ArchivedHow could you spread so much hate about gays?So, which is true, 35 years of unpublished research (I say unpublished because you have yet to post a published unbiased source for any of your comments other than vague rhetoric from a biased source – the APA) or per a prior post of yours “no scientific research”. You keep changing your statement. They know that homosexuality is not a pathological condition since the only way to know if gays have a mental disorder (for lack of a better term) is to dissect the brain, which would kill the patient. So they use subjective and anecdotal evidence to make a statement that we are to accept as scientific. As to ex-gay ministries, they are available for those who want their help. No person is forced to attend meetings, visit counselors, or go through the process of change. They are considered biased only because they incorporate Biblical principles in their programs. However, those I recommend also use good counseling techniques that are not harmful to anyone. The few men I know who dropped out of ex-gay programs did so because they could not take the self-examination required to complete the programs, put a time limit on it (6 mos. to 2 years on the process), were not motivated to change and only attended to please a parent, decided the change was too drastic and time consuming, or got mad at an arrogant director. And this does not take into account the gay sexual predators who attended simply to take advantage of people when they were vulnerable. My ex-ex-gay friends (and I do have a couple who fall into this category) never really wanted to change. They refused to make any adjustments to their lives and dated, slept around, used pornography, and fought the counseling until they finally gave up and gave in. You want a sound research protocol? Take two groups of men (gay and straight) seeking professional help overcoming deep seated issues of anger, bitterness, etc. that do cause them emotional problems that do effect their lives and ability to function in our society. Self-hate, envy, and a lot of factors can effect a person’s mental functions, which effect their socialization. Now, give one group a counselor who will use Bible based psychology in their treatment. This treatment cannot include using “thou shalt not” in any way, shape, or form, which would eliminate Leviticus and other Bible passages that say you shall not be an adulterer, fornicator, etc. Give the other group a counselor that uses APA guidelines in counseling and follow both groups for 10 to 15 years and see if any of the gay and/or straights changed their sexual orientation in the process of riding themselves of the anger, bitterness, self-hate, etc. I would expect to find gays who go straight, and straights who realize their anger is based on self-denial of their sexuality and become openly gay. Lets face the facts of the real world. There are straight men who are married, living unhappy lives denying their true feelings. To often these men come out later in life destroying families. This will not prove that homosexuality is genetic or inborn but would satisfy your requirement about including straight men. Dean Hamer’s published research into a genetic root for homosexuality was discounted by geneticists because he did not have a control group in his research. No independent researcher was able to duplicate Hamer’s original findings and neither was Hamer. From his book “Science of Desire”: ..he (Hamer) explains why the old “nature vs. nurture” dichotomy is a false one, why the discovery of a genetic link doesn’t mean that everyone with the gene will be gay or that everyone who is gay has the gene, and how the gene might act through personality straits such as independence and self-reliance.” Other geneticists have stated that homosexuality is probably a combination of biology, environment, and personality. Now the APA totally ignores the other sciences in their proclamations about counseling homosexuals seeking change. Can they unequivocally state on the basis of long-term studies that personality does not effect sexuality? If molecular geneticists and other scientist will not take an unequivocal stance on homosexuality why does the APA believe they are the supreme source of real information when they won’t conduct peer reviewed studies? You can appeal to the anecdotal evidence of ex-ex-gay’s who don’t share the details of their experience except in generalizations that only tell me their issues were with the directors of the ministries or counselor; I can appeal to Joes Dallas (ex-gay founder of Genesis Counseling), Melvin Wong Ph.D., Dennis Jernigan, Stephen Bennett, NARTH, Journal of Homosexuality, Jeffrey Satinover M.D., and a plethora of others who have changed, support change, or have done research into changing sexual orientation (and are not afraid to publish their findings – pro and con). I will state upfront I don’t agree with Stephen Bennett’s association with the political religious right, I believe he is a pawn of this political action group; but I have read and reviewed the writings, experiences, and etc. of the others and agree with them. If the APA was really interested in people they would be conducting on-going peer reviewed research and not taking an unmovable stance based on an arrogant disregard for published studies that disagree with them. And so far all you have posted are biased statements that change is impossible. As to the mailing of 1998 is concerned I would expect the new generation of APA members to agree with an organization that has had control of educating them. However, in 1973 69% of their membership opposed the decision! I would agree with this statement. However, I also include both APA's in "dissemination of accurate information about sexual orientation, and mental health, and appropriate interventions in order to counteract bias that is based on ignorance and unfounded beliefs about sexual orientation." By lack of action in publishing the studies they refer to; making generalized comments about those of us who have changed (without their help, which is a slap in their face); and refusal to conduct on-going studies actually prove their own bias. Real science neither fears asking questions nor refuses on-going studies; only bias is used to cease true scientific investigation. |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame