|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
I don't see how they could be conclusive.
And I don't see how the environment argument means that homosexuality is a "choice". Your environment isn't always your choice(in childhood, it very rarely is).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,958
some RKMB'ers are Obsessed with Black People Hmmm? 5000+ posts
|
|
some RKMB'ers are Obsessed with Black People Hmmm? 5000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,958 |
I'm actually debating posting William 'one eyed bandit' Bennett's OpEd peice from last Friday. It was regarding homosexuals and their agenda to defile the institution of marriage.... let me run a search 1st of all to see if I can find it. quote:
October 17, 2003
COMMENTARY
What Nature Joins Let No Gays Put Asunder
Marriage is meant to be between one man and one woman. Period.
By William J. Bennett, William J. Bennett is a former secretary of Education and the author of "The Broken Hearth: Reversing the Moral Collapse of the American Family" (Random House, 2001).
For all the damage the institution of marriage sustained during the sexual revolution, its recognized significance as the fundamental social unit remains intact.
If nothing else, this one conviction at least remains: that marriage should be strengthened. It remains our achievable ideal and the reason President Bush proclaimed Oct. 12-18 "Marriage Protection Week."
Yet the state of marriage today is fragile. Battered by divorce, eroded by rising rates of cohabitation and shaken by infidelity, marriage is now imperiled by a proposal to redefine it. This challenge has been advanced by gay activists in the culture and the courts.
Though we are the most open, tolerant, forgiving and embracing of people, it is important that the movement toward gay marriage be resisted. It would in no way strengthen marriage to redefine it by embracing gay marriage.
Marriage is rooted in the proper order of life. To be human implies purpose; human beings are set apart from the rest of the material world, even from other animate beings, by that purpose.
By way of contrast, the essence of a tree presents no moral limitations for the uses we may develop for it. But the nature of man does limit how we may treat him: This we have affirmed from the Declaration of Independence to today's human rights movement. It is why we should not clone humans, why we do not experiment on human subjects and why we oppose sexual subjugation.
Just as human nature has inherent purpose, so does human sexuality. There is a natural sexual order, a proper order for love — an ordo amorum, as St. Augustine put it. We are made male and female, and these immutable characteristics define proper sexual behavior. Because this proper sexual behavior quite commonly results in childbearing, these characteristics also define the appropriate relationship for sexual behavior: marriage.
In marriage alone do men, women and children find the relationship that balances their sometimes mutual, sometimes competing, needs.
"Marriage is our attempt to reconcile and harmonize the erotic, social, sexual and financial needs of men and women with the needs of their partner and their children," says Maggie Gallagher, co-author of "The Case for Marriage."
The parameters of proper sexual behavior are not arbitrary, nor are they intended to evolve. If we depart from the natural order of sexuality and the proper behavior and relationships that ensue from it, we are left with no guiding principle but the prevailing mood of the age. We are currently on the cusp of doing just that: We must decide whether we will continue to reinforce the natural sexual order in our laws or whether we will let them cave in to arbitrary preference.
As the proponents of gay marriage are quick to point out, promiscuity, adultery, cohabitation, divorce and out-of-wedlock births have severely damaged the institution of marriage. But this is not an argument for the redefinition of marriage. That the family is struggling today is not because of a design flaw. The problem is our failure to live up to the design.
When our behavior does not live up to the standard, we have two choices: We can change our behavior or change the standard.
The homosexual movement would change the standard. This is a conflict of ideals.
The homosexual movement cannot tolerate the persistence of mores that define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, the marriage relationship as the proper context of sexual expression and the family as the unit formed around that nucleus.
To normalize homosexuality requires us to deny that man linked to woman is both natural and ideal — that it is the purpose of our human sexuality — and to affirm the aberrant view that sexuality is an arbitrary construct and choice.
The homosexual vanguard proposes to replace sexual identity — that inescapable fact of nature that we are created male and female — with sexual behavior as a fundamental organizing principle of society. And if sexual behavior is the determinant, then appetite is the guiding principle.
Without respect for sexual identity, sexual partners become nothing more than interchangeable parts, rather than complementary on the basis of nature. And if behavior and appetite are the only determinants of sexual conduct, what is the argument against polygamy, incest or any other imaginable sexual relationship?
For our custom and law, the implications of such a fundamental change are profound, but nowhere more than for marriage.
The last decades have sobered us about the consequences of the sexual revolution, which replaced the traditional marriage ethic with a code that has sought to free both marriage and human sexuality from restraint and commitment.
Faced with this, we must redouble our efforts to make our behavior meet the traditional standard. And that standard does not call for the redefinition of marriage or the reconfiguration of family, and it in no way translates into an argument for gay marriage.
What we now call a traditional family remains the safest place to raise children, the soundest investment in children's economic and emotional futures and the strongest safety net in our modern world. The evidence is overwhelming that no household arrangement can compare with an intact family. Conversely, the absence of such support will prove a lifelong deficit.
Marriage between one man and one woman is the ideal that we must continue to uphold in our law and our culture. What is broken should be restored, not redefined or destroyed.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-bennett17oct17,1,4208428.story?coll=la-news-comment
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,958
some RKMB'ers are Obsessed with Black People Hmmm? 5000+ posts
|
|
some RKMB'ers are Obsessed with Black People Hmmm? 5000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,958 |
Some reaction: quote:
Bennett on the Nature of Sexuality and Marriage
After reading William J. Bennett's "What Nature Joins Let No Gays Put Asunder" (Commentary, Oct. 17), in which he makes such a point of the natural purpose of sexual union between a man and a woman, I was moved to remember Shakespeare: "Let me not to the marriage of true minds admit impediments."
I am fortunate to have been married for 20 years, and find that the marriage of minds Shakespeare celebrates is the more important ingredient. Where love conflicts with traditional sexual roles, I cast my vote for love. I do not understand the argument that allowing others to be married weakens my marriage in particular or the institution of marriage in general, even when some people choose unions I would not consider for myself.
Ernesto Gomez
Crestline
*
Human sexuality is far more complex than Bennett seems to be able to understand, although for all of us who are gay, it is a simple matter that we were born attracted to people of our own gender. So to live a lie and pretend to be heterosexual, we not only violate our own humanness but also hurt those we try to be straight with.
Human sexuality is a natural drive to bond adults together, as well as produce children. In his infinite wisdom God made humans capable of responding to life in a number of ways. If Bennett could take time to listen to himself, he might recognize how a life of deceit can be harmful to those in his own life.
Dan Gumbleton
Pasadena
*
Will someone please tell the withered and ridiculous Bennett to get back to his slot machines and stop trying to dictate his own flawed morality to the rest of the world? Gay people don't want to "redefine" marriage; they want to participate. Gay people just can't win with the family-values crowd. If they're promiscuous and freewheeling, they're condemned as hedonists. If they want to settle down and nest (parroting a non-gay lifestyle), they're condemned for destroying marriage. Sheesh.
People like Bennett know that they can muster lots of political support for their born-again commander in chief if they stir panic about evil gays trying to ruin marriage. That's what's behind President Bush's "Marriage Protection Week." It's not about morality; it's about votes.
Tim Bryant
West Hollywood
*
Bennett views marriage primarily as a sexual relationship while, in fact, it is a legal relationship offering protections to the participants. The U.S. should follow the example of many other countries and separate the religious and legal aspects of marriage. Marriage should be a civil union performed before a judge or other government representative. Those who wish to sanctify the union can then have a religious ceremony. Our present system of allowing religious leaders to act as agents of the government has confused the perception of marriage.
Bob Marlin
Los Angeles
*
Bennett is absolutely correct in his assertion that homosexuality has no place in marriage. The rise of homosexuality is a phenomenon fed by this "do whatever feels good" age, combined with the liberal garbage Hollywood and television force-feed the populace. With everything on television being sexually themed, are we surprised? This country's moral compass is now upside down as we slip further and further into decay and acceptance of previously immoral actions and behaviors. God said homosexuality is an "abomination" and, for me, that is the bottom line.
Gregg Freeman
Simi Valley
*
Numerous studies show that the rates of divorce, domestic violence and child abuse, homelessness, bankruptcy, suicide and many other ills are significantly higher in families of gambling addicts. Having lost a reported $8 million to his own gambling addiction, it would appear that Bennett is highly qualified to exhort people to avoid gambling lest they destroy their marriages, lives or professional reputations. But beyond that, he's just another right-wing gasbag trying to preach a hypocritical "morality" to others.
Jeff Nelson
Chatsworth
My own opinions?
Well, seeing as how i've been freinds with several gay people ever since high school, I can safetly attest that they in no way "chose" to be gay because "it feels good". If that were justification, wouldn't more "immoral" straight people be putting their johnsons into other men?
One of my best freinds is a gay man. I met him though when he was the boyfreind of a good female freind of mine. Their relationship was pretty much a disaster because he was trying to confom to being a straight man and carry a heterosexual relationship when it really wasn't in his nature. The end result was a miserable, frustrated, and suffering girlfreind and a miserable, frustrated, and suffereing boyfreind. Once he 'came out" and accepted his nature and his sexuality, he was a much happier person and he was free of the guilt that came with not being able to be what others wanted of him. His 'girlfreind, his family and mostly, himself out of a need to be "normal".
He's still a cool guy. He still has a killer record collection and taste in music. He can still outdrink anybody i know and he still throws great parties. Only he just chooses to be committed to another man.
He's just one person. I Know several others. I can honestly say that being gay is initially more of a burden for them than a blessing. Mostly having to do with social acceptance, stigmas and ridicule. i think suicide rates among teen homosexuals can corroborate this.
As with global warming though, I think depending on what ideology one CHOOSES to follow detirmines just how willing people are to accept news stories like the one posted above and how they choose to accept homosexuals.
My big desire to see DEFINATIVE UNQUESTIONALBE PROOF is borne out of a desire to finally see homophoboia put where it belongs, in the category of bigotry.
bigotry
\Big"ot*ry\, n. [Cf. F. bigoterie.] 1. The state of mind of a bigot; obstinate and unreasoning attachment of one's own belief and opinions, with narrow-minded intolerance of beliefs opposed to them.
Honestly, to me, it just means a better single female to male ratio. Why any straight man would challenge that is bewildering. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,958
some RKMB'ers are Obsessed with Black People Hmmm? 5000+ posts
|
|
some RKMB'ers are Obsessed with Black People Hmmm? 5000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,958 |
I don't get the question. Anything less than a legally recognized union would just be a symbolic jesture with no legal (or spiritial depending on the ceremony type) weight behind it.
Ah never mind. I think you were referring to a church ritual. Although that would be ideal as you wouldn't have people running around condemning other people as abonimations before God, I think legally recognized civil unions would be more practical (not to mention realistic) than trying to change some factions of christianity of their belief systems.
Civil unions would also adress some of the more day to day practical aspects of why gays want to be recognized as "married" such as insurance and medical descisions and benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
I still don't understand how you're interpreting the environment argument as a "choice".
I don't think people "choose" to be gay, but I also don't think it's necessarily something you're born with. I think it's something acquired, but not consciously.
A person's interests and beliefs are a result of their upbringing, based on how their parents/friends/teachers influence them(positively or negatively). If a certain taste has no factor in a person's childhood(or teenhood) either way, they probably won't acquire it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,796 Likes: 40
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,796 Likes: 40 |
quote:
Originally posted by Pariah:
Question Whomod: Why exactly should gay people have a right to marry in a "private club", as I've heard my few gay friends describe it, which has a policy within said club, that specifically prohibits such actions? If it's an organization, there are no rights involved, just rules and regs. Even so, why would most gays, who feel that it is merely a symbol of bigotry, want to be bound together with someone they love by a bigot organization?
Also...
Marriage transcends law. Its not like Canada can tell the Vatican what to do and what not to do.
If this was already mentioned, then forgive me, but I didn't feel like going over the entire thread.
Legalizing gay marriage wouldn't force any private club (religion) to marry gay people. It would however prevent one church dictating that another church can't marry gays.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,958
some RKMB'ers are Obsessed with Black People Hmmm? 5000+ posts
|
|
some RKMB'ers are Obsessed with Black People Hmmm? 5000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,958 |
quote:
Let Matthew Shepard Rest
Matthew Shepard died an unimaginably horrific death, lashed to a wooden fence in the lonely Wyoming countryside, beaten until he fell into coma and then abandoned. Yet five years after his October 1998 murder, the red-hot homophobia that fueled the college freshman's killers has flared up again in Wyoming, where outside extremists who call themselves Christians continue to flog Shepard in death.
The Rev. Fred Phelps, a Topeka, Kan., pastor, was one of the twisted demonstrators at Shepard's funeral who screamed, "God hates fags!" as Shepard's grieving parents and friends entered a Casper, Wyo., church. Phelps has returned to that city to mark the five-year anniversary of Shepard's death. But instead of expiating his sickening behavior, Phelps wants to commemorate it by installing a 6-foot-high granite monument with Shepard's face and these words: "Matthew Shepard Entered Hell October 12, 1998, at Age 21 in defiance of God's Warning: 'Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind; it is abomination.' Leviticus 18:22."
Phelps' political maneuverings are as wily as his ideas are repulsive. He wants his monument to hate to sit in Casper's City Park, where a large replica of the Ten Commandments was erected in 1965, a gift from the local Eagles Club. Last year, a Denver federal court, which has jurisdiction over Wyoming, ruled that communities displaying religious messages or symbols must allow other messages or symbols as well. So Phelps figured that if the park included a monument to the Ten Commandments, the city would have to accommodate his demand to place his "religious" anti-gay statue.
Casper's leaders, righteously appalled at Phelps' gambit, have come together to shut down his poisonous message. Last week, the City Council voted to move the Ten Commandments to a new historic plaza under construction. It's a move that while solving one problem might create new legal challenges, but at least the Ten Commandments wouldn't be used as an excuse for Phelps' testament to bigotry.
Meanwhile, the Eagles Club has offered to remove the granite Ten Commandments tablet from Casper's park. At least three local churches say they want it and would put it on private land. That's a far better idea — and the best way to let Matthew Shepard finally rest in peace.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,342
Peacock Teaser 3000+ posts
|
|
Peacock Teaser 3000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,342 |
quote:
Supreme Court: Gay Sex Not Adultery
Decision Comes In Divorce Appeal
POSTED: 11:55 a.m. EST November 7, 2003
http://www.thechamplainchannel.com/wnne/2619895/detail.html
CONCORD, N.H. -- If a married woman has sex with another woman, is that adultery? The New Hampshire Supreme Court says no.
The court was asked to review a divorce case in which a husband accused his wife of adultery after she had a sexual relationship with another woman. Any finding that one spouse is at fault in the break-up of a marriage can change how the court divides the couple's property.
Robin Mayer, of Brownsville, Vt., was named in the divorce proceedings of a Hanover couple. She appealed the case to the Supreme Court, arguing that gay sex doesn't qualify as adultery under the state's divorce law.
In a 3-2 ruling Friday, the court agreed.
The majority determined that the definition of adultery requires sexual intercourse. The judges who disagreed said adultery should be defined more broadly to include other extramarital sexual activity.
I had some comments on this, but www.opinionjournal.com beat me to it.
One wonders what gay-rights activists will make of this case. On the one hand, it puts homosexual spouses at an advantage in divorce proceedings, compared with unfaithful heterosexuals. On the other hand, it would seem an affront to gay dignity to say that homosexual affairs don't rise to the level of adultery. Also, if members of the same sex are ever allowed to wed, this ruling would make it legally impossible for them to consummate their marriages.
Come to think of it, will traditionalists applaud the New Hampshire high court for reaffirming the definition of adultery as a relationship between a man and a woman?
If gay unions were legalized, and then one of them had an affair with another man, then there would be no punishment, right? That doesn't make sense. The would mean the wronged spouse couldn't get any justice. But how would it make it impossible to consumate the marriage?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
|
|
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281 |
I can't beleive this shit is still being debated...I go away for like four months and you arrogant assholes are still pontificating about how wrong and morraly corrupt us 'faggots' are. Shut the fuck up and go mind your own fucking lives. Once you breeders manage to get your own shit sorted (that would involve a higher than 51 percent marriage sucess rate) you can come back and tell me and my fellow faggot brothers and sisters how we should live our lives. Until then, you have no clue what it's like to live as a gay man or woman in a judeo-christian society and shit like 'it should remain a classifiable mental illness' is just fucked up, back assward bullshit. I know you have your religious beliefs...but keep them the hell to yourself. Really, shut the fuck up.
I honestly can't believe this topic hasn't died. I'd never sit here and debate the right of a pregnant woman to get an abortion (a decidedly un-christian prqctice)...So please just ignore us and let us go about living a normal life, with all of the freedoms and liberties that you slef-righteously take for granted. Fuck...You cannot imagine how fucking irritated I am to come in here after so many months and see the same fucking assholes telling me what's right and wrong.
SHUT UP! (And God bless...)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
I did kinda miss you, Klinton. Good to see you're back.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31 |
Here's a panel discussion from a few days back on the PBS News Hour, where four editorial page editors from major newspapers across the country, discuss recent court rulings regarding gay marriage : John Diaz of the San Francisco Chronicle; Bruce Dold of the Chicago Tribune; Michael Ryan of the Augusta Chronicle in Georgia; and Virginia Buckingham of the Boston Herald. I find it interesting to observe a panel of what are arguably some of the most informed on the issue have to say, from both sides. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/media/july-dec03/marriage_12-4.htmlThey make many of the same points both sides have here in this topic.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,230 Likes: 1
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,230 Likes: 1 |
Go Klinton! Go Canada! quote:
God said homosexuality is an "abomination" and, for me, that is the bottom line.
Allow me to express a very remote hope: If the Almighty does exist, I hope He sends this ignorant, intolerant, unthinking, and ultimately malevolent hater to hell to burn.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 6,377
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 6,377 |
It's just sex! Who the fuck really cares who does what to whom? If the parties are agreeable then I say go for it!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
Dave TWB said: "I think the legitimizing of homosexuality and removing it from the list of psychological disorders is a mistake"
Thank goodness your opinion doesn't count.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31 |
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Jackson:
Dave TWB said: "I think the legitimizing of homosexuality and removing it from the list of psychological disorders is a mistake"
Thank goodness your opinion doesn't count.
I wish I could say "Thank goodness you have manners and a tolerance for opposing views" but obviously you don't.
I was discussing what psychologists within the APA --highly qualified people regarding psychological disorders, who feel their own trade organization is doing a dis-service to people who would benefit from counseling.
It's rather pointless of you, taking my discussion of the issue, and your re-directing it into a personal insult at me.
Although your posts reveal a consistent pattern toward personal insults, that contribute nothing to the issue itself.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 |
he worships a pedderass, what do you expect?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
![[whaaaa!]](eek01.gif) A peddler of ass? I thought TK did that on the Women board... or is that just referring to female ass? ![[eh?]](images/icons/confused.gif) Nice avatar, BSAMS. Dave TWB, I'm amazed at your persistence, but I don't think your message is sinking in. We should all be laid back and groovy like the other Dave. ![[cool]](images/icons/cool.gif) Not that I completely disagree with you - but then again, there's almost nobody here I completely disagree with. :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
|
|
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281 |
quote:
Originally posted by LLance:
It's just sex!
That's really the problem, isn't it? Bible thumping conservative folks seem to forget the fact that it's not about the sexual act. It's about companionship...love for somone of the same sex. The actual sexual part of it is really irellevant. I love my boyfreind for who he is...character traits that are exclusively male.
And Dave, if you really wan't to trot out psychiatric bullshit, I'd suggest looking into ridiculous obsessions with shit that really has nothing to do with you. Let it go. We're not going away, but folks with such judgemental ideals as yourself really need to. Live your life as you need to and let us live ours. Your personal views are your own, and should be respected as such. Mine are eaqually valid...And if you really can't see that simple truth, then I'm sorry. Enjoy your bitter little life.
WHY THE FUCK HASN'T THIS TOPIC DIED!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
Dave TWB said: "I was discussing what psychologists within the APA --highly qualified people regarding psychological disorders, who feel their own trade organization is doing a dis-service to people who would benefit from counseling."
You were discussing perhaps SOME psychologists within the APA. It's a large organization, you know (having myself once been a member), and even it does not speak for all psychologists. In fact, not all psychologists working in the States are even members of the APA.
That SOME shrinks feel that SOME gays may benefit from counseling says...what? Very little, actually beyond personal opinion.
You have to understand about psychology and psychologists...and I should know, I have two degrees in the field...there is no unified theory at work in psychology. There are groups who have their own pet views of the world, and clinicians are the worst of that lot in that respect because so damned many of them are extremely removed from basic research into human behavior. They take their theory, assume its validity, and conduct their counseling and psychotherapeutic work on the basis of this theory. It can be argued that these clinicians are operating on little more than "gussied up personal opinion."
Dave, the thing is, in this discussion, we all know you have an agenda with this...you've argued that homosexuality is a violation of God's law based on biblical passages. What you're doing is obvious...you're trying to attach the supposed biblical evidence to an onstensible scientific context by saying that a few psychology types believe that gays can benefit from counseling and can even undergo orientation change.
Nice try. I have my doubts that anyone'll convince the bulk of psychologists that homosexuality is a mental/behavior "condition" deserved of treatment so long as the gay person lives a functional, reasonably contented life.
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31 |
It's not about bitterness, much as you'd like to rationalize my opposition to gay marriage by assuming that I am.
It's about warping of values. Gays have the right to do whatever they want. All I ask is they do it behind closed doors, and don't harass the rest of us with what they believe.
