The Gay Impact

[FightingFat]

I caught a couple of excellent programmes on EWTN over the last couple of days which deal with homosexuality

The Gay Impact: Its Cultural Advance

And

The Gay Impact: Redefining Marriage

I was most impressed with the depth of knowledge displayed, the integration with research, the clarity with which the issues were discussed and the courage displayed by approaching these controversial issues head on.

Surely this is essential? This is what we should be doing (as Fr. Ed Sylvia says himself in the second programme) education is the key, we need to be in command of the facts, things like:

The truth about the way the agenda has been pushed and the way that language, education etc has been manipulated so that honest people are not allowed to disagree with homosexual behaviour; they want it to be illegal!!

Why is homosexuality dangerous?

What damage does it do to the individual and to society?

Why is it wrong?

Anyone else seen it? (You can watch the two programmes on line by following the link I posted). Is this information well known in US Catholic circles? It’s all new to me here I have to say!

 

[Barbkw]

Johnette Benkovic’s “Women of Grace” and “Abundant Living” on EWTN (DISH Channel 261) also discuss SSA, homosexual acts and the “gay” agenda.

Her program this week on “Women of Grace” spoke about those issues. I believe her program reruns throughout the week.

Fr. Ed’s commentary is a daily addition to Johnette’s programs.

 

[Samuel63]

Why is homosexuality dangerous?

What damage does it do to the individual and to society?

Why is it wrong?

It is dangerous because unaware persons can be led into a life so exposed to disease their lifespan is reduced to about 50 or 55 (cannot remember exactly).

It is dangerous because activist segments of this group are not satisfied with neutral acceptance of their lifestyle. They require the dismantling of the institution of marriage so all “couples” are reduced to the same base status.

What damage does it do…? AIDS is one example. This is just the physical side which is not as significant. The personal/spiritual damage is tragic.

Why is it wrong? Well, let’s see, because God said so! In the old testament, people were killed for these offenses. This law was dictated by God Himself.

 

[Santi2]

Thanks, FF. Wish we could have this sort of discussion on mainstream telly over here.

 

[FightingFat]

Thanks, FF. Wish we could have this sort of discussion on mainstream telly over here.

Can you imagine the hysteria??? The lawsuits???

 

[kenofken]

Five bucks says this panel of “experts” has no one who could be considered a credible mainstream researcher in the areas of medicine, psychology or social science. By that I mean people who are published regularly in real peer reviewed journals and who are members in good standing with the top professional groups in their profession. I’ve studied up on some of the “leading lights” in this movement.

Their top “researchers” are guys who were struck off from their professional organizations for absurdly poor research methodology and deliberate misrepresentation of research. This stuff gets no traction in mainstream media or society because it’s junk science. Their methods wouldn’t even net you a C- in a freshman community college class, let alone pass muster with doctorate level researchers. If the Church or street-level Catholic America hitches their wagon to this movement, it will zero out any credibility you might have had on the issue before.

 

[FightingFat]

Five bucks says this panel of “experts” has no one who could be considered a credible mainstream researcher in the areas of medicine, psychology or social science. By that I mean people who are published regularly in real peer reviewed journals and who are members in good standing with the top professional groups in their profession. I’ve studied up on some of the “leading lights” in this movement.

Their top “researchers” are guys who were struck off from their professional organizations for absurdly poor research methodology and deliberate misrepresentation of research. This stuff gets no traction in mainstream media or society because it’s junk science. Their methods wouldn’t even net you a C- in a freshman community college class, let alone pass muster with doctorate level researchers. If the Church or street-level Catholic America hitches their wagon to this movement, it will zero out any credibility you might have had on the issue before.

I think a lot of sense is made in the discussion surrounding such simple ideas as language. A lot of people feel that homosexuality is not OK, but these days you can’t even say that, you’re immediately a bigot.

Just think about it from a common sense point of view- it can’t be genetic, can it!

 

[buffalo]

I think a lot of sense is made in the discussion surrounding such simple ideas as language. A lot of people feel that homosexuality is not OK, but these days you can’t even say that, you’re immediately a bigot.

Just think about it from a common sense point of view- it can’t be genetic, can it!

This is all part of the “gay” agenda. It is not about rights, it is not about morality, it is all about license.

 

[kenofken]

I think a lot of sense is made in the discussion surrounding such simple ideas as language. A lot of people feel that homosexuality is not OK, but these days you can’t even say that, you’re immediately a bigot.

Just think about it from a common sense point of view- it can’t be genetic, can it!

I’ve spent the last year and a half toiling in a molecular biology struggling to tease out a fairly simple question about gene expression in a plant. If you have a surefire method that can predict how the human genome expresses itself to determine something as complex as sexuality in humans based on “common sense,” you ought to write it up and submit it to a journal like Nature. If it pans out, there would be Nobel talk about you in short order.

 

[FightingFat]

I’ve spent the last year and a half toiling in a molecular biology struggling to tease out a fairly simple question about gene expression in a plant. If you have a surefire method that can predict how the human genome expresses itself to determine something as complex as sexuality in humans based on “common sense,” you ought to write it up and submit it to a journal like Nature. If it pans out, there would be Nobel talk about you in short order.

I figure I am supposed to be impressed?

It would seem that if homosexuality was genetically passed on, Darwin fails. Also we would see homosexual tendencies in genetically identical twins for example.

 

[kenofken]

This is all part of the “gay” agenda. It is not about rights, it is not about morality, it is all about license.

Why would it be a fight about “license”? They’ve had that for almost 40 years in most places and the Supreme Court ultimately enshrined that in law.

 

[buffalo]

Why would it be a fight about “license”? They’ve had that for almost 40 years in most places and the Supreme Court ultimately enshrined that in law.

People who advocate deviant behaviors want the license to practice them. They confuse this with freedom. Freedom carries the weight of responsibility.

 

[Barbkw]

Five bucks says this panel of “experts” has no one who could be considered a credible mainstream researcher in the areas of medicine, psychology or social science. By that I mean people who are published regularly in real peer reviewed journals and who are members in good standing with the top professional groups in their profession. I’ve studied up on some of the “leading lights” in this movement.

Their top “researchers” are guys who were struck off from their professional organizations for absurdly poor research methodology and deliberate misrepresentation of research. This stuff gets no traction in mainstream media or society because it’s junk science. Their methods wouldn’t even net you a C- in a freshman community college class, let alone pass muster with doctorate level researchers. If the Church or street-level Catholic America hitches their wagon to this movement, it will zero out any credibility you might have had on the issue before.

SSA was classed as a disordered in psychiatry until the homosexual lobby (through intimidation) fought to have the SSA classed as if it were genetic.

The Genome Project found zero proof of any gene that causes SSA. Identical twins don’t share SSA.

Which means, that SSA is learned. Events in a child’s life create an aversion toward one sex and an attraction toword another.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

SSA was classed as a disordered in psychiatry until the homosexual lobby (through intimidation) fought to have the SSA classed as if it were genetic.

The Genome Project found zero proof of any gene that causes SSA. Identical twins don’t share SSA.

Which means, that SSA is learned. Events in a child’s life create an aversion toward one sex and an attraction toword another.

That’s kinda how it works, but it’s not that simple. It’s more about how one perceives ones’ self in relation to others. If I, a male, don’t see myself as a MAN, I won’t relate to other men as a man or to women as a man. Ever hear the term “fag hag?” Generally speaking, gay men love to hang out “with the girls” because they feel more comfortable and can relate with women on that level. Men are the “other;” the mystery. Now, think about that dynamic.

Generally speaking, a person with SSA has the problem of their whole world being backwards. It’s very difficult for me to feel that I can trust another man with my story. I’m 39 years old and there’s only one other man who knows me well. I’ve noticed that when I’m involved in a big get-together, I usually find myself on the women’s end of the table because I don’t feel comfortable around men. I still fear the mockery and hurtfulness that received at the hands of my peers as a youth.

 

[kenofken]

SSA was classed as a disordered in psychiatry until the homosexual lobby (through intimidation) fought to have the SSA classed as if it were genetic.

The Genome Project found zero proof of any gene that causes SSA. Identical twins don’t share SSA.

Which means, that SSA is learned. Events in a child’s life create an aversion toward one sex and an attraction toword another.

Psychiatry declassified homosexuality as a disorder because the science found no evidence that the orientation itself causes disordered behavior or dysfunction. Whether or not they believed it to have a genetic basis has no bearing on the decision. Many of the psychiatric diseases (arguably all), which are still classed as disorders clearly have a genetic component. The profession clearly has no bias against diagnosing and treating conditions on the theory that “God made them that way.” They follow the science, and the science shows that the mere fact of conservative Christians opining that someone is “icky” does not make orientation a disease state.

