ArchivedHow could you spread so much hate about gays?AngelBaby wrote:First of all, why would an ever-straight want to become gay?
The same reason an ever-gay would want to become straight. Some straights or gays might think it would be neat to be bi. To see the beauty in both sexes.
You can see the beauty of both sexes without engaging in sex. If all you are talking about is sexual behavior it does not take a scientific study to engage in sex. If a man or women wants to change their sexuality from straight to gay, go for it. But, I would doubt you can find any heterosexual willing to go that route.
If you believe this should be part of the research are you saying that sexual orientation is chosen?
By your own words:
Many possibilities can come from that, they could already be bi or confused. There is no scientific data to show what it really is.
No I was assuming you were saying changing their inborn orientation without therapy and also the other possibilities would include they were already Bi or Confused about their sexuality.
You side stepped what you posted and I quoted, here it is again: There is no scientific data to show what it really is.
You keep posting unscientific and unproven assumptions over and over. in·nate
in·nate (i-nat?, in?at´) adjective
1.Possessed at birth; inborn.
2.Possessed as an essential characteristic; inherent.
3.Of or produced by the mind rather than learned through experience: an innate knowledge of right and wrong.
[Middle English innat, from Latin innatus past participle of innasci, to be born in : in-, in. See in-2 + nasci, to be born.]
— in·nate?ly adverb
— in·nate?ness noun
Synonyms: innate, inborn, inbred, congenital, hereditary. These adjectives mean existing in a person or thing from birth or origin. Innate, inborn, and inbred are often used interchangeably. Inborn, however, is strongest in implying that something has been present since birth: inborn intelligence; an inborn sense of the appropriate. What is inbred has either existed from birth or been ingrained through earliest training or associations: an inbred love of music; inbred superiority. Something that is innate seems essential to the nature, character, or constitution: innate honesty; innate common sense. Congenital is applied principally to characteristics, especially defects, acquired during fetal development: a congenital disease. Hereditary refers to what is transmitted by biological heredity (a hereditary heart anomaly) or by tradition: “that ignorance and superstitiousness hereditary to all sailors” (Herman Melville).
Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition Copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from Lernout & Hauspie Speech Products N.V., further reproduction and distribution restricted in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved.
; their is no scientific data to back up this statement. In fact you have fallen into the trap "those who change were either bi to begin with or were never really gay". This is simply begging the question. I was not confused, bi, and neither were many ex-gays. Everything you have quoted are assumptions made since 1973.
I don't assume that they were bi or confused, I accept it as within the realm of possibilities.
What you have not cited are the "experts" cited by the APA executive board in 1973. Irving Bieber's book "Homosexuality" published in 1968 was hailed by members of the APA as a breakthrough in counseling gay men who sought to change. 5 years later unnamed experts are cited for the removal of homosexuality from the DSM III.
Here is what they say about it,
"Psychologists, psychiatrists and other mental health professionals agree that homosexuality is not an illness, mental disorder or an emotional problem. Over 35 years of objective, well-designed scientific research has shown that homosexuality, in and itself,is not associated with mental disorders or emotional or social problems. Homosexuality was once thought to be a mental illness because mental health professionals and society had biased information. In the past the studies of gay, lesbian and bisexual people involved only those in therapy, thus biasing the resulting conclusions. When researchers examined data about these people who were not in therapy, the idea that homosexuality was a mental illness was quickly found to be untrue.
In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association confirmed the importance of the new, better designed research and removed homosexuality from the official manual that lists mental and emotional disorders. Two years later, the American Psychological Association passed a resolution supporting the removal. For more than 25 years, both associations have urged all mental health professionals to help dispel the stigma of mental illness that some people still associate with homosexual orientation."
This is an organization that deals with psychology in general, not just homosexuality, with nationwide psychologists, they have no reason to be biased about it. There got there conclusion from real scientific studies.
They have had 30 years to change it back if it needed to be. Which they haven't.
You still have not cited the studies they used to make a decision that 69% of their membership disagreed with.
If "professional pride" and fear of embarrassment are not the reasons for this rhetoric why does the APA refuse to sponsor peer reviewed studies so scientific information can be made available
No they removed it because trying to change ones sexual orientation implies being gay is something to 'cure'. Which they know that it is not because it is not a mental illness. So they took it out of DSM III.
We can agree that homosexuality is not a curable disease that can be treated with chemicals, surgery, or other medical courses used to treat human diseases. On this basis I agree with removing homosexuality from the DSM III, however, it is still a behavior that can be changed, and has been changed by thousands of men and women.
" When the DSM-III was published in 1980 homosexuality was not included although "ego dystonic homosexuality" was recognized as a category for people "whose sexual interests are directed primarily toward people of the same sex and who are either disturbed by, in conflict with, or wish to change their sexual orientation."
When the DSM-III was revised in 1987, "ego dystonic homosexuality" was deleted as a separate diagnostic entity because "In the United States, almost all people who are homosexual first go through a phase in which their homosexuality is ego dystonic." (DSM-III-R) "
http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbpolicy/orient.html
That psychologists 'do not knowingly participate in or condone unfair discriminatory practices' (Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, American Psychological Association, 1992, Principle D, p. 1600);
andThat 'in their work-related activities, psychologists do not engage in unfair discrimination based on...sexual orientation' (Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, American Psychological Association, 1992, Standard 1.10, p. 1601)
Which all of the gay change organizations say that being gay is something to be cured.
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/reptherapy.pdf
A broad and inaccurate assumption and statement. Gay change organizations say homosexuality is a behavior that can be changed to the extent their members accept as fulfilling their personal needs and goals. For some in the ex-gay movement living a celibate life is sufficient to meet their goals. Others have so transformed their sexuality as to no longer experience, desire, or participate in same sex activity or thoughts. It is a personal matter that cannot be legislated, mandated, or forced on any person with any degree of success. "The movement to change gay men and lesbians into heterosexuals through so-called conversion therapy or reparative therapy is founded on the discredited view that homosexuality is a mental illness, is not based on scientific data, and uses practices that whose ethics have been questioned by the mainstream mental health profession."
"For every story about someone whose sexual orientation was supposedly converted to heterosexuality, there are many other reports of people who tried unsuccesfully to change and who endure a great deal of psychological pain and suffering in the process."
I'm sure if there was a non biased organization, (which means they would also be looking to change str8s orientation, etc.) based on real scientific studies, the APA would do peer reviewed studies on it.
The only reason they haven't is because the reparative therapies are biased. Which goes against there code of conduct. There has been no real scientific claims that say it can be successfully changed.
Really? I will again cite Bieber’s published work in “Homosexuality”. He did prove it can be changed by those committed to the change. It takes commitment not just a desire.
instead of an arrogant stand on an seemingly arbitrary decision made by an small percentage of this "professional organization" and crammed down the throats of their membership?
The vote was won over by more than half of the members and that was 1973 when alot of psychologists were still relying on biased information.
We seem to have conflicting sources of information. 69% of the APA membership opposed the executive committee decision.
As to the fall of Rome; history teaches Rome fell for many reasons. Morality is seldom looked at as a cause of a nations downfall since military invasions; weak leadership; revolts by conquered peoples; and other forces are what historians write about. However, a decline in morality destroys a nation from within which leads to weak leadership and apathy among conquered nations as well as the citizenry.
It is only an assumption. Anyone can say things like that to fit their view. Racists say the fall of rome was because of inter-racial marriages. There isn't any reason to believe homosexuality would cause any harm. It is a form of love.
I will see if I can find my notes from historians who are not biased who have stated that the fall of Rome and other societies had more to do with morality than external forces. However, this is mute as you can find sources that disagree. As to AIDS, two of my best friends were the first recorded AIDS related deaths in Houston in the early 80's. I have been following this pandemic since its inception. AIDS is a human disease that has killed 60 million worldwide 51% of whom are woman, 48% are men with the remaining 1% being children (WHO statistics). HIV is transmitted by contact with contaminated body fluids, which includes blood. This is why IV drug users who share needles are at high risk as well as those who engage in unprotected promiscuous sex. AIDS hit the headlines in about 1981 as GRID (Gay Related Immune Deficiency) and has been considered a gay disease by arrogant, unloving, bigoted Christian's every since in spite of scientific research that denies this assumption. Testing of stored blood from the 1956 Ebola outbreak showed that 8% of the samples were HIV+.
Yes exactly, 1 year later GRID was renamed AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome) because it was found that anybody could get it just as much as gay people can. Later they knew that is was uncareful sex that spread it when straight people started to get it.
http://www.aids101.com/timeline1.html
You brought AIDS into this discussion; an issue I don’t usually get involved with because I know the truth. In fact on other Christian boards I have a reputation of calling homophobic Christian’s bigots and hate mongers for using AIDS in any anti-gay posts.
Use of condoms is taught as the best preventive measure, however, the failure rate of condoms is 2%. My brother infected his partner because of this failure rate. Improper use of condoms is also a factor. The CDC’s posted guidelines on condom use include 15 steps to ensure their effectiveness, therefore the failure rate of condoms is acutally higher than the 2% manufacturers defects.
Yes that risk is for Str8 & Gay people.
Then why did you even bring this into the discussion? Human diseases are not the result of sexuality; although sexuality can be a reason a disease is more prevalent (based on % of infections compared to % of population) in one portion of our society. Anal cancer is one in particular that is more prevalent in gay men than straight men.
| View Parent Message View dfilename Return Home |