Should Trump/Congress Cut Off The American Psychological Association (APA)?

[Silhouette]

Well Skylar as of yesterday the poll was 100% agreement with me. But you voted bringing it down to 87.5%.

Still, the vast majority sees what the media is doing as a kangaroo court. Whether it was Bill Clinton or the KY Rep. what this does is it makes our best & brightest not want to go near civil service in leadership. So it's actually a national security issue if you think about it.

 

[Skylar]

Well Skylar as of yesterday the poll was 100% agreement with me. But you voted bringing it down to 87.5%.

Still, the vast majority sees what the media is doing as a kangaroo court. Whether it was Bill Clinton or the KY Rep. what this does is it makes our best & brightest not want to go near civil service in leadership. So it's actually a national security issue if you think about it.

Yesterday, 7 people agreed with you. That doesn't mean they share your all consuming obsession. Nor does the electorate.

Remember, when you asked folks what their priorities were, they never mentioned your obsession with gay parents. They mentioned the economy. National security. Jobs. The mental health crisis. Opiod addiction. Border walls.

Your obsession is not ours.

 

[Silhouette]

Yes, you and your pocket pay-per-post LGBT bloggers here at USMB don't agree. But that's a tiny minority. Most think it's a problem. Did you notice I included Clinton as being one of the victims of this media kangaroo court process? It needs to stop. What do you think about it being a national security issue with suppressing our best and brightest from seeking a life in the public limelight as a public official?

 

[Skylar]

Yes, you and your pocket pay-per-post LGBT bloggers here at USMB don't agree.

Laughing....and now its a conspiracy, with the 'gays' infiltrating the message board? Is this where you start ranting again about how the 'gays' have infiltrated Gallup, and how the 'gays' blackmailed the pope and how the 'gays' have blackmailed justice Kennedy?

I have a much simpler explanation, Sil: Your obsessions are not our priorities.

When asked what matter to them, folks cited the economy. National security. Immigration. Mental health. Jobs.

Only you cited your bizarre fixation on gay parents. And then predictably began to try and support your obsession with more imaginary conspiracy nonsense.

Sorry Sil....your imagination isn't our priority, either.

 

[Silhouette]

So you do or don't think that media kangaroo trials of public figures (even democrat ones like they did to Clinton) has a chilling effect on our best and brightest running for Office?

 

[Skylar]

So you do or don't think that media kangaroo trials of public figures (even democrat ones like they did to Clinton) has a chilling effect on our best and brightest running for Office?

A media report isn't a trial, Sil. Once again, the bug of your imagination runs smack into the windshield of reality.

 

[Silhouette]

The APA still remains silent and the majority of people here in the poll want answers for that silence.

Meanwhile if you check out the OP, they have a webpage dedicated to grooming Congress for more money. Yet Congress can't fund tacit child abuse. Maybe it's time for a second Congressional censure of the APA?

 

[Cecilie1200]

This should be one of the first cuts to the budget.
No need for government funding of the APA, no gain no loss,

There's a need for psychology funding for sure. But I'd like to see it go to an actual science based outfit instead of the "qualitative" "craft" practiced at the APA.

For the life of me, I don't understand why the federal government is funding them in the first place. One of the many, many things the federal government funds that I don't understand.

 

[Silhouette]

For the life of me, I don't understand why the federal government is funding them in the first place. One of the many, many things the federal government funds that I don't understand.

If you understand the heroin epidemic and it's mental health roots, you would understand the need. A country DOES have a vested interest in the mental stability of its citizenry. With "monkey see/monkey do" in homo sapiens, you let shit like that go unchecked with professional help and you can wind up with chaos or something like Nazi Germany.

Anyway, that would be under a situation where the APA still functioned as a scientific group, and not an extension of the LGBT cult propaganda. Their silence on the boy being mutilated by the two lesbian "parents" who have custody of him is the final straw. When your psychological associations start adopting silence on a policy of manifest child abuse, that's when the purse strings snap shut from Uncle Sam.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Everybody knows that human behavior can be adequately explained by crack-pot religious theories, so who needs any scientific research?

No scientific research is necessary to diagnosis your pathological hostility toward religion and obsessive need to shoehorn that hatred into everything, however inappropriate and irrelevant.

However, since accurate psychology will be necessary to determine what trauma led to us being endlessly tortured by your blather on the subject, that does make insisting on good scientific psychology a priority.

 

[Cecilie1200]

For the life of me, I don't understand why the federal government is funding them in the first place. One of the many, many things the federal government funds that I don't understand.

If you understand the heroin epidemic and it's mental health roots, you would understand the need. A country DOES have a vested interest in the mental stability of its citizenry. With "monkey see/monkey do" in homo sapiens, you let shit like that go unchecked with professional help and you can wind up with chaos or something like Nazi Germany.

Anyway, that would be under a situation where the APA still functioned as a scientific group, and not an extension of the LGBT cult propaganda. Their silence on the boy being mutilated by the two lesbian "parents" who have custody of him is the final straw. When your psychological associations start adopting silence on a policy of manifest child abuse, that's when the purse strings snap shut from Uncle Sam.

Don't fall into the trap of conflating "necessary" with "therefore, the government must do it". I have no problem with government agencies like NIMH and the CDCP for issues of general public health, both mental and physical. But I'm very dubious about the need for the federal government to fund the APA, even if it was serving its stated function usefully.

 

[Silhouette]

Don't fall into the trap of conflating "necessary" with "therefore, the government must do it". I have no problem with government agencies like NIMH and the CDCP for issues of general public health, both mental and physical. But I'm very dubious about the need for the federal government to fund the APA, even if it was serving its stated function usefully.

