Gay marriage legal in Massachussetts

[OCA]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
I've never heard of such a group, however, if a person can come to honest terms with himself/herself and declare that theirs was a choice I have no problem acknowledging that THEIR's was a choice. I believe that that is also a relatively small percentage of the total in that group. Do we accept the minority premise simply because it fits the mold of what you believe?

Well by that line of thinking since homosexuals are a relatively small portion of the population do we believe them that they are normal and not abnormal? You are saying that the thoughts of the majority should overrule the thoughts of a minority which in theory I agree with. So shouldn't we say that, no homosexuals we are the majority and we believe you are wrong therefore no marriage.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by OCA
Well by that line of thinking since homosexuals are a relatively small portion of the population do we believe them that they are normal and not abnormal? You are saying that the thoughts of the majority should overrule the thoughts of a minority which in theory I agree with. So shouldn't we say that, no homosexuals we are the majority and we believe you are wrong therefore no marriage.

"normal and not normal" does not equal "right and wrong". When will you get this through youre severely sloped and excessively thick skull?

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Well welfare is against my principles. and I'm not looking for work now, so you can shove them both up your ass. Careful of the papercuts, monkeyjobber.

I know you'd rather be a fucking bum. Congrats you are doing a bang up job!

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by OCA
I know you'd rather be a fucking bum. Congrats you are doing a bang up job!

Why don't you go shit in the pool and then take a swim.

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
"normal and not normal" does not equal "right and wrong". When will you get this through youre severely sloped and excessively thick skull?

Sorry it does in some cases including homosexuality Mr. Apologist.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by OCA
Well by that line of thinking since homosexuals are a relatively small portion of the population do we believe them that they are normal and not abnormal? You are saying that the thoughts of the majority should overrule the thoughts of a minority which in theory I agree with. So shouldn't we say that, no homosexuals we are the majority and we believe you are wrong therefore no marriage.

convoluted again, or maybe i'm not understanding.

should the majority overrule the minority? in certain instances yes, but not when it comes to oppression or suppression of that minority.

when it comes to actions or relevancies that cause damage to others, then yes overrule them.

I, personally, don't see how two people of the same sex having sex or getting married hurts me. It just doesn't. I've got more important things to worry about than to wring my hands because the non-harmful actions of two people are considered immoral or abnormal in the eyes of a majority.

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Why don't you go shit in the pool and then take a swim.

I just sit back and laugh when you self destruct. Hey you vs me is like the Durham Bulls taking on the N.Y. Yankees, you are way out of your league son.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by OCA
Sorry it does in some cases including homosexuality Mr. Apologist.

At least I'm not Mr. MonkeyNut, like you.

 

[007]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/822816/posts


Politically Correct Psychiatry
Citizen Magazine ^ | JAN 2003 | Linda Ames Nicolosi


Posted on 01/14/2003 7:36:01 PM PST by Remedy



A university course on changing homosexual orientation loses its accreditation after gay activists complain — and threaten.

By Linda Ames Nicolosi

Psychiatrist Richard Fitzgibbons says people who are attracted to same-sex partners can benefit from therapy and some can change their orientation. That’s the message he hoped to give at a one-day seminar course on homosexuality at the University of Michigan Hospital.

But two weeks before the seminar, an official from the Michigan State Medical Association phoned the seminar’s organizers to say the association was yanking its accreditation of Fitzgibbons’ course.

The State Medical Association received a "flood of gay-activist complaints" after the conference brochure was mailed out, according to Dr. Cathy Dowling, president of the Catholic Medical Association, Lansing Guild, which supports Fitzgibbons’ course. Gay activists also threatened to disrupt the seminar.

Alarmed by the last-minute loss of accreditation, Dowling quickly located scores of scientific articles that documented support for Dr. Fitzgibbons’ claim that homosexuality can be changed.

"We do not believe that people with same-sex attraction must undergo therapy," Dowling explained in a letter to the Medical Society. "Only that they have a right to know that it exists — and that it can be helpful."

But the Michigan State Medical Society refused to reconsider the case. Supporters of the Fitzgibbons seminar wrote the medical society to complain. One letter said "it is political decisions such as this that make patients like me suspicious of ‘treatments’ recommended by any doctors."

