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.

 

Sexual Orientation Change Efforts Do Not Lead to Increased Suicide Attempts

page: 3
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   
Ok dude mmm really? If ANYONE says over 9000 it is referring to... uggh just watch this video: www.youtube.com...

Over 9000 is a meme for "A lot but i dont know exactly"
Just like trolling is pissing people off
and derp is screwing up.

Heres an educational site I think you need to visit: Memebase.com




posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by IlluminatusOculus33

Originally posted by spw184
Also, you guys have to know that the bible was written by like 9000+ people and over a period of like 100 years, also, the anti-gay messages in it may have been because homosexuality was a danger back than, and one male in a family may be the only one that wasa ble to bear children, so being gay would be bad to say the least.

Yeah and almost all animals have homosexual relations so haha.


You can't even get your basic facts straight. It wasn't written by over 9,000 people here you go:



Many people contributed to the writing of the Bible. Actually the Bible is a collection of writings from about forty contributors, thirty in the Old Testament and ten in the New Testament. For example, the Psalms are a collection of the works of several authors, of whom David, the "sweet singer of Israel", is the best known. But psalms were also written by Moses, by Asaph, by a man named Ethan, and by the sons of Korah.

Who Wrote The Bible



Only forty people wrote the Bible. You grossly exaggerated the amount of people.

How is homosexuality any less of a danger today? Homosexuals have the highest HIV/AIDS rate among the population. Seems pretty dangerous to me.

Animals can't make a moral choice but humans can. If a dog runs up and snatches a sandwich out of someones hand and gobbles it up it doesn't know any better because it doesn't have any morals. If a person would to come up and steal a sandwich from another person it's different because that person has the understanding what morals are and that stealing is wrong. Animals don't have the capacity.
edit on 22-8-2011 by IlluminatusOculus33 because: (no reason given)


Orlynao? Than how come HETEROSEXUALS are the fastest growing group of hivaids?


www.bmj.com... Hetero/homo Hiv stats
edit on 22-8-2011 by spw184 because: Found a graph to support



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Who's study is this?
Who funded the study?
For what purpose were funds granted for this study?

Considering funding for homosexual studies is low on the totem pole of importance. It is especially important to know the who/what/where etc - - - of this study.

There is very little in significant information/data currently available to make any kind of reasonable/legitimate claims from data on hand.

So - if they are making an assessment from available information/data - - - I am especially curious why.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


I got that hetrosexuals where fastest growing because of the CDC and advert sites, however male to male contact IS STILL the majority of how aids gets through, but hetero sex is climbing quite quickly, and also, How owuld that pose a danger to humanity? In ancient times, a gay man was a useless man because he wouldn't screw a chick = no babies. But now, your trying to say aids is a threat to heteros, well i got news for you, maybe its a threat to HOMOSEXUAL communities, but us gays aren't gonna be screwing your chicks... now bisexuals on the other hand......



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by spw184
reply to post by Annee
 


I got that hetrosexuals where fastest growing because of the CDC and advert sites, however male to male contact IS STILL the majority of how aids gets through, but hetero sex is climbing quite quickly, and also, How owuld that pose a danger to humanity? In ancient times, a gay man was a useless man because he wouldn't screw a chick = no babies. But now, your trying to say aids is a threat to heteros, well i got news for you, maybe its a threat to HOMOSEXUAL communities, but us gays aren't gonna be screwing your chicks... now bisexuals on the other hand......


By definition a man having sex with another man is homosexuality even if they are bisexual.

Definition of HOMOSEXUALITY
1
: the quality or state of being homosexual
2
: erotic activity with another of the same sex

Merriam Webster

But you are right that bisexuals having a greater risk at spreading STDs to their heterosexual partner, especially if their partner doesn't know about their risky sexual behavior.



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 02:48 AM
link   
I don't "bash" Christians because these reparative therapy programs cause people to commit suicide.

I simply do not understand the logic of trying to treat something that it is not an actual disease. I simply see that the time and money that go into these programs would be better spent helping the poor or sponsoring children in Africa or something like that.



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 08:08 AM
link   
The unashamed bigotry of Christians in regards to homosexuality simply amazes me. How is it in this day and age that such primitive prejudice and haltered is accepted and tolerated? It's taught to children and imposed on anyone they they can. Now we have a potential presidential candidate that's married to a man that runs these 'camps'......

If this bigotry and prejudice was directed at blacks, whites, Hispanics, Jews etc........there would be uproar, and rightfully so.

