Define a 'Liberal' or a 'Conservative'

What I see is balls tossed by several pitchers and me, hitting each one solid right back or over their heads. :)

With respect to "karma", we've already established what faces you upon exit from this earth. :burn:

Actually, its a bunch of balls slapping you in the face.... which I am quite certain you are enjoying. Its ok to come out of the closet, let go of your hate, embrace your true self.
 
Actually, its a bunch of balls slapping you in the face.... which I am quite certain you are enjoying. Its ok to come out of the closet, let go of your hate, embrace your true self.

OH, SNAP! I couldn't have put it better myself. I want to see him extricate himself from that doo doo. I'm going to get popcorn. LOL.
 
Common sense is not often an atribute one would associate with you, Whateveryernameisthisweek. Are there many same sex parents in the US? I mean sufficient to take a sample and analyse sufficient data to an acceptable confidence level? If you are going to compare say 100 million opposite gender parents with same gender parents, how many would you need?
Mmm. You really are quite unlikely to arrive at a figure that was in any way meaningful.
So we're back to your common sense. You have a greater chance of stumbling over a steaming pile of rocking horse shit than developing common sense.

yes, there are enough to study the effects and as Winter showed (by linking the studies) there is NO evidence to support his bigoted views.
 
I appreciate your willingness to remain anonymous. But I doubt your stories would account for 80% of the pedophiles, as you claimed gays account for. So unless you have some link, we'll just go with facts.



I have had poet on ignore since about a week after he got here. As for your call for me to "man up", I have already done so. I do not follow some party line or talking head. I follow what I think it right. I am certainly not one to be politically correct. But I guess this reply means you have no factsto back up your claims?

oneup.jpg
 
Do try to pay attention. I said it was considered a SOCIAL deviance, not sexual.


There is absolutely NO valid reason to be legislating it. None. It is like legislating whether being black or hispanic or asian or native american should be 'allowed'. The very concept is derived from bigotry. It is NORMAL for homosexuality to occur in a species. We find it in numerous species. You are trying to equate it to abnormal because it helps you feel better when you discriminate against homosexuals. Just because homosexuality is not the MAJORITY, doesn't mean it isn't normal or natural for it to occur.

The remainder of your post is severely outdated, though it is a prime example of what people will do when they react based on fear rather than fact. There was NEVER any validity to stating that homosexuality was a mental disorder. None.

Social deviance is a nice way to attempt to lump in bigotry to the equation, I agree-in much the same way as painting any kind of opposition to PC thinking as ignorant and hateful is. The fact is that sexual deviance is where the argument needs to be made. Pointing to "occurrences in species" is another attempt to sidetrack a discussion. Older mammals also mount younger ones of the same sex-should we now argue for pedophilia?

The reason the research is outdated is because of the small, but powerful, homosexual lobby that has succeeded in killing research that might otherwise be available. There are 1000,s of homosexuals that actually want to get help- but they are faced with derision and a wall of opposition. They are likewise hindered by a loss of 40 years of research and finding qualified psychiatrists and doctors to help as a result. I have no fear. That people like you, choose to call people who disagree with them homophobes is just proof of your own weak arguments.

Human sexuality is seated in the brain- no matter if it is normal human sexuality or deviant. Calling it a mental disorder is completely medically appropriate.
 
Social deviance is a nice way to attempt to lump in bigotry to the equation, I agree-in much the same way as painting any kind of opposition to PC thinking as ignorant and hateful is. The fact is that sexual deviance is where the argument needs to be made. Pointing to "occurrences in species" is another attempt to sidetrack a discussion. Older mammals also mount younger ones of the same sex-should we now argue for pedophilia?

The reason the research is outdated is because of the small, but powerful, homosexual lobby that has succeeded in killing research that might otherwise be available. There are 1000,s of homosexuals that actually want to get help- but they are faced with derision and a wall of opposition. They are likewise hindered by a loss of 40 years of research and finding qualified psychiatrists and doctors to help as a result. I have no fear. That people like you, choose to call people who disagree with them homophobes is just proof of your own weak arguments.

Human sexuality is seated in the brain- no matter if it is normal human sexuality or deviant. Calling it a mental disorder is completely medically appropriate.

The biggest problem I have with your statement is that I question why people seek help. If it is because they truly want to be heterosexual, that is fine with me. But what I see as the biggest reasons for not wanting to be gay is the social stigma and the religious pressures. Both of those can create a huge problem for someone who is attracted to people of the same gender.

The idea that homosexuality is a disorder would mean that there is something wrong with being homosexual, in and of itself. I have not seen that in any research. I see it as like being left-handed, it may be different and the exception rather than the rule, but it is not a disorder because it is not a medical or psychological problem in its own right.
 
Social deviance is a nice way to attempt to lump in bigotry to the equation, I agree-in much the same way as painting any kind of opposition to PC thinking as ignorant and hateful is. The fact is that sexual deviance is where the argument needs to be made. Pointing to "occurrences in species" is another attempt to sidetrack a discussion. Older mammals also mount younger ones of the same sex-should we now argue for pedophilia?

The reason the research is outdated is because of the small, but powerful, homosexual lobby that has succeeded in killing research that might otherwise be available. There are 1000,s of homosexuals that actually want to get help- but they are faced with derision and a wall of opposition. They are likewise hindered by a loss of 40 years of research and finding qualified psychiatrists and doctors to help as a result. I have no fear. That people like you, choose to call people who disagree with them homophobes is just proof of your own weak arguments.

Human sexuality is seated in the brain- no matter if it is normal human sexuality or deviant. Calling it a mental disorder is completely medically appropriate.


My God, you are so full of crap. Don't let your bigotry and hatred for the freedom of others get in the way of your hate for government intervening in your affairs.....because you're all up in mine. Homosexual lobby? There is no homosexual lobby. Hell, who would we lobby to?
Democrats are generally liberal, in their thinking, and reject bigotry and homophobia...which leaves only the hypocritical "right", to which bigotry, hate, and restriction of freedom is their foundation.
You'd deny a woman's right to choose what to do about her condition and the contents of her own body, but you want to fight for the imagined right of a dysfunctional and ill-adjusted, confused homosexual to change, fundamentally, who she or he really is, instead of helping him or her adjust to reality.
My question is why is it any of your business what others choose or choose not to do?
Only homophobes and bigots believe that homosexuality is "deviant" behavior, or a mental disorder.
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/293530-overview

Introduction, Definitions, and Key Concepts
Homosexuality is not a medical or psychiatric disorder, but is a condition associated with certain medical risks. Homosexuality has long been recognized both in human and animal populations. Despite the relative frequency of homosexuality, it remains misunderstood and controversial to much of society. Homosexual individuals who choose members of their own sex for sexual relations and domestic partnerships are often targets of prejudice and may even be discriminated against by health care professionals.

The psychiatric and biologic literature on homosexuality has grown rapidly over the past 30 years. The literature now provides both a biologic and behavioral perspective on homosexuality and guidance on how physicians can positively affect the health of their gay and lesbian patients. Physicians who understand current scientific views of homosexuality are in a position to provide excellent care to gay and lesbian patients and to provide a model of leadership in their communities and hospitals regarding issues of homosexuality. Without such understanding, physicians risk repeating the prejudicial and harmful actions that often characterized medical treatment of gay and lesbian individuals in the past. This article provides an overview of homosexuality and is intended as a basic guide for both psychiatrists and general physicians.

Information regarding homosexuality is spread widely across the disciplines of psychiatry, psychology, general medicine, neuroscience, sociology, genetics, and anthropology. Thus, nonspecialists have difficulty in finding and evaluating the science and literature that are now available. The American Psychiatric Association recognized the need for a comprehensive reference that would make the literature accessible to generalists and specialists alike. The resultant Textbook of Homosexuality and Mental Health remains the single best reference for psychiatrists and general physicians to find information on homosexuality.[1]

A brief review of definitions and key concepts may be helpful. The term gender identity refers to an individual's internal sense of being male or female, boy or girl, man or woman. According to ego psychology, gender identity develops early in childhood and normally solidifies by age 2.5 years.[2] Most homosexual individuals have a firmly established gender identity that is consistent with their anatomy. For example, a homosexual man understands himself to be a man, just as does a heterosexual man. When gender identity is not firmly established, an individual may experience significant psychological distress, which is termed gender dysphoria.

http://www.apa.org/international/pi/2008/05/anderson.aspx

Home |Help |Log In


MORE APA WEB SITES
ACT Against Violence APA Education Advocacy Trust APA Style Practice Central Psychologically Healthy Workplace Program X About APAPsychology TopicsPublicationsPsychology Help CenterNews & EventsResearchEducationCareersMembershipSEARCH IN Office of International Affars Entire Site E-MAILPRINTHome » Office of International Affairs » Newsletter » Psychology Associations Challenge ...
Cart
Psychology International | May 2008 COVER STORY
Psychology Associations Challenge Mental Disorder Concept of Homosexuality
A number of psychology groups around the world are working to educate professionals and the public about gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender issues, to counter a conception that associates these with disease or illness, and to promote policies that affirm positive mental health in these populations.
by Clinton Anderson, PhD, Director
APA Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Concerns Office

Over the past 50 years, psychology’s understanding of homosexuality has changed, based on consistent efforts to publicize research and models that reject an illness framework. However, many individuals and groups still promote the idea that homosexuality is a disorder and offer interventions to change sexual orientation, sometimes referred to as “reparative therapy.” A number of psychology groups around the world are working to educate professionals and the public about gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender issues, to counter a conception that associates these with disease or illness, and to promote policies that affirm positive mental health in these populations.

Now, shoot messenger, because you don't like the message.
 
The biggest problem I have with your statement is that I question why people seek help. If it is because they truly want to be heterosexual, that is fine with me. But what I see as the biggest reasons for not wanting to be gay is the social stigma and the religious pressures. Both of those can create a huge problem for someone who is attracted to people of the same gender.

The idea that homosexuality is a disorder would mean that there is something wrong with being homosexual, in and of itself. I have not seen that in any research. I see it as like being left-handed, it may be different and the exception rather than the rule, but it is not a disorder because it is not a medical or psychological problem in its own right.

Exactly
 
The biggest problem I have with your statement is that I question why people seek help. If it is because they truly want to be heterosexual, that is fine with me. But what I see as the biggest reasons for not wanting to be gay is the social stigma and the religious pressures. Both of those can create a huge problem for someone who is attracted to people of the same gender.

The idea that homosexuality is a disorder would mean that there is something wrong with being homosexual, in and of itself. I have not seen that in any research. I see it as like being left-handed, it may be different and the exception rather than the rule, but it is not a disorder because it is not a medical or psychological problem in its own right.
The difference is whether you define it according to social order, or biological/medical. From a scientific/biological aspect, sexual behaviors are about reproduction and survival of the species. As such, behaviors that do not contribute to reproduction, which is an essential aspect of species survival, are, by definition, aberrant behavior, and the causes of aberrant behavior are, by definition, disorders.

OTOH, humans have also placed much of sexual behavior into the social realm. We even have an entire industry whose purpose is to PREVENT reproduction in spite of sexual behaviors, which from a purely biological aspect, is itself an aberrant behavior.** And, since any society can freely define what is and what is not aberrant behavior from the aspect of their social structure, quite literally anything and everything can be defined as "normal" if enough of society desires such a definition.

** There is a theory from behaviorists that hypothesizes behavior is one of the primary causes of extinction - either through lacking the ability to shift behavior to meet new conditions, even though physically the new conditions are not a threat, or by a shift in behavior that reduces survival. It is an interesting view on the possible causes of extinction. And while I am not trying to imply homosexuality is threatening the human race with extinction, it is possible that other behaviors could well develop into a threat. (wide-spread obesity, sloth, destruction of environment, etc.)
 
The difference is whether you define it according to social order, or biological/medical. From a scientific/biological aspect, sexual behaviors are about reproduction and survival of the species. As such, behaviors that do not contribute to reproduction, which is an essential aspect of species survival, are, by definition, aberrant behavior, and the causes of aberrant behavior are, by definition, disorders.

OTOH, humans have also placed much of sexual behavior into the social realm. We even have an entire industry whose purpose is to PREVENT reproduction in spite of sexual behaviors, which from a purely biological aspect, is itself an aberrant behavior.** And, since any society can freely define what is and what is not aberrant behavior from the aspect of their social structure, quite literally anything and everything can be defined as "normal" if enough of society desires such a definition.

** There is a theory from behaviorists that hypothesizes behavior is one of the primary causes of extinction - either through lacking the ability to shift behavior to meet new conditions, even though physically the new conditions are not a threat, or by a shift in behavior that reduces survival. It is an interesting view on the possible causes of extinction. And while I am not trying to imply homosexuality is threatening the human race with extinction, it is possible that other behaviors could well develop into a threat. (wide-spread obesity, sloth, destruction of environment, etc.)

If lack of reproduction were a hinderance or a negative, then homosexuality would be a disorder. Perhaps from a purely biological viewpoint it could be termed that. But so could virginity until marriage in your mid 20s. So could a lot of things. But our society and its standards are hardly based solely on biological viewpoints. In fact, very little is "normal" from a biological viewpoint.
 
Texas doesn't recognize my marriage at a local MCCR Church, back in 2003, in a mass ceremony. But I'm hopeful, that one day, it will.
Shacking up? Really? That would be your mother.

Since my mother has passed from this earthly plane, I doubt that this is a possibility.
But the fact is, is that you're shacking up. :)
 
Since my mother has passed from this earthly plane, I doubt that this is a possibility.
But the fact is, is that you're shacking up. :)

But if the Hindu are correct, she may very well be a part of this plane. So be careful.... you don't know who or what she could be this time around. ;)
 
Since my mother has passed from this earthly plane, I doubt that this is a possibility.
But the fact is, is that you're shacking up. :)

You know, normally, I respect the family members of forum members...but since apples don't fall too far from rotten trees, I've revised my stance.
She may have passed from this earthly plane, as has mine, but you and I, both, remain. And look at us. I have no animosity for you based on your race. I have many dear white friends....so all that talk about being racist is simply "bullshit". The reason I despise you, is because of your contempt for me as a black man, and as a gay man. That's basic. The fact that you would go so far as to disrespect my relationship shows that you don't give a damn....so, why should I? If my partner was female, we'd be considered married "by common law", after 10 years. The fact that Texas doesn't recognize it, means absolutely nothing to me. One day it will....hopefully in my lifetime...and this all will be a moot point.
 
Back
Top