion that it was sexual in nature. Obviously that is incorrect and I called you on it… in response you come up with this deflection? How bizarre.

“The reality is that once the ‘pathway’ is created that would allow certain individuals to receive sexual satisfaction from violence these people can’t be cured.”
They do not receive sexual satisfaction in the psychological manner, rather only in the physical manner. Again you do not understand the difference between a rapist (non-sexual) and a predisposed SSA (sexual). These are very different and you tried to combine them in the previous post, to which I responded, and now you attempt blur the line again.

“I don’t CARE if Ted Bundy or Gary Ridgeway are taking out anger at their mothers by killing women. The reality is that they have LEARNED to become sexually aroused by this violent behavior.”
You should given this was your analogy in the first place…

“And it’s almost impossible to unlearn. Hence we must be protected from them.”
Yes, this condition is almost impossible to unlearn.

“So you believe a Ted Bundy is born not made? Baloney.”
What? I said not always learned… always being the key qualifier!! And yes, some people are hardwired psychologically not be fully capable of horrific evil. Not all behaviors are learned. Have you ever taken a single psychology course at all?

“I have never denied SSA is a ‘mixed bag.’”
You do if you hold there is NO biological connection like Dj Roy Albert does and you later espouse.

“But I think too many homosexual activists try to play the biological card to justify perverted, dangerous and unhealthy behavior as something that is hardwired in.”
As do I, which you would have noted had you actually taken the time to read my posts here and in other “gay” threads. Of course… research does not seem to be your stronghold…

“I disagree with that attitude.”
As do I. However, I do not let the pendulum swing the other way and say the polar opposite when there is evidence to suggest that there is a variety of biological connections.

“Please provide your evidence.”
Again, the burden of proof is on Dj Roy Albert for making the assertion in the first place and with you for taking up his cause and espousing it. When you do I will provide you with either my doctoral thesis, my university credentials, further studies from reliable sources, et cetera ad nauseum.

“There are very few studies at all.”
Actually there are many studies… some trying to promote deviancy, as you stated above, but most more credible than that.

"Several times we’ve seen the famous “twin” studies posited as proof. However those have been totally debunked. “THere was some ‘homosexual fruit fly’ study where they manipulated a certain gene and created homosexual fruit flies. Gee doesn’t that sound significant?”
Um, did I mention these? Did I mention any at all? I rather think not, as you are hell bent on trying to get me to play my trump card before you anti in. Come, come now.

“I’d love to be considered on par with a bug.”
I won’t go there…

“Again we don’t know if there is ANY biological basis or ‘gay gene.’”
And here, alas, is yours and others great folly! I never asserted anything whatsoever about a “gay gene” did I? No I didn’t. Rather, I made mention of a biological, chemical connection and predisposition. Here in this statement you have negated your own argument.

** cont on next post **

 

[dcmac]

“We do know that the problem is not in HAVING SSA but in acting on it.”
Agreed. Something to which I have already remarked repeatedly… if you had taken the time to investigate and read before chastising me…

"If a person has a conflicted mind on this subject it’s considered a cross to bear and something to fight.
Agreed. Something to which I have already remarked repeatedly… if you had taken the time to investigate and read before chastising me…

“It’s when the person acts on this desire that problems arise.”
Agreed. Something to which I have already remarked repeatedly… if you had taken the time to investigate and read before chastising me…

“Correctly? No you stated that there were studies that indicated a biological basis.”
Wrong again, I said a biological connection in refutation to Dj Roy Albert’s assertion that there was not a biological connection. Splitting hairs? No, I just believe that words have meanings and needed to be taken as such.

“I asked you to provide them. You declined and tossed the ball back.”
Again, and I can only surmise that you either never took, or did and failed, your university rhetorical debate/speech/public speaking class, for this is a basic… one which one learns in high school frankly. The ball was always in yours and Dj Roy Albert’s court for making the assertion in the first place…

“Check this board for past threads. This is quite well ploughed ground. Actually the CA homepage has a good discussion as well. Check it out and get back to me.”
While I love and respect the CA boards and have dug around on them for some time now, I will not place the credibility, or not, of this argument in the hands of posts in “threads” on any Internet forum. Rather, I will stick with my Psy.D. and what I learned from credited sources thank you… of course if you are willing to believe any old thing that is posted in any old thread of any old place… so be it. As for me, I will stick with a proper education in the field. Oh, and by the by, I must confess that I have heard Dr. Ray speaking of biological connections to this disorder on Catholic Family Radio and Catholic Answers radio many times when I had those stations here… of course he should probably his doctorate as well in favor of the posts on these “threads”. Give me a break…

“Again please provide a list of studies that are a) properly done b) statistically significant c) published in a respected journal and d) replicated by independent sources.”
I refer you to the above responses.

“I grew up with research scientists and understand proper methodology.”
That is nice. However, “growing up” with research scientists does to give you proper insight into research itself, this disorder, or any other such hard/soft discipline. Instead it takes practical application in such things… something to which I must confess you do not display well if you do have.
P.S. I should think that if you had read my posts here and elsewhere on the “gay” threads that you’d know that I do not fall for the Gay Militia’s agenda of acceptance through corrupt recognition of valid biological connections. In truth, you have spent much time blasting someone who is closer to your side than you think. The only major difference between you and I that is obvious is that I do see it as a mixed bag and that means that there is a biological connection.

 

[dcmac]

SELF REPORTING ON A POST

Ya know what… after reading these last three posts of mine… I don’t like the tone of my own post. As I can’t self-report, I hereby do so publicly.

Moderator, please be advised that this post was not as charitable as it could have, and should have, been.

LisaN, while I wholeheartedly disagree with you on a number of issues, I apologize if the nature of the posts comes off bad. I won’t lie and say it wasn’t meant to be harsh, however I could have been more gracious with the stern position of my posts. For that I am sorry.

LisaN, when we have both calmed down I will start a thread in which I will give evidence for the positions I am taking. While I have good reason to disagree with you, my Psy.D. not withstanding, I could have done so more charitably and fruitfully. In this regard I have rather embarrassed myself. So be it.

We have strayed off topic for Ryan, whose problems are really the true thrust of this thread. Ryan I apologize I participated in the serious diversion of this thread…

Moderator, feel free to delete it or edit it, or whatever, as I can not.