Most Gays & Psychologists Agree...

[Socrates]

[quote]What this shows is that contrary to some claims on here that twins are destined to a deterministic life. That environment and other factors change our makeup to ultimately make unique persons whilsts being seemingly identical. Its funny to see catholics support a materialist worldview.[/quote]

We're not the ones arguing that one's "sexual orientation" is genetically determined at birth. The fact that a significant number of identical twins have different "orientations" proves that false.

Edited July 14, 2005 by Socrates

[infinitelord1]

not to mention how subjective and liberal the dang psychologists are that agree with gays.........psychologists are so worthless these days.....especially for an issue like this..........and of course the gays are gonna reject conversion.......they dont know how to be straight and they are content with who they are........they dont feel the need to convert.

This rix man outrages me...........if any liberals on this site thinks they can counter any of my ideas on this topic........bring it........i know i will win. :angry:

Edited July 14, 2005 by infinitelord1

[infinitelord1]

ill make sure i scratch presbyterian off the list.

[track2004]

I was asked what I personally think about the whole debate. I am relunctant to actually state my full thoughts as they are somewhat undecided and in some areas are not in line with the Catechism.

To whether homosexuality is genetic or because of environmental factors, I think it's both. If it was exclusively one huge problems would arise. Parents of children who have the 'gay gene' would be put in a tough position, espically Catholic parents. Parents whose children turned out to be gay in adulthood would feel at fault for their child's sexuality and inability to have a good Catholic marriage. The homosexual community would be thrown into the category of genetic rejects or of mistreated youths.

As a psych student, I really doubt how helpful attempting to 'convert' a homosexual is. I think it is somewhat similiar to forcing people to change handedness. It is something very innate to the way they act or think. Most true homosexuals I know (not the one's who are just looking for a good time or for attention) could not maintain a heterosexual relationship because it is just not what they are looking for or desire. On a more relatable level, can any of you who are heterosexual imagine having a homosexual relationship and maintaining it?? I really doubt you can.

As a kid who is only 19, I have many gay friends, family and coworkers. In all honesty I think that all they really want is the same love and companionship that a heterosexual is. I think that you fall in love with who you fall in love with. I also think that the stigma of being gay is so strong (yes, still) that many homosexuals turn to a promiscious livestyle or drugs to cope. My stepfather's brother died of AIDS in the late 80s and my stepfather thinks that the drug use and promiscuity that caused his death were coping mechanisms for feeling such rejection for his sexuality.

Most of my peers, espically at the large public university that I attend, feel that sexuality is a fluid thing and that everyone fits somewhere in the middle (not exclusively homo or hetrosexual). I tend to agree with that idea beacuse I have seen it and I have felt it.

About infinitelord1's comment about psychologists, I really feel that the APA and the psychologists are trying to let people be happy with themselves. True the mood of the time is not to convert gays, but this is not because we hate God, it is because the research that drives the field generally says that conversion is more harmful than acceptance. If someone would walk in and want to convert that would be different, but conversion is not the aim when a homosexual walks in the door. If the research starts saying something different the APA will respond to that.

Okay it's late, I need sleep. PM me about whatever if you want to.

track

[infinitelord1]

[quote name='track2004' date='Jul 14 2005, 01:09 AM']I was asked what I personally think about the whole debate.  I am relunctant to actually state my full thoughts as they are somewhat undecided and in some areas are not in line with the Catechism. 

To whether homosexuality is genetic or because of environmental factors, I think it's both.  If it was exclusively one huge problems would arise.  Parents of children who have the 'gay gene' would be put in a tough position, espically Catholic parents.  Parents whose children turned out to be gay in adulthood would feel at fault for their child's sexuality and inability to have a good Catholic marriage.  The homosexual community would be thrown into the category of genetic rejects or of mistreated youths. 

As a psych student, I really doubt how helpful attempting to 'convert' a homosexual is.  I think it is somewhat similiar to forcing people to change handedness.  It is something very innate to the way they act or think.  Most true homosexuals I know (not the one's who are just looking for a good time or for attention) could not maintain a heterosexual relationship because it is just not what they are looking for or desire.  On a more relatable level, can any of you who are heterosexual imagine having a homosexual relationship and maintaining it??  I really doubt you can.

As a kid who is only 19, I have many gay friends, family and coworkers.  In all honesty I think that all they really want is the same love and companionship that a heterosexual is.  I think that you fall in love with who you fall in love with.  I also think that the stigma of being gay is so strong (yes, still) that many homosexuals turn to a promiscious livestyle or drugs to cope.  My stepfather's brother died of AIDS in the late 80s and my stepfather thinks that the drug use and promiscuity that caused his death were coping mechanisms for feeling such rejection for his sexuality. 

Most of my peers, espically at the large public university that I attend, feel that sexuality is a fluid thing and that everyone fits somewhere in the middle (not exclusively homo or hetrosexual).  I tend to agree with that idea beacuse I have seen it and I have felt it. 

About infinitelord1's comment about psychologists, I really feel that the APA and the psychologists are trying to let people be happy with themselves.  True the mood of the time is not to convert gays, but this is not because we hate God, it is because the research that drives the field generally says that conversion is more harmful than acceptance.  If someone would walk in and want to convert that would be different, but conversion is not the aim when a homosexual walks in the door.  If the research starts saying something different the APA will respond to that.

Okay it's late, I need sleep.  PM me about whatever if you want to.

track
[right][snapback]642898[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
i understand that it must be difficult for a psychologist to try to convert gay people to being straight.......as a student i am sure that you have learned that a psychologist is limited as to the help that he can minister to his patients. Furthermore, you probably know that you have to go by the each individuals idea of morality when you confront each individual. So of course you are going to find a wide spectrum of where people fit according to sexuality. Ive been taught the "everybody falls somewhere along this line" theory........unfortunately it is true. But the question is........what determined where these people fall on the line? Liberals and gays like to believe the cause was genetic. Psychologists are generally liberal because they were prepared to be this way in school. Unfortunately, because of laws and restrictions you have to approach things like this from a liberal perspective. It used to be different however.......but as our country accomodated so many immigrants from all over the world (which introduced different belief systems to America) things eventually changed. Now, if you want help you have to go to a christian counselor of some type for something like this. If there was a such thing as a gay gene, i personally believe that more than 2% of the world would be gay, but that is just me........liberals like to believe the figure is more like 10%.......that is not true. Another fact, there was a poll taken on how many gay people were molested during their childhood........90% of them were molested. If you want proof of this i can make a phone call and provide some. Fortunately, not everyone that gets molested turns out to be gay. Why? well, everybody deals with things differently........some may have found the molestation to be pleasureable others not. But honestly, the research done up to this day and age suggests that it is environmental more than anything. As far as it being genetic goes.........they really have no clue......they just havent ruled it out because of uncertainty.

Edited July 14, 2005 by infinitelord1

[jasJis]

The conclusion from Track4's article:
[quote]We have examined many causes for homosexuality in the preceding pages, both biological and social. And although an interesting topic of debate, no one theory or experiment leads to a definitive answer. Some believe that the characters found on Xq28 are the Holy Grail of homosexuality research, the elusive 'gay gene'. Others may place stock in the theories of Foucault and Halperin. Perhaps Simon LeVay did reveal to us that anatomy is the key to understanding the difference in sexual orientation. [b]Perhaps there is no one answer, that sexual orientation, whether homosexual or heterosexual; gay, straight, lesbian, or bisexual, all are a cause of a complex interaction between environmental, cognitive, and anatomical factors, shaping the individual at an early age[/b].[/quote]I think the last sentence says alot. I have very close friends and family that are actively gay. I would say from personal experience, it's a combination of factors. But one must also consider where Society can draw the moral line on socially promoting a biological tendency. For example, the [u]tendency[/u] to be an alcoholic is known to be at least partly genetically caused. Should Society change some of it's standards to enable alcoholics to be 'functioning' alcholics? Enabling them to drink, be accepted, keep their familys, keep their job. We should be more understanding. Have more help and free transportation if they over imbibe. Allow a certified alcoholic days off from work (as medical leave) if need be. That way they can keep their job and not get so depressed which adds to the cycle of depression. Let's get their families to accept them. Don't get so mad when they pass out. Etc.

It's a multiplicity of items.

[Didacus]

[quote name='Melchisedec' date='Jul 13 2005, 04:17 PM'][snip]
Well if it doesnt support your idealogies, you simple toss it as propaganda trash. Instead of an objective analysis of the issue. Ignorance endures because of this.
Its absolutely funny how everything is so black and white for you. That you will fantasize about some global liberal conspiracy to create sciences that support the homosexual agenda. Oakie doke.


[right][snapback]642382[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


*sigh*

Why do I always find a way to get intop these messes...

hey, Melcheeseder... hold off on the ad hominen will you. that is the entirity of your post, just one big shinobi on my head - well, you tried, but you missed.

The reasopn I said I stopped reading it is because it ain't worth my time and I have better things to do. I claim that it is worthless in the context of this conversation because it adds no new valid argumentation EVEN if it was true.

Draw the conclusion you want little man (or girl)... you'll just be pissing in the wind.

I don't believe in the homosexual agenda and never made allusions towards it. You are just trying to put words into my mouth, but that's fine, that's typical liberal tactics... Funny how you guys stretch right away to ad hominens whenever your argumentation is even slightly in trouble. (one good ad hominen deserves another, don't you think?)

[Didacus]

Track,

Don't worry about people name calling and stuff... keep asking the qeustions, keep expressing your genuine thoughts and keep searching for the truth- you'll eventually find it.

I was a liberal like you before... uncertain... until I found that the homosexual community whom I tolerated where no longer tolerating me?!?!? Even though I had defended their rights for years, all of the sudden my ideas where no longer valid because I was catholic... That really made me look at things differently.... talk about a kick in the nut cracker... Jumped the train since then... and returned to my roots - the church, and the truth.

And to be honest, if I was a homosexual, I would probably never get married, try to live the best life I could with the occasion sin of flesh... I think you're right that I would not change... however - I WOULD ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WHAT I AM DOING IS WRONG AND RESPECT THE CHURCH'S TEACHINGS - that much I can honestly affirm.

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='infinitelord1' date='Jul 13 2005, 07:48 PM']oh, mr. melchisedec........hello......excuse me........i wonder if you have a degree in genetics or if you are just buying into this liberal garbage that liberal scientists want you to believe in. After all, most of the scientists who have tried to prove homosexuality as genetic were supporters of homosexuality........this has been done in the past........they fooled people into believing it was genetic at first then when researchers looked further into it the conclusion was so skewed and biased it wasnt even funny. Logically, it appeared more to do with the environment rather than genetics.
[right][snapback]642529[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


oh infinite, i wonder if you are just buying into this catholic garbage that catholic scientist want you to believ ein. After all, most of the 'scientist' who have tired to disprove homosexuality as genetic are homophobic. This has been done in the poast, they try to fool people into believing its a mental disorder. When researchers look into it the conclusion wa so skewed it wasnt even funny.

Do you see where this narrow look on the subject leads infinite?

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='infinitelord1' date='Jul 13 2005, 07:59 PM']not to mention how subjective and liberal the dang psychologists are that agree with gays.........psychologists are so worthless these days.....especially for an issue like this..........and of course the gays are gonna reject conversion.......they dont know how to be straight and they are content with who they are........they dont feel the need to convert.

This rix man outrages me...........if any liberals on this site thinks they can counter any of my ideas on this topic........bring it........i know i will win. :angry:
[right][snapback]642538[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


You have contradicted yourself, considering that aren't you in the therapy to try to help your homosexual tendecies? If so, than how can you say that gays are going to reject conversion? I think most gays would rather live a normal life than to have to be gay and experience prejudice.

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Jul 13 2005, 07:51 PM']We're not the ones arguing that one's "sexual orientation" is genetically determined at birth.  The fact that a significant number of identical twins have different "orientations" proves that false.
[right][snapback]642532[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Isnt it because the notion itself is that if it was genetic, than twins would both be gay?

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='track2004' date='Jul 14 2005, 01:09 AM']I was asked what I personally think about the whole debate.  I am relunctant to actually state my full thoughts as they are somewhat undecided and in some areas are not in line with the Catechism. 

To whether homosexuality is genetic or because of environmental factors, I think it's both.  If it was exclusively one huge problems would arise.  Parents of children who have the 'gay gene' would be put in a tough position, espically Catholic parents.  Parents whose children turned out to be gay in adulthood would feel at fault for their child's sexuality and inability to have a good Catholic marriage.  The homosexual community would be thrown into the category of genetic rejects or of mistreated youths. 

As a psych student, I really doubt how helpful attempting to 'convert' a homosexual is.  I think it is somewhat similiar to forcing people to change handedness.  It is something very innate to the way they act or think.  Most true homosexuals I know (not the one's who are just looking for a good time or for attention) could not maintain a heterosexual relationship because it is just not what they are looking for or desire.  On a more relatable level, can any of you who are heterosexual imagine having a homosexual relationship and maintaining it??  I really doubt you can.

As a kid who is only 19, I have many gay friends, family and coworkers.  In all honesty I think that all they really want is the same love and companionship that a heterosexual is.  I think that you fall in love with who you fall in love with.  I also think that the stigma of being gay is so strong (yes, still) that many homosexuals turn to a promiscious livestyle or drugs to cope.  My stepfather's brother died of AIDS in the late 80s and my stepfather thinks that the drug use and promiscuity that caused his death were coping mechanisms for feeling such rejection for his sexuality. 

Most of my peers, espically at the large public university that I attend, feel that sexuality is a fluid thing and that everyone fits somewhere in the middle (not exclusively homo or hetrosexual).  I tend to agree with that idea beacuse I have seen it and I have felt it. 

About infinitelord1's comment about psychologists, I really feel that the APA and the psychologists are trying to let people be happy with themselves.  True the mood of the time is not to convert gays, but this is not because we hate God, it is because the research that drives the field generally says that conversion is more harmful than acceptance.  If someone would walk in and want to convert that would be different, but conversion is not the aim when a homosexual walks in the door.  If the research starts saying something different the APA will respond to that.

Okay it's late, I need sleep.  PM me about whatever if you want to.

track
[right][snapback]642898[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Very well said.

[Didacus]

[quote name='Melchisedec' date='Jul 14 2005, 08:54 AM']Isnt it because the notion itself is that if it was genetic, than twins would both be gay?
[right][snapback]642980[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I believe you are taking his comments out of context. the intent behind the comment was in reply to a common notion from the liberal front that gays and lesbians must be who they are because their condition is genetic and thus cannot be changed. Some even argue that since it is genetic, it is a desired condition of God's will.


A quick look into the theory of evolution will tell you that the homosexual condition is obviously not genetic, since its behavior does not promote reproduction. Any genetic condition that does not promote reproduction is phased out through generations since the reproductive rate of those affected are consequentially lower than the other 'normal' individuals of a specie.

[MC Just]

[quote name='melporcristo' date='Jul 13 2005, 01:10 PM']Matthew 10:34-36 -->
Jesus said to his Apostles:
"Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth.
I have come to bring not peace but the sword.
For I have come to set
a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
and one's enemies will be those of his household.

Keep pressing on ...
[right][snapback]642104[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

yeah try reading verses like this to liberals. They have Jesus looking like a softy who loves sin.,

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='Didacus' date='Jul 14 2005, 07:45 AM']*sigh*

Why do I always find a way to get intop these messes...

hey, Melcheeseder... hold off on the ad hominen will you.  that is the entirity of your post, just one big shinobi on my head - well, you tried, but you missed.

The reasopn I said I stopped reading it is because it ain't worth my time and I have better things to do.  I claim that it is worthless in the context of this conversation because it adds no new valid argumentation EVEN if it was true.

Draw the conclusion you want little man (or girl)...  you'll just be pissing in the wind.

I don't believe in the homosexual agenda and never made allusions towards it.  You are just trying to put words into my mouth, but that's fine, that's typical liberal tactics...  Funny how you guys stretch right away to ad hominens whenever your argumentation is even slightly in trouble.  (one good ad hominen deserves another, don't you think?)
[right][snapback]642965[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I wasn't attack you but your complete argument. You said:

[quote]So the liberals can't find a 'gay gene' so they will will try to redefine genetics.  Heard this one before... hmmmm.... oh ya... its called 'gay marriage'...[/quote]

You were saying the epigenetics are an attempt by liberals to redefine genetics to find a 'gay gene'. Or did you mean something else by that comment? Everything you say always contains a 'liberal' this and that, yet you want to accuse me of being exclusive to an ad hominen fallacy. The fact that you reject my argument completely is because I'm a 'liberal' , if I were a catholic would I be treated in a such a disrespectful manner. I doubt.