Being queer is a sexual disorder

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Smack
reply to post by Acidtastic
 


Also, NARTH is a crypto-religious organization with a sociology / psychiatric front. It has been thoroughly discredited in legitimate scientific circles. I won't bother to cite what can easily be searched by anyone that gives a damn about the truth. I will cite some of the NARTH member's quotes:

“We, as citizens, need to articulate God’s intent for human sexuality,” -- Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, President of NARTH, CNN’s 360 Degrees with Anderson Cooper, April 14, 2007

“When we live our God-given integrity and our human dignity, there is no space for sex with a guy. -- Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, President of NARTH, Feb. 10, 2007 Love Won Out conference in Phoenix

“I do not believe that any man can ever be truly at peace in living out a homosexual orientation." -- Dr. Nicolosi

There are more, but why bother. If you are truly interested in the truth, you will research a bit before spewing nonsense.
hehe, say no more. Anything to do with religion and sexuality should be ignored and jeered at.

thanks for the pointers. i won't be searching anything out. I know i'm as "normal" as i ever have been,




posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Well,i kinda dont agree with the story..i went for my hiv test last year, first time doing it..clean!!! woohoo! i am a straight male, but have had quite a few alte night encoutners with women. Not prostitutes of course, jsut women that like to get it on, who have jobs ect.
Talking to the lady counselor at my local health department, taking an hiv test is free, but optional..they cannot force it on anyone. Youde be surpised, how many choose to never get tested, and are walking around with hiv, std's, or in rare cases full blown aids. That seems to be how it gets pased, is those that choose to never get tested,...because their scared to know the truth, or are jsut too nervous for fear of knowing.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Acidtastic
 


To be clear, that last bit was not pointed at you.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by reject
www.newswithviews.com...

being queer is a sexual disorder


By David R. Usher
March 29, 2009
NewsWithViews.com



© 2009 David Usher - All Rights Reserved


[SNIP]


No conclusive evidence has ever been found for any physiological basis for being sexually deviant; i.e. NOT straight. No "gay" gene has ever been found and most probably there won't be.
?

www.newswithviews.com...

[edit on 30-3-2009 by reject]

Mod Edit: Removed all caps title, unnecessary quote and Sexually oriented obscenity.
Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 30-3-2009 by Gemwolf]

[edit on 30-3-2009 by reject]


Okay, so I need to see evidence of this "straight gene". After all, if your reasoning behind calling homosexuality a sexual disorder is that there is no genetic evidence, then shouldn't there be a gene that causes people to be straight? If not, isn't your argument moot and pointless?

Also, anyone who researches David R. Usher will see very quickly where this man's agenda lies.



Edit to make my sentences complete....

[edit on 3/30/2009 by cautiouslypessimistic]



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Cannot say that I agree with homosexuality in any way shape or form, yet and still people have the right to express themselves. It is unfortunate that in many circumstances society plays a role which makes these people have to live in secrecy, therefore furthering the cycle of risky behavior.
Unfortunately this has been apart of the human race for centuries ( Do some research this isn't new, it was previously practiced in secret )

People should have the freedom to be them, reguardless of who dislikes it, whether its "healthy" for them or not. Freedom "with restrictions" is not freedom at all.

*edit 1*
And I'm pretty sure "queer" isn't a nice thing to say about homosexual people.

*edit 2*
Now what people fail to realize is that, sex is for advancement of the species ( to have babies ) women cannot have children without men, and vice versa. So, there may be no gene that will say who you are supposed to be attracted to, the term would be viewed as a "sexual disorder "because there is no way to reproduce thru homosexual activity.


[edit on 3/30/2009 by degenerate oto]



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 11:34 AM
link   



There is no finer metaphor for “pretzel logic” than the issue of “gay rights”. The contemporary addiction to “gay” liberation is no less dangerous or mind-altering than being addicted to heroine.

Being gay is a sexual disorder the American Psychological Association does not recognize because it drove out Division leaders and members who recognized sexual addiction for what it is. Gay men have eight times more sexual partners than heterosexual men do, and are the prevalent reason why 3% of individuals living in Washington D.C. are infected with H.I.V – on par with AIDS crisis countries such as Kenya.

Speaking frankly, I know what goes on in the gay community having been invited to a few gay parties. The real party is in the bathroom...... blah blah blah blah blah.........


Here is my in depth, point by point rebuttal of the article.

No. (That sure makes that easy and less time consuming).

Anyways, why was he invited to gay parties and why did he go? Quiet the popular guy it sounds like.


No conclusive evidence has ever been found for any physiological basis for being sexually deviant; i.e. NOT straight. No "gay" gene has ever been found and most probably there won't be.

Although, there are congenital abnormalities in a few individuals with ambiguous gender it is safe to say such instances are not exceptions and has no bearing on the sexually deviant.

They say it is nature. Observed in animals. Animals have been observed mounting another of the same gender. That is a given. But this is to establish dominance not as a consummation of sexuality.


Much evidence exists that show gay men more similar to women than straight men in a number of experiments. Lesbians have shown in experiments to be more similar to straight men than straight women are to straight men. Gay men have shown to have different finger lengths, different sized proportions in the brain, different reactions to shocking stimuli (they tend to be more jumpy like women). And the list goes on.

Identical twins separated at birth for example. If one is gay, the other who had a totally different environment and no communication with the other twin, the other twin's chances for being gay are 30%. Explain to me how that is not genetic, its proven that genes play a role.

It isn't just for dominance. Male rams (brings a new understanding of their name..) have been shown to display this homosexual behavior and the receiving ram will actually adjust himself in order for penetration to be easier....

What it comes down to is pleasure. That is why this can't be considered a disorder or a disease, because it has to cause harm to the person for it to be charactorized as such. And this is why as much as you and other try to differenciate straight sex and gay sex, and how one is perfectly fine and the other sinful, evil, mentally sick, ect., what it comes down to is pleasure and enjoyment, and between gays and straights there is absolutely, zero difference when it comes to pleasure. Each does what brings them that, in all areas of life.

Animals are driven by pleasure, including people. But what needs to be corrected isn't the actions, but the intention. No action (gay sex, straight sex, whatever) is right or wrong.



[edit on 30-3-2009 by ghaleon12]

[edit on 30-3-2009 by ghaleon12]



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Thank "GOD" I went on to read many well "THOUGHT" out responses to this moronic and article and subsequent statement following it.

To the point of non-stop gay sex parties and on and on and on. What people who are terrified of the 'gay' population think is that these people are not really people at all. That they are sex driven monsters that simply can't get enough.

I'm just getting myself worked up here by the sheer ignorance those people display.


Gay people are just like you and I. They like loyalty and trust in relationships just like the 'straight' people that enjoy those kind of relationships.

However, what they do, which is the norm for the religious groups, is they go to the extreme. They pick out the oddball stories as depicted by the ignorant, and most likely fabricated, crap written about in the article. You all wanna know something? Shhhhhh, it's a secret. STRAIGHT PEOPLE DO THIS TOO!!!!!!

Holy bejesus! Are you kidding? No WAY! It can't be true! But alas it is. There are those that have sexual relations solely with the opposite sex that decide to do it with one, two or three (or more) different people a day. Heck, they even pull it off with 2 or 3 of the opposite sex all at once!


I know, I know. It's a shocker. But why not just go ahead and label the 'gay' population with what many consider a despicable sexual behavior of multiple partners in short periods of times.

Pathetic. That's all I have to say. Pathetic!

Get over the 'holier than though' attitudes and start to do what the 'all loving' God would want you to do. Love thy neighbor. Regardless of their behaviors. Stop being hipocritical.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Smack
reply to post by Acidtastic
 


To be clear, that last bit was not pointed at you.
I figured as much


( I was going to question it, but it contradicted the rest of your post so I kind of guessed it wasn't aimed in my direction.
)



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by degenerate oto
People should have the freedom to be them, reguardless of who dislikes it, whether its "healthy" for them or not. Freedom "with restrictions" is not freedom at all.


This goes both ways. Strongly heterosexual people have a right to be who they are, even when they have no tolerance for homosexuality. Heterosexuals must be free to "express themselves," even when it offends homosexuals. Heterosexuals have as much right to mock and disdain homosexuals as homosexuals have a right to mock and disdain those who do not tolerate them. Welcome to the real world.

As I've said before, nobody is required to approve of homosexuality. If homosexuals have suffered emotional distress due in some way to their sexuality, guess what? It's their problem, they need to deal with their own demons, just as anyone else does, and stop blaming others.

My wife and I have gay friends, and I think they have pretty healthy outlooks, inasmuch as they do not dwell on their sexuality any more than we do. People who constantly dwell on how their sexuality is or is not "accepted by society" do, indeed, have a mental problem — obsessive compulsive disorder or some such neurosis.

And, yes, I've seen and met a few angry gays who fit that description perfectly, perpetually living in their sexuality to the exclusion of other interests, resulting in these lopsided, self-obsessed personalities that aren't very sociable and are barely likeable.

Just as with any other nutjobs, I tend to avoid them.


— Doc Velocity






[edit on 3/30/2009 by Doc Velocity]



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Doc Velocity
 


I absolutely agree, people should be allowed to show there disdain for something,respectfully. Now mocking as immature as it is, freedom is freedom and whether you make the "choice" or are "born" gay, it is that individuals burden to bear. Noone should be given "special treatment" for circumstances. Some will be tolerant others will not be, so is the double edged sword of freedom.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Doc Velocity
 


the point you made about peope not banging on about ones sexuality is a very good one. The only time i ever talk about sexuality, is in threads like these. In real life, I'm me, I do me things. I go to work, I have a few beers at lunch (naughty naughty) I go home, have my tea, veg out by the box and or mess about online for a bit. I love hard music, love hard drinking and of course, my 2 dogs. The only people who cling on to sexuality in such an obsessive way, that I come across, are those like in the OP.

Maybe if they didn't spend too long actually thinking about gays and what we get up too behind closed doors, then they wouldn't be so freaked out by it. In fact, I'd lay money on it. Oh, and for the record, if you're straight, it's perfectly FINE to be repulsed and disgusted by the image of 2 guys getting it on (or gilrs). That's because you're staight, you're not ment to like it
(otherwise you'd be like, gay, innit) But people are more than their sexuality. We've all got more in common than we realise. And I've not said this yet on this thread (I always slip it in one of these threads somewhere, maybe one day it'll break through)

If people stopped thinking about why we're all different, and started focusing about our simularities, the world would be a much nicer place.

fin.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:27 PM
link   
I have to laugh sort of when people say its a mental disorder and that gays should be locked up in hospitals. Or when people say anyone who constantly dwells on how society views them have a mental problem.

Gays have higher rates of depression and anxiety disorders than other groups, whether that is genetic or environmental I don't know. But that does cost tax payer money to help them. And while they're getting treated for those things they go on to collect welfare basically for the duration of their problem, the problems only get worse when you have societal pressure against them. It's just funny because the problem comes from society and in some cases the solution comes from society's money. You tax them emotionally, and they tax you financially



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:28 PM
link   
There's a post on ATS about pedophiles who want to hurt kids. I guess this is because sex does hurt kids.

Then there's another thread (in the... 6 million threads here?) about how sodomy connects the evil bastids to the etheric realms. Weird.

But women can't sodomize. Right?

I think this whole gay-fear is really sodomy-fear because we all are afraid for our sphincters.

But women can't assault the human sphincter as traumatically, according to nature, so why all the hatred toward lesbians? Only one party has the obelisk. The other has the sweat lodge.

But obelisk on obelsik is just perverted, ya know? In spite of all the pressure to become a gay male and give up on all the female ****-blocking which drives men crazy, I decided to just keep pursuing girls (tho its harder) instead of going the way of easy sodomy, which frankly, doesn't appeal to me except in the male-female context. ...Hey remember when Lot sent out his daughters to the men, they weren't interested in girls? Very telling there.

But the reason so many Obelisk-obsessed guys are simultaneously gay and also women-haters (perhaps true in ancient Sodom and Gomorrah?) is because early in life they just got ****-blocked over and over by some hot cheerleader and then they ended up with boys because A: it was easier, and B: there is great male pressure to join up.

But it's only when the obelisk combines with the sweat lodge, that true magic can happen. Obelisk on obelisk may give a sense of power, but it's false.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps
I know alot of gay men who have nothing to do with sodomy. There's more to life than that. There's more to sex than that.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Acidtastic
I know alot of gay men who have nothing to do with sodomy. There's more to life than that. There's more to sex than that.


I hear that a lot.

Yet, always there's the obelisk, and it needs a home, right?

Any gay celibate males out there care to comment on female psychology? Those conversations are always a hoot assuming you can find one.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
I have no idea where you saw that ...

In my human sexuality text book for my psychology degree.


Originally posted by Acidtastic
It's always been a gay slur round these 'ere parts.

When i was a kid ... a long time ago ... it was just a nasty slang towards homosexuals. But in my college text it has 'queering' as those who are attracted to both sexes and who will 'switch' their own sex day to day, by strapping on faux-sex organs and dressing as the other sex etc etc.



That is not being Queer at all. "Queer", is -although much too often missused- a word that is meant to describe a person that don't wish to put a lable on him/herself, neither regarding gender or sexual orientation, but are dwelling in his/her own "area", so to speak.

However, the word is often missused, and often people call themselves Queer only to be "fashionable".



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps

I think this whole gay-fear is really sodomy-fear because we all are afraid for our sphincters.



Oh, but I did chuckle at that one!

There may be some butthole paranoia out there, but I doubt it has more than a passing influence on the psychosis that is homophobia. The main influence is societal indoctrination, from parents and other authority figures. Much like prejudices of all kinds it is passed down through the generations. Religion must take a large portion of the blame as well.

edited for grammar and punctuation.

[edit on 30-3-2009 by Smack]



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:49 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:51 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Acidtastic
 





If people stopped thinking about why we're all different, and started focusing about our simularities, the world would be a much nicer place.


Wise words hun...thank you! I think that the word "queer" falls into the same category as "dyke" and "poof"...they can be incredibly offensive if used by straight people as a derogatory term, but in the gay community, we own them and they become words of power and identity. WE know what they mean to us, and the rest doesn't really matter.





top topics
 
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join