The Genome Project had nothing to do with proving or disproving genetic causes of homosexuality. It was about defining the nucleotide sequence, the “letters” of the genome and its variations, which sequences are genes and code for proteins etc. It also led to work defining genetic markers associated with real and major diseases like breast cancer and diabetes.

The body of evidence pertaining to genetics and sexuality clearly show a genetic basis based on twin studies and studies of variations on certain regions of the X chromosome and patterns of inactivation of the second X chromosome which are clearly different in mothers of gay sons than mothers of straight sons. Then we have studies of brain structure which shows marked differences between gay and straight people. None of this proves that homosexuality is determined solely, or even primarily by genetics and biology, but it is very clear there is a significant biological basis. To pretend there isn’t is to play the same game as flat-Earthers and creationists, who just ignore any findings they don’t like or fob it off with conspiracy theories.

 

[Barbkw]

Psychiatry declassified homosexuality as a disorder because the science found no evidence that the orientation itself causes disordered behavior or dysfunction.

narth.com/docs/whitehead.html

From that website:

"One important and carefully conducted study found **suicide attempts among homosexuals were six times greater than the average **(Remafedi et al. 1998).

"Then, more recently, in the Archives of General Psychiatry-- an established and well-respected journal–three papers appeared with extensive accompanying commentary (Fergusson et al. 1999, Herrell et al. 1999, Sandfort et al. 2001, and e.g. Bailey 1999). J.
Michael Bailey included a commentary on the above research; Bailey, it should be noted, conducted many of the muchpublicized “gay twin studies” which were used by gay advocates as support for the “born that way” theory. Neil Whitehead, Ph.D.

"Bailey said, “These studies contain arguably the best published data on the association between homosexuality and psychopathology, and both converge on the same unhappy conclusion: homosexual people are at substantially higher risk for some forms of emotional problems, including suicidality, major depression, and anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, and nicotine dependence…The strength of the new studies is their degree of control.”

"The commentaries on those studies brought up three interesting issues.

1. First, there is now clear evidence that **mental health problems are indeed associated with homosexuality. **This supports those who opposed the APA actions in 1973. However, the present papers do not answer the question; is homosexuality itself pathological?
2. The papers do show that since only a minority of a nonclinical sample of homosexuals has any diagnosable mental problems (at least by present diagnostic criteria), then most homosexuals are not mentally ill.

In New Zealand, for example, lesbians are about twice as likely to have sought help for mental problems as heterosexual women, but only about 35% of them over their lifespan did so, and never more than 50% (Anon 1995, Saphira and Glover, 2000, Welch et al. 2000) This corresponds with similar findings from the U.S.

"Relationship Breakups Motivate Most Suicide Attempts

"Next, we ask–do the papers show that it is gay lifestyle factors, or society’s stigmatization, that are the motivators that lead a person to attempt suicide? Neither conclusion is inevitable.

"Still, Saghir and Robins (1978) examined reasons for suicide attempts among homosexuals and found that if the reasons for the attempt were connected with homosexuality, about 2/3 were due to breakups of relationships --not outside pressures from society.

"Similarly, Bell and Weinberg (1981) also found the **major reason for suicide attempts was the breakup of relationships. **

"In second place, they said, was the inability to accept oneself.

"Since homosexuals have greater numbers of partners and breakups, compared with heterosexuals, and since longterm gay male relationships are rarely monagamous, it is hardly surprising if suicide attempts are proportionally greater.

"The median number of partners for homosexuals is four times higher than for heterosexuals (Whitehead and Whitehead 1999, calculated from Laumann et al 1994).

"A good general rule of thumb is that suicide attempts are about three times higher for homosexuals. Could there be a connection between those two percentages?

"Another factor in suicide attempts would be the compulsive or addictive elements in homosexuality (Pincu, 1989 ) which could lead to feelings of depression when the lifestyle is out of control (Seligman 1975).

“There are some, (estimates vary, but perhaps as many as 50% of young men today), who do not take consistent precautions against HIV (Valleroy et al., 2001) and who have considerable problems with sexual addiction and substance abuse addiction, and this of course would feed into suicide attempts.”

Continued…

 

[Barbkw]

Continued 2 of 2

"The Effect of Social Stigma

"Third, does pressure from society lead to mental health problems?

"Less, I believe, than one might imagine. The authors of the study done in The Netherlands were surprised to find so much mental illness in homosexual people in a country where tolerance of homosexuality is greater than in almost all other countries.