Well I'd consider something vital to national security for the whole nation something government not only should do, they MUST do to preserve the Union. However, a way out temporarily of funding vital mental health research is to say "NO" to an entity that tacitly supports and quietly promotes child abuse.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Don't fall into the trap of conflating "necessary" with "therefore, the government must do it". I have no problem with government agencies like NIMH and the CDCP for issues of general public health, both mental and physical. But I'm very dubious about the need for the federal government to fund the APA, even if it was serving its stated function usefully.

Well I'd consider something vital to national security for the whole nation something government not only should do, they MUST do to preserve the Union. However, a way out temporarily of funding vital mental health research is to say "NO" to an entity that tacitly supports and quietly promotes child abuse.

I don't know that I consider the APA's stated purpose to be vital to national security on the level of "so the government should do it". And that's aside from the fact that I think they do a shit job of achieving that purpose, anyway.

I tend to believe that research funding happens much more effectively in the private sector, and we do already have government agencies whose purpose is to manage public health concerns.

 

[Silhouette]

Sometimes the private sector can be too heavily influenced by industry and profits to do "unbiased" research. So grants achieve two things with regards to the problem with the APA and other entities charged with research: 1. They fund the outfits so the best and brightest can join without motivation to profits and 2. It gives the People inroads to monitor science to be sure it's unbiased.

That being said, the APA is biased heavily towards LGBT child abuse and the funding needs to stop until it does. See how that works?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Sometimes the private sector can be too heavily influenced by industry and profits to do "unbiased" research. So grants achieve two things with regards to the problem with the APA and other entities charged with research: 1. They fund the outfits so the best and brightest can join without motivation to profits and 2. It gives the People inroads to monitor science to be sure it's unbiased.

That being said, the APA is biased heavily towards LGBT child abuse and the funding needs to stop until it does. See how that works?

There is no point at which the government is LESS influenced by outside factors than private industry is. More so, in fact, the profit motive at least requires private industry to be effective, and nothing apparently ever requires that of government. All too often, the government's "research" amounts to nothing more than declaring something to be true according to whatever special interest group is screaming the loudest at the moment.

I tend toward natural suspicion of anyone being the "best and brightest" without a profit motive, and frankly feel a lot more secure when they have one. I'm not saying altruism never happens; I'm just saying that self-interest is a lot more reliable.

If your goal in government funding is to keep science unbiased, I'd say the entire premise of this thread demonstrates that that is a monumental, epic-level contradiction in terms. Hell, look at your own last sentence. See how THAT works?

 

[sartre play]

Slow news day? a 1999 study that was regarded as trash in 1999, is dug up today, for what reason. please explain.

 

[Silhouette]

Slow news day? a 1999 study that was regarded as trash in 1999, is dug up today, for what reason. please explain.

Read the OP in total silly. It's part of the whole conversation, not all of it.

 

[Lysistrata]

Everybody knows that human behavior can be adequately explained by crack-pot religious theories, so who needs any scientific research?

No scientific research is necessary to diagnosis your pathological hostility toward religion and obsessive need to shoehorn that hatred into everything, however inappropriate and irrelevant.

However, since accurate psychology will be necessary to determine what trauma led to us being endlessly tortured by your blather on the subject, that does make insisting on good scientific psychology a priority.

I have never voiced any "pathological hostility toward religion." "Religion" is a very generic term. If I say that the Taliban are full of shit, is that voicing "hostility toward religion"? Do I have to voice approval of every religious sect in the universe? Even if they do very dumb things and behave aggressively toward others?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Everybody knows that human behavior can be adequately explained by crack-pot religious theories, so who needs any scientific research?

No scientific research is necessary to diagnosis your pathological hostility toward religion and obsessive need to shoehorn that hatred into everything, however inappropriate and irrelevant.

However, since accurate psychology will be necessary to determine what trauma led to us being endlessly tortured by your blather on the subject, that does make insisting on good scientific psychology a priority.

I have never voiced any "pathological hostility toward religion." "Religion" is a very generic term. If I say that the Taliban are full of shit, is that voicing "hostility toward religion"? Do I have to voice approval of every religious sect in the universe? Even if they do very dumb things and behave aggressively toward others?

You have voiced nothing BUT. Just the fact that you're trying to wedge it into THIS discussion indicates the level of hostility and pathology. And there's a big difference between objecting to the Taliban and your dismissive post of "crack-pot religious theories, who needs science?"

When you finally do us all a favor and hie yourself to a therapist, he's going to be fascinated by just how much you reveal about your mental illness without even realizing it.

 

[Lysistrata]

Everybody knows that human behavior can be adequately explained by crack-pot religious theories, so who needs any scientific research?

No scientific research is necessary to diagnosis your pathological hostility toward religion and obsessive need to shoehorn that hatred into everything, however inappropriate and irrelevant.

However, since accurate psychology will be necessary to determine what trauma led to us being endlessly tortured by your blather on the subject, that does make insisting on good scientific psychology a priority.

I have never voiced any "pathological hostility toward religion." "Religion" is a very generic term. If I say that the Taliban are full of shit, is that voicing "hostility toward religion"? Do I have to voice approval of every religious sect in the universe? Even if they do very dumb things and behave aggressively toward others?

You have voiced nothing BUT. Just the fact that you're trying to wedge it into THIS discussion indicates the level of hostility and pathology. And there's a big difference between objecting to the Taliban and your dismissive post of "crack-pot religious theories, who needs science?"

When you finally do us all a favor and hie yourself to a therapist, he's going to be fascinated by just how much you reveal about your mental illness without even realizing it.

I never voiced any hostility toward "religion" in general. You need to take your bozo sectarian self to a certified shrink and find out what is wrong with you. Sorry, I can't help you. Find a shrink that is outside of the cults.