Which Homosexuals Are "Incurable"?

[aprilfloyd]

Um, that isn’t proof. That’s your opinion.

It’s not my opinion - it is accepted science. I would love to have discovered it, but I am not that clever.

 

[CopticChristian]

I appreciate the position that the church teaches - but that does not make it right. Invoking a god - to make an argument to the contrary does not change human biology or physiology.
I don’t think humans do pick and choose what they believe, we have a system where we explore and test hypotheses on a continual basis to determine what is factual and verifiable as such.

Floyd,

Homosexuality is normal and is very natural - that is evolutionary biology at work.

Evolution is a theory. You cannot make a statement you believe to be fact based on a theory. Your statement is an opinion based on a theory and in that vain is nonsense.

 

[CopticChristian]

It’s not my opinion - it is accepted science. I would love to have discovered it, but I am not that clever.

April,

You will have to do better than this. It is not accepted science. It is accepted theory. You truly may be clever but in the sense of believing that you have found evolution to be accepted science, you are correct concerning your adeptness in cleverness.

 

[speakttruth]

This suggests that the main drive of that person are his sexual instincts, which effectively reduces him to an animal. Does it mean that if he was hungry and there was no food around he should be excused to steal?

We should NOT accept sexual deviants practices but criticize those as often as possible, even at the cost of political incorrectness. Obviously, it should be sin we hate, not the sinner himself.

I know what I am talking about; I lived in the sin of homosexual practices from my teens to the age of 25, when I was saved by the grace of the Lord. My tendencies are my cross, for which I thank Him. I will bear it through the rest of my life, just as alcoholics always remain alcoholics. Still, I fight my war every day and I defeat devil. Do not say it cannot be cured. I have a loving, happy family and a child - all thanks to God’s grace.

Thanks be to God!
God bless you, you are inspiration!

 

[epan]

Floyd,

Evolution is a theory. You cannot make a statement you believe to be fact based on a theory. Your statement is an opinion based on a theory and in that vain is nonsense.

You know better than this Coptic, or do you not accept the gravitational theory? Much of the field of biology (and hence medicine), accepts “facts” which are derived from the observation of the consequences of the theories of evolution and natural selection.

the list of fields which accept these theories as foundational is long.

But I am not going to beat this old horse any further either. if you need an example: drug resistant bacteria. explain that fact, without referring to those theories.

 

[speakttruth]

Floyd,

Evolution is a theory. You cannot make a statement you believe to be fact based on a theory. Your statement is an opinion based on a theory and in that vain is nonsense.

Some people are just incorrigible!

Pride the belly of the beast!

 

[dshix]

It’s not my opinion - it is accepted science. I would love to have discovered it, but I am not that clever.

lol, once again, definitive statements without proof. I’m gonna start counting them.

 

[speakttruth]

You know better than this Coptic, or do you not accept the gravitational theory? Much of the field of biology (and hence medicine), accepts “facts” which are derived from the observation of the consequences of the theories of evolution and natural selection.

the list of fields which accept these theories as foundational is long.

But I am not going to beat this old horse any further either. if you need an example: drug resistant bacteria. explain that fact, without referring to those theories.

If you believe in evolution than why aren’t we still evolving? Why if homosexuality were part of the process of evolving how would we propagate the species? Wouldn’t that be a defect in evolution and therefore homosexuality would die out and correct itself? Are all theories facts? Why do they call them theories?
I am a little confused and not as educated as I can see some of you are.

 

[epan]

If you believe in evolution than why aren’t we still evolving? Why if homosexuality were part of the process of evolving how would we propagate the species? Wouldn’t that be a defect in evolution and therefore homosexuality would die out and correct itself? Are all theories facts? Why do they call them theories?
I am a little confused and not as educated as I can see some of you are.

I am not sure why you think that we are not evolving. Evidence of evolution is readily observable. Remember my explanation of how the HIV retrovirus overwhelms the immune system? That is directly observable evolution, and natural selection. We all have within our cells an evolutionary record in certain parts of the cell. You might find this an interesting way to find out more about your own ancestry:

shop.nationalgeographic.com/ngs/product/genographic-kits/geno-2.0—genographic-project-participation-and-dna-ancestry-kit

I have never suggested that homosexuality is of genetic origin. You might want to ask someone who makes that claim. I have heard that there are some hereditary patterns, hormone differences in pregnancy, and so on… the clues are tantalizing. But my take on it is that there is more information that is inconclusive, than there is conclusive which suggests any strong theories.

