Does Anyone Have A Relative Or Close Friend Who Is Gay Or Lesbian?

[blovedwolfofgod]

did you know that when this version of the DSM was written, a good portion of the psychologists were homosexual? why would a group of 'respected' men in a position to legitimize themselves not take the opportunity?

[Kitty]

Where did you hear that?

[blovedwolfofgod]

[url="http://www.narth.com/docs/mentaldisorder.html"]http://www.narth.com/docs/mentaldisorder.html[/url]

You can just cut down to the Summary section. First bullet point. Basically says that its in question.

[url="http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20America/Sodomy/homosexuality_and_psychiatry.htm"]http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%..._psychiatry.htm[/url]

and this article was interesting, but the music is obnoxious and over-dramatizing. But this article addresses my point.

Edited January 18, 2008 by blovedwolfofgod

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='Jozzyjo' post='1446814' date='Jan 16 2008, 09:42 PM']There is nothing "wrong" being autistic. I work with autistic men and women. They are people like you and me that see things diffrently. Autism is something you are born with. It is not a sin at all. They can't help it if they were born diffrently then the "avrege" child (actually I wonder what the "avrege" is no one is the same...everyone is diffrent).
I do admit some people "use" there handi-caps to get away with bad things. and that is wrong. I do not agree with some of the things I have seen them do, then they say they "didn't know they did it". And that is usaully a lie. BUT, a true autistic person is actually an amazing person. I have spent days studying (reading books) and spending time with autistic men and women. I have learned so much from them. Then I go to youth group and here the "normal" kids making fun of the other kids. It is not right.
In some countries they will kill an autistic child. That is sad. I have learned more from them than anyone else.
They are no diffrent than us, just see things diffrently. So, please don't say it is a sin to be autistic (I bet you that there are atleast 10 people on this bored who are autistic).

God Bless,
Jozzy[/quote]
Great post, but I think the mentioning of autism was in relation to an earlier post, which was not making it a "sin". Anywho, Welcome to Phatmass!

[quote name='Kitty' post='1447319' date='Jan 17 2008, 11:13 PM']I'm not even going to reply. I see that you are completey closed minded to anything anyone else has to say over this subject and you have not even provided proof that backs up some of your claims even though I asked. I'd just be repeating myself if I replied and I really don't have time for nonsense like that. Oh well.[/quote]

I'm not openly siding with anyone here at the moment, but I must ask you from my layman's perspective what your proofs or backups were. Thanks

[Farsight one]

I had a gay roommate for a semester. At least he said he was.

Also, studies are suggesting that homosexuality is not a choice. Here's one sample of many: [url="http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro98/202s98-paper2/Bodian2.html"]http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neur...r2/Bodian2.html[/url]

It says that information suggests that homosexuality is not passed on through the genes, nor is it a choice. It is a genetic mutation caused by the introduction of certain chemicals in utero. This would technically make it a birth defect, but it is most certainly not a choice.

[Alycin]

[quote name='blovedwolfofgod' post='1447439' date='Jan 18 2008, 11:32 AM']did you know that when this version of the DSM was written, a good portion of the psychologists were homosexual? why would a group of 'respected' men in a position to legitimize themselves not take the opportunity?[/quote]


[quote name='blovedwolfofgod' post='1447444' date='Jan 18 2008, 11:43 AM']First bullet point. Basically says that its[u][b] in question.[/b][/u][/quote]

If it's in question then you perhaps shouldn't state it as if it were a FACT.

Just a suggestion.

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='Farsight one' post='1448804' date='Jan 20 2008, 11:53 PM']I had a gay roommate for a semester. At least he said he was.

Also, studies are suggesting that homosexuality is not a choice. Here's one sample of many: [url="http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro98/202s98-paper2/Bodian2.html"]http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neur...r2/Bodian2.html[/url]

It says that information suggests that homosexuality is not passed on through the genes, nor is it a choice. It is a genetic mutation caused by the introduction of certain chemicals in utero. This would technically make it a birth defect, but it is most certainly not a choice.[/quote]
Who, thanks for the insight there, Nightcrawler.

[Kitty]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1448780' date='Jan 20 2008, 11:25 PM']I'm not openly siding with anyone here at the moment, but I must ask you from my layman's perspective what your proofs or backups were. Thanks [/quote]

What am I supposed to provide proof for? I've already posted links to teachings of the Church on page three and I also posted a link on this page. Otherwise, I'm speaking about people in my life and if I cannot prove something (such as I can't prove God made people gay, and vice versa) then I say so.

[blovedwolfofgod]

[quote name='Alycin' post='1448821' date='Jan 21 2008, 01:07 AM']If it's in question then you perhaps shouldn't state it as if it were a FACT.

Just a suggestion.[/quote]

You connected two unrelated points... of course, i organized them backwards. The second post is whats referring to the statement that you quoted of mine first. The bullet point is unrelated to the APA having significant gay influence in writing the DSM-4.

[cathoholic_anonymous]

[quote name='blovedwolfofgod' post='1447444' date='Jan 18 2008, 05:43 PM'][url="http://www.narth.com/docs/mentaldisorder.html"]http://www.narth.com/docs/mentaldisorder.html[/url]

You can just cut down to the Summary section. First bullet point. Basically says that its in question.

[url="http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20America/Sodomy/homosexuality_and_psychiatry.htm"]http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%..._psychiatry.htm[/url]

and this article was interesting, but the music is obnoxious and over-dramatizing. But this article addresses my point.[/quote]

I wouldn't treat NARTH as a source of reputable information for anything, given the extremely dubious quality of their work. (All the studies that I've seen from them are riddled with serious methodological errors that invalidate the findings.) And as the homepage of 'Jesus is Savior' dismisses all Bible translations other than the KJV as Satanic counterfeits and currently has the sensationalist headline "Satanism in the Vatican!", I'm not really inclined to take it very seriously. Here is a sample of the quality of its contents:

[quote]Sister Charlotte Keckler and The Black Veil [She was a Catholic nun in the convent for 23 years, and tells of her nightmarish experiences―of demonic brainwashing, child molestation, priests raping little girls, shame, torture, illegitimate pregnancies, murder, drunken priests, et cetera. This is the true story of the Catholic Church. Beware of this cult![/quote]

Do you really want to listen to the claims of the people who made this website? Especially as one of the reasons why they dismiss all Bible versions except the KJV is because other translations apparently promote 'oral sex and lesbianism'? I don't know how they draw their conclusions, but their methods don't look reasonable to me.

Edited January 21, 2008 by Cathoholic Anonymous

[Didacus]

[quote name='Kitty' post='1447288' date='Jan 17 2008, 11:27 PM'][snip]

[quote]QUOTE
And if "God makes people gay," does God also make people have a sexual attraction to small children? To barnyard animals??[/quote]
You're making an insulting, borderline homophobic generalization. Being gay should NOT be compared to pedophilia or zoophilia. They are completely different disorders.

[snip]

[/quote]


You're ignoring his point and borderline accusing him of homophobia. He is trying to point out that if God is responsible for attraction to the same-sex, then would it not be logical that He is the cause of all sexual attractions?

And let me get your thinking; homosexuality is a totally different disorder than zoophilia or pedophilia?

[blovedwolfofgod]

[quote name='Cathoholic Anonymous' post='1448887' date='Jan 21 2008, 09:26 AM']I wouldn't treat NARTH as a source of reputable information for anything, given the extremely dubious quality of their work. (All the studies that I've seen from them are riddled with serious methodological errors that invalidate the findings.) And as the homepage of 'Jesus is Savior' dismisses all Bible translations other than the KJV as Satanic counterfeits and currently has the sensationalist headline "Satanism in the Vatican!", I'm not really inclined to take it very seriously. Here is a sample of the quality of its contents:
Do you really want to listen to the claims of the people who made this website? Especially as one of the reasons why they dismiss all Bible versions except the KJV is because other translations apparently promote 'oral sex and lesbianism'? I don't know how they draw their conclusions, but their methods don't look reasonable to me.[/quote]

You make a decent source attack, but you miss you point, I think. Just because a site is rampantly anti-catholic, does not mean its information in other sources is incorrect, it just means they hate Catholics. In fact, there was no need even to go to the bible when discussing corruption in the APA or the biology of homosexuality. The Guttmacher Institute strongly supports abortion rights, and yet has the most accurate statistics regarding abortion, and is hailed by even anti-abortion folks.

[Jaime]

[quote name='blovedwolfofgod' post='1447439' date='Jan 18 2008, 11:32 AM']did you know that when this version of the DSM was written, a good portion of the psychologists were homosexual? why would a group of 'respected' men in a position to legitimize themselves not take the opportunity?[/quote]

That is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen posted.

[blovedwolfofgod]

Well, thank you for such a high honor! Perhaps, I shall shoot for dumbest next time!

But, I did mispeak. The DSM wasnt what was written by homosexuals. That is pretty silly. It was the APA, the ones the approved it, with the political agenda based on hidden orientations and pressure from external sources.

Edited January 21, 2008 by blovedwolfofgod

[Jaime]

[quote name='blovedwolfofgod' post='1448924' date='Jan 21 2008, 11:15 AM']Well, thank you for such a high honor! Perhaps, I shall shoot for dumbest next time!

But, I did mispeak. The DSM wasnt what was written by homosexuals. That is pretty silly. It was the APA, the ones the approved it, with the political agenda based on hidden orientations and pressure from external sources.[/quote]


Well that is certainly less dumb.


Its as true as your previous statement. (which is not at all true)