It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Homosexual Conversion Therapy

page: 4
17
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 09:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Haxsaw
a reply to: Degradation33

already been addressed, you cant just look at an animal and say look the animal did it so it must be natural human behaviour, that's absurd, as per one of my previous posts; some female spiders eat the male spider they just had sex with, should we call that natural human behaviour now too, no offense but seriously no thought at all put into this pathetic attempt to push homosexual behaviour onto those who think rationally.



There are animals who mate for life. Does that mean it's wrong and humans shouldn't do that? There are female animals who nurture their young - keep them clean, fed and protected. There are animals who grieve the loss of their mate. Does that mean it's wrong and humans shouldn't do it? You can't just look at an animal and say if the animal does it, humans should not do it. The point is, there are many behaviors in nature that are similar to behaviors in humans. That's a fact. Why do we worry about the behaviors that don't hurt anyone? Being gay in and of itself doesn't hurt anyone. And we do see it in nature. It's a harmless behavior that happens occasionally in both humans and nature.




posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 09:07 AM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

Thats's true and I also thought that America had the separation of church and state?
(the separation of church and state sometimes "wall of separation between church and state") was a phrase used by Thomas Jefferson and others expressing an understanding of the intent and function of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

That's from Wiki btw in case someone says I plagiarised it.



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 09:14 AM
link   
how to turn men against women in 3 easy steps:

1. make laws that favor women to the extreme, to the point of being ludicrous
2. make laws that force men to undergo therapy of various kinds to fix their ______ (fill in the blank) , some of which is useful but most of which is not
3. rinse, wash, repeate'

if you want to know why these kinds of therapies are being brought into play, this late in the game, consider the target. it isn't the homosexual population. just like it isn't the white population who are the actual targets of the over the top laws favoring everybody BUT whites, particularly white males. just like the wars in iraq/afghanistan/and etc, are not targeting muslims specifically but rather, american christians, ultimately, but christians globally, as well.

the target is often not what the headline reads.
edit on 7-6-2014 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Degradation33

No, the real strawman argument would be to try and justify an action just because someone(or in this case not even someone, but some other species) did it.

Please get a grip, its not a matter of whether humans are 'capable of it' it's a matter of whether is should be discouraged, you need to differentiate between what's being said here, I'm not sure how you missed this but anyway we aren't talking about what humans are capable of, we are talking about whether it should be discouraged or not, or you could say whether or not it is 'acceptable behaviour'.

So let me knock this ridiculous argument on the head, just because apes do something doesn't make it acceptable human behaviour, seriously if you want to act like an animal go right ahead, but there are many laws that we as humans have implemented that will stop you in your tracks, are they unnatural laws to you? should male humans be allowed to run around like an male ape and kill a females baby and then push her into having sex? how can so many homosexual sympathisers not think through what they are arguing for? indoctrinated indeed



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: OpenEars123

I see the horrendously rigid bias in seemingly undiscerning, not thoroughly informed, blind support of at best a challenging lifestyle is, as usual, loudly evident on this thread.

Last I checked . . . hormonal and genetic factors accounted for 10-20% of the predisposition toward homosexuality in males.

POLITICAL DECLARATIONS do not equate to biological nor conditioning nor any other "facts."

Besides all that . . .

A physiological/genetic predisposition toward alcoholism does NOT equate to a gun to the head forcing each drink of alcohol.

= = =


en.wikipedia.org...



Changing Sexual Orientation: A Consumer's Report

Ariel Shidlo and Michael Schroeder found in "Changing Sexual Orientation: A Consumer's Report", a peer-reviewed study of 202 respondents[96] published in 2002, that 88% of participants failed to achieve a sustained change in their sexual behavior and 3% reported changing their orientation to heterosexual. The remainder reported either losing all sexual drive or attempting to remain celibate, with no change in attraction. Some of the participants who failed felt a sense of shame and had gone through conversion therapy programs for many years. Others who failed believed that therapy was worthwhile and valuable. Shidlo and Schroeder also reported that many respondents were harmed by the attempt to change, causing; depression, suicidal ideation and attempts, hypervigilance of gender-deviant mannerisms,social isolation, fear of being a child abuser and poor self-esteem. Of the 8 respondents (out of a sample of 202) who reported a change in sexual orientation, 7 worked as ex-gay counselors or group leaders.[97] NARTH states that the Shidlo study has often been used by gay activists as "proof" that conversion therapy is on average harmful, but they advertised for study participants with an ad that said, "Help Us Document the Harm".[61] The Shidlo-Schroeder recruitment poster is available at NARTH online,[98] stating that the study's authors did not seek to measure the average outcome of conversion therapy, although their study has often been used by activists as if it had, in fact, sought a representative sample; the lack of a representative sample therefore means that the 80% failure rate, cited above in this same paragraph, should be taken with caution. The study does show however that qualitatively conversion therapy can cause significant harm.




conservapedia.com...



Ex-homosexuals: Religiously mediated change in homosexuals vs. reparative therapy

Peter LaBarbera is the President of Americans for Truth which is a organization which counters the homosexual agenda. LaBarbera stated the following regarding Christian ex-homosexuals who reported being transformed by the power of God:
“ Another factor from my experience as a close observer of the “ex-gay” phenomenon is that many former homosexuals do not linger in “reparative therapy” programs, or participate in them at all. They attribute their dramatic and (relatively) rapid transformation to the power of God, and likely would not show up in a study of this kind. In fact, these “unstudied” overcomers would appear to be the most successful ex-homosexuals because they’ve moved on with their lives — as “reborn” Christians move on after overcoming any besetting sin.[1] ”

Peter LaBarbera's statement above concerning overcoming homosexuality certainly has some evidence supporting it. In addition, in 1980 a study was published in the American Journal of Psychiatry and eleven men participated in this study. The aforementioned study stated that eleven homosexual men became heterosexuals "without explicit treatment and/or long-term psychotherapy" through their participation in a Pentecostal church.[2]

. . .

Refusal to study conversion therapy scientifically

Political adherence to the homosexual agenda results in refusal even to consider the possibility that conversion therapy is effective. Politics may explain the American Psychological Association's refusal to cooperate in a proposal to study the effectiveness of conversion therapy:
“ "NARTH offered to join with the American Psychological Association (APA) in conducting a detailed study of the effectiveness of reparative therapy. The APA refused to cooperate."[9] ”

The opposition to conversion therapy is sometimes ideologically based, and it directs attention away from the harm that gay affirmative therapy can cause. The American Journal of Psychotherapy published a case study about a client who was supposedly harmed by treating him for "internalized homophobia".[10]

A therapist reports that, after conversion, a previously homosexual man tends to be physically attracted to only his girlfriend or wife. A heterosexual male is typically attracted to women in addition to his wife, while a converted former homosexual is typically physically attracted to only his girlfriend or wife.

Homosexuality is highly correlated to someone's activities and culture. For example, training in baseball and figure skating begin when a boy is only about six years ago. After years of engaging in those activities, often for hours each day, upon reaching adulthood fewer than 1 in 1000 baseball players are homosexual, while estimates are that 33% of male figure skaters are -- a 300-fold difference after doing different activities.

In some cases, the therapy addresses hatred a male patient had for his father while growing up. By repairing that relationship (see also the Prodigal Son), the therapist can be successful in enabling the patient to become heterosexual. Paul endorses the equivalent of Christian-based conversion therapy in 1 Corinthians 6:11.

. . .




Dennis Jernigan is a wonderful anointed Christian musician delivered . . .



www.youtube.com...



www.youtube.com...





FREEDOM FROM HOMOSEXUALITY MULTI PART VERSION



PART 1

www.youtube.com...



