Quote:

Jim Jackson said:
Dave TWB said: "There is no scientific proof to back your allegation that homosexuality is inborn, or to disprove what I've said: that homosexuality is a choice.
As I documented, there are still a number of psychologists who treat homosexuality as a treatable mental disorder, and think it is a mistake and a disservice to homosexuals who need treatment, to NOT treat homosexuality as a treatable disorder, as it was until 1973. (see pages 22 thru 26 of this topic)."

Dave, unless you're a psychologist, with training to back it up, please stay away from psychological arguments, OK?

It only makes you look foolish (more foolish?).






I already gave a counter-response to this the first time you said this, on page 24 of this topic.
I don't have to be an attorney to know my rights under the law.

Regarding your attacks on my ability as a non-psychologist to understand the scientific counter-response to the gay argument, that says homosexuality is not a treatable illness, ( scientific evidence of the type that Pariah was just referring to, in his above post) :

I don't have to be a physician or a pharmacist to read usage directions for an anti-biotic.
I don't have to be a fisherman to know what a fish is.
And I don't have to be a historian or economist to read newspapers, books and studies of economic trends, and have a knowledge of recent history or the economy.

And similarly --and to the point-- I don't have to be a psychologist to read and understand a psychological study and its conclusions.

Your insults are not facts. And your pathological need to insult me and paint my opinion as "foolish" only makes you look foolish. And your comments go way beyond civility and reason, in what should be a simple discussion of the issue. If you could only refrain from bitterly personal remarks that only undermine your own credibility.


Quote:

Jim Jackson said:

That there may be some clinicians who see homosexuality as a treatable "condition" does not add any scientific weight to your assertion that homosexuality (or bisexuality) is a choice.



That is what you'd like people reading this to believe. Part of your holy war to slander all counter-argument to your own opinion.

Quote:

Jim Jackson said:


The research into biological, physiological, and social-learning causes or origins or homosexuality continues, at a slow pace, which is the case for investigations into human behavior.



This is blather. When you have something conclusive to post, you can claim that I'm wrong.
But I'm confident that will never happen.

Many attempts by gay (and pro-gay) scientists to manufacture "proof" have been reported. The evidence doesn't exist, and I'm confident it never will.

If and until absolute proof to the contrary emerges (and it won't), the psychological studies I posted are just as valid as your own chosen beliefs on the nature of homosexuality.

Quote:

Jim Jackson said:


Regarding changes in attitude toward homosexuality by the clinical profession...there were times when no one would have questioned a white man's assertion that owning and controlling a black man was a legal, moral, and healthy thing to do. Nowadays, if a man had that attitude to the point that he was trying to act on it, we'd be insisting that he needed at some kind of psychological/psychiatric intervention.

The medical and psychological community's understanding of human health and behavior has evolved over the centuries. We no longer believe spirits make people sick. We may soon have evidence to say that people don't choose to be gay, too.





That is a distorted argument.

Even black church and political groups have said they resent this comparison of denial of gay rights to discrimination against blacks.

Race is not gender-preference-lifestyle-choice.

The key word there being choice.

Being gay isn't visible on someone's face, they have to disclose their homosexuality for it to become an issue. And as I said, gays certainly don't suffer from wage discrimination.

Another distortion of the facts on your part to make an emotional, anger-inducing argument.


Quote:

Jim Jackson said:

I mean, seriously, given the kind of invective you toss about, who'd WANT to be gay?

Jim



More of your attempts to misrepresent me. I haven't launched any epithets or invectives or hate rhetoric. I've simply discussed the issue and offered counter-argument to your slanted propaganda that it's impossible to question that homosexuality is inborn.

There are certainly counter-arguments to the view held widely by gays, and I've simply offered them here, in as respectful a way as I've been permitted to.

--------------------

"This Man, This Wonder Boy..."