But as the explanation I've given at length has detailed, tolerance of the gay lifestyle has just emboldened gays to push for more invasiveness and warping of mainstream values.
It's not enough that gays can live together and be happy, and have spousal benefits and so forth, they have to force the rest of us to warp the long-standing definition of marriage from one man/one woman (a tradition as old as the human race), to whatever abberation of that rationalizes their gay lifestyle.
I get outraged by things that defy common sense.
I don't like seeing murderers go free.
I don't like people saying that if a nativity scene is put in front of a government building, it's an intolerable outrage, when Christianity is the foundation of this country's government, and the majority religion of its population.
And that a public school teacher can't even say "Merry Christmas" to her students, but instead has to say the more politically correct and neutral "happy holidays". Christianity is still the dominant religion in the U.S., but that is rapidly changing due to secularist anti-Christian forces in our culture, that try to re-write history and biasedly push Christianity out of the mainstream.
And similarly, it bugs the hell out of me when gays, about 2% or so of the U.S. population, and the liberals who support them who have a contempt for all things traditional, try to usurp the 98%majority and warp the definition of marriage out from under the rest of us. A deceitful few, usurping the majority, through misrepresentation and underhanded manipulation.
Permissiveness toward gays over the last 3 decades has only resulted in allowing gays to further pervert society, and allowed gays to demand even greater concessions from the mainstream.
Threesomes, bisexuality, group sex, bondage, sado-masochism, an increasing array of illicit drugs, all these things are far more prevalent because of the tolerance of gays.
And each new generation has an increasingly warped sense of what "normal" is, and a decreasing ability to see how our society is descending toward lawlessness, and on a path toward self-destruction.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31 |
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Jackson:
Dave, the thing is, in this discussion, we all know you have an agenda with this...you've argued that homosexuality is a violation of God's law based on biblical passages. What you're doing is obvious...you're trying to attach the supposed biblical evidence to an onstensible scientific context by saying that a few psychology types believe that gays can benefit from counseling and can even undergo orientation change.
Nice try. I have my doubts that anyone'll convince the bulk of psychologists that homosexuality is a mental/behavior "condition" deserved of treatment so long as the gay person lives a functional, reasonably contented life.
Jim
Oh, right, I have "an agenda". EVERYONE has a set of beliefs, and therefore everyone making counter-points to me ALSO has "an agenda", including yourself. Your contempt for Christianity and conservative values in general is palpable, so arguably, you have an anti-traditional agenda.
If you choose to look at it that way. I don't think I have "an agenda", I simply have values that I believe in, that I see maligned and circumvented by others who choose to have contempt for what I believe.
If the majority of psychologists cannot be convinced, it's only because political correctness bars the way, and psychologists who buck the pro-gay mainstream know they will pay a heavy price for it professionally, and see their reputation dragged through the mud.
(See the editorial from the editor of Psychology Today that I posted above, to see the type of crap any professional has to put up with, who even tries to honestly weigh the politically correct support of gay rights. It's a holy war on progress by gay activists, and pure intimidation of anyone who dares to question the Party Line. )
~
Captain Sammich, you're absolutely right about the apparent futility of being persistent. People believe what they want to believe.
And anyone who dares to disagree is "hateful" and has "an agenda".
![[AAAHHHH!!!]](graemlins/aahhh.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
"See the editorial from the editor of Psychology Today that I posted above"
PSYCHOLOGY TODAY is not a scholarly periodical. It's a popular magazine aimed at untrained readers.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
"If the majority of psychologists cannot be convinced, it's only because political correctness bars the way, and psychologists who buck the pro-gay mainstream know they will pay a heavy price for it professionally, and see their reputation dragged through the mud."
Convinced of what? You make it sound as though it's FACT that homosexuality is a mental illness deserved of treatment. Since it is not fact, there is nothing to convince psychologists about.
Doesn't the fact that there may be a "pro gay mainstream" say something about the possibility that homosexuality is not an illness? Do you see any obsessive-compulsive disorder mainstream out there trying to get OCD out of the DSM?
Yes, we all have personal beliefs, and psychology is certainly one discipline where those beliefs are held strongest because psychology is talking about the science of the human condition. No one will give up their pet theories of the human condition easily.
That said, on what basis are you arguing for benefit of treating homosexuality? Would you argue it's necessary for the gay person who is contented, functioning, and acting as a productive member of society? Or for the unhappy, malfunctioning gay person? If you argue for the second, hell, ANY shrink would say that that person can benefit from therapy, and their homosexuality may or may not have a damned thing to do with why they're presenting.
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31 |
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Jackson:
"See the editorial from the editor of Psychology Today that I posted above"
PSYCHOLOGY TODAY is not a scholarly periodical. It's a popular magazine aimed at untrained readers.
The editors and journalists who write for the magazine are NOT untrained readers.
You might as well try to argue that TIME, OMNI, PLAYBOY and POPULAR MECHANICS are worthless news sources too, just because they publish articles aimed at the general public.
The people who write the articles are professional journalists and writers. And they investigate and interview professional sources.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
"But as the explanation I've given at length has detailed, tolerance of the gay lifestyle has just emboldened gays to push for more invasiveness and warping of mainstream values.
It's not enough that gays can live together and be happy, and have spousal benefits and so forth, they have to force the rest of us to warp the long-standing definition of marriage from one man/one woman (a tradition as old as the human race), to whatever abberation of that rationalizes their gay lifestyle. "
You do realize that homosexuality is as old as the human race?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31 |
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Jackson:
Yes, we all have personal beliefs, and psychology is certainly one discipline where those beliefs are held strongest because psychology is talking about the science of the human condition. No one will give up their pet theories of the human condition easily.
That said, on what basis are you arguing for benefit of treating homosexuality? Would you argue it's necessary for the gay person who is contented, functioning, and acting as a productive member of society? Or for the unhappy, malfunctioning gay person? If you argue for the second, hell, ANY shrink would say that that person can benefit from therapy, and their homosexuality may or may not have a damned thing to do with why they're presenting.
Jim
Someone can be happy smoking crack every day, but just because they're happy smoking crack doesn't mean they're not an addict, and would actually be happier if their root issues that led to their addiction were addressed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
"You might as well try to argue that TIME, OMNI, PLAYBOY and POPULAR MECHANICS are worthless news sources too, just because they publish articles aimed at the general public."
This is very interesting. That's twice in discussions with me in this forum that you've put words in my mouth. I never said big business was evil (in another forum) and I never said that PSYCH TODAY was worthless.
But it's not a scholarly journal. Things that get published in it do not have to adhere to the rigors that have to be maintained when trying to get a pub in a scholarly periodical.
Hope this helps.
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
"Someone can be happy smoking crack every day, but just because they're happy smoking crack doesn't mean they're not an addict, and would actually be happier if their root issues that led to their addiction were addressed."
You want to equate homosexuality with drug addiction? Drug addiction starts with a choice. Being gay does not.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31 |
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Jackson:
You do realize that homosexuality is as old as the human race?
And recognized as abberant and undesireable for just as long.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
Your true colors are showing...
You want to dislike homosexuality? Fine, just as long as you do so behind close doors and don't harrass the rest of us with it.
JJ
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dave the Wonder Boy:
You might as well try to argue that TIME, OMNI, PLAYBOY and POPULAR MECHANICS are worthless news sources too, just because they publish articles aimed at the general public.
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Jackson:
This is very interesting. That's twice in discussions with me in this forum that you've put words in my mouth. I never said big business was evil (in another forum) and I never said that PSYCH TODAY was worthless.
But it's not a scholarly journal. Things that get published in it do not have to adhere to the rigors that have to be maintained when trying to get a pub in a scholarly periodical.
Hope this helps.
Jim
I can't be blamed for your own lack of clarity. Clearly, you are dismissive to whatever degree of PSYCHOLOGY TODAY as a reliable source of information. You come back and act as if I jumped to some kind of outrageous conclusion.
Here's exactly what you said:
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Jackson:
"See the editorial from the editor of Psychology Today that I posted above"
PSYCHOLOGY TODAY is not a scholarly periodical. It's a popular magazine aimed at untrained readers.
You clearly imply some kind of deficiency in its quality of information. I didn't mistake anything.
In the other topic, you expressed a distrust of big business. I countered that big business builds our economy, and provides jobs and benefits to tens of millions.
Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dave the Wonder Boy:
Someone can be happy smoking crack every day, but just because they're happy smoking crack doesn't mean they're not an addict, and would actually be happier if their root issues that led to their addiction were addressed.
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Jackson:
You want to equate homosexuality with drug addiction? Drug addiction starts with a choice. Being gay does not.
Believing that homosexuality is "not a choice" is an unproven belief system, as scientifically unproven as bleeding and alchemy.
Many others categorize homosexuality --as I said, including psychological professionals-- as a treatable obsessive-compulsive disorder, just as drug addiction, alcoholism, pedophilism, sado-masochism, gambling, and many other disorders are treatable.
And I hasten to add, that pedophilism and other psychological disorders are being pushed by psychologists to be removed from the list of psychological disorders ALSO , just as homosexuality has recently been. (see the top of page 23 of this topic for the linked article)
That, to me, is quite telling, about just how "healthy" and psychologically normal homosexuality really is.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31 |
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Jackson:
Your true colors are showing...
You want to dislike homosexuality? Fine, just as long as you do so behind close[d] doors and don't harrass the rest of us with it.
JJ
Ah, back to personal insults.
My "true colors" are simply presenting the alternative argument to the pro-gay perspective.
Facts that are out there, for those who are open to them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
"Believing that homosexuality is "not a choice" is an unproven belief system, as scientifically unproven as bleeding and alchemy."
Just as unproven is that it's a choice. Of coure, I'm sure you discount any evidence that's been found that indicates brain differences between gays and straights. Yes, that line of research is still in its infancy, so we'll have to see where it leads. No conclusions yet.
?Many others categorize homosexuality --as I said, including psychological professionals-- as a treatable obsessive-compulsive disorder, just as drug addiction, alcoholism, pedophilism, sado-masochism, gambling, and many other disorders are treatable."
How many? Seriously, poll all the shrinks and let's see some numbers.
"And I hasten to add, that pedophilism and other psychological disorders are being pushed by psychologists to be removed from the list of psychological disorders"
Of course you hasten to add this.
Name the shrinks pushing for pedophilism being pushed from the DSM. Name them! Goddamn it, name them! Stop indicting an entire profession based on a few fucks. Jesus, there are always a few crackpots everywhere...
Just keep your fucking homophobia to yourself. You don't want gays throwing their lives in your face, please do the rest of us the same favor!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
"Ah, back to personal insults."
No, not meant as an insult. You said earlier you'd like it if gays kept what they do with each other behind closed doors. IOW, you don't want to have to deal with it. OK, let's make the reverse happen. YOU do the same thing. Keep your dislike for gays out of everybody else's face.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
|
|
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dave the Wonder Boy:
All I ask is they do it behind closed doors, and don't harass the rest of us with what they believe.
That's exactly what I want. Take your own advice for once. Please.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dave the Wonder Boy:
And I hasten to add, that pedophilism and other psychological disorders are being pushed by psychologists to be removed from the list of psychological disorders
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Jackson:
Of course you hasten to add this.
Name the shrinks pushing for pedophilism being pushed from the DSM. Name them! Goddamn it, name them! Stop indicting an entire profession based on a few fucks. Jesus, there are always a few crackpots everywhere...
Just keep your fucking homophobia to yourself. You don't want gays throwing their lives in your face, please do the rest of us the same favor!
Man, I love the name-calling. When you can't disprove what I say, you just slap on a dismissive label, and avoid dealing with the logic of what I'm saying.
The article that names names of who is pushing legitimizing pedophilism is in my top few posts on page 23 of this topic, as I said.
And I'm sure homosexuality's push for normalization within the psychological community began "based on a few f---s" as well. And gradually gained legitimacy. The fact that the psychological association will even LISTEN to an argument for normalization of pedophilism speaks volumes.
You just try to keep your denial of the facts and your rabid anti-conservatism in check, and remember that it's a free country, and I have just as much right to express my views as you do. Especially since the view of homosexuality I'm voicing is held by a majority, and that the pro-gay lobby in this country, however large, is still a minority.
It is not your right, as a minority view, to tell a majority that they don't have a right to their beliefs, and a right to VOICE those beliefs.
"Homophopia" translates to: trying to shut me up, and others who share my views, by using slanderous and dismissive labels.
Jerk.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
"It is not your right, as a minority view, to tell a majority that they don't have a right to their beliefs, and a right to VOICE those beliefs."
Fine. You voice your beliefs that you feel are in a majority. This is America.
But I can tell you this...on a personal level, I am making sure that my children recognize bigots like you who want to cloak yourself in the Bible and pseudoscience to push your agenda of hate.
And the obligation of the majority is not to trod all over the minority. This is America.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
And I'll take being a jerk over being a narrow-minded, bigoted fascist any day.
You Christians sure turn the other cheek well, don't ya? One more phoney.
JJ
|
|
|
|
|
