Why is the gay community afraid of "conversion therapy"?

[Inevitable]

Why do people so often respond to questions like that by assuming the people in question must not be straight? People care about, discuss, argue about and insult things that they are not all the time.

This was in specific reference to Some posters and I apologize for notmaking that clear. It isn't, that he disagrees with it or even insults it. It's deeper than that I will explain on the bottom of this post.

Sorry, not trying to single you out as this is a common response. It just irks me, and reminds me too much of the thread I've been involved in for a while now claiming atheists who argue too strenuously with believers must secretly believe in god.

I don't feel singled out, and furthermore I made a statement publicly, I will explain at the bottom.

Straight men worrying about what consenting gay adults do in the bedroom may be asinine, but it's not indicative of being other than heterosexual. Indicative of a lack of intelligence, perhaps.

It's not the bedroom. It's the idea that men are gay. If you don't like what they do in their bedroom, don't watch them and don't join in. You don't even have to think about it. Why would any straight guy even think about it? Why aren't they thinking about Tits or women in general?

As promised above here is my explanation. Several members on this particular thread have repeated that homosexuality is a mental disorder, however, the APA says it isn't. They respond, "well the APA was taken over by gays." Okay, why was it added as a mental disorder in 1952? They respond either one of two ways. "........crickets......" Or "The homosexuals have removed all that data." Okay, than what is the pathology? Again the responses are the same as the previous question. Okay, what evidence do you have of this conspiracy of gays manipulating information? The response I have received from this question from two different posters was the same: "You are a stupid (explicit deleted) that doesn't know (explicit deleted) about (explicit deleted). You loser piece of (explicit deleted)...on and on and on."

Now I ask you, why would somebody need to fabricate a conspiracy and then attack me when I ask for proof of this? To believe that it is a mental disorder that can be treated? Why become so defensive when this position is challenged?

Many people that are homosexual, go through a period of time when they don't want to be homosexual, they are either in a religion, culture or society that looks down on it. And they want to believe there is a way not to be gay. If I am cutting one of those strings of hope with logic it's an assault on their beliefs they go on attack.

Now this board seems to be much less governed than other boards and there is a lot more license to really slander people. I have noticed people losing their patience. I argue with logic and not emotion. Now I may have minced a few less savory words on this board but it seems mild in comparison. That and people that make the same fallacy over and over frustrate me. But you should be able to defeat an argument without slander.

Basically some posters here protest way to much, they fabricate nonsense that people know and can verify isn't true. Who are they trying to convince? Gay people are reduced to a sexual act and only one sex. Forget that they enjoy other parts of a relationship, it's all about anal sex. This is a fixation first there are plenty of homosexual women, and straight people like to have anal sex as well.

So I have listed delusions (gay conspiracy) I have listed emotional outbursts, and a laser beam fixation on the type of sex that people imagine gay people having, that is a pathology. It's clear that posters that exemplify these pathological behaviors are trying to convince themselves of something.

 

[GreenBean]

only thing I really have to say to you green bean is that I need proof that theAPA was taken or by homos

You are a sad little person, not only are you a degenerate , but you're a low IQ, poorly informed, uneducated and ignorant one-

I take that to mean you have no proof of the "homosexuals taking over the APA." And since your entire argument is based on discreditingthem you have utterly failed.



That is likely why you have to lower yourself to calling me a "sad little person" and a "degenerate" with a "low IQ" that you ignorantly claim is "uninformed and uneducated." If you had an argument you wouldn't need to be reduced to slander and other such projections.

"When the argument is lost slander becomes the tool of the loser." - Socrates-

Basics, since all you can do is slander me, that must mean you lost the argument.

GreenBean: My points stand unrefuted, you are a loser in life and probably always will be - die young and do the world a favor - Regards and best wishes.

Inevitable: No your point is rubbish, it's a paranoid conspiracy theory.

GreenBean: In a conversation betweent Adults , which you apparently are not - Opinions are supported by factual evidence - some of your opinions may be valid -but- you have yet to present a single fact to back up your opinions - so in effect you're a loser -

.....

So you feel Dr Cummings was a "Kook" when he authored and supported the motion to remove Homosexuality from the DSM - effectively delisting it as a Mental Illness ?? Hmmm - intersting point and not without validity - I have to agree that was a assinine move - so what else do you feel Dr.Cummings has done that would classify him as a kook- other than to disagree with your wholly unqualified Opinion ?

And while you're at it what about Dr. Rogers Wright former member of APA's Board of Directors, who stated that "psychology has been ultra-libera...and beholden to the Gay Rights movement" Wright described the difficulties he has encountered with the American Psychological Association -

Or Dr. A. Dean Byrd another former APA officer who has bailed out of theorganization - because it has lost all crredibility

Or Dr. Frank Farley who stated that "...APA should give the widest possible hearing to Dr. Cummings' concern about APA's preoccupation with political correctness, and should instead focus efforts on the decline in psychological practice."

Or Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, M.D. In his talk entitled "Judicial Abuse of Scientific Literature on Homosexuality by the American Mental Health Professional Organizations," he offered a tediously referenced description of ethics and morals breeches in recent legal cases that have led to landmark changes in family-law policy.

Or Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons who has stated said that "the American Psychiatric Association (APA) has continuously ignored evidence that homosexuality is a manifestation of a psychiatric disorder."

Or Dr. Apu Chakraborty who has been blasted by the Gay Mafia for producing findings that were heresy to their ears and eyes - he prooved that the rates of mental disorder among gays were significantly higher,nay ridiculously higher than sane people. Rates of depression, anxiety, obsessive compulsive disorder, phobia, self-harm, suicidal thoughts, substance abuse , alcohol dependence. ......

I guess they were all quacks Right ? And of course you are much more qualified to judge the issues because you're a cock sucker - I'd call you a dirty cock sucker- but I have no proof of that and couldn't really give a flying fuck either - Oh and FYI -if you truly are a dirty cock sucker watch out for shigelosis - you don know what shigelosis is don't you? It's an extremely common disease among faggots - it comes from eating their partners feces [ when you suck off their dirty cocks ]

 

[Stephanie]

They control freaks

one thread ask if homophobia can be cured and not a peep out of them

but talk about this therapy and they go nuts

 

[Seawytch]

They control freaks

one thread ask if homophobia can be cured and not a peep out of them

but talk about this therapy and they go nuts

Yes, homophobia can be "cured" because you aren't born hating people.

"This therapy" as you put it has a history of harm. It hurts people. That's okay with you?

 

[Stephanie]

They control freaks

one thread ask if homophobia can be cured and not a peep out of them

but talk about this therapy and they go nuts

Yes, homophobia can be "cured" because you aren't born hating people.

"This therapy" as you put it has a history of harm. It hurts people. That's okay with you?

If you aren't born haten people then why do you refer to someone who isn't homosexual, hetros?
and ANY therapy, I don't care if it's witch craft to voodoo, if a Person want's to use it's THEIR CHOICE
remember that WORD you all use for killing ones offspring, A WOMANS CHOICE

 

[Inevitable]

You are a sad little person, not only are you a degenerate , but you're a low IQ, poorly informed, uneducated and ignorant one-

I take that to mean you have no proof of the "homosexuals taking over the APA." And since your entire argument is based on discreditingthem you have utterly failed.



That is likely why you have to lower yourself to calling me a "sad little person" and a "degenerate" with a "low IQ" that you ignorantly claim is "uninformed and uneducated." If you had an argument you wouldn't need to be reduced to slander and other such projections.

"When the argument is lost slander becomes the tool of the loser." - Socrates-

Basics, since all you can do is slander me, that must mean you lost the argument.

GreenBean: My points stand unrefuted, you are a loser in life and probably always will be - die young and do the world a favor - Regards and best wishes.

Inevitable: No your point is rubbish, it's a paranoid conspiracy theory.

GreenBean: In a conversation betweent Adults , which you apparently are not - Opinions are supported by factual evidence - some of your opinions may be valid -but- you have yet to present a single fact to back up your opinions - so in effect you're a loser -

I simply doubt your conspiracy theory.
.....

So you feel Dr Cummings was a "Kook" when he authored and supported the motion to remove Homosexuality from the DSM

No, I believe it was improperlylisted in the first place.

And while you're at it what about Dr. Rogers Wright former member of APA's Board of Directors, who stated that "psychology has been ultra-libera...and beholden to the Gay Rights movement" Wright described the difficulties he has encountered with the American Psychological Association -

If he could explain why he believes that homosexuality was ever listed as a mental disorder, and lay off the political cry baby routine I might give what he said some weight.

Or Dr. A. Dean Byrd another former APA officer who has bailed out of theorganization - because it has lost all crredibility

How did it lose credibly? Explain why is opinion is of any validity.

Or Dr. Frank Farley who stated that "...APA should give the widest possible hearing to Dr. Cummings' concern about APA's preoccupation with political correctness, and should instead focus efforts on the decline in psychological practice."

What political correctness?

Or Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, M.D. In his talk entitled "Judicial Abuse of Scientific Literature on Homosexuality by the American Mental Health Professional Organizations," he offered a tediously referenced description of ethics and morals breeches in recent legal cases that have led to landmark changes in family-law policy.

Judicial abuse? Now the courts are in on it? When did that happen?

Or Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons who has stated said that "the American Psychiatric Association (APA) has continuously ignored evidence that homosexuality is a manifestation of a psychiatric disorder."

What's the pathology?

Or Dr. Apu Chakraborty who has been blasted by the Gay Mafia for producing findings that were heresy to their ears and eyes - he prooved that the rates of mental disorder among gays were significantly higher,nay ridiculously higher than sane people. Rates of depression, anxiety, obsessive compulsive disorder, phobia, self-harm, suicidal thoughts, substance abuse , alcohol dependence.

correlation is not causation. That's basic psychology

It seems like these doctors disagree with the APA, that isn't unheard of. It doesn'tmake them quacks. But what you have posted is rather empty and without information. List the pathology show their opinions to have validity verses just pathetic target practice.

I guess they were all quacks Right ? And of course you are much more qualified to judge the issues

No, they just disagree with the APA I don't know enough about their theories to claim they are quacks. They are definitely alternative. But psychologists have been disagreeing about this issue since long before it was ever put into theDSM. If the APA is so weak to political influence who is to say homosexuality wasn't put in the DSM based on political whims.


You don't need to carry on with the personal crap first it clouds your argument second it distracts you, you are so interested in telling me to perform oral sex on other men that you can't even make a point.

It's a wonder your argument is shop weak.

 

[GreenBean]

Greenbean needs to keep seeing his lie about shigella.

He has not responded to it yet, because he can't.

shigellosis - definition of shigellosis in the Medical dictionary - by the Free Online Medical Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Description Shigellosis is a well-known cause of traveler's diarrhea and illness throughout the world. Shigella are extremely infectious bacteria, and ingestion of just 10 organisms is enough to cause severe diarrhea and dehydration. Shigella accounts for 10-20% of all cases of diarrhea worldwide, and in any given year infects over 140 million persons and kills 600,000, mostly children and the elderly. The most serious form of the disease is called dysentery, which is characterized by severe watery (and often blood- and mucous-streaked) diarrhea, abdominal cramping, rectal pain, and fever. Shigella is only one of several organisms that can cause dysentery, but the term bacillary dysentery is usually another name for shigellosis.

Most deaths are in less-developed or developing countries, but even in the United States, shigellosis can be a dangerous and potentially deadly disease. Poor hygiene, overcrowding, and improper storage of food are leading causes of infection. The following statistics show the marked difference in the frequency of cases between developed and less-developed countries; in the United States, about 30,000 individuals are hit by the disease each year or about 10 cases/100,000 population. On the other hand, infection in some areas of South America is 1,000 times more frequent. Shigellosis is most common in children below age five, and occurs less often in adults over 20.

Shigella infection spreads through food or water contaminated by human waste. Sources of transmission are:

•contaminated milk, ice cream, vegetables and other foods which often cause epidemics
•household contacts (40% of adults and 20% of children will develop infection from such a source)
•poor hygiene and overcrowded living conditions
•day care centers
•sexual practices which lead to oral-anal contact, directly or indirectly

Nothing about homosexuals, but I imagine the last cause is overwhelmingly heterosexual.

Jake , coming from you I find that post an incredible improvement over your usual drive by nonsensical tripe - I really must commend you for your efforts, especially given the fact that are working such limited intellectual capacity

The copy and paste job you just perpetrated outlines the conventional modes by which shigelosis has been known to be contracted. It is not an STD - so the fact that as you stated " the last cause is overwhelming heterosexual" is somewhat irrelevant - but I'll address it anyway , because youre a somewhat irrelevant person ....

Were it a disease that could be conracted equally by all persons, than you would expect it to be dispersed equally at a per capita percentage [Please let me know if you understand per capita or not - I doubt they covered it when they were handing out coloring books and crayons at your educational institution]. It is not dispersed equally - it is contracted by homosexuals at aprox. 5X the rate that sane people [heterosexual] contract it.

It is contracted commonly by gays because they suck each others shit coated organs while they salivatiouslly sodomize one another . [Now I'm sure our modern educational institutions , despite having some of the lowest test scores on the planet, are very keen at educating the milk and cookie crowds that you frolic with into the "Joys of queer sex" - so I think you probably understand some of what I just said.

 

[GreenBean]

I take that to mean you have no proof of the "homosexuals taking over the APA." And since your entire argument is based on discreditingthem you have utterly failed.



That is likely why you have to lower yourself to calling me a "sad little person" and a "degenerate" with a "low IQ" that you ignorantly claim is "uninformed and uneducated." If you had an argument you wouldn't need to be reduced to slander and other such projections.

"When the argument is lost slander becomes the tool of the loser." - Socrates-

Basics, since all you can do is slander me, that must mean you lost the argument.

GreenBean: My points stand unrefuted, you are a loser in life and probably always will be - die young and do the world a favor - Regards and best wishes.

Inevitable: No your point is rubbish, it's a paranoid conspiracy theory.

GreenBean: In a conversation betweent Adults , which you apparently are not - Opinions are supported by factual evidence - some of your opinions may be valid -but- you have yet to present a single fact to back up your opinions - so in effect you're a loser -

I simply doubt your conspiracy theory.
.....

No, I believe it was improperlylisted in the first place.

If he could explain why he believes that homosexuality was ever listed as a mental disorder, and lay off the political cry baby routine I might give what he said some weight.

How did it lose credibly? Explain why is opinion is of any validity.

What political correctness?

Judicial abuse? Now the courts are in on it? When did that happen?

What's the pathology?

Or Dr. Apu Chakraborty who has been blasted by the Gay Mafia for producing findings that were heresy to their ears and eyes - he prooved that the rates of mental disorder among gays were significantly higher,nay ridiculously higher than sane people. Rates of depression, anxiety, obsessive compulsive disorder, phobia, self-harm, suicidal thoughts, substance abuse , alcohol dependence.

correlation is not causation. That's basic psychology

It seems like these doctors disagree with the APA, that isn't unheard of. It doesn'tmake them quacks. But what you have posted is rather empty and without information. List the pathology show their opinions to have validity verses just pathetic target practice.

I guess they were all quacks Right ? And of course you are much more qualified to judge the issues

No, they just disagree with the APA I don't know enough about their theories to claim they are quacks. They are definitely alternative. But psychologists have been disagreeing about this issue since long before it was ever put into theDSM. If the APA is so weak to political influence who is to say homosexuality wasn't put in the DSM based on political whims.


You don't need to carry on with the personal crap first it clouds your argument second it distracts you, you are so interested in telling me to perform oral sex on other men that you can't even make a point.

It's a wonder your argument is shop weak.

GreenBean: So you feel Dr Cummings was a "Kook" when he authored and supported the motion to remove Homosexuality from the DSM

Inevitable: No, I believe it was improperlylisted in the first place.

GreenBean: And what are your qualifications ? -there are some people , who are qualified that share your opinion - but they back up what they have to say with facts - I don't agree with what they believe - but at least their opinions are informationally based - not simply based on a personal bias .

I guess they were all quacks Right ? And of course you are much more qualified to judge the issues because you're a cock sucker
[ See Post - http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...aid-of-conversion-therapy-14.html#post9302766 ]

GreenBean:And while you're at it what about Dr. Rogers Wright former member of APA's Board of Directors, who stated that "psychology has been ultra-libera...and beholden to the Gay Rights movement" Wright described the difficulties he has encountered with the American Psychological Association -

Inevitable: If he could explain why he believes that homosexuality was ever listed as a mental disorder, and lay off the political cry baby routine I might give what he said some weight.

GreenBean: He has - on many occasios , google it or read one of his books

The rest of your post is simply more poorly informed and highly biased opinion - but I'llgive you credit for trying - maybe there's hope for you - but I doubt it

 

[Seawytch]

They control freaks

one thread ask if homophobia can be cured and not a peep out of them

but talk about this therapy and they go nuts

Yes, homophobia can be "cured" because you aren't born hating people.

"This therapy" as you put it has a history of harm. It hurts people. That's okay with you?

If you aren't born haten people then why do you refer to someone who isn't homosexual, hetros?

I'm sorry, you'll have to try that one again in English.

and ANY therapy, I don't care if it's witch craft to voodoo, if a Person want's to use it's THEIR CHOICE
remember that WORD you all use for killing ones offspring, A WOMANS CHOICE

Yes, if an adult wants to harm themselves, that's fine with me. I don't have a problem with adults choosing this type of "therapy" anymore than I object to adults choosing Angel therapy. (yeah, it's a real thing)

But the Texas GOP actually put this bullshit akin to Angel Therapy in their platform to the extent that they don't want ANY restrictions on it, like the restrictions in CA and NJ which limit it to ADULTS. Get it now, Steph?

 

[Inevitable]

I removed the bits of your argument that was just trolling and childish insults. Seems there isn't much left, but I will precede

[It is not an STD - so the fact that as you stated " the last cause is overwhelming heterosexual" is somewhat irrelevant.

Ooo this ought to be good.

Were it a disease that could be conracted equally by all persons, than you would expect it to be dispersed equally at a per capita percentage

So you are saying that this illness targets homosexuals, I find that dubious but alas I will give you the benefit of the doubt.

It is not dispersed equally - it is contracted by homosexuals at aprox. 5X the rate that heterosexual contract it.

It would be nice to see a link to the CDC, you know facts. Since you aren't trustworthy.

It is contracted commonly by gays because they suck each others shit coated organs while they salivatiouslly sodomize one another.

Thank you doctor asshat butI would be interested in CDC statistics.

Boy there isn't much to your arguments out side of puffy superiority complex.

 

[JFK_USA]

So attempts to help young men having identity crises are bad? I thought libs cared about people.

You're not helping anyone with conversion therapy. It only helps the people sending their children to the therapy. It's pure crap and it doesn't work unless your goal is to get people to kill themselves over the torture and guilt you give them.

 

[Inevitable]

GreenBean: So you feel Dr Cummings was a "Kook" when he authored and supported the motion to remove Homosexuality from the DSM

Inevitable: No, I believe it was improperlylisted in the first place.

Apparently Dr. Cummings did too.

GreenBean: And what are your qualifications ?

To ask questions? I didn't think I needed any.

-there are some people , who are qualified that share your opinion - but they back up what they have to say with facts

What opinions are those?

I don't agree with what they believe - but at least their opinions are informationally based - not simply based on a personal bias.

What opinions are those? That some doctors disagree? Meh I don't really feel the need to prove that seems relatively pointless.

Anything else would come from the APA and UCDavis and of courseyou think they are controlled by the gay Jedi or gay illuminati or some other such fictional boogeyman sowhy bother?

I guess they were all quacks Right ? And of course you are much more qualified to judge the issues

I can't make the judgment thatthey are quacks without reading their work, but I would bf skeptical due to missing peer review.

GreenBean:And while you're at it what about Dr. Rogers Wright former member of APA's Board of Directors, who stated that "psychology has been ultra-libera...and beholden to the Gay Rights movement" Wright described the difficulties he has encountered with the American Psychological Association -

Inevitable: If he could explain why he believes that homosexuality was ever listed as a mental disorder, and lay off the political cry baby routine I might give what he said some weight.

GreenBean: He has - on many occasios , google it or read one of his books

The rest of your post is simply more poorly informed and highly biased opinion - but I'llgive you credit for trying - maybe there's hope for you - but I doubt it

Meh, don't care to read his books.

How convenient that you remove the parts of my post that you can't refute. What a wimp.

 

[GreenBean]

GreenBean:And what are your qualifications ?

Inevitable:To ask questions? I didn't think I needed any.

GreenBean: To ask questions - No . You don't even need qualifications to spout your opinions - but when you somehow think your opinion carries more weught than troves of professionals - than you need some data to back those opinions up - or they are simply the laughable rants of a sexual degenerate.

--------------------

GreenBean there are some people , who are qualified that share your opinion - but they back up what they have to say with facts

Inevitable: What opinions are those?

GreenBean Oh ! so now you're saying you have no opinion - yup okay

------------------

GreenBean I don't agree with what they believe - but at least their opinions are informationally based - not simply based on a personal bias.

Inevitable: What opinions are those? That some doctors disagree? Meh I don't really feel the need to prove that seems relatively pointless.

Anything else would come from the APA and UCDavis and of courseyou think they are controlled by the gay Jedi or gay illuminati or some other such fictional boogeyman sowhy bother?

GreenBean I generally address the content of an article - but will also point out the unreliability of the source if that is the case.

Fell free to do the same - but at least first address the content - being that you are on a much lower level intellectually than the average poster is more than likely the reason you have been unable to cite a single viable argument, although sloven laziness could be another diagnosis.

-------------------------

GreenBean:And while you're at it what about Dr. Rogers Wright former member of APA's Board of Directors, who stated that "psychology has been ultra-libera...and beholden to the Gay Rights movement" Wright described the difficulties he has encountered with the American Psychological Association -

Inevitable: If he could explain why he believes that homosexuality was ever listed as a mental disorder, and lay off the political cry baby routine I might give what he said some weight.

GreenBean He has - on many occasios , google it or read one of his books

The rest of your post is simply more poorly informed and highly biased opinion - but I'llgive you credit for trying - maybe there's hope for you - but I doubt it

--------------------

GreenBeanI guess they were all quacks Right ? And of course you are much more qualified to judge the issues

Inevitable:

I can't make the judgment thatthey are quacks without reading their work, but I would bf skeptical due to missing peer review.

GreenBean You have no clue - do you young man ? You wouldn't know peer review if it bit you in the ass - and I sincerely doubt you would even be able to comprehend much of what you read even if you made the effort to.

I'm not saying you're stupid , but you are certainly not showing too many signs of intelligence here [/B] could it possibly be due to the fact that you are just one lazy ass kid

 

[RosieS]

GreenBean - you detract from your own content with constant ad hominems.

Inevitable - libel comes from the written word; slander comes from the spoken word. The term you wish to use is "libelous".

Carry on carrying on!

Regards from Rosie

 

[GISMYS]

GOD'S WORD GIVES A STRONG WARNING ON THE SICK ABOMINATION OF SEXUAL PERVERSION===The Lord can rescue you and me from the temptations that surround us, and continue to punish the ungodly until the day of final judgment comes. 10 He is especially hard on those who follow their own evil, lustful thoughts. 2 PETER 2:9-10==God let go of them and let them do all these evil things, so that even their women turned against God’s natural plan for them and indulged in sex sin with each other. 27 And the men, instead of having normal sex relationships with women, burned with lust for each other, men doing shameful things with other men and, as a result, getting paid within their own souls with the penalty they so richly deserved.

32 They were fully aware of God’s death penalty for these crimes, yet they went right ahead and did them anyway and encouraged others to do them, too.
Romans 1:26-32== Don’t you know that those doing such things have no share in the Kingdom of God? Don’t fool yourselves. Those who live immoral lives, who are idol worshipers, adulterers or homosexuals—will have no share in his Kingdom.
1 corinthians 6:9

 

[GreenBean]

GreenBean - you detract from your own content with constant ad hominems.

Inevitable - libel comes from the written word; slander comes from the spoken word. The term you wish to use is "libelous".

Carry on carrying on!

Regards from Rosie

Sorry Rosie , being insulting and arrogant to degenerates aand half wits just seems to come naturally. But you're not the first to state that - so ya think I should play nice ?

 

[Inevitable]

I had to prune the worthless garbage from your post

To ask questions - No

Well that is all I did.

Oh ! so now you're saying you have no opinion

No, I have an opinion, but I simply haven't spoken about it here.

I generally address the content of an article - but will also point out the unreliability of the source if that is the case.

Okay, here you go.
Answers to Your Questions For a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality

APA Resolution on "Reparative Therapy"

Homosexuality and Mental Health

Fell free to do the same - but at least first address the content

I pointed out the unreliability in your articles.

You have no clue

What peer review is? Yes I actually do. Thank you.

When you remove all your babbling childish name calling and what not you really don't say much.,

 

[Inevitable]

Sorry Rosie , being insulting and arrogant to degenerates aand half wits just seems to come naturally. But you're not the first to state that - so ya think I should play nice ?

Well insults are all you have, because your argument falls flat.

 

[Inevitable]

GreenBean - you detract from your own content with constant ad hominems.

Inevitable - libel comes from the written word; slander comes from the spoken word. The term you wish to use is "libelous".

Carry on carrying on!

Regards from Rosie

Libel huh, learn something new every day thank you.

 

[Noomi]

GOD'S WORD GIVES A STRONG WARNING ON THE SICK ABOMINATION OF SEXUAL PERVERSION===The Lord can rescue you and me from the temptations that surround us, and continue to punish the ungodly until the day of final judgment comes. 10 He is especially hard on those who follow their own evil, lustful thoughts. 2 PETER 2:9-10==God let go of them and let them do all these evil things, so that even their women turned against God’s natural plan for them and indulged in sex sin with each other. 27 And the men, instead of having normal sex relationships with women, burned with lust for each other, men doing shameful things with other men and, as a result, getting paid within their own souls with the penalty they so richly deserved.

32 They were fully aware of God’s death penalty for these crimes, yet they went right ahead and did them anyway and encouraged others to do them, too.
Romans 1:26-32== Don’t you know that those doing such things have no share in the Kingdom of God? Don’t fool yourselves. Those who live immoral lives, who are idol worshipers, adulterers or homosexuals—will have no share in his Kingdom.
1 corinthians 6:9

So how many gay people has God commanded you to kill?