Another writer, a research professional, said homosexuality "is a developmental disorder, its causes and predictors are well-documented, it is treatable in adulthood, and it is highly associated with self-defeating and self-destructive behaviors and maladaptation — and those four preceding points have been politically buried or denied."

Said another letter-writer: "I am a practicing psychiatrist with over 20 years’ experience. It offends me deeply that all sorts of crackpot psychological ideas and theories are allowed—and even encouraged," while the argument that homosexuality is treatable gets ‘the ‘politically correct’ all up in arms."

Coming up at the American Psychiatric Association this spring, psychiatrists are scheduled to debate about another diagnosis which will be of particular interest. That’s the diagnosis of "Gender Identity Disorder of Childhood." Gay activists have been lobbying for removal of this disorder from the psychiatric manual for many years — and if it’s approved, then a boy who wears high heels and a dress and wants to be a girl will be said to have nothing psychologically wrong with him.

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
convoluted again, or maybe i'm not understanding.

should the majority overrule the minority? in certain instances yes, but not when it comes to oppression or suppression of that minority.

when it comes to actions or relevancies that cause damage to others, then yes overrule them.

I, personally, don't see how two people of the same sex having sex or getting married hurts me. It just doesn't. I've got more important things to worry about than to wring my hands because the non-harmful actions of two people are considered immoral or abnormal in the eyes of a majority.

Not convoluted, you got it perfectly.

As I and many of us have stated here many times its not about sex, you want to bang your buddy fine just do it in privacy as I would ask the same of heterosexuals. Its when they decide to push acceptance of their obviously abnormal lifestyle through judges and politics then I have a problem seeing as how they already have the same rights as every other American. Americans overwhelmingly reject homosexuality and are not going to be bullied by activist judges. Everyone wants to talk about a coming civil war along party lines uh uh, its going to be along social lines and its going to be brought on by the radicals in our midst such as the homosexuals.

 

[007]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
convoluted again, or maybe i'm not understanding.

should the majority overrule the minority? in certain instances yes, but not when it comes to oppression or suppression of that minority.

when it comes to actions or relevancies that cause damage to others, then yes overrule them.

I, personally, don't see how two people of the same sex having sex or getting married hurts me. It just doesn't. I've got more important things to worry about than to wring my hands because the non-harmful actions of two people are considered immoral or abnormal in the eyes of a majority.

So it doesn't hurt "you". Is that all your concerned about? So you didn't get hurt in the 9/11 attack either. Does that mean you don't care about that either.

The point is, it hurts the institution of "MARRIAGE"! That's a sacred union between a man and woman in the eyes of GOD! And queers are destroying that.

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
At least I'm not Mr. MonkeyNut, like you.

A perfect example of somebody in need of psychiatry, *sigh*

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by Pale Rider
That's a sacred union between a man and woman in the eyes of GOD! And queers are destroying that.

And then they are coming for your kids!

 

[007]

Originally posted by OCA
A perfect example of somebody in need of psychiatry, *sigh*

You've got the patients of a saint with this dimwit OCA.

 

[007]

Originally posted by nycflasher
And then they are coming for your kids!

That's right. And after the kids they'll want the DOGS!

 

[007]

Another writer, a research professional, said homosexuality "is a developmental disorder, its causes and predictors are well-documented, it is treatable in adulthood, and it is highly associated with self-defeating and self-destructive behaviors and maladaptation — and those four preceding points have been politically buried or denied."

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Pale Rider
You've got the patients of a saint with this dimwit OCA.

Awfully tough words. You should direct them toward me, ya lady.

 

[Aquarian]

I was about to go off on somebody but decided to reign it in. I thank those that have discussed this in a rational (or nearly so) fashion but I'll leave the flamebaiting this thread is degenerating into to those so inclined to participate in such.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Pale Rider
Another writer, a research professional, said homosexuality "is a developmental disorder, its causes and predictors are well-documented, it is treatable in adulthood, and it is highly associated with self-defeating and self-destructive behaviors and maladaptation — and those four preceding points have been politically buried or denied."

Do you have a link? Bold and red doesn't make things more convincing.

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Do you have a link? Bold and red doesn't make things more convincing.

You guys could write in blood and still wouldn't make more convincing arguments, or sound/look less foolish.

Try it.

: