Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
Why is there a fight? Who's doing the fighting and why are the people trying to prevent gay marriage making me - "Joe taxpayer" foot the bill for their morality crusade
I agree its possible but you are talking about behaviors that are not an expression of their sexual orientation. These behaviors are instead motivated by a societal need to conform and or a psychosis. Take for instance a case where a man marries a woman and has children but all along knows he is gay and attracted to men. Or another case where a male child is abused and thinks that is the only way to obtain love is to have sex with men but really is attracted to females. I've heard both cases and I don't consider the behaviors as orientations.
not really, not on the gay marriage issue...Why is there a fight? Who's doing the fighting and why are the people trying to prevent gay marriage making me - "Joe taxpayer" foot the bill for their morality crusade
Because it's a MUTUAL fight.
1. the gay advocates feel this is natural progression for them to gain equality, no different from the blacks and slavery
2. the blacks and churches who disagree and/or insulted by this, get involved and protest
and push to stop from imposing too far (neutral and open policies are okay, but not imposing further than equal inclusion)
3. the conservatives and christians who disagree jump in and lobby to defend their beliefs against imposition by other beliefs "pushed too far" (again, neutral objective and equally inclusive is okay, but not punishing people for beliefs which is imposing farther)
And all these groups blame the imposition on the other.
The same way you see it as the morality crusaders costing us money with conflict.
Put them in YOUR shoes, [MENTION=45886]Mad_Cabbie[/MENTION]
And they feel the SAME way, that the OTHER group is pushing THEIR agenda "too far"
and introducing conflict to cost taxpayers money
They BOTH feel just like you do. Why is this going on and why do I have to pay for your conflict imposed in other ppl's space? Why can't you stay within your private space?
BOTH argue the other side is "pushing too far" and causing discrimination.
Sad thing is, they are both right.
BOTH are discriminating against the other if they don't arrive at a consensual solution.
So they are BOTH causing the fights and costs if they don't resolve conflicts and
agree on policies or agree to separate. and quit fighting in public at taxpayer expense.
In extreme cases of trauma, people can have all sorts of reactions to it. I would agree with that. I think you're talking about a pretty miniscule percent of gays though here.
In extreme cases of trauma, people can have all sorts of reactions to it. I would agree with that. I think you're talking about a pretty miniscule percent of gays though here.
Yes, and gays are a small % of the population (estimated 4%?)
and yet public policy, marriage and business laws are all being debated
on how to accommodate gays without imposing on people's beliefs either way.
Obviously size doesn't matter over principle.
If it affects a small % it still must be accounted for to be fair.
Or else we wouldn't even be discussing this
if that small % didn't matter because it's so minor.
Note: even if it's just a small % the same PROCESS that helps
them also helps all people
Nobody knows how anybody thinks. To suggest Christians think a certain way and that they all think that way, you are just as guilty as I am.You said I was attacking Christianity, I was not.So again back to what I said and you objected to, it seems you have not established any merit for your objection.
No, I said you don't understand Christians, so you shouldn't say what they think when you clearly don't know. Just like I said they should not speak for you as they obviously don't know.
In extreme cases of trauma, people can have all sorts of reactions to it. I would agree with that. I think you're talking about a pretty miniscule percent of gays though here.
Yes, and gays are a small % of the population (estimated 4%?)
and yet public policy, marriage and business laws are all being debated
on how to accommodate gays without imposing on people's beliefs either way.
Obviously size doesn't matter over principle.
If it affects a small % it still must be accounted for to be fair.
Or else we wouldn't even be discussing this
if that small % didn't matter because it's so minor.
Note: even if it's just a small % the same PROCESS that helps
them also helps all people
BS. On the issue of gay marriage, they are not asking for accommodation, they are asking for the bigoted laws against gay marriages to be stricken.
Why is there a fight? Who's doing the fighting and why are the people trying to prevent gay marriage making me - "Joe taxpayer" foot the bill for their morality crusade
Because it's a MUTUAL fight.
1. the gay advocates feel this is natural progression for them to gain equality, no different from the blacks and slavery
2. the blacks and churches who disagree and/or insulted by this, get involved and protest
and push to stop from imposing too far (neutral and open policies are okay, but not imposing further than equal inclusion)
3. the conservatives and christians who disagree jump in and lobby to defend their beliefs against imposition by other beliefs "pushed too far" (again, neutral objective and equally inclusive is okay, but not punishing people for beliefs which is imposing farther)
And all these groups blame the imposition on the other.
The same way you see it as the morality crusaders costing us money with conflict.
Put them in YOUR shoes, [MENTION=45886]Mad_Cabbie[/MENTION]
And they feel the SAME way, that the OTHER group is pushing THEIR agenda "too far"
and introducing conflict to cost taxpayers money
They BOTH feel just like you do. Why is this going on and why do I have to pay for your conflict imposed in other ppl's space? Why can't you stay within your private space?
BOTH argue the other side is "pushing too far" and causing discrimination.
Sad thing is, they are both right.
BOTH are discriminating against the other if they don't arrive at a consensual solution.
So they are BOTH causing the fights and costs if they don't resolve conflicts and
agree on policies or agree to separate. and quit fighting in public at taxpayer expense.
Yes, and gays are a small % of the population (estimated 4%?)
and yet public policy, marriage and business laws are all being debated
on how to accommodate gays without imposing on people's beliefs either way.
Obviously size doesn't matter over principle.
If it affects a small % it still must be accounted for to be fair.
Or else we wouldn't even be discussing this
if that small % didn't matter because it's so minor.
Note: even if it's just a small % the same PROCESS that helps
them also helps all people
BS. On the issue of gay marriage, they are not asking for accommodation, they are asking for the bigoted laws against gay marriages to be stricken.
They are asking for government involvement in their marriages. Probably not wise of them considering past government involvement in personal affairs.
If I was homosexual, I'd be fighting against government involvement. I'm trying to warn them, but they don't listen.
They'll get what they ask for, then regret it.
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.
I was drawing a parallel about 'rights', which Luddly Neddite introduced into the conversation.
Pedophilia or bestiality are not comparable as neither involves adult humans of the age of consent whilst my example did. Yer just trying to stir up shit.
BS. On the issue of gay marriage, they are not asking for accommodation, they are asking for the bigoted laws against gay marriages to be stricken.
They are asking for government involvement in their marriages. Probably not wise of them considering past government involvement in personal affairs.
If I was homosexual, I'd be fighting against government involvement. I'm trying to warn them, but they don't listen.
They'll get what they ask for, then regret it.
That is a really lame idea - to not want the government to have a say, because they muck stuff up.
The Government has failed us before, so we don't need them? Do you refuse legal council for a lawsuit, because lawyers are crooked?
Not if you have any sense.
again, everything in this post is almost completely irrelevant and has little or nothing to do with the topic.Fetishes are typically acquired, being that homosexuals tend to cohabitate, become involved in romantic relationships sometimes even abstaining from sexual contact until it isdeemed appropriate, it doesn't seem reasonable to equate it to merely something that you getyour jollies from. That tends to be the staple mischaracterization from people that argue against homosexuality.What causes any compulsive behavior? It's not genetics. There is nothing about genetics that causes a man to be turned on by watching women wearing high heel shoes stomp small animals to death, but some men are turned on by that.
Dear Katzndogz and Inevitable:
Some fetishes, phobias or obsessions could be spiritually born or caused.
Some therapists are trying to get more research done on this angle --
where karma from past generations can be carried spiritually and influence
people not genetically connected, including "phobias" or other irrational obsessions.
I met a woman who had such a phobia, and went to a therapist who used a combination of Buddhist past life regression and Christian prayer to identify and heal the connection from the past which, when released, eliminated the phobic reactions (in her case she had some emotional attachment associated with "candles" and "fire", while another friend of mine had fear of "hair" and also irrational attraction to "antique carved furniture legs" that she came to peace with as spiritually connected to people from past generations who lived or died in some way related to those things.)
This "spiritual connection" is IMPOSSIBLE to prove,
but the PROCESS of healing phobias/obsessions by going through the steps,
the METHOD CAN be quantified in stages by professional observation to meet criteria for diagnosis, similar to doctors treating psychiatric patients by recording their progress.
The more people who report success in healing, by identifying and releasing connections to past generations, the STATISTICS can show a correlation in outcome/recovery (even if spiritual theories of where this comes from and if it is real or imagined cannot be proven).
[MENTION=49586]Inevitable[/MENTION]: back to the idea that a condition does not need to be a "pathological disease" with a "proven cause" in order to be HEALED. Someone can have a disdain for "black thugs" and be HEALED of fear by forgiving all negative associations and events related. And that is not a physical pathology or disease. Someone publicly offered to help TX Gov. Perry recovery from his "homophobia" -- what this means is to forgive and heal of negative biases that make him come across as a bigot. Is bigotry a mental illness? In some cases it may be caused by an extreme phobic reaction. If not, it can still be healed by forgiveness.
There is mountains of evidence. Your drive to procreate is the strongest urge going after the freeze, flight, or fight response. The fact this world is populated should tell you that. You honestly think choice has something to do with that?
If the drive to procreate is so strong, how do you explain homosexuality at all? The fact that people, and animals, actually engage in sex when procreation is impossible proves that you are wrong about this. That might lead you to consider he possibility that you are wrong about other things.
I doubt it, but it might.
Glad you asked that. Genes or gene expression.
Your genes have no understanding of if procreation is possible. Thanks for pointing that out. That should let you know its hardwired into humans.
Nobody knows how anybody thinks. To suggest Christians think a certain way and that they all think that way, you are just as guilty as I am.You said I was attacking Christianity, I was not.
No, I said you don't understand Christians, so you shouldn't say what they think when you clearly don't know. Just like I said they should not speak for you as they obviously don't know.
BS. On the issue of gay marriage, they are not asking for accommodation, they are asking for the bigoted laws against gay marriages to be stricken.
They are asking for government involvement in their marriages. Probably not wise of them considering past government involvement in personal affairs.
If I was homosexual, I'd be fighting against government involvement. I'm trying to warn them, but they don't listen.
They'll get what they ask for, then regret it.
That is a really lame idea - to not want the government to have a say, because they muck stuff up.
The Government has failed us before, so we don't need them? Do you refuse legal council for a lawsuit, because lawyers are crooked?
Not if you have any sense.
[MENTION=22295]emilynghiem[/MENTION][
[MENTION=49586]Inevitable[/MENTION] really wanted us to stick to addressing the issue of how can this be
defined as a disease, pathology, mental illness, etc. by professional medical standards.
Can we focus on solutions (not problems we ALL know are going on in the media)
and try to find common terms, language, RESEARCH or studies/examples that explain
how these "conditions" have been successfully healed or changed without any fraud?
If you have some unusual or dangerous proclivities from sexual abuse, please explain how that even remotely effects orientation.As long as we agree that any change is to "restore people to their natural orientation,"
(and is NOT to turn people into something unnatural that's not them), we don't have to agree if "ALL cases are" a choice, genetic, caused by social influence, abuse/rape, etc.
The place where we disagree it's the need for change. Why would somebody need to change their sexual orientation? I don't even think it'spossible let alone ethical.Can we "table" the points we disagree on, and focus on what kind of changes or healing we WOULD agree is Natural, consistent with science and normal effective therapy, and not rejected by anyone. If we can agree there, these other points may not be such an issue.
We don't agree, I think you are dead wrong to suggest sexual orientation is acquired via rape or sexual abuse, I further think you are dead wrong to insist that people can change it via whichever method of the week you choose.Thank you, Gentlemen. I'm glad if we can agree on something!
That there is more that is being missed, so how do we work toward that as a team?
[MENTION=22295]emilynghiem[/MENTION]Hi [MENTION=49586]Inevitable[/MENTION] and [MENTION=46353]GreenBean[/MENTION]
Thanks for developing a very interesting and diverse thread with different angles.
1. Healing still applies, WITHOUT Homosexuality being a "disease or mental illness."
Natural healing is rather meaningless to me. Not sure that phrase even has a meaning.Factoring in the studies, PROCESS, and results of effective natural healing
DOES change the statistical data and medical findings, and the resulting conclusions.
So Inevitable, it can make the difference between drawing a false or true conclusion.
From what you have explained thus far, "natural healing" is hocuspocus. I recall asking you several times what natural healing was and why it should be regarded as anything only to be ignored.2. "Faith healing" (as in "blind praying for an outcome") is faulty and NOT what is meant.
Real spiritual healing is about "praying to receive forgiveness" over conflicts that were previously blocking natural healing; and it is NOT about "dictating" conditions or results.
What on earth does this have to do with the thread?It is about taking the steps to RECEIVE natural healing after obstructions are removed by forgiving the issues, memories, conflicts, motions and perceptions attached, letting go.
So explain to me then why you feel it's so important to push your faith healing on the thread about homosexuality and frankly any thread regarding this topic. It's beginning to become insulting. Are you posting this as a cure for homosexuality?fSo it's NOT "faith healing" and it doesn't depend on homosexuality being a "disease."
This is exactly what I meant when I said it's beginning to be insulting. Why do you think homosexuality is a condition or that people need to be healed from it?BTW I'm glad to know you are Christian, if that helps you understand there is a bigger process going on. I believe science can prove the healing of other mental illness such as schizophrenia, using the same methods, and resolve a lot of these issues at the same time. That's why I see a connection. How can you research one without affecting all applications.
The mind/body follow a natural healing process that works for all people (if something is not forgiven or resolved in the past, it can build up negative memories and emotions and block the mind/body from the natural flow of life's healing energy and process; and if the blocked memory or conflict is removed by forgiveness, this unblocks that natural energy flow so the mind/body can heal as they are designed).
Conditions DON't have to be an "illness, disease or disorder" to be healed this way.
You make no sense.Nobody knows how anybody thinks. To suggest Christians think a certain way and that they all think that way, you are just as guilty as I am.No, I said you don't understand Christians, so you shouldn't say what they think when you clearly don't know. Just like I said they should not speak for you as they obviously don't know.
Kaz did not suggest that, you did. You might not be aware of the suggestion, but you can't claim kaz is not the only person that saw it.
If the drive to procreate is so strong, how do you explain homosexuality at all? The fact that people, and animals, actually engage in sex when procreation is impossible proves that you are wrong about this. That might lead you to consider he possibility that you are wrong about other things.
I doubt it, but it might.
Glad you asked that. Genes or gene expression.
Your genes have no understanding of if procreation is possible. Thanks for pointing that out. That should let you know its hardwired into humans.
Actually, a number of different animals know when procreation is possible, humans among them. The human body, like many animals, emits signals when women are fertile, and men can detect them.
Men Can Smell Fertility, Study Says - ABC News
I actually knew the exact time when my ex wife became pregnant. She never believed me, and I know you won't, but I did. I also knew an ex girlfriend was lying to me when she told me she was pregnant.
The funny thing is, even though I knew when to procreate, it never once stopped from having sex, because, ultimately, we aren't programmed to procreate. Despite Dawkins claims to the contrary, genes do not control behavior in any species on Earth.
So, even though we are quite capable of knowing when to procreate.