PART 2

www.youtube.com...



PART 3

www.youtube.com...



PART 4

www.youtube.com...



PART 5

www.youtube.com...



PART 6

www.youtube.com...



PART 7

www.youtube.com...



PART 8

www.youtube.com...

.



edit on 7/6/2014 by BO XIAN because: added



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

what? lol, I never said just because an animal does it we should not do it, don't put words in my mouth, I said "just because an animal does something does not make it acceptable human behaviour", and to think otherwise is totally absurd.

I don't care if we see it in nature, that is not a valid argument, and I've given many reasons why not, that you and others seem to want to dance around and yet still use this.

Whether or not it is harmless is debatable, but the fact remains that trying to use the action of a animal to call it 'acceptable' human behaviour is clutching at straws to say the least.



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

oh sick, just sick, no wonder the world is so twisted with thinking like that.

Does a mother hurt her child if she convinces him to have sex with her at the age of 18? Does a father hurt here daughter if he convinces her to have sex with him at the age of 18? Does a brother hurt his sister if they are both of the legal age and want to marry each other, Does a woman hurt a donkey if she convinces the donkey to have sex with her(that is the donkey willingly partakes, and shows no signs of not wanting to partake), Does a man hurt a dead woman when he tries to have sex with the dead(there's no after-life in your eyes right? you and your kind seem to be arguing that we are mere animals and nothing more, so how could a dead person ever be hurt, if you are going to say that the deceased's family members would find that abhorrent, well I can tell you that more than half the world finds homosexuality to be abhorrent, so that's not a valid argument either, yes more than half the world is against homosexuality, so on a side note if democracy is real and implemented in its true form(most of us know its a political circus stunt that in fact means nothing) then homosexuals would be punished,,,,I could go on and on and describe what little your brain has thought of that comes with your misguided comments, but rest assured ignorance will not win any argument



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 10:11 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: openyourmind1262
Homosexuals are not born gay. I will admit that men can be born a bit more feminine and a woman a bit more masculine but that in no way implies they were born gay. It still comes down to a choice. Before you ask, no I did not choose heterosexuality. Heterosexuality is the natural order of things so no I did not choose it. If one is homosexual one chooses that lifestyle same as if one is abstinent, they choose to be abstinent.



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 10:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Haxsaw

I don't care if we see it in nature, that is not a valid argument, and I've given many reasons why not, that you and others seem to want to dance around and yet still use this.

Whether or not it is harmless is debatable, but the fact remains that trying to use the action of a animal to call it 'acceptable' human behaviour is clutching at straws to say the least.



I have never used the argument of homosexuality in nature as acceptable human behavior. I have historically used the argument of seeing homosexuality in nature only to prove the point that it isn't strictly a psychological mental disorder to be gay. You don't see those psychological mental disorders like that in the animal kingdom. No situation of an absent father and domineering mother causing homosexuality in animals. Some animals are just born homosexual. Some humans are just born homosexual. That IS a valid argument.

Prove to me that a small percentage of homosexuality in any population is harmful.



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 10:13 AM
link   
convincing men to go to therapy for gayness is just not a good idea. if they seek out therapy on their own, that's one thing, but telling them they can be cured by therapy is just ridiculous.

i had a female friend who married a reformed gay male, who really wasn't reformed. he was apparently, just trying to look the part of a heterosexual male husband, so he could get a job as a councellor in a half way house. before it was over with, he had kicked her down a flight of steps, whipped out the willy and urinated all over her, then threw her outside in the snow, still drenched in his urine, middle of winter, detroit michigan. then he went to the fridge got out a beer and sat down and watched tv. she could see him thru the picture w indow. he wouldn't open the door. left her out there. she had to call the police to rescue her.

don't encourage people who are not straight, to require heterosexuality for jobs and so forth. it wreaks havoc on the women / men they end up marrying as a result.
edit on 7-6-2014 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Haxsaw

Uninformed consent is victimization. Children and animals and dead people cannot give informed consent. There is no victimization with consenting adults who are of sound mind.