"Another good comparison country is New Zealand, which is much more tolerant of homosexuality than is the United States. Legislation giving the movement special legal rights is powerful, consistently enforced throughout the country, and virtually never challenged.

"Despite this broad level of social tolerance, suicide attempts were common in a New Zealand study and occurred at about the same rate as in the U.S.

"In his cross-cultural comparison of mental health in the Netherlands, Denmark and the U.S., Ross (1988) could find no significant differences between countries - i.e. the greater social hostility in the United States did not result in a higher level of psychiatric problems.

"There are three other issues not covered in the Archives journal articles which are worthy of consideration. The first two involve DSM category diagnoses.

"Promiscuity and Antisocial Personality

"The promiscuous person–either heterosexual or homosexual --may in fact be more likely to be antisocial. It is worth noting here the comment of Rotello (1997), who is himself openly gay: “…the outlaw aspect of gay sexual culture, its transgressiveness, is seen by many men as one of its greatest attributes.”

"Ellis et al. (1995) examined patients at an clinic which focused on genital and urological problems such as STD’s; he found 38% of the homosexual men seeking such services had antisocial personality disorder, as well as 28% of heterosexual men.

"Both levels were enormously higher than the 2% rate of antisocial personality disorder for the general population (which in turn, compares to the 50% rate for prison inmates) (Matthews 1997).

"Perhaps the finding of a higher level of conduct disorder in the New Zealand study foreshadowed this finding of antisocial personality . Therapists, of course, are not very likely to see a large number of individuals who are antisocial because they are probably less likely to seek help.

"Secondly, it was previously noted that **43% of a bulimic sample of men were homosexual or bisexual (Carlat et al. 1997), a rate about 15 times higher than the rate in the population in general–**meaning homosexual men are probably disproportionately liable to this mental condition. This may be due to the very strong preoccupation with appearance and physique frequently found among male homosexuals.

"Ideology of Sexual Liberation

"A strong case can be made that the male homosexual lifestyle itself, in its most extreme form, is mentally disturbed. Remember that Rotello, a gay advocate, notes that “the outlaw aspect of gay sexual culture, its transgressiveness, is seen by many men as one of its greatest attributes.”

Same-sex eroticism becomes for many, therefore, the central value of existence, and nothing else–not even life and health itself–is allowed to interfere with pursuit of this lifestyle.

Homosexual promiscuity fuels the AIDS crisis in the West, but even that tragedy it is not allowed to interfere with sexual freedom.

"And, according to Rotello, the idea of taking responsibility to avoid infecting others with the HIV virus is completely foreign to many groups trying to counter AIDS. The idea of protecting oneself is promoted, but protecting others is not mentioned in most official condom promotions (France in the '80s was an interesting exception). Bluntly, then, core gay behavior is both potentially fatal to others, and often suicidal.

"Surely it should be considered “mentally disturbed” to risk losing one’s life for sexual liberation. This is surely among the most extreme risks practiced by any significant fraction of society. I have not found a higher risk of death accepted by any similar-sized population.

“In conclusion, then, if we ask the question “Is mental illness inherent in the homosexual condition?” the answer would have to be “Further research–uncompromised by politics --should be carried out to honestly evaluate this issue.””

 

[kenofken]

NARTH is a classic junk science institute which operates solely for the purpose of advancing a religious agenda. This is also the same outfit in which one of it’s science advisors argued in a paper that enslaved Africans were ultimately better off for the experience. Another esteemed member of its advisory board, George Alan Reckers, the darling expert of the “ex-gay” movement, got caught traveling with a nubile young male “executive assistant.”

The average UFOlogist has more scientific credibility.

 

[Barbkw]

NARTH is a classic junk science institute which operates solely for the purpose of advancing a religious agenda. This is also the same outfit in which one of it’s science advisors argued in a paper that enslaved Africans were ultimately better off for the experience. Another esteemed member of its advisory board, George Alan Reckers, the darling expert of the “ex-gay” movement, got caught traveling with a nubile young male “executive assistance.”

The average UFOlogist has more scientific credibility.

What I expected you to say. In your to-be-expected antisocial way.

These homosexual disorders are evident for all to see.

A scientific study isn’t even necessary, except to validate what we already are seeing with our own eyes.

 

[Barbkw]

More of that “classic junk science” pages and pages of studies conducted on the drug and alcohol addiction practices in gay and lesbian communities.

www.lesbianinformationservice.org/alcohol3.rtf - Similar