THIS is very interesting. Gay Conversion Therapy.....
I don't really care one way or the other about it except that I do know that there are people who've left the gay lifestyle after therapy. Sadly, I also know that there people who've been emotionally hurt by it. Here's a woman whose book I just started to read. She was a lesbian activist tenured English professor at the University of Syracuse who decided to debunk the Bible for something she wanted to write, didn't like anything about Christians, and became one after reading the Bible and talking to a minister over the course of a couple of years. She left her lesbian lover and is married to a pastor now and they've adopted four children. Her faith in Christ and leaving her lover did not include gay conversion therapy 'per se' but most conversation therapy, I believe, is tackled by Christians seeking to help those who've asked for help.
What bothers me is information which is in that link above...I do care that there are people who actually think that gay conversion therapy needs to be banned by legislation. What in the heck for? Let's not forget that nobody's forcing anybody who thinks he's gay to get converted; it's a choice.
WHY is it that libs, like ghouls, believe in CHOICE only when it could have a dead baby as a consequence of that choice?
So, whether you think gay conversion therapy is good or bad, isn't it nuts to ban it by law? Are we so screwed that we can't even decide for ourselves something like this?
What do you think?
z
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
177 comments:
Exodus International has always been a target of the liberal hate groups.
If AA's recidivism rate was similar to Exodus', would the liberals then be super-critical of AA as a failure, or that drunks can't change?
Of course not.
Are the origins and evolution of sexual orientation are well understood? I don't think so. Right now, the prevailing school of thought is that same-sex individuals are born that way; a different school of thought prevailed for a long time before the present school of thought.
I think that gay conversion therapy should be an option. Of course, the danger is that minors undergoing gay conversion therapy might be abused.
A few years ago, I knew a 20-something young lady who was a virgin. Some group of "Christian" volunteers jumped all over her and told her that she was a lesbian because she had not yet had sexual relations with a man. She was not a lesbian; instead, she was one who had taken a vow of chastity until marriage and had adhered to that vow.
These people berated poor Susan to the point that she nearly had a nervous breakdown. Susan's story has a happy ending: she's been married now for over 15 years and has 3 beautiful daughters.
Ban diet clinics and programs!
"I have a RIGHT to be fat." - Chris Chistie.
So, whether you think gay conversion therapy is good or bad, isn't it nuts to ban it by law?
----
No, it is perfectly sane.
First, the "therapy" is only banned for minors because it can do significant damage, not that my evangelical brothers and sisters care much about that.
Second, since the likes of Aesthetic Realism and other cults have been outed the "make them straight" movement has exposed as a fraud.
Third, Michele Bachmann's husband must be worried the Minