Texas GOP endorses ‘treatment’ for homosexuality

originally posted by: jrod

originally posted by: smithjustinb
What flyer's fan pointed out and what the current research that supports your side states is that there is no difference between a gay's desire for pleasure than there is a straight person's. That study is inconclusive.

This post shows you are a closed minded bigot. Referring to someone like that dehumanizes them. This post could be reported for a ToC violation. I will not report you because I know you are ignorant and simply do not know better. Hopefully you can realize how wrong you are.

This is my take on your reasoning in this thread: You do not like what science suggests, so in your mind science must be wrong.

But calling someone a bigot because he disagrees with you is A OK right?

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: smithjustinb

The Scientific Method is not biased.

2nd line.

2's

Agenda driven science is not science. The "scientific" answer is predetermined and the "scientists" job is to prove it weather it is true or not.

originally posted by: begoodbees
They are genetically identical! Their brains are exactly the same genetically.

The brains are not exactly alike.

Your propaganda fails.

No .. the failure of yours is to not read and absorb the scientific facts that were presented.

Homosexuality is not a choice. It's not a disease. It's a normal variant in humanity just like having green eyes or being left handed.

originally posted by: zazzafrazz

originally posted by: smithjustinb

originally posted by: luciddream


Lmao... you know the number of heterosexual who has anal sex is higher than homosexuals right?

That is a perversion.
.

Why.

per·ver·sion
noun \pər-ˈvər-zhən, -shən\

: sexual behavior that people think is not normal or natural

: something that improperly changes something good

: the process of improperly changing something that is good

originally posted by: begoodbees


I agree so what if people are gay. The problem arises when gay propaganda is everywhere.

I first noticed this trend with the seatbelt laws. They do about 10 to 20 years of propaganda on tv shows, commercials, movies, the so called news and mainstream music. After 1 or 2 decades of propaganda desensitizing the populace than they move to make the law.

I saw this same trend happening with gay propaganda starting in the mid nineties or so. So I knew long ago that this was coming but I am still not happy about it.

I have never been against gays, I am always against government sponsored propaganda, social engineering and the general brainwashing/indoctrination of the public.

You remind me of my 12-year-old. She is so stubborn. If I suggest or recommend anything to her, she is determined not to take part in it, or to admit that it was a good idea, if it wasn't HER idea. If I tell her to read a book that I know loads of other kids just like her are enjoying, she'll refuse to read it, or if forced, she'll refuse to admit it was any good. Doesn't matter if it really was a good book. Drives me crazy.

There is such a thing as social engineering for good. Jesus was an excellent example of that.

The ending of slavery - good. Seat belts to save lives - good. Mothers Against Drunk Driving - good. Equality for gays - good.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: smithjustinb
That is a perversion..

That's THEIR BUSINESS ... not yours. What consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedroom is no one's business but their own. If you don't like it ... pray for them. But also ... mind your own business, it doesn't affect anyone but them. They don't need curing.

His viewpoints don't affect you. So why are you bothered by what he says and thinks? Thought police? Maybe you should mind your own business as well?

originally posted by: begoodbees
So the everything but the past 40 years is ancient history to you huh?

Don't be obtuse. You know ... or you SHOULD know ... that the more advanced medicine and psychology is, the more information it gets. We know more now then we did 50 years ago .. 100 years ago .. 200 years ago. To say that medicine and biology understanding is better 40 years ago than it is now ... that's absurd.

Something cannot be normal and a variation.

Yes it can. Green eyes are normal. Being left handed is normal. Being homosexual is normal. It's all within expected 'normal variation' range for humans. There is no one standard 'normal' human.

originally posted by: begoodbees
When did it become their job to decide what is right and what is wrong?

People educated in medicine, biology and psychology are in a much better position to tell us what is normal and what isn't. They don't have the bias brought in by religious indoctrination or general stupidity. Decades of research and knowledge vs some random guy on the internet spewing .... obviously the educated experts in the field know better.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: smithjustinb
I presented a counter point against the currently accepted conclusion of the studies that suggest homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexuality.

No you didn't. The fact is that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexuality. You have not in any way proven that wrong.

You gave your opinion that the accepted truth - that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexuality - is incomplete. You said that their conclusion is based on the psychological adjustment of desire to pleasure but is inconclusive due to its failure to include the psychological adjustment of pleasure to procreation.

My degree is in psychology and I can tell ya' .... that's just wrong.

The consensus of the experts in the fields of behavioral and social sciences and the health and mental health professions is that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexual orientation. The American Psychiatric Association, The American Psychological Association Council of Representatives and the World Health Organization all are HIGHLY educated and understand this much more than you or I do .... and they agree that this is a normal variation in human sexuality. It's a normal variation in animal sexuality. Homosexuality is found throughout the animal kingdom.

The once-prevalent social norms from hundreds of years ago, which were full of religious bias, have been dumped in favor of accurate scientific, medical, and psychological information. Superstitions are not 'proof'.

Animals also throw dung at each other and then maybe even eat the dung afterword. Probably not the best example. I am sure you probably think that we are animals also because that is part of the indoctrination.

We are semi divine beings. We have divine qualities such as spirituality and intellect. We have the ability to tell right from wrong. This is what is being taken or hidden from us. By surrendering to animalllistic desires we deny our divinity and our true place in the universe.

originally posted by: begoodbees
Agenda driven science is not science. The "scientific" answer is predetermined and the "scientists" job is to prove it weather it is true or not.

You mean 'whether' it's true or not? Yeah .. those super educated folks don't know nutt'n eh?

originally posted by: begoodbees
: sexual behavior that people think is not normal or natural
: something that improperly changes something good
: the process of improperly changing something that is good

Well ... that settles it. Homosexuality isn't perverse. According to very well educated experts in the fields of biology, medicine and psychology ... It's normal. It's not something bad. So there we go. Thank you for the definition.

originally posted by: captaintyinknots

originally posted by: whyamIhere
a reply to: captaintyinknots

I do give you credit though....you are one of the few who will actually admit to being a bigot.

You are very good at arguing your point.

Then you start name calling the first time somebody disagrees...Why ?

You are obviously intelligent enough to make your point without name calling.

when a person admits to having a prejudice against gay people based solely on the fact that they are gay, is it really name calling to point out the bigotry?

Why is it that people think its their right to spread hatred, but not to be called on it? Dont like being called a bigot? Dont be a bigot, and certainly dont run around bragging about being a bigot.

Disliking certain behaviors is much different than disliking certain people.

originally posted by: begoodbees
I am sure you probably think that we are animals also because that is part of the indoctrination.

We ARE animal. Humans are part of the animal family. And just because we have a spiritual aspect doesn't take away from the fact that the spirits are housed in ANIMAL BODIES. That's reality.

And spiritually speaking ... there is nothing wrong with homosexuality either. Oh .. and don't quote Leviticus to us .... people aren't going to hell for eating bacon, or for cutting their beards, or for planting their gardens with mixed seeds, or for being homosexual. Leviticus is the work of uneducated peasants who superstitiously blamed every bad thing that happened to them on God being angry about this or that.

Have there been any studies (not just gay) where one can change their attraction both personality wise and physical? Heterosexuals have variation in what they find attractive. We gays also have wide variation in what is "attractive" to us as well.

Examples from a lot of people that I know.

Heterosexual female dates younger smaller (height) guys. She wants them dependent on her so she ends up with the guys she dates sponging off her. She admits it annoys her but, at the same time she feels good about "taking care of them."

One of my best friends in high school was a very skinny and tall metal head. He is highly attracted to obese women. He got a lot of jabs about it in school and at one time was embarrassed about it but, he viewed thin women or healthy curvy women as unattractive.

Take me for example. I am attracted to artistic types about my age, height, near my weight and size, not too feminine, not too masculine. I am not attracted at all to overly feminine, too masculine, too buttoned down, or overly hairy men. Long term relationship oriented.

One of my buddies is attracted to super masculine, hairy, controlling/domineering males. He doesn't believe in long term relationships rather friends with benefits.


I would like to see proof that attractions to any person can be changed. Can the first lady be talked into dating a more mature male her own age without feeling that she isn't needed as much? Can the metal head friend of mine be convinced that thin women are attractive? Can I be convinced to date a guy that is more domineering and masculine or a female that is not interesting to me as a partner both physically and emotionally? Can the last friend be convinced that he needs to date skinny feminine men and spend the rest of his life with him?

To me it is a bold statement to say they can change what people are attracted to for any reason including personality, looks, gender, eye color, hair color, weight, height, education level, employment, money or lack thereof. My statement about I and the other gay guy was the fact that we are attracted to "some men" but, not all and not the same men.

originally posted by: toochaos4u
I would like to see proof that attractions to any person can be changed.

The only information that I found .. (and I posted it) ... was that attempts to change orientation usually fails and it causes a lot of harm to the person psychologically and spiritually. There are a small percentage who claim to have changed .. usually found in ultra religious groups with a great deal of anti-homosexual pressure.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
a reply to: Stormdancer777
I can tell you what my psychology prof told me years ago ... most are born homosexual ... also some develop that way for reasons unknown. But it isn't a 'lifestyle choice'. No one wakes up one morning and decides that they are going to be homosexual. There is direct and indisputable information showing that there are physical differences between the homosexual brain and the heterosexual brain.

The bottom line ... it's not a choice ... it's not 'evil' ... it's a natural variation in human sexuality (like being left handed or having green eyes is a natural variation) ... and what adults do in their own bedrooms is no one's business but their own.

Of course it is not a choice. No sane person would ever choose that. It is the product of broken homes, molestation, and other types of childhood trauma that have become the norm in western uncivilization due to the progressive degradation of morals ethics and decency that produce happy healthy homes that produce happy healthy children that become happy healthy adults that continue the cycle. Once that broken cycle reaches critical mass it is game over.

This was largely known and agreed upon and backed up by studies and statistics that are now being ignored and buried on behalf of the agenda.

Just because it is not a willful choice doesn't mean that it is genetic.

a reply to: kaylaluv

I was gonna say, how in the world is getting people to wear a seat belt propoganda? The damn seat belt agenda and those safety minded seat belt pushers trying to save our lives. What gives them the right?

originally posted by: captaintyinknots
a reply to: whyamIhere

He has the right to his opinion.

Yes he does.

He has the right to be uneducated on the subject.

Yes, he does.

He (nor anyone else) have made any Gay slurs. Yet you go right to bigot

Nope, he said this:
"I don't like homosexual life partners. Don't like it? To bad! " which is a completely bigoted statement.

Bigotry is the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats or views other people with fear, distrust or hatred on the basis of a person's ethnicity, evaluative orientation, race, religion, national origin, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics.

en.wikipedia.org...

Saying that I dont like all gay people solely based on the fact taht they are gay, does, in fact, make you a bigot.

To me it discredits your argument.

Fair enough. I wont lose sleep over the fact that people dont like to see a bigot called a bigot.

He never said he doesn't like gays. here is the real definition of bigot.

big·ot
noun \ˈbi-gət\

: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)

originally posted by: begoodbees

But calling someone a bigot because he disagrees with you is A OK right?

That guy was disagreeing with the vast majority of the people on this board as well as widely accepted scientific studies.

Perhaps a little refresher in the English would help here.

bigot-a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group

I stand by what I wrote.

dp

a reply to: toochaos4u

I would think it would be a lot easier to change the body type you are attracted to, or the personality you are attracted to - than it would be to change the gender you are attracted to. I could probably be convinced to be attracted to short males (I'm attracted to tall males now), but could I be convinced to be attracted to females? Not likely.