Is homosexuality a choice, a mental illness or something simply inherent?

[Inevitable]

[Except I never actually misrepresented your position, I just asked a few questions that need to be answered. Asking questions is not a straw man.

Than they were loaded questions.

What position is that?

That it's origins are unknown.

There isn't any, just like there isn't any that it is inherited.

Didn't claim it was inherited.

On the other hand, if you aver watch a really good handball player they have learned to use both hands equally well while playing, even if they aren't ambidextrous.

That doesn't negate a strong hand.

It is irrelevant to this discussion whether I did the research, but the answer is yes.

That said, why is my evidence inconclusive? Two editors of the DSM stated publicly that the editors developing the manual where intentionally ignoring evidence that contradicts the diagnostic guidelines they were setting out as the standard for the entire profession. If you think that is inconclusive evidence I would suggest that you are being dogmatic in your assumptions.

It simply isn't enough to condemn the APA.

Have you read the thread?

My position is completely validated by this. Claiming that no proof contrary to your position thus your position must be correct is logical fallacy.

There you go again.

I am not claiming that thre is no evidence that is contrary to my position. In fact, I actually posted a link to a paper that contradicts my position that it is a choice.

You stayed that it is up to others to prove you wrong.

Interesting.

How does the fact that free will exists validate your position, whatever it is? Are you just declaring victory because you refuse to actually take a position?

I have a position it's that we don't know the origins of homosexuality. Free will isn't really relevant.

 

[emilynghiem]

Is homosexuality a choice, a mental illness or something simply inherent?

I really don't give a rat's ass.

Let's examine two possible media headlines.

1. *Insert Celebrity Name* announces that they are homosexual.
2. *Insert Celebrity Name* announces that they are heterosexual.

Guess which headline you never see?
Why does the media think one of those headlines is more important than the other?
If homosexuals think keeping the government out of their bedroom is so important (and I agree with that), then why do they keep publicizing what is going on in their bedroom?

However:
1. If a person "comes out" as heterosexual, claiming to be a former homosexual,
this create a huge backlash to discredit them, arguing they never were homosexual in the first place.
Or that people who claim to change go back to their orientation anyway.

2. If a person who is bisexual "comes out" and claims it is "a choice,"
they get jumped on for that, too!

What REALLY needs to come out is the truth: Not ALL cases are the same
* Some people are "spiritually by birth" transgender or gay etc.
And this may be considered natural OR unnatural DEPENDING on the person.
* Some people may or some people may not change.
* People who have healed/recovered from unnatural sexual abuse or addictive behavior
include homosexual as well as heterosexual, so it isn't targeting just gays.

Until THAT truth gets out, anything less than the FULL INCLUSIVE
truth, including ALL CASES, causes disruption in one form or another
because of groups "taking ONE side" and assuming "It's true for ALL of them"

 

[auditor0007]

I don't believe it's a one size fits all issue. I believe some are born gay while others choose that lifestyle due to convenience. The convenience part is because many kids have a hard time talking to the other side and are more comfortable with their own gender and act on it. After a while they accept it because it's easier. I saw many women who were lesbians who had been married to a man but felt so screwed over that they changed sides. Very hard to believe that they were born gay. Just my 2 cents.

I do think that some people choose that lifestyle, but I think that the vast majority are just born that way or develop that way. Either way, for most it is not a choice. I certainly never decided to be heterosexual; I just am heterosexual. I've known many gays in my lifetime, and honestly, I can't think of one who actually chose to be gay.

 

[Qball]

I don't really care much about why some people are gay or if it's a choice. I just think some people need to stop acting like they've never actually known any gay people when they debate this issue. It's definitely true that for some people being gay is absolutely a choice. They're not going to broadcast that, CNN isn't doing a documentary series on them, but there are women who are with women more or less because they don't want a man. There are men who are with men because they don't enjoy sex with women. I mean, for many gays, probably most gays, their sexual orientation wasn't something they ever chose...they just knew they were "different" from a young age and they just never have had the urge to be with someone of the opposite sex. But there are many gays who have histories of abuse and have a sort of passive contempt for the opposite sex.

 

[emilynghiem]

Homosexuality is genetic.

That is the one thing anyone who pays attention knows it isn't.

My sister is lesbian. We knew she was lesbian by the time she was 10 years old. She is a man in every respect save her genitalia and has ALWAYS been so. She was the toughest kid in her school and regularly took on the bullies who were tormenting her friends.

She has been in a committed relationship with her wife for over 15 years. There is no doubt that she is lesbian and has always been one.

Likewise my daughters godmother. She too has always been a lesbian. She tried real hard to be "normal". She comes from a devout Catholic family and dated guys up into college. It was never comfortable for her. Never. She then was introduced to a lesbian from another college student and instantaneously she knew that it was the right thing for her.

I am sorry but you and those who think like you are simply wrong. You allow your religious training and upbringing to bias your thinking.

Dear Westwall:
1. is it possible for it to be "genetic or born" in one case like your sister's
but not in others? I've heard of people born with the ability to play the piano as an expert, without any training, while others have to acquire the ability by physical learning/practice.

Why do all cases have to be the same?

2. Can it be spiritually born in someone, and not be in their genetics?

Studies on identical twins show AT MOST a 50% chance of twins "raised in the same household environment" both having the same orientation (and 0% if raised in separate households).

If it is PURELY genetic, why isn't it 100% matching orientation in twins?

Source: F.MacNutt "Homosexuality Can it be Healed" where from his experience with spiritual healing and outreach in all areas of physical and mental health, he wrote this book affirming a much higher than 50/50 rate of change in people seeking therapy.

I believe it depends on the person, if they are meant to change or not.
(I think the people seeking change because it's not natural for them
are more likely for it to apply to, so of course they will keep at it and not go back.
And the people for whom their orientation is not a problem and not "unnatural" are less likely to seek therapy to change it anyway,
so of course the success rate will look higher if the people for whom it would fail aren't included in the pool of people who try it.)

 

[emilynghiem]

Hi [MENTION=38085]Noomi[/MENTION]
What about the people who were not,
but whose sexual behavior resulted from rape or repeated abuse?

You are born that way.

You don't have to believe that such cases exist.
But to "deny the possibility" makes you lose credibility
with people who have experienced and reported this, themselves,
or have friends who suffered it and went through therapy to heal afterwards.

If you leave these cases out, you sound as close minded to truth
as those who INSIST that "all cases are UNNATURAL"
which excludes the many people who report otherwise.

Why not acknowledge "it is possible" for those other cases to exist,
where people claim to have returned to their original orientation
after healing from abuse that affected their behavior?
Both homosexual and heterosexual people have benefited from
spiritual healing and forgiveness therapy to recovery from abuse.

What is wrong with acknowledging those cases?

You can still argue that some are BORN and not caused by abuse.
It does not hurt your argument or beliefs, but helps them by not discrediting you
as ignorant and "deliberately excluding" other cases where people experienced unnatural abuse.

What does it hurt to be open to DIFFERENT cases as all being possible?

prove they are possible.

[MENTION=49586]Inevitable[/MENTION]

Do you want me to go out and find actual people to post on here their experiences?
Does that count as proof?

Are you okay researching resources, or you aren't interested unless someone else does all that work?

I work two jobs and am trying to save a national historic site
AND also propose a reform to the Democratic party platform
AND prepare for meetings on the conversion therapy issue
with Gay Republicans and liberal Democrats.

I find it faster to work with people who already know that all kinds of cases
are going on, don't need to argue about proof, so that we can focus on what
to change the language in the platforms to.

If you really want sources, I can dig them up but I have these other deadlines to make to propose changes to both platforms that mention conversion therapy and caused conflicts.

Some sources I recommend, I am happy to buy copies and send them to you:
Francis MacNutt "Healing"
"Homosexuality Can it be Healed" -- this book cites the research results of only 50/50 chance of twins matching in orientation, implying that it isn't just "genetic" but other factors/conditions.
Anyone can contact his nonprofit group http://www.christianhealingmin.org and see if they have someone who can give
their testimony about going through changing orientation. He does not specialize in any one application of spiritual healing. But he can refer other groups that do focus on sexuality and healing.

If you want proof, I can go ask around for a speaker from one of these groups
to post on here and answer questions.

My friend Olivia counseled
* a lesbian who receive help to heal of sexual abuse in order to change her own behavior
* a young man who thought he was transgender, but went through healing and overcome having those thoughts and attractions to people that weren't natural for him

Inevitable, one of my friends said if "reparative therapy" was banned, then my friend wouldn't have gotten help to think through and make the personal decision about "not being bisexual by nature", coming to terms that it was a "choice", and no longer having those feelings anymore.

Do you want me to ask that friend to prove to you that really happened?
Do you want medical proof or what?

This could take time, I am happy to work on it with you, but I also have other
things to work on for people who DON'T need such proof and are ready to work on
policy changes directly, not argue about "proving people's personal experiences."

What timeframe are you looking at? For what level of proof?

Is this what you are looking for, or some medical statistics instead:
http://ex-gaytruth.com/ex-gay-news/testimony-of-ex-gay-dr-david-kyle-foster/

 

[westwall]

That is the one thing anyone who pays attention knows it isn't.

My sister is lesbian. We knew she was lesbian by the time she was 10 years old. She is a man in every respect save her genitalia and has ALWAYS been so. She was the toughest kid in her school and regularly took on the bullies who were tormenting her friends.

She has been in a committed relationship with her wife for over 15 years. There is no doubt that she is lesbian and has always been one.

Likewise my daughters godmother. She too has always been a lesbian. She tried real hard to be "normal". She comes from a devout Catholic family and dated guys up into college. It was never comfortable for her. Never. She then was introduced to a lesbian from another college student and instantaneously she knew that it was the right thing for her.

I am sorry but you and those who think like you are simply wrong. You allow your religious training and upbringing to bias your thinking.

Dear Westwall:
1. is it possible for it to be "genetic or born" in one case like your sister's
but not in others? I've heard of people born with the ability to play the piano as an expert, without any training, while others have to acquire the ability by physical learning/practice.

Why do all cases have to be the same?

2. Can it be spiritually born in someone, and not be in their genetics?

Studies on identical twins show AT MOST a 50% chance of twins "raised in the same household environment" both having the same orientation (and 0% if raised in separate households).

If it is PURELY genetic, why isn't it 100% matching orientation in twins?

Source: F.MacNutt "Homosexuality Can it be Healed" where from his experience with spiritual healing and outreach in all areas of physical and mental health, he wrote this book affirming a much higher than 50/50 rate of change in people seeking therapy.

I believe it depends on the person, if they are meant to change or not.
(I think the people seeking change because it's not natural for them
are more likely for it to apply to, so of course they will keep at it and not go back.
And the people for whom their orientation is not a problem and not "unnatural" are less likely to seek therapy to change it anyway,
so of course the success rate will look higher if the people for whom it would fail aren't included in the pool of people who try it.)

Yes. It is. To a point. When I was in college I worked along the Strip in Hollywood on the graveyard shift and knew many young men who were engaged in the gay sex trade. They were not gay but it was how they made their money.

They were universally unhappy about their lot in life. I am certain that engaging in sex acts they were uncomfortable with played a part, as did the drugs they ingested, as did the generally unhealthy lifestyle that being a street person entails.

However, there are those who are simply born that way. I was born a heterosexual and there is no amount of money that would convince me to have sex with a guy. None.

There are likewise people who will not have sex with a person of another sex....no matter how much money you give them.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

One study does not a "truth" make. It is a fact only. Interestingly enough in the Abstract (which you kindly provided was this statement of fact...

"Pedigree and twin studies indicate that homosexuality has substantial heritability in both sexes


What exactly does that mean?

Like I already said, you are not interested in truth, you just want to spout your ignorant opinion and ignore the science, homosexuality is not genetic.

If you don't know what heritability means why did you declare yourself to be the board expert on science?

How wrong you are. I am interested in facts. Truth is the purview of religion not science. To that end the definition of HERITABILITY is

1: the quality or state of being heritable


2: the proportion of observed variation in a particular trait (as height) that can be attributed to inherited genetic factors in contrast to environmental ones.

Heritability - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary


YOUR link supporting what I said. Don't you dare lecture me about science when you don't even know what the basics are. This is a simple definition which you seem to not understand.

No it isn't, you said that homosexuality is genetic, That is flat out wrong, if it were all monozygotic twins would either be gay or straight. The studies show that this is not true.

Twin studies of homosexuality have shown that identical twins are about twice as likely to both be gay compared to fraternal twins. This means that being gay is partly genetic and not simply something that a person learns or chooses to be.
There is one important thing to note, though. If the DNA sequence is the only thing determining whether someone is gay or not, we would expect that if one identical twin were gay, then the other would be too 100% of the time.
But this is not what scientists have found – the rate is actually closer to 50%. So while we know that genetics is involved, it doesn’t tell us the whole story. This is where environment comes in.

Understanding Genetics

Did you notice that I, once again, used a link that disagrees with my position? Feel free to pretend to yourself that you are the one that is being unbiased and objective even though I have proved you wrong twice.

 

[Inevitable]

[MENTION=49586]Inevitable[/MENTION]

Do you want me to go out and find actual people to post on here their experiences?
Does that count as proof?

Are you okay researching resources, or you aren't interested unless someone else does all that work?

I work two jobs and am trying to save a national historic site
AND also propose a reform to the Democratic party platform
AND prepare for meetings on the conversion therapy issue
with Gay Republicans and liberal Democrats.

I find it faster to work with people who already know that all kinds of cases
are going on, don't need to argue about proof, so that we can focus on what
to change the language in the platforms to.

If you really want sources, I can dig them up but I have these other deadlines to make to propose changes to both platforms that mention conversion therapy and caused conflicts.

Some sources I recommend, I am happy to buy copies and send them to you:
Francis MacNutt "Healing"
"Homosexuality Can it be Healed" -- this book cites the research results of only 50/50 chance of twins matching in orientation, implying that it isn't just "genetic" but other factors/conditions.
Anyone can contact his nonprofit group Home - Christian Healing Ministries and see if they have someone who can give
their testimony about going through changing orientation. He does not specialize in any one application of spiritual healing. But he can refer other groups that do focus on sexuality and healing.

If you want proof, I can go ask around for a speaker from one of these groups
to post on here and answer questions.

My friend Olivia counseled
* a lesbian who receive help to heal of sexual abuse in order to change her own behavior
* a young man who thought he was transgender, but went through healing and overcome having those thoughts and attractions to people that weren't natural for him

Inevitable, one of my friends said if "reparative therapy" was banned, then my friend wouldn't have gotten help to think through and make the personal decision about "not being bisexual by nature", coming to terms that it was a "choice", and no longer having those feelings anymore.

Do you want me to ask that friend to prove to you that really happened?
Do you want medical proof or what?

This could take time, I am happy to work on it with you, but I also have other
things to work on for people who DON'T need such proof and are ready to work on
policy changes directly, not argue about "proving people's personal experiences."

What timeframe are you looking at? For what level of proof?

Is this what you are looking for, or some medical statistics instead:
Testimony of ex-gay Dr. David Kyle Foster | Ex-gayTruth.com

No, anecdotal claims aren't valid proof.

Conversion therapy is quackery, and it has a higher suicide rate than a success rate. I don't care what your church websites say they are the wicked institutions that fabricated this garbage and fraudulently labeled it conversion therapy. There is zero provable success with so fraudulently called "conversion therapy" all you can really say is that you have beaten homosexuals into conforming to heterosexual behaviors or that you convinced bisexuals to forget about being with the same sex.

Prove the therapy isn't complete garbage, prove homosexuality is a condition in need of healing. Prove any of your claims aren't fraudulent, and please do so without using fraudulent links.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

@Inevitable

Do you want me to go out and find actual people to post on here their experiences?
Does that count as proof?

Are you okay researching resources, or you aren't interested unless someone else does all that work?

I work two jobs and am trying to save a national historic site
AND also propose a reform to the Democratic party platform
AND prepare for meetings on the conversion therapy issue
with Gay Republicans and liberal Democrats.

I find it faster to work with people who already know that all kinds of cases
are going on, don't need to argue about proof, so that we can focus on what
to change the language in the platforms to.

If you really want sources, I can dig them up but I have these other deadlines to make to propose changes to both platforms that mention conversion therapy and caused conflicts.

Some sources I recommend, I am happy to buy copies and send them to you:
Francis MacNutt "Healing"
"Homosexuality Can it be Healed" -- this book cites the research results of only 50/50 chance of twins matching in orientation, implying that it isn't just "genetic" but other factors/conditions.
Anyone can contact his nonprofit group Home - Christian Healing Ministries and see if they have someone who can give
their testimony about going through changing orientation. He does not specialize in any one application of spiritual healing. But he can refer other groups that do focus on sexuality and healing.

If you want proof, I can go ask around for a speaker from one of these groups
to post on here and answer questions.

My friend Olivia counseled
* a lesbian who receive help to heal of sexual abuse in order to change her own behavior
* a young man who thought he was transgender, but went through healing and overcome having those thoughts and attractions to people that weren't natural for him

Inevitable, one of my friends said if "reparative therapy" was banned, then my friend wouldn't have gotten help to think through and make the personal decision about "not being bisexual by nature", coming to terms that it was a "choice", and no longer having those feelings anymore.

Do you want me to ask that friend to prove to you that really happened?
Do you want medical proof or what?

This could take time, I am happy to work on it with you, but I also have other
things to work on for people who DON'T need such proof and are ready to work on
policy changes directly, not argue about "proving people's personal experiences."

What timeframe are you looking at? For what level of proof?

Is this what you are looking for, or some medical statistics instead:
Testimony of ex-gay Dr. David Kyle Foster | Ex-gayTruth.com

No, anecdotal claims aren't valid proof.

Conversion therapy is quackery, and it has a higher suicide rate than a success rate. I don't care what your church websites say they are the wicked institutions that fabricated this garbage and fraudulently labeled it conversion therapy. There is zero provable success with so fraudulently called "conversion therapy" all you can really say is that you have beaten homosexuals into conforming to heterosexual behaviors or that you convinced bisexuals to forget about being with the same sex.

Prove the therapy isn't complete garbage, prove homosexuality is a condition in need of healing. Prove any of your claims aren't fraudulent, and please do so without using fraudulent links.

Wouldn't that depend on the forum that the proof is offered in? For example, eyewitness testimony, AKA anecdotal evidence, is completely valid in a court of law.

 

[GreenBean]

So sad all that drek and only one sentence with some mild argument value, extremely mild.Prove it.

See I told you it was mild.

I guess you can't really come up with valid points when you are so busy attempting to insult me.

Scroll back - [NO SILLY NOT WITH YOUR JOY STICK !!!!] - ONce again you are engaging in the Circle Jerk round house logic .

once again you have failed to pissy anything besides garbage.

Too much effort huh littlle fella ?

 

[Inevitable]

@Inevitable

Do you want me to go out and find actual people to post on here their experiences?
Does that count as proof?

Are you okay researching resources, or you aren't interested unless someone else does all that work?

I work two jobs and am trying to save a national historic site
AND also propose a reform to the Democratic party platform
AND prepare for meetings on the conversion therapy issue
with Gay Republicans and liberal Democrats.

I find it faster to work with people who already know that all kinds of cases
are going on, don't need to argue about proof, so that we can focus on what
to change the language in the platforms to.

If you really want sources, I can dig them up but I have these other deadlines to make to propose changes to both platforms that mention conversion therapy and caused conflicts.

Some sources I recommend, I am happy to buy copies and send them to you:
Francis MacNutt "Healing"
"Homosexuality Can it be Healed" -- this book cites the research results of only 50/50 chance of twins matching in orientation, implying that it isn't just "genetic" but other factors/conditions.
Anyone can contact his nonprofit group Home - Christian Healing Ministries and see if they have someone who can give
their testimony about going through changing orientation. He does not specialize in any one application of spiritual healing. But he can refer other groups that do focus on sexuality and healing.

If you want proof, I can go ask around for a speaker from one of these groups
to post on here and answer questions.

My friend Olivia counseled
* a lesbian who receive help to heal of sexual abuse in order to change her own behavior
* a young man who thought he was transgender, but went through healing and overcome having those thoughts and attractions to people that weren't natural for him

Inevitable, one of my friends said if "reparative therapy" was banned, then my friend wouldn't have gotten help to think through and make the personal decision about "not being bisexual by nature", coming to terms that it was a "choice", and no longer having those feelings anymore.

Do you want me to ask that friend to prove to you that really happened?
Do you want medical proof or what?

This could take time, I am happy to work on it with you, but I also have other
things to work on for people who DON'T need such proof and are ready to work on
policy changes directly, not argue about "proving people's personal experiences."

What timeframe are you looking at? For what level of proof?

Is this what you are looking for, or some medical statistics instead:
Testimony of ex-gay Dr. David Kyle Foster | Ex-gayTruth.com

No, anecdotal claims aren't valid proof.

Conversion therapy is quackery, and it has a higher suicide rate than a success rate. I don't care what your church websites say they are the wicked institutions that fabricated this garbage and fraudulently labeled it conversion therapy. There is zero provable success with so fraudulently called "conversion therapy" all you can really say is that you have beaten homosexuals into conforming to heterosexual behaviors or that you convinced bisexuals to forget about being with the same sex.

Prove the therapy isn't complete garbage, prove homosexuality is a condition in need of healing. Prove any of your claims aren't fraudulent, and please do so without using fraudulent links.

Wouldn't that depend on the forum that the proof is offered in? For example, eyewitness testimony, AKA anecdotal evidence, is completely valid in a court of law.

it isn't valid in the forum of science. And if you intend on administering therapy, you better have some damn good science.

First, do no harm. This is one of the principles of bioethics. If you haven't proven that there is an effective therapy to convert homosexuals to heterosexual you are bumbling around in thedark and likely causing far more harm than good.

If this so called "conversion therapy" is valid, why is it invalidated by every reputable behavioral sciences group? Why aren't the "therapists" that administer such "therapy" licensed, educated, or even cognizant of the principles of bioethics?

Where are their studies, where is their measurable success?

 

[Inevitable]

Scroll back - [NO SILLY NOT WITH YOUR JOY STICK !!!!] - ONce again you are engaging in the Circle Jerk round house logic .

once again you have failed to pissy anything besides garbage.

Too much effort huh littlle fella?

I guess it is for you, you can't produce an argument so you keep projecting your fantasies onto me.

 

[Inevitable]

Inevitable, one of my friends said if "reparative therapy" was banned, then my friend wouldn't have gotten help to think through and make the personal decision about "not being bisexual by nature", coming to terms that it was a "choice", and no longer having those feelings anymore.

Do you want me to ask that friend to prove to you that really happened?
Do you want medical proof or what?

[MENTION=38085]emilnghiem[/MENTION]

No, tell me what principles were used, explain from where they were derived, how was this person's bisexuality categorized, was it properly categorized? What method was used to essentially "cure" the perceived psychosis? Can you "cure" psychosis?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I really don't give a rat's ass.

Let's examine two possible media headlines.

1. *Insert Celebrity Name* announces that they are homosexual.
2. *Insert Celebrity Name* announces that they are heterosexual.

Guess which headline you never see?
Why does the media think one of those headlines is more important than the other?
If homosexuals think keeping the government out of their bedroom is so important (and I agree with that), then why do they keep publicizing what is going on in their bedroom?

On the face of it, I agree but they should have the same right I do and that's what they're demanding.

I support that completely.

If a brother and sister demand the same rights, are you fine with that?
The assumption being that the brother sister wont procreate just like the homosexuals wont procreate.
Just curious.

HUH??

Sorry but last I looked, this thread concerned homosexuality. If you would like to start a thread about incest, by all means do. In the meantime, I'll just say that the two are not the same and, pardon the pun, not related.

 

[GreenBean]

Its not just that your posts are full of really low down and nasty insults, they are also just plain ignorant.

I like dishing out low down and nasty insults, they sometimes snap people out of their stupors and from time to time - perhaps they'll even take a moment to reflect on their own demented little worlds. Please feel free to hurl some back at me - I dish it out and I take it in [Don't get no funny ideas about "taking it in - Capice ?! ]

they are also just plain ignorant.

If you mean ignorant as in mean and nasty - that was covered above . If you mean ignorant as in uninformed - try refuting one of my assertions - go ahead I dare you - I double dog dare you :>

This is called the Clean Debate Zone for a reason.

More than that however is that words have consequences. Saying homosexuals are mentally ill, demented, damaged goods is the kind of thing that drives very young homosexuals to suicide. Its one thing to disagree or have a strong opinion but won't you please take into consideration that there may well be people reading this who are struggling with their identity.

Don't we have some degree of responsibility to those people? How would we feel if we knew our words caused a young homosexual to kill him or herself?

This is called the Clean Debate Zone for a reason.

More than that however is that words have consequences. Saying homosexuals are mentally ill, demented, damaged goods is the kind of thing that drives very young homosexuals to suicide.

Or it drives them to come to the realization that they need help. Which Gay activists are trying to deny them the right to recieve .

Its one thing to disagree or have a strong opinion but won't you please take into consideration that there may well be people reading this who are struggling with their identity.

Oh trust me , i am fully aware of that , I worked in the Mental Health field for many years - I do not have a doctorate - by my superiors did -I've seen what happens to these people . I knew one young man who blew his brains out - not because he was Gay or oppressed -he was bisexual and infected his wife with the bug. There are many other horror stories - but I never heard of anybody committinmg suicide for the reasons you state .

In a society, advanced as we seem to think we are in our sciences - Reperative Therapy - which is fairly new - has a relatively high success rate - comparable to Drug Rehab - sometimes they relapse - but overall - if you can make the patient/victim aware that they are sick / not healthy you can enable them to seek the first steps toward a normal, healthy life. I've seen the dark side of homosexuality and how it effects people - the dark side is not pretty , but it is pretty much all there really is . Gay is not Okay

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I don't know how any straight person gets around the paradox unless they're either gay or bisexual.

There is no way I can "choose" who my "sex organ" rises up for. It's a natural occurrence. I cannot change it merely by choice.

Yep.

If its true that homosexuality is a choice, then so is heterosexuality.

Homosexuality is not a choice. Acting on homosexual urges is a choice just as acting on heterosexual urges is a choice.

[MENTION=33658]Katzndogz[/MENTION]

One is not related to the other.

1. Nature or nurture.
2. Acting on nature or nurture.

See the difference?

 

[GreenBean]

On the face of it, I agree but they should have the same right I do and that's what they're demanding.

I support that completely.

If a brother and sister demand the same rights, are you fine with that?
The assumption being that the brother sister wont procreate just like the homosexuals wont procreate.
Just curious.

HUH??

Sorry but last I looked, this thread concerned homosexuality. If you would like to start a thread about incest, by all means do. In the meantime, I'll just say that the two are not the same and, pardon the pun, not related.

He was trying to draw a paralell bewenn sexual taboos in linking homosexuality to incest - while I agree the two are not the same - his point would have been better served had he used pedophilia or beastiality as an example.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Good for her.

The science is actually irrefutable, being gay is not genetic. I actually have peer reviewed papers to back me up on that statement all you have is empty rhetoric and a false belief that you understand science. Feel free to look read through my posts and find the link.

Never mind, I know you don't actually care about the facts, so I will provide the link for you.

If you will note the paper actually contradicts my position that you are not born gay, so you can't accuse me of posting biased links.


Homosexuality as a Consequence of Epigenetically Canalized Sexual Development

One study does not a "truth" make. It is a fact only. Interestingly enough in the Abstract (which you kindly provided was this statement of fact...

"Pedigree and twin studies indicate that homosexuality has substantial heritability in both sexes


What exactly does that mean?

Like I already said, you are not interested in truth, you just want to spout your ignorant opinion and ignore the science, homosexuality is not genetic.

If you don't know what heritability means why did you declare yourself to be the board expert on science?

Science says it is.

 

[Inevitable]

If a brother and sister demand the same rights, are you fine with that?
The assumption being that the brother sister wont procreate just like the homosexuals wont procreate.
Just curious.

HUH??

Sorry but last I looked, this thread concerned homosexuality. If you would like to start a thread about incest, by all means do. In the meantime, I'll just say that the two are not the same and, pardon the pun, not related.

He was trying to draw a paralell bewenn sexual taboos in linking homosexuality to incest - while I agree the two are not the same - his point would have been better served had he used pedophilia or beastiality as an example.

Neither would have been apt. This threadisn't about taboos, it's about the origins of homosexuality. Pedophilia, incest, and bestiality as well as other paraphilias aren't really relevant.