The only people in this world who are against homosexuality are those who are hateful against anyone different than themselves, or those poor fools who fall for the religious brainwashing dished out by those who are hateful against anyone different than themselves.



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 10:17 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

Whatever!!! I assure you that most people are still against homosexuality but refuse to speak out against it for fear of retribution, hurting a friend or family member's feelings, or just introversion. Don't be led astray, the reason the homosexual agenda is spreading like it is is not due to most agreeing with it, it has to do with good people not standing up.



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 10:24 AM
link   
a reply to: OpenEars123

I know because men are not physically compatible with men and women are not physically compatible with women. That I think we can all agree upon. A woman's sexual primary sexual organ was designed and made for a man's primary sexual organ.



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

oh it's gone to a small percentage now has it? this is still debatable, and I think you need to do a lot more reading before I bother educating you anymore, so please spare me

and, animals don't suffer from psychological mental disorders now either? wow ignorance must be bliss, start with googling the fact you are wrong on this, then you'll realise you actually have nothing worthy to say. Regardless of whether some humans have an innate disposition to do certain actions does not in any way make whatever those actions may be 'acceptable', and this is what is being debated, stop clutching at straws and dancing around the point.



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv
so incest between an entire family over the age of consent should be supported by the community, just like the actions of homosexuals? again dancing around the point I see.

The dead person is dead, and you gave the argument before that as along as no-one is being hurt then homosexuals should be able to do what they want, enlighten us as to how a dead person is being hurt in the mind of someone who believes in no GOD/after-life?

And why not a donkey? we are just animals in your world right?, you have any pets?, if they did not consent to you taking them in your home then according to your way of thinking you have kidnapped them,,,, please spare me, your head must be spinning, you speak as if you haven't given a single thought to what you are saying, take your pro homosexual indoctrination and belt someone else over the head with it, this is pathetic


edit on 7-6-2014 by Haxsaw because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 10:36 AM
link   
A reply to: Haxsaw

You actually didn't knock crap on its head. I'm saying it doesn't need a justification, as it is normal.

However...

Legal codes are not innate. They occur organically and differ depending on culture. In fact the "crimes" you mentioned, have been the norm many times in human history, and still today. Normal for them. Laws are a product of society, not the other way around. Sexuality IS innate, not learned.

Sometimes sexuality is encouraged by the culture, and embraced.

The indoctrination is a result of another man made occurrence, "morality". In ancient cultures (Rome/Greece) it was the norm to for well to do men to have young house boys to service them sexually. Today that disgusts people. It's taboo. Back then??

The indoctrination is the stigma placed by Abrahamic ideology or other control memes. Programming instilled in your head to reject carnality and see yourself as somehow different from the rest of the animal kingdom.

so yeah, I guess I am a "gay sympathizer" or whatever other brainwashed pejorative you can hurl.

So please give me a reason why it isn't natural (not based on a moralistic/theological stance), and I'll concede you the point.
edit on 7-6-2014 by Degradation33 because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-6-2014 by Degradation33 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Christian Voice
a reply to: openyourmind1262
Homosexuals are not born gay. I will admit that men can be born a bit more feminine and a woman a bit more masculine but that in no way implies they were born gay. It still comes down to a choice. Before you ask, no I did not choose heterosexuality. Heterosexuality is the natural order of things so no I did not choose it. If one is homosexual one chooses that lifestyle same as if one is abstinent, they choose to be abstinent.


Sources please, otherwise this is just an opinion.



posted on Jun, 7 2014 @ 10:37 AM
link   
a reply to: OpenEars123

Too be honest with you I don't really care what label it falls under, I do not agree with it and never will. Though I couldn't give two hoots what other people choose to do in their lives, I won't fight for something I am against and have never thought about doing.




top topics



 
17
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join