This should also be kept in mind, when listening to people like Nicolosi. I would not entirely dismiss what he says, but we also don’t really have enough evidence to accept his theories as being well founded.

 

[epan]

If you believe in evolution than why aren’t we still evolving? Why if homosexuality were part of the process of evolving how would we propagate the species? Wouldn’t that be a defect in evolution and therefore homosexuality would die out and correct itself? Are all theories facts? Why do they call them theories?
I am a little confused and not as educated as I can see some of you are.

There are whole volumes, and courses taught on the topic. But basically, a theory is an idea to explain something. You try to prove or disprove the theory with observation and/or experimentation. Over time, theories become discredited, or they become more accepted. They can also be modified as new ideas and evidence arise.

For example, let’s say that Newton thought of the theory of gravitation as an idea to explain why an apple fell on his head. He developed his gravitational theory, which was accepted for centuries. Some might call “gravity” a fact, but Newton’s theory was always a theory to explain the phenomenon that he observed. That theory is good enough to allow civil engineers to use it to design bridges and buildings, and so on, or to predict the trajectory of an artillery shell, or a rocket, or to put a satellite in synchronous orbit. So, it is a pretty good theory.

Along came Einstein, who had some ideas to modify and extend Newton’s theory, and also to elaborate on some of its implications.

So the theory was seen in a new way, with new evidence. It took some years, even beyond Einstein’s death to gather the evidence to confirm some of his theories which he was only able to find mathematical evidence to support.

So, there is this gray area, where well accepted theories are often referred to as facts. It is a common, and rather cheap, rhetorical argument to say… “well it is only a theory.” Being a theory, neither makes something true, nor does it make something untrue. So, don’t fall for that trick. In the cases of gravitation, and evolution, the amount of evidence supporting the theories is very large indeed. The evidence against both theories is miniscule, by comparison. But everyone is free to choose which evidence to give weight to, in deciding what to make of a theory’s credibility.

When you hear of a theory, it is never wrong to question what the evidence is to support it, just as you have asked what the evidence is for evolution, or a genetic origin to homosexuality. Those are good questions, and show a healthy skepticism for the theories. Many people just accept what they are told, as being true, because someone in authority said so.

But also, some theories can be hard to weigh the evidence on. How many people can pick up Einstein’s mathematical calculations as casual reading, and form an informed opinion as to whether his calculations are correct?

So, each person must decide which authority to accept, on matters which they don’t understand. But I applaud your skepticism.

 

[speakttruth]

There are whole volumes, and courses taught on the topic. But basically, a theory is an idea to explain something. You try to prove or disprove the theory with observation and/or experimentation. Over time, theories become discredited, or they become more accepted. They can also be modified as new ideas and evidence arise.

For example, let’s say that Newton thought of the theory of gravitation as an idea to explain why an apple fell on his head. He developed his gravitational theory, which was accepted for centuries. Some might call “gravity” a fact, but Newton’s theory was always a theory to explain the phenomenon that he observed. That theory is good enough to allow civil engineers to use it to design bridges and buildings, and so on, or to predict the trajectory of an artillery shell, or a rocket, or to put a satellite in synchronous orbit. So, it is a pretty good theory.

Along came Einstein, who had some ideas to modify and extend Newton’s theory, and also to elaborate on some of its implications.

So the theory was seen in a new way, with new evidence. It took some years, even beyond Einstein’s death to gather the evidence to confirm some of his theories which he was only able to find mathematical evidence to support.

So, there is this gray area, where well accepted theories are often referred to as facts. It is a common, and rather cheap, rhetorical argument to say… “well it is only a theory.” Being a theory, neither makes something true, nor does it make something untrue. So, don’t fall for that trick. In the cases of gravitation, and evolution, the amount of evidence supporting the theories is very large indeed. The evidence against both theories is minuscule, by comparison. But everyone is free to choose which evidence to give weight to, in deciding what to make of a theory’s credibility.

When you hear of a theory, it is never wrong to question what the evidence is to support it, just as you have asked what the evidence is for evolution, or a genetic origin to homosexuality. Those are good questions, and show a healthy skepticism for the theories. Many people just accept what they are told, as being true, because someone in authority said so.

But also, some theories can be hard to weigh the evidence on. How many people can pick up Einstein’s mathematical calculations as casual reading, and form an informed opinion as to whether his calculations are correct?

So, each person must decide which authority to accept, on matters which they don’t understand. But I applaud your skepticism.

Thanks I have read so many arguments to these things. I can’t keep them all in my 264 processor head, but I try. Have you heard of Dr. Fitzgibbons?,
he is very knowledgeable on SSA, transgenderism, he also very Catholic and is a big help on the Courage site and has helped a lot of young people.
I heard him speak at a conference and have one of his books on anger and forgiveness, but it’s kind of deep for me, more for a therapist to use.

Ok I won’t shoot you.
GB

 

[Elizabeth502]

Thanks I have read so many arguments to these things. I can’t keep them all in my 264 processor head, but I try. Have you heard of Dr. Fitzgibbons?,
he is very knowledgeable on SSA, transgenderism, he also very Catholic and is a big help on the Courage site and has helped a lot of young people.
I heard him speak at a conference and have one of his books on anger and forgiveness, but it’s kind of deep for me, more for a therapist to use.

Ok I won’t shoot you.
GB

Not addressed to me, but I’ve certainly not only heard of him, but heard him speak. What a guy. He has tons of clinical experience and is fantastic. He also correctly addresses the problem on more than just a secular clinical front. He affirms the essential need of spiritual resources, says it is not possible without that.

 

[epan]

Thanks I have read so many arguments to these things. I can’t keep them all in my 264 processor head, but I try. Have you heard of Dr. Fitzgibbons?,
he is very knowledgeable on SSA, transgenderism, he also very Catholic and is a big help on the Courage site and has helped a lot of young people.
I heard him speak at a conference and have one of his books on anger and forgiveness, but it’s kind of deep for me, more for a therapist to use.

Ok I won’t shoot you.
GB

You need a program to keep track of the supporters and the detractors of reparative therapy. No doubt, there are many who are detractors out of political correctness. There have also been some practitioners who have resorted to techniques which could be called torture. Some who have praised it in the past, have retracted their statements. Some who have vilified it, now support it. It is a complicated topic.

My take on it, as that like any sort of psychotherapy, results are not easy, and there is a high recidivism rate. I would neither discourage nor encourage anyone to try it, just because I don’t understand it, and it is so controversial. But I respect the right of anyone to try it. I hope that any practitioner would be ethical, and respect the patient. Full disclosure, as to the prognosis, and the course of treatment, would be important.

 

[down_under]

You know better than this Coptic, or do you not accept the gravitational theory? Much of the field of biology (and hence medicine), accepts “facts” which are derived from the observation of the consequences of the theories of evolution and natural selection.

the list of fields which accept these theories as foundational is long.

But I am not going to beat this old horse any further either. if you need an example: drug resistant bacteria. explain that fact, without referring to those theories.

I was taught in lecture at a major university that the theory of evolution has holes in it that cannot be rectified by science. This is not opinion. The lecturer noted this from the beginning. When the theory was invented the universe was infinite and the nucleus was a black box. The big bang theory has been proven, you got 13.7 billion years, no billions and billions of years, and the black box has been opened and nobody can account for the information stored in DNA. That is why evolutionary science is at a stand still these last 10 or 15 years. There is no explanation for 12 encyclopedias of information that suddenly appeared. In fact it is a well known fact that biology is the only science founded on an unproven theory which has since fallen apart. There have been various attempts to prop it up, but the general problem still remains.

 

[Monkey1976]

You need a program to keep track of the supporters and the detractors of reparative therapy. No doubt, there are many who are detractors out of political correctness. There have also been some practitioners who have resorted to techniques which could be called torture. Some who have praised it in the past, have retracted their statements. Some who have vilified it, now support it. It is a complicated topic.

My take on it, as that like any sort of psychotherapy, results are not easy, and there is a high recidivism rate. I would neither discourage nor encourage anyone to try it, just because I don’t understand it, and it is so controversial. But I respect the right of anyone to try it. I hope that any practitioner would be ethical, and respect the patient. Full disclosure, as to the prognosis, and the course of treatment, would be important.

And this is why I believe that psychologists and psychiatrists do a disservice to people who suffer from SSA when they claim that homosexuality is not a disorder. I suffer from mild bipolar disorder. Is there a “cure” for my disorder? Sadly, no. Should I then have been told I was perfectly normal and encouraged to act on my manic and depressive urges? Of course not. What got me to where I am today is that I was taught to understand and manage my swings, combined with appropriate stabilizers to give me the space to learn it properly. In time, I weaned myself off of the stabilizers, and can now live a normal, healthy life without them because I can recognize when my disorder is driving me in a particular direction and act accordingly. When manic, I do chores or play music instead of emptying my bank account, doing drugs, and having as much sexual intercourse as possible. When depressed, I draw, paint, take photos, or go for a hike instead of sitting in a darkened room contemplating ways I could end my life. It isn’t easy, but it is possible, and it does work.

 

[epan]

I was taught in lecture at a major university that the theory of evolution has holes in it that cannot be rectified by science. This is not opinion. The lecturer noted this from the beginning. When the theory was invented the universe was infinite and the nucleus was a black box. The big bang theory has been proven, you got 13.7 billion years, no billions and billions of years, and the black box has been opened and nobody can account for the information stored in DNA. That is why evolutionary science is at a stand still these last 10 or 15 years. There is no explanation for 12 encyclopedias of information that suddenly appeared. In fact it is a well known fact that biology is the only science founded on an unproven theory which has since fallen apart. There have been various attempts to prop it up, but the general problem still remains.

Yes, well you must form your own opinion.

Was this at a religious school? Just curious.

I am not saying that this was the case, but one does need to be careful of those who try to pretend objectivity, when their real purpose is to prove an agenda.

 

[down_under]

I am not sure why you think that we are not evolving. Evidence of evolution is readily observable. Remember my explanation of how the HIV retrovirus overwhelms the immune system? That is directly observable evolution, and natural selection. We all have within our cells an evolutionary record in certain parts of the cell. You might find this an interesting way to find out more about your own ancestry:

shop.nationalgeographic.com/ngs/product/genographic-kits/geno-2.0—genographic-project-participation-and-dna-ancestry-kit

I have never suggested that homosexuality is of genetic origin. You might want to ask someone who makes that claim. I have heard that there are some hereditary patterns, hormone differences in pregnancy, and so on… the clues are tantalizing. But my take on it is that there is more information that is inconclusive, than there is conclusive which suggests any strong theories.

This should also be kept in mind, when listening to people like Nicolosi. I would not entirely dismiss what he says, but we also don’t really have enough evidence to accept his theories as being well founded.

and once again lets completely confuse the issue so that nobody really understands what is being debated but you “win” some meaningless conversation. MACRO evolution has never been proven. species to species jumps have NEVER been seen or verified by anyone. Nor has any missing link of any species ever been verified. Every once in a while something comes out of china some guy gets a million dollars for his discovery and then a year later everybody finds out it was a big hoax. Micro evolution (change inside a species) is well proven. viruses change to be more deadly taking on plasmids ect… birds and beak sizes changing with the winter and summer months. lobster and mollusk arms race.

yes thats all quite true, but nobody has ever extended that theory to the macro level. It has become difficult to imagine anyone ever will be able to given what we now know about the nature of DNA. The unexplainable 12 encyclopedias of information present in the most ancient simplest creature ever on the planet.

 

[down_under]

Yes, well you must form your own opinion.

Was this at a religious school? Just curious.

I am not saying that this was the case, but one does need to be careful of those who try to pretend objectivity, when their real purpose is to prove an agenda.

Griffith university where I learned my pharmacy degree. Not a religious institution. I understand the question on offense taken.

 

[down_under]

sorry epan I was a little on my soap box. my objection was not to you it was to sooo many people who continue to argue like this is 1985. It really is amazing but your knowledge begins to degrade the moment you finish school. Not because you forget everything but because new science comes out. I get this a lot from people much less gracious about there argument then you.

 

[CopticChristian]

You know better than this Coptic, or do you not accept the gravitational theory? Much of the field of biology (and hence medicine), accepts “facts” which are derived from the observation of the consequences of the theories of evolution and natural selection.

the list of fields which accept these theories as foundational is long.

But I am not going to beat this old horse any further either. if you need an example: drug resistant bacteria. explain that fact, without referring to those theories.

Epan,

Physics is science with Mathamatical components that are nothing more than obsevation and description of what is already there…

Zoology/Biology/Botany…Evolution is not Physics…it is observation…

Yes, Indeed I know better than this…do you?