Queer eye for the straight guy

[Woodsy]

Regent University Law Review​

Homosexuality: Truth Be Told​

Not exactly a bunch of ignorant people writing these papers...

Homosexuality: Innate and Immutable?​

 

[SirKenin]

Regent University Law Review​

Homosexuality: Truth Be Told​

Not exactly a bunch of ignorant people writing these papers...

Homosexuality: Innate and Immutable?​

from that second link...

http://www.regent.edu/acad/schlaw/lawreview/articles/14_2Rondeau.PDF

Selling Homosexuality to America, by Paul Rondeau, explores how gay rights activists use rhetoric, psychology, social psychology, and the media–all the elements of modern marketing–to position homosexuality in order to frame what is discussed in the public arena and how it is discussed.
FULL TEXT: PDF MSWORD

I'm reading it write now. Excellent so far.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

How about if I give you some genetic/homosexual links to read?

http://www.narth.com/docs/innate.html

http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html

NARTH is not a scientific organization.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

Regent University Law Review​

Homosexuality: Truth Be Told​

Not exactly a bunch of ignorant people writing these papers...

Homosexuality: Innate and Immutable?​

Perhaps they aren't ignorant, per se, but they are Christians who hold the a priori belief that homosexuality is a sin and thus inherently harmful.

 

[silas]

Homosapiens are animals. Dictionary, biology textbook, Medical Doctor - all these will tell you that.

Humans are animals???!!! No offense, Truncate, but placing your faith in lexicographers, biologists & doctors will keep you in an inpenetrable darkness forever.

And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."
(Genesis 1:24-28)

Wake up, my friend, and see the Light.

Silas

.

 

[Truncate]

Completely irrelevant (not to mention a little devoid of details).

The fact of the matter remains is that it's very recently that society has openly adopted the passive view it has about homosexuality. It wasn't like this even ten years ago, yet by your own profession, homosexuality has been around for centuries.

I repeat what I said: "Homosexuality is millions of years older than any and all religions." Not only centuries, not only in homosapiens.

Ancient Rome was very passive about homosexuality - arguably more so than in the USA today.

 

[SirKenin]

Perhaps they aren't ignorant, per se, but they are Christians who hold the a priori belief that homosexuality is a sin and thus inherently harmful.

Read the article, Bliss. Jeepers.

You're adhering to their message exactly.

Part II of this article provides a brief overview of the social climate and politics that ultimately led to the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) imprimatur of homosexual behavior. The declassification of homosexuality as a disorder by the APA provides context for the propaganda war proposed by Kirk and Madsen's homosexual manifesto fifteen years later. The section ends by reviewing the main elements of the campaign including the call to specifically discredit, intimidate, and silence opponents with particular attention paid to conservative Christians.

That's you to a T. A capital T. Maybe you don't get it, but you're digging yourself a really deep hole.

 

[Truncate]

Humans are animals???!!! No offense, Truncate, but placing your faith in lexicographers, biologists & doctors will keep you in an inpenetrable darkness forever.

And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."
(Genesis 1:24-28)

Wake up, my friend, and see the Light.

Silas

Much of the world does not believe that the bible is anything more than many books written by many people, and edited together by other people, years later. Many of the people in this Open-Discussion forum believe that, as I do.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

Read the article, Bliss. Jeepers.

You're adhering to their message exactly.



That's you to a T. A capital T. Maybe you don't get it, but you're digging yourself a really deep hole.

Of course it is. Conservative Christians do deserve that discredit because they automatically assume that homosexuality is sinful and thus inherently harmful and nothing would ever change that belief. That loses all credibility.

 

[revolutio]

Ancient Rome was very passive about homosexuality - arguably more so than in the USA today.

The USA isn't very passive about homosexuality. It may not take active action against it, but it is rather at odds with the concept.

(Source)

 

[Truncate]

Read the article, Bliss. Jeepers.

You're adhering to their message exactly.



That's you to a T. A capital T. Maybe you don't get it, but you're digging yourself a really deep hole.

Scientific groups change their opinion on things when new facts arise and studies are done, on many occasions. For example:

The Canadian Pediatric Society used to approve routine circumcision, but they do not recommend routine circumcision any longer. They leave the decision up to the parents, they give any information deemed necessary/helpful to the parents, but it is not done so willy-nilly anymore.

http://www.cps.ca/english/statements/FN/fn96-01.htm#OVERALL ASSESSMENTS

Science is constantly learning, new facts are learned, old 'facts' are found to be incorrect. It is a process.

 

[Truncate]

The USA isn't very passive about homosexuality. It may not take active action against it, but it is rather at odds with the concept.

(Source)

Agreed - but things are slowly changing for the better.

 

[SirKenin]

Of course it is. Conservative Christians do deserve that discredit because they automatically assume that homosexuality is sinful and thus inherently harmful and nothing would ever change that belief. That loses all credibility.

Would you stop repeating yourself? It gets annoying. You're trying to desensitize, but I'll always know homosexual sex for what it really is, and your extremist left wing propaganda machine isn't going to change that. You live the statements of the very articles you refute. You're our built in case example.

If it makes you feel better, though, and makes every sexual contact with another man that much more pleasurable, you go right ahead and think whatever you want.

Just when you come in here, have your facts straight and present the whole argument. At least give us facts for your PART of the argument. That would be a good start. You're more of a discredit to your own regime than any conservative Christian could possibly be.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

People who claim that homosexuality is inherently harmful due to an a priori belief that it is sinful according to their religious beliefs have no credibility in their arguments.

Of course they're going to claim that I would be playing right into their hands just like the same deceptive con-artist tactics of your religious text and how it paints unbelievers.

Sources without credibility hold no weight with me whether it's bigots or a religious text. And quite frankly, I'm not interested in having a discussion with you in the first place given how you have acted here in the past.

 

[SirKenin]

Scientific groups change their opinion on things when new facts arise and studies are done, on many occasions. For example:

The Canadian Pediatric Society used to approve routine circumcision, but they do not recommend routine circumcision any longer. They leave the decision up to the parents, they give any information deemed necessary/helpful to the parents, but it is not done so willy-nilly anymore.

http://www.cps.ca/english/statements/FN/fn96-01.htm#OVERALL ASSESSMENTS

Science is constantly learning, new facts are learned, old 'facts' are found to be incorrect. It is a process.

That doesn't address my post, never mind the contents of that article, "Selling Homosexuality to America." Matter of fact, it doesn't come close to addressing any of the articles I've seen so far.

This isn't an opinion, this is an article done with people that know what they are talking about. And please stop talking about facts. There is a severe lack of them in your posts.

 

[SirKenin]

People who claim that homosexuality is inherently harmful due to an a priori belief that it is sinful according to their religious beliefs have no credibility in their arguments.

Of course they're going to claim that I would be playing right into their hands just like the same deceptive con-artist tactics of your religious text and how it paints unbelievers.

Sources without credibility hold no weight with me whether it's bigots or a religious text. And quite frankly, I'm not interested in having a discussion with you in the first place given how you have acted here in the past.

You obviously missed it. First, you can't refute the evidence, so there you go attacking me again. Don't tell me about how I've acted. That's impertinent. I believe a poster commented once about a common tactic being attacking the poster if you can't refute the post.

Second, how can you claim they have no credibility, when you're living proof of their thesis? You keep going on and on with your propaganda, but fail to provide any substance of your own. You repeat the same tired rhetoric that many have no doubt lost interest in over and over again. You're a living sample, all the proof they, and I, need. Until you really blow me away with your scientific facts, and prove that you're not a walking, talking contradiction in terms, I'm afraid I'm going to have to side with them.

 

[Lola]

NARTH is not a scientific organization.

Please show me ONE link-YOUR CHOOSING-that shows scientific fact that homosexuality is genetic. Not hypothetical, opinion, or thesis. FACT. I just showed you facts that it has not been determined to be genetic.

 

[Volos]

Originally posted by sweetkitty:

Homosexuality

Statistics You Should Know: It's Not Just Holding Hands

http://www.inoohr.org/factsheet.htm

More lies and falsified data from the family research council.

Several people asked why many view sites like this as propaganda. It is because the Family research council has been shown to have falsified data and reports in their “studies” of homosexuality. Knowingly presenting false information for the purpose of supporting an agenda is propaganda.

 

[Volos]

Lola:
Where is this supposed "gay" gene? Where is the proof? The only thing I keep hearing from the gay side is that "animals do it, so it's natural".

I still believe that one chooses to be homosexual. Until you can prove me wrong with scientific fact, I will not entertain any thesis'

I will be the first to agree there is only tenuous evidence of homosexuality being linked to genetics. However it is the ONLY theory that has any evidence whatsoever. There is no, repeat no evidence linking any psychological, social or familial factor to homosexuality.
Until you can provide scientific fact that sexual orientation is a choice and nothing else I will continue to believe that saying it is a choice is simply a mechanism to defend a personal prejudice.

Lola: please show me the PROOF that homosexuality is a choice.

 

[Omnedon]

I'm just curious what cold, hard facts the scientists have to offer that show why society is where it is today.

Exactly *where* do you think society is today, anyhow?

And how do you support that position?