Anyone who engages in such small minded hatred, at any level, should be embarrassed of themselves......and it should NOT be tolerated simply because its a religious belief.
edit on 23-8-2011 by Prezbo369 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Prezbo369
 


I completely agree, Did you know that michelle bachmans youtube channel actually posted a comment that said "Gay people molest children - Sick freaks!" on a video that had nothing to do with gays? (It was a lady gaga preformance) When I messaged her/them they said yes we are the offical campaign channel, and we where trying to spread our campagin. Really? These people should be locked away somewhere, isn't one of the civic cores of america diversity? What about presuit of happiness? But god forbid that I try and say anything bad about them... oh no, cuz all you people who try to convert us think that your the "Chosen ones" Or some s****.



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by spw184
reply to post by Prezbo369
 


I completely agree, Did you know that michelle bachmans youtube channel actually posted a comment that said "Gay people molest children - Sick freaks!" on a video that had nothing to do with gays? (It was a lady gaga preformance) When I messaged her/them they said yes we are the offical campaign channel, and we where trying to spread our campagin. Really? These people should be locked away somewhere, isn't one of the civic cores of america diversity? What about presuit of happiness? But god forbid that I try and say anything bad about them... oh no, cuz all you people who try to convert us think that your the "Chosen ones" Or some s****.


Guess you don't believe in free speech. You can't censor those you disagree with. Free speech is for everyone.



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 03:55 PM
link   
There are many interpretations of Christianity, and quite a significant gay Christian movement internationally.
However, if one becomes a reborn Christian of the fundamentalist stream, then I can understand why one would give ex-gay therapy a bash.
Since it is also true that some people are forced into such "therapies", I guess it is equal free speech to say that fundamentalists should be locked up and cult-deprogrammed.
I suppose it's sauce for the goose and the gander in that discourse.
Nevertheless, in most religions one is expected to surrender one's sexuality to the teachings, and that is true for fundamentalist Christianity and many other faiths, like Hinduism.
However only Christianity (and more recently Islam) has turned a focus on gay people only into a pseudo-scientific growth industry.
It's like ex-gays are meant to be paraded as examples that a specific religion has the "truth".
Gay healing is the convenient "miracle", since it relies only on a verbal claim that one is now "cured".
Been there and done that.
I must say that some of these pastors were sincere people, and not the Nazi monsters one may think, but in my case they were sincerely wrong.
Just a few years before my experience, the South African Defense Force still believed they could cure homosexuality, and they used older methods of conversion therapy; like emetics, hormone therapy, electric shocks and surgery.
None of it worked, and the infamous Dr. Aubrey Levine who convinced the government in 1968 that law reform on homosexuality in SA was unnecessary because he could "cure it", has recently been arrested in Canada for abusing his patients.

As for HIV being proof that homosexuality causes harm - I find that a very weak argument.
In South Africa we have a very overwhelmingly heterosexual epidemic.
So before AIDS homosexuality was OK?
I could say that Americans are more likely to be obese and suffer the related early deaths and diseases, and therefore we should avoid their main religions.
Many other groups suffer from higher rates of some genetic disorders because their religion encourages breeding in a small gene pool - do they also need therapy to stop the harm?
Moralizing a virus is reaching a low point.

As for Jesus being celibate - this may have been so, but if He was fully human He must have lusted after something. It's a bit of a paradox to say He was fully human and divine and He never experienced longing or attraction in some way. But this is complex, because in Christianity we also have "thought crime", where even "thinking of a woman in lust" is committing adultery in your heart (so much for being straight -huh?).

But Jesus also says some men who do not marry are exempt from the teachings on adultery and divorce, including the men who are made "eunuchs" in their mother's womb.
There is nothing else about homosexuality in the Gospels, until we jump to St Paul, who didn't exactly champion heterosexual marriage either: he said it was better to compromise with one wife to stop men burning with lust; but if you are loose of a wife then don't take one. The procession of the redeemed in Revelation 14:4 are male "virgins" who are "undefiled by women". This was clearly the ideal, and to turn people from one "sexual defilement" to another ignoble form is Biblically unsound.

The good thing during early Christianity was that people who didn't like it could choose from many other cults and religions, and a cosmopolitan mixture of beliefs in the Roman Empire.
So it was easy for them to make tribal laws that favored procreation of the group above all else, because their dissidents could simply elope to more accommodating cities, and homophobia was not widespread or even present at that time.
Let us remember that.
Religion should remain for those who choose it (even the religion that supposedly puts faith before works).
Religion needs the wider secular world for people who no longer want to follow the leaders.
So while I don't want to bash the people who choose ex-gay ministries, it would be good for religions to realize that not everyone is meant to follow their paths, and they cannot simply take one group in secular society to demonize, or to rather arbitrarily target with obviously concocted pseudoscience, and then to expect the world to be impressed.
Not everybody will submit to a certain discourse.

The OP mentions "Christian bashing"; I do not see most Christians advancing ex-gay therapies.
It's already been mooted on other threads that Islamic, Catholic and Protestant conversion therapists sometimes work together, and their approaches are very similar.
So there's nothing in Christianity that guides this, and it's not specifically Christian.



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by IlluminatusOculus33

Originally posted by spw184
reply to post by Prezbo369
 


I completely agree, Did you know that michelle bachmans youtube channel actually posted a comment that said "Gay people molest children - Sick freaks!" on a video that had nothing to do with gays? (It was a lady gaga preformance) When I messaged her/them they said yes we are the offical campaign channel, and we where trying to spread our campagin. Really? These people should be locked away somewhere, isn't one of the civic cores of america diversity? What about presuit of happiness? But god forbid that I try and say anything bad about them... oh no, cuz all you people who try to convert us think that your the "Chosen ones" Or some s****.


Guess you don't believe in free speech. You can't censor those you disagree with. Free speech is for everyone.


No, I just disagree with people that disagree with my freedom of expression and freedom of speech, if you notice, i also pointed out that if i try and say anything against than, they freak the f**** out, but yet if I object to anything they say, they call me ignorant, stupid, animal, freak, and many other names, and also, i dont care if its a freedom of speech issue or not, Michelle Bachman's campaing should not have been using that language ON ANY SITE, ON ANY MATTER. Do you want a president that calls about 5% of the american population a sick freak that molests children? And no, im not making these words up, those are THE EXACT Words that the comment used. And before sombody goes all sourcefreak on me i found the stats here: www.avert.org...



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 


100% agree



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by spw184

Originally posted by IlluminatusOculus33

Originally posted by spw184
reply to post by Prezbo369
 


I completely agree, Did you know that michelle bachmans youtube channel actually posted a comment that said "Gay people molest children - Sick freaks!" on a video that had nothing to do with gays? (It was a lady gaga preformance) When I messaged her/them they said yes we are the offical campaign channel, and we where trying to spread our campagin. Really? These people should be locked away somewhere, isn't one of the civic cores of america diversity? What about presuit of happiness? But god forbid that I try and say anything bad about them... oh no, cuz all you people who try to convert us think that your the "Chosen ones" Or some s****.


Guess you don't believe in free speech. You can't censor those you disagree with. Free speech is for everyone.


No, I just disagree with people that disagree with my freedom of expression and freedom of speech, if you notice, i also pointed out that if i try and say anything against than, they freak the f**** out, but yet if I object to anything they say, they call me ignorant, stupid, animal, freak, and many other names, and also, i dont care if its a freedom of speech issue or not, Michelle Bachman's campaing should not have been using that language ON ANY SITE, ON ANY MATTER. Do you want a president that calls about 5% of the american population a sick freak that molests children? And no, im not making these words up, those are THE EXACT Words that the comment used. And before sombody goes all sourcefreak on me i found the stats here: www.avert.org...


Isn't that what gays do call people that disagree with them bigots, ignorant, stupid, etc? Seems like it's the pot calling the kettle black.



posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 01:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by IlluminatusOculus33

Isn't that what gays do call people that disagree with them bigots, ignorant, stupid, etc? Seems like it's the pot calling the kettle black.


They are ignorant bigots and stupid.

Has nothing to do with the color of a kettle.



posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by IlluminatusOculus33

Isn't that what gays do call people that disagree with them bigots, ignorant, stupid, etc? Seems like it's the pot calling the kettle black.


They are ignorant bigots and stupid.

Has nothing to do with the color of a kettle.


Noun

pot calling the kettle black

(idiomatic) A situation in which somebody comments on or accuses someone else of a fault which the accuser shares. en.wiktionary.org...



posted on Aug, 29 2011 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by IlluminatusOculus33

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by IlluminatusOculus33

Isn't that what gays do call people that disagree with them bigots, ignorant, stupid, etc? Seems like it's the pot calling the kettle black.


They are ignorant bigots and stupid.

Has nothing to do with the color of a kettle.


Noun

pot calling the kettle black

(idiomatic) A situation in which somebody comments on or accuses someone else of a fault which the accuser shares. en.wiktionary.org...


Exactly!

They are ignorant bigots and stupid.

Has nothing to do with the color of a kettle.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 08:28 AM
link   
So your NOW your saying that sexual orientation makes a person ignorant. Good luck trying to prove THAT one.
edit on 31-8-2011 by spw184 because: Typed it wrong xD



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join