Most Gays & Psychologists Agree...

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='Didacus' date='Jul 14 2005, 09:01 AM']
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.
[right][snapback]642985[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Now you are starting to talk objectively about it, instead of liberal this and liberal that. Thats an excellent point. I've discussed this with others and thats been brought up before. Like I've said, I don't know what causes homosexuality anymore than what causes heterosexuality. A gay gene , a hetero gene. We really do not know. But what we see, is that people are born with an intrinsic desire for one or the other. In most cases.

[Aloysius]

If it is something genetic, was there something specific about the genes of the ancient greeks that made almost every male gay? because it was pretty prevelant back then at that specific time period in that particular geographic and cultural area.

this obviously boils down to nature vs. nurture. not on the general level, but to this specific case it is nature vs. nurture. There is a lot of evidence of nurture, common threads in the upbringings of homosexuals that ultimately lead to this. issues with one's father, and with making friends of the same sex at an early age, et cetera all run through it.

I once met a psychologist who went into the field studying anger issues, and now deals exclusively with homosexuality. why? they are often related.

the best scientists who have objectively studied it will tell you that sexuality exists on a spectrum... most are not far off to the extreme of the spectrum and as such it is possible to change. Dr. Robert Spitzer was the psychologist responsible for having homosexuality taken off of the APA's list of disorders. He recently did a study on conversion therapy going into it very skeptically. He found that it can very well work.

He interviewed about 200 people who had been treated. These are some quotes from his study:
[quote]"For the participants in our study, there was no evidence of harm"

"Mental health professionals should stop moving in the direction of banning therapy that has as its goal a change in sexual orientation"

"Many patients can make a rational choice toward developing their heterosexual potential and minimizing their homosexual attractions." [/quote]

The problem here is that often neither side will do this objectively. Completely objective studies on either side are nearly impossible to come by. The one by Dr. Robert Spitzer had some pretty solid methodology and was done when he was very skeptical of conversion therapy though.

Oh, and saying that so and so percent of "gays" think they can't be cured is absurd. Why? Because some of us don't believe that to be part of our ontollogical reality and as such would not identify ourselves as "gay" in the first place.

People who have accepted that as part of themselves are the ones that would identify themselves as homosexuals or gays and thus would already be inclined to say that they cannot be cured. Once you allow that into your perception of yourself, you seal yourself in.

[Didacus]

[quote name='Melchisedec' date='Jul 14 2005, 09:04 AM']I wasn't attack you but your complete argument. You said:
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.
[right][snapback]642989[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

That line is something called sarcasm... sorry about that.

[Semalsia]

[quote name='Melchisedec']Like I've said, I don't know what causes homosexuality anymore than what causes heterosexuality. A gay gene , a hetero gene. We really do not know. But what we see, is that people are born with an intrinsic desire for one or the other. In most cases.[/quote]

Most likely there are a set of genes which together make up the human sexuality (whatever that may be like). Everyone has them, they just work differently together from person to person. That is how human skin color is determined, if I remember correctly. There is no "black gene", for example.

But I'm not a biologist or anything. And to be honest, I don't care what causes homosexuality. It makes no difference. Since it causes no harm to anyone, there is no reason to try to "convert" out of it. If you are unhappy with yourself, then you are welcome to try, but who knows how badly it will mess your head. I know I wouldn't risk it, even if I wanted to be something else.

[quote name='Socrates']That still means that 48% of those identical twins in the survey had different orientations. These twins share the same genetics and the same hormonal environment in the womb. This pretty much smashes the theory that homosexuality is completely biologically predetermined.[/quote]

Perhaps it's not [i]completely[/i], but it shows that genetics has a lot to do with it.

[infinitelord1]

[quote name='Melchisedec' date='Jul 14 2005, 08:52 AM']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.
[right][snapback]642979[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
i have gone to therapy and psychologists NOTE: i used the plural form of psychologist..........they did nothing for me.........they have to go by what i feel is right..........i feel one way but i dont feel its right..........so as you can see they are no help to me or most gay people.

[infinitelord1]

[quote name='Melchisedec' date='Jul 14 2005, 08:50 AM']
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?
[right][snapback]642977[/snapback][/right]
[/quote

i dont just listen to the catholics........the catholics are right.......well, how do i know they are right? I look at the statistics on things and found that they fall in line with catholic teaching. Most catholics tend to believe homosexuality is environmental..........the statistics show that 90% of homosexuals were molested at an early age........hmmmmmmmm that is a pretty large percentage.........i think its more logical to side with the catholics on this one (considerably).

[Semalsia]

[quote name='infinitelord1']the statistics show that 90% of homosexuals were molested at an early age[/quote]

Where exactly did you get that number from? I very much doubt it.

The total failure of "converting" homosexuals to heterosexuals would indicate that it is in fact not related to a emotional trauma or other psychological disorders. But that the cause is in genes or brain structure or similar.

[url="http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_caus.htm"]Here[/url], [url="http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_fixe.htm"]here[/url] and [url="http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_repar.htm"]here[/url].

[Guest enquirer]

Hi, this is probably the wrong place to make my first ever post, but I read a lot of the message boards and couldn't help but want to reply to this one.

It seems to be that there isn't really a debate happening here at all. What seems to be happening is that people are stating their views and dismissing others. Obviously we are entitled to our personal beliefs (whether or not these accord with church teaching and whether or not others agree with us), but I have always understood the point of a debate to be to explain why we believe what we do and to listen to others doing the same, and then discuss these viewpoints.

One thing that I've noticed a conspicuous absence of in this thread is the "sliding-scale" idea, that each of us is at a point on a scale between straight and gay. I know that, although I'm fairly certain I'm at the straight end of the scale, if one exists, I can find a female attractive. Just thought I'd throw this idea into the mix since I've heard about it so often!

The other thought I've had as I've been reading through the posts is that scientific research is just that. It is research into something that we don't understand and that scientists are not in agreement on. Not every piece of research is going to reach the same conclusion, and stacked evidence does not constitute proof. Many things can be concluded from slightly dodgy data, and I think anyone who did much science at school must know! I think we must be prepared to alter our world view in response to the evidence we are presented with. We do not understand the world God has given us, and things we think we understand may be, at some point in the future, shown to be wrong. For example, the idea of a flat earth, or of being able to change lead into gold. Who knows what cutting-edge science may show in the future? I don't mean that to say that God's laws are not constant, but that as our understanding of the world develops, so might our understanding of human nature and what can and cannot be changed.

Sorry for making my first ever post such a long one. I've lurked for so long on these boards, and this is the first time I've felt the need to say something that hasn't been said before.

Thanks

[photosynthesis]

[quote name='enquirer' date='Jul 14 2005, 06:07 PM']One thing that I've noticed a conspicuous absence of in this thread is the "sliding-scale" idea, that each of us is at a point on a scale between straight and gay.[right][snapback]643504[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
yeah, it's called the Kinsey Scale, developed by Alfred Kinsey in the 50's.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Semalsia' date='Jul 14 2005, 04:02 PM'][quote name='infinitelord1']the statistics show that 90% of homosexuals were molested at an early age[/quote]

Where exactly did you get that number from? I very much doubt it.

The total failure of "converting" homosexuals to heterosexuals would indicate that it is in fact not related to a emotional trauma or other psychological disorders. But that the cause is in genes or brain structure or similar.

[url="http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_caus.htm"]Here[/url], [url="http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_fixe.htm"]here[/url] and [url="http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_repar.htm"]here[/url].
[right][snapback]643500[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Your quotes are all from a website with a liberal pro-"gay rights" agenda, which bashes "religious conservatives." It is a blatantly political site, so I doubt its objectivity.

If homosexuality was genetically predetermined at birth, all sets of identical twins would be of the same orientation. But many are not. That proves that homosexual "orientation" is not something fixed at birth.

[Socrates]

[quote name='photosynthesis' date='Jul 14 2005, 04:17 PM']yeah, it's called the Kinsey Scale, developed by Alfred Kinsey in the 50's.
[right][snapback]643517[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Kinsey (also responsible for the notorious "10% figure,") was a pervert whose methods were not scientifically valid. His methods of "study" included molesting young children and even infants, and much-sited figures come from surveys of those largely in prisons and mental institutions (hardly representative of the mainstream of society).

How this "scale" is relevant to anything is beyond me, anyway. People probably have varying amounts of inclination to any vice or behavior, but that has nothing to do with whether that behavior is good, or natural, or whether it is possible to change.

[infinitelord1]

[quote name='Semalsia' date='Jul 14 2005, 04:02 PM'][quote name='infinitelord1']the statistics show that 90% of homosexuals were molested at an early age[/quote]

Where exactly did you get that number from? I very much doubt it.

The total failure of "converting" homosexuals to heterosexuals would indicate that it is in fact not related to a emotional trauma or other psychological disorders. But that the cause is in genes or brain structure or similar.

[url="http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_caus.htm"]Here[/url], [url="http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_fixe.htm"]here[/url] and [url="http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_repar.htm"]here[/url].
[right][snapback]643500[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
im gonna have to look further the source i got this number from........all i could find on the internet was that 1/3 of all child molestation cases were associated with homosexuals molesting young boys.

[Semalsia]

[quote name='socrates']If homosexuality was genetically predetermined at birth, all sets of identical twins would be of the same orientation. But many are not. That proves that homosexual "orientation" is not something fixed at birth.[/quote]

But, like I said before, the chances are significantly higher. And if I'm not totally mistaken, identical twins are exactly identical only at conception. That's nine months before birth.

[infinitelord1]

[quote name='Semalsia' date='Jul 14 2005, 04:38 PM'][quote name='socrates']If homosexuality was genetically predetermined at birth, all sets of identical twins would be of the same orientation. But many are not. That proves that homosexual "orientation" is not something fixed at birth.[/quote]

But, like I said before, the chances are significantly higher. And if I'm not totally mistaken, identical twins are exactly identical only at conception. That's nine months before birth.
[right][snapback]643535[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
take a look at what you are supporting young friend...........here are a number of statistics on homosexuality.........

[url="http://www.inoohr.org/homosexualstatistics.htm"]http://www.inoohr.org/homosexualstatistics.htm[/url]

[infinitelord1]

i think it would be a fair assessment to assume that either A) you are not going to reply at all to these statistics i have provided for you or B) you will simply question the sources in which the article was based upon. Go ahead and question the sources if you so choose..........they are all based on government census.