Aineo wrote:Pint0 Xtreme wrote:Aineo wrote:Religious Tolerance is not the best source for real and accurate information.
Religious Tolerance is a great source for real and accurate information.
Tell me Pint0 Xtreme did you bother to check the references used by Religious Tolerance? Since you think this site is a "great source for real and accurate information" if you did not check the references then you are as bad or worse a bigot as those Christians you denigrate for their lack of knowledge.
For instance the section you quoted from Religious Tolerance is from one book -- Chandler Burr's A Seperate Creation. Now I happen to own a copy of this book and have read it; can you say the same? Burr interviewed and quoted only those sources that agreed with his premise (a premise based on Dean Hamer's discredited research).
That's retarded. Religious Tolerance takes sources from completely biased sources such as Focus on the Family and Concerned Women of America to present both views but also uses research studies from other various sources. The fact that it makes use of Chandler Burr's A Seperate Creation makes no real significance difference in the site's objectivity.
Religious Tolerance and other pro-gay sources use the APA removal of homosexuality as a pathological condiiton from the DSM III in 1974 as proof that gays cannot change. However do you know why the APA's executive committee took this action? The truth is interesting since the action was taken so that gay activists would cease disrupting APA meetings. In other words it was a political not a scientific decision. If you are interested in truth read Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth by Jeff Satinover. If you are not willing to do your home work then your opinions are just that -- your opinions and are meaningless when not supported by real evidence from credible sources.
First of all, I'm get fairly weary of your appeal to authority fallacies. I'm not here for you to tell me that read what some guy named Jeff Satinover said. You either present your or his arguments yourself. Secondly, it's absurd to conclude that the APA's continuation of conclusions stem from the actions of gay activists. You're telling me that the APA has been continuing to set its claims of homosexuality for the past 31 years because of gay activists? :roll: