your opinions on gays

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gingerfish
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Aside from being misguidedand and a tad insensitive, what exactly do you base this claim on?.
I agree defenderoftruth is a tad insensitive, but only misguided on delivery. The APA is not only been politically influenced by the gay rights movement, but also a very good example of the pseudo science we call psychiatry gone nuts. excuss the pun. I guess that may be due to the influence of shrunk’n heads like Jung. Though not a homosexual himself, a sexual pervert and pagan in his own right.
Part I. The APA, the DSM, and Homosexuality
**The Campaign Begins. **A lifelong hard-left political activist, the psychologist Evelyn Hooker is more than anyone else credited by believers with having demonstrated that homosexuality is normal. Even today, almost fifty years after its publication in 1957 in Projective Testing, her “The Adjustment of the Male Overt Homosexual” is the only paper referenced in detail on the main website of the American Psychological Association in its discussion of Gay and Lesbian issues, as it attempts to make the case that there is no evidence for an association between homosexuality and psychopathology. 2 Crucially, her study was one of the two upon which in 1973, the APA decided to remove homosexuality from the list of disorders in the DSM and the one study discussed in the APA’s brief in 2003 in the *Lawrence *case. It claims to show that
“homosexuals [are] not inherently abnormal and that there [is] no difference between the pathologies of homosexual and heterosexual men.” 3 Eight years after her landmark study, she found herself chair of a newly –established National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Task Force on Homosexuality, hand -picked by Judd Marmor, an influential psychiatrist at UCLA. The only other “mental health” representatives were Alfred Kinsey’s close colleagues Paul Gebhard, and John Money, the latter a psychologist from Johns Hopkins and an early (but recently discredited and fired) proponent of transsexual surgery. In 1969 the Task Force issued its report. It claimed, parroting the Kinsey reports almost word-for-word, that sexuality was a continuum from exclusive homosexuality to exclusive heterosexuality, and that some degree of *bisexuality *was the human norm. Without evidence, it stated that any homosexual suffering was caused by societal prejudice. (It avoided mentioning, however, that in Kinsey’s view, human sexual taste was almost infinitely malleable.) Thus, there was nothing problematic with homosexuality per se.
Within a few years, Marmor, who was active in anti -war, pro-abortion, and other “New Left” causes, became Vice-President of the APA. With Hooker and Marmor in such prominent roles, agitators outside the professions could count on their collaboration in organizing protests aimed at radicalizing an organization which until then, held to a tacit ethical creed of professionalism that prohibited them from using the public’s trust in their presumed scholarly expertise in circumscribed domains to exercise influence over general matters of civics. One can see the beginnings of a coordinated effort to corrupt this ethos at the APA’s 1970 annual meeting, when a most eminent and respected psychiatrist and psychoanalyst presenting a paper on “homosexuality and transsexualism” was interrupted by an outside agitator who had been secretly bought into the meeting. 4 Acceding to pressure, the organizers of the 1971 conference agreed to sponsor a special panel —not *on *homosexuality, but *by *homosexuals: MORE
 
Interesting. Catholics teach that it’s demonic for women to wear jeans and tshirts, pants, etc? I am not sure what you mean exactly by “talk like men”, “walk like men”, or “act like men”. As to men who “do vice versa”, that would be men who wear jeans and tshirts? Again, you will need to be more explicit with the “walk, talk and act like” bit
Uh unless you live in a cave I think you know what I’m talking about. Let’s just call them very masculine women. I’m talking about lesbians that wear men’s shirts, men’s pants with big metal chains hanging out of the pockets. (you can tell they’re mens clothes), no bra (I have no idea why they do that except they hate being women-the reason I notice that is the voice isn’t quite male and then well it’s hard not to see them…flopping around) and chop off all their hair to the point of actual crew cuts, and talk (with the deep male voice and mannerisms of men). Unfortunately I have to look at one of these “women” at my daughter’s gymnastics class cheer on her “friend’s” children (poor kids). And the “vice versa” would be men that talk feminine, act feminine (more feminine that feminine women with the whole flaming male homosexual walk etc.) and wear women’s clothes.

Is that enough info for ya? Unless you’ve been in a cave you’ve seen someone that is homosexual and fits the profile. I have yet to meet a straight man that wears women’s clothes and walks and talks like a super feminine woman and yet isn’t homosexual. I have yet to meet women that fit the above that isn’t a lesbian.

signed,
a mom whose very disturbed by homosexuals not being labeled RIGHTFULLY mentally ill and or demon possessed.:confused:

PS really this is a serious issue children are being taught this is “normal” behavior and taught that it’s ok if they themselves grow up to act like this. It’s sad and it’s even sadder when children are thrown into the mix with homosexuals that play “house”.:mad:
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by defenderoftruth
I really don’t care what the APA says about homosexuality not being a “disorder/illness” it is.
Aside from being misguidedand and a tad insensitive, what exactly do you base this claim on?
Quote:
(GO TO A PRIDE PARADE SOMETIME) I have, to talk to them about their need for Jesus Christ and forgiveness and that they can change if they actually give up their desires to God.
Wouldnt it be better to direct them to the nearest therapist, them having a mental illness and all?
Maybe you should try talking “with” them instead of “to” them and leaving them alone if they are not interested in “talking”.
Quote:
I’ve met former homosexuals who have no “attraction” to men/women and actually speak out against this mentality of “be temted just don’t act”. Someone that is tempted to molest children but doesn’t is still sick and in need to be delivered. (no I’m not pentacostal or protestant even) But I do believe in catholic exorcism!
So gay people are paedophilles?
Quote:
I’m sick and tired of hearing “how dare you tell me I need to be delivered I’m just fine as long as I don’t act, you’re not being ‘compassionate’” (while they attend homosexual events that mock God, with naked/half naked people that relish homosexuality).
Then perhaps you should stop going to these events and telling them things that they have quite obviously heard many times before, it doesnt seem to be working for you clearly.
I would say your not being respectful more than not being compassionate.
Quote:
It’s not compassionate to let someone live STUBBORNLY in sin or in temptation of sin without telling them they need to be delivered.
It all depends on how you do it.
Read my post a person that wants to engage and or is tempted to engage in sodomy isn’t well in the head. The nearest “therapist” probably agrees (incorrectly) with the APA. They need a priest, preferrably one that will actually tell them the truth of their sinful “lifestyle”. I’m sorry talking with them? I don’t just go to hear myself speak (nor do my other catholic friends). I do talk with them but I tell them the truth and as many well know that “truth is hate to those that hate the truth”. It’s not “loving” to tell them that they are ok in God’s eyes when he calls it an abomination, vile etc.

I never said all homosexuals are pediphiles but they have a high rate of child molesting yet they are a smaller part of the population. Here’s a link I found.

freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1502263/posts

Yes and maybe Paul and the other apostles should have left the first time people didn’t want to hear them. I don’t think Stephen the first martyr’s listeners wanted to hear him either that isn’t the point. Whether they want to or not they need to hear. Just like pro-aborts need to see what abortion is even though they don’t want to. Respectful/uncompassionate? Is it respectful or compassionate to a person to just let them jump off a cliff or should we actually try to talk them out of it? Again stephen wasn’t stoned for talking softly and rosy to the Jews and Paul wasn’t stoned and left for dead for the same thing.

People need the truth whether they want it or not whether they hear it or not.
 
I agree defenderoftruth is a tad insensitive, but only misguided on delivery. The APA is not only been politically influenced by the gay rights movement, but also a very good example of the pseudo science we call psychiatry gone nuts. excuss the pun. I guess that may be due to the influence of shrunk’n heads like Jung. Though not a homosexual himself, a sexual pervert and pagan in his own right.
Tom, is that you?

I hope that I am not being glib. 😊
 
Read my post a person that wants to engage and or is tempted to engage in sodomy isn’t well in the head.The nearest “therapist” probably agrees (incorrectly) with the APA. They need a priest, preferrably one that will actually tell them the truth of their sinful “lifestyle”.
You didnt answer the question of: what exactly do you base this claim on?

How much experience do you actually have with mental illness?
I’m sorry talking with them? I don’t just go to hear myself speak (nor do my other catholic friends).
By your own post, it doesnt appear that way.
I do talk with them but I tell them the truth and as many well know that “truth is hate to those that hate the truth”. It’s not “loving” to tell them that they are ok in God’s eyes when he calls it an abomination, vile etc.
Yep, that confirms it.
I never said all homosexuals are pediphiles but they have a high rate of child molesting yet they are a smaller part of the population. Here’s a link I found.
Oh here we go.
Yes and maybe Paul and the other apostles should have left the first time people didn’t want to hear them. I don’t think Stephen the first martyr’s listeners wanted to hear him either that isn’t the point. Whether they want to or not they need to hear. Just like pro-aborts need to see what abortion is even though they don’t want to. Respectful/uncompassionate? Is it respectful or compassionate to a person to just let them jump off a cliff or should we actually try to talk them out of it? Again stephen wasn’t stoned for talking softly and rosy to the Jews and Paul wasn’t stoned and left for dead for the same thing.
People need the truth whether they want it or not whether they hear it or not.
What, the truth according to you?

I was going to suggest that you try a different stratigy, since the one you are using is obviously not working for you. But after reading your other post (which was disturbing to say the least) as well as this one, it might be an idea to not do what you do at all and possibly get some councilling (a priest could help).
 
You know you’ve hit a nerve when the personal attacks start rolling in.👍

So answer me this…is it wrong for an adult to be “attracted” to children in a sexual way just as long as he doesn’t act on it? Yes or no will suffice.

Now you can avoid answering, but that’s up to you.

You shouldn’t really be offended because it’s a valid comparison to homosexuality. I have to laugh at your post because you are obviously “offended” at me and trying to get an equal response in return. Not gonna happen. I’ve been attacked outside abortion clinics for just holding a sign with a dead baby on it. I’ve been attacked for simply holding a “peace in the womb sign” and yes I’ve been spit on at a homosexual pride event because I dared to wear a sandwich board with the gospel message on it. (not to mention the many times I’ve been threatened with assault and or death) So you post isn’t upseting it’s funny. :rotfl:

Anyway I’m off to bed. :sleep:
 
You know you’ve hit a nerve when the personal attacks start rolling in.👍
Two things here:

1, Hit a nerve about what?

2, What personal attack?
So answer me this…is it wrong for an adult to be “attracted” to children in a sexual way just as long as he doesn’t act on it? Yes or no will suffice.
The idea actually makes me uncomfortable, but it does happen. Its not really a yes or no situation.

I would hope that a person in that situation would seek help for their attraction and avoided being around children.
Now you can avoid answering, but that’s up to you.
Now its funny that you would say that, since you have avoided answering a couple of questions that I asked you.
You shouldn’t really be offended because it’s a valid comparison to homosexuality.
What am I not meant to be offended by?

What is a valid comparison to homosexuality and why is it valid?
I have to laugh at your post because you are obviously “offended” at me and trying to get an equal response in return.
What am I offended about?

You keep saying this but wont say what it is I took offense to. The only thing that I can think of that comes close to being offended is my objection to stating that homosexuality is a mental illness. Is that what you mean?

Now are you suggesting that I am trying to offend you in retaliation?

How am I doing that?
Not gonna happen.
What me offending you or you being offended?
I’ve been attacked outside abortion clinics for just holding a sign with a dead baby on it. I’ve been attacked for simply holding a “peace in the womb sign” and yes I’ve been spit on at a homosexual pride event because I dared to wear a sandwich board with the gospel message on it. (not to mention the many times I’ve been threatened with assault and or death)
You must be very proud, but Im thinking that there is more to the story.
So you post isn’t upseting it’s funny. :rotfl:
Actually it wasnt meant to be upsetting, I dont get why you keep saying this. I was trying to offer you some helpful advice because I am actually a little concerned.
Anyway I’m off to bed. :sleep:
 
Uh unless you live in a cave I think you know what I’m talking about. Let’s just call them very masculine women. I’m talking about lesbians that wear men’s shirts, men’s pants with big metal chains hanging out of the pockets. (you can tell they’re mens clothes), no bra (I have no idea why they do that except they hate being women-the reason I notice that is the voice isn’t quite male and then well it’s hard not to see them…flopping around) and chop off all their hair to the point of actual crew cuts, and talk (with the deep male voice and mannerisms of men). Unfortunately I have to look at one of these “women” at my daughter’s gymnastics class cheer on her “friend’s” children (poor kids). And the “vice versa” would be men that talk feminine, act feminine (more feminine that feminine women with the whole flaming male homosexual walk etc.) and wear women’s clothes.

Is that enough info for ya? Unless you’ve been in a cave you’ve seen someone that is homosexual and fits the profile. I have yet to meet a straight man that wears women’s clothes and walks and talks like a super feminine woman and yet isn’t homosexual. I have yet to meet women that fit the above that isn’t a lesbian.

signed,
a mom whose very disturbed by homosexuals not being labeled RIGHTFULLY mentally ill and or demon possessed.:confused:
I have met people who fall at many places along the continuum of the way that humans can walk, talk, act and dress and they are not all easily labeled by their choice of clothing or their mannerisms. Of course, I do not go up to every person I happen to see on the street and ask about their sexual activities, either, because, frankly, if they aren’t asking me or my immediate family to participate, it’s honestly none of my business.

The folks that I know who are gay do not stand out in a crowd. They are not women who look extremely masculine nor are they drag queens. The lesbians that I know all wear bras, but some of the straight women I know don’t. You seem to be making the mistake of believing in stereotypes and seeing those as the standard for folks who are gay. That has not been my experience.
 
Originally Posted by defenderoftruth View Post
I’m sick and tired of hearing “how dare you tell me I need to be delivered I’m just fine as long as I don’t act, you’re not being ‘compassionate’” (while they attend homosexual events that mock God, with naked/half naked people that relish homosexuality).

Then perhaps you should stop going to these events and telling them things that they have quite obviously heard many times before, it doesnt seem to be working for you clearly.

I would say your not being respectful more than not being compassionate.
So you expect people to be respectful to the indecency described above by defenderoftruth?
 
Originally Posted by agangbern View Post
So you expect people to be respectful to the indecency described above by defenderoftruth?

What do mean by “indecency”?
Specifically the one just described by defenderoftruth.
 
You mean people attending a “gay pride” event?
No. As I said, the one described by defenderoftruth. Here:

Originally Posted by defenderoftruth View Post
I’m sick and tired of hearing “how dare you tell me I need to be delivered I’m just fine as long as I don’t act, you’re not being ‘compassionate’” (while they attend homosexual events that mock God, with naked/half naked people that relish homosexuality).
 
No. As I said, the one described by defenderoftruth. Here:

Originally Posted by defenderoftruth View Post
I’m sick and tired of hearing “how dare you tell me I need to be delivered I’m just fine as long as I don’t act, you’re not being ‘compassionate’” (while they attend homosexual events that mock God, with naked/half naked people that relish homosexuality
).
Defenderoftruth IS describing a gay pride event there…
 
Defenderoftruth IS describing a gay pride event there…
Therefore, that particular pride event , as specifically described by defenderoftruth, is the one I am referring to. I don’t speak of other pride events. To say “a pride event” is not determinative of which pride event is referred to.
 
Elric,

I think that homosexuals that have “attractions” and don’t act, are just like people that are “attracted” but don’t act on their sexaul desires for children. There is differences in temptation on things. Someone may be tempted to eat to much but if they don’t they get over it and aren’t tempted anymore. (unless it’s a problem to which they need help too) Sexual deviancy whether homosexual or pedestry is a different type of temptation. (I’ve also worked with MANY homosexuals before I became a housewife and stayed home, so I know what alot are thinking from hearing from their own mouths)

Because whether people are aware of it or not, many (notice I didn’t say all) homosexuals (like some on this board that shall remain nameless) that have the “attraction” feel it’s fine and dandy to be “attracted” to the same sex. Even though to be “attracted” means they are interested in sodomy/lesbianism. (which isn’t normal/sane/or Christian for that matter)

You see what I’m getting at? I don’t think you don’t get it, I think you understand but are trying to “act” as though you don’t get it. (why I have no idea)

In plain language…
  1. Having homosexual attractions all the time and thinking it’s ok and yet not acting on them is sinful.
  2. There is nothing normal/healthy about someone thinking sodomy/lesbianism is ok yet “oh I don’t act on it”.
  3. I believe the scriptures make clear that someone can and should be delivered of this awful vice like they can and should be of kleptomania, sexual addictions, etc. (it deals with theft and fornication/adultery amongst others but “whom the Son sets free is free indeed”)
  4. This whole straining scripture to deal with “it only mentions action not attraction” is ridiculous because really aren’t sinful thoughts evil too?
Jesus was tempted by Satan but said get lost (and quoted scripture back at him) I’m pretty sure he didn’t sit there and fantasize about the temptations yet not “act” on it.

Someone said on another thread “the homosexual agenda people are the most intolerant” yes they are, they (dare I say it) are no different than they were 3000+ years ago in sodom and gamorrah. You cannot tell them that they are sinning (blasphemy) by saying that their “homosexuality is good and godly”. They get really offended and attack with words, fists, or spit.

Bottom line they are in sin. Those that dance at the fine line between “attraction” and “acts” are in vice not free. They can and should be delivered be it by a Catholic priest counseling them, or by a Catholic exorcism. We aren’t “helping” anyone by letting them persist in sin and say well just don’t act on it. (attending homosexual events, pro-homosexual group meetings, homosexual bars etc.) Because really the more they think it’s ok, the more they’ll attend the filthy blasphemous events, and then ultimately they’ll give in and act.

It’s a slippery slope. The “attraction” is sinful not just the act.
 
  1. Having homosexual attractions all the time and thinking it’s ok and yet not acting on them is sinful.
  2. There is nothing normal/healthy about someone thinking sodomy/lesbianism is ok yet “oh I don’t act on it”.
  3. I believe the scriptures make clear that someone can and should be delivered of this awful vice like they can and should be of kleptomania, sexual addictions, etc. (it deals with theft and fornication/adultery amongst others but “whom the Son sets free is free indeed”)
  4. This whole straining scripture to deal with “it only mentions action not attraction” is ridiculous because really aren’t sinful thoughts evil too?
Okay? So what is your solution then? Note that your view is COUNTER to Catholic teaching.

I have undergone literally hundreds, if not thousands of hours of therapy in attempts to cure my SSA, most when I was a teenager. None of it did iddly. If anything it made me suicidal, the only times I ever tried (three times total) were when I was undergoing therapy.

Jesus is not physically manifested at this time, no one can wave their hands and magically cure people of SSA. No therapy has been proven to be even mildly successful. The recent study that came out from the organizations themselves more or less considered it a ‘success’ if they created bisexuals and/or managed to get people to be celibate, but not cure them of the thoughts.

You condemn us, but then offer no suggestions as to a way out. When I was a child I prayed every day to be healed, I underwent blessings of unction, many many many things, for nearly a decade my family and I did this. And it did diddly, nothing at all, in the end.
 
Okay? So what is your solution then? Note that your view is COUNTER to Catholic teaching.
I have undergone literally hundreds, if not thousands of hours of therapy in attempts to cure my SSA, most when I was a teenager. None of it did iddly. If anything it made me suicidal, the only times I ever tried (three times total) were when I was undergoing therapy.
Jesus is not physically manifested at this time, no one can wave their hands and magically cure people of SSA. No therapy has been proven to be even mildly successful. The recent study that came out from the organizations themselves more or less considered it a ‘success’ if they created bisexuals and/or managed to get people to be celibate, but not cure them of the thoughts.
You condemn us, but then offer no suggestions as to a way out. When I was a child I prayed every day to be healed, I underwent blessings of unction, many many many things, for nearly a decade my family and I did this. And it did diddly, nothing at all, in the end
.

You saw my solution, and I don’t think to have someone be a former homosexual is a miracle, it’s plain spiritual rebirth. And to say Jesus cannot set someone free of sexual deviancy is ridiculous. How is it counter to Catholic teaching? The Catechism of the Catholic church says:

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms throughout the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on sacred Scripture, which present homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity [Gen. 19:1-29, Rom. 1:24-27, 1 Cor. 6:10, 1Tim. 1:10], tradition has always declared that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered [Persona Humana 8]. They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

Now can you show me where it says that attraction is ok or healthy? Or that it’s ok to think “attraction” is ok as long as it’s not acted upon? It doesn’t say that. It says acts are wrong and why should homosexuals be able to dwell on their “attraction” while in the straight world it’s called “sinful thoughts”? Have you not read on this very board from people who think it’s ok to be attracted just not act?

Well I had an addiction to pornography (of men I’m a woman) and a filthy mouth that couldn’t by my own will be curbed. I prayed and prayed and prayed and now I’m completely free of both. I’m sorry you have not been freed of this, I really am you are among those that actually want to stop being homosexually oriented others think it’s ok as long as they don’t act, and or think the acts are just fine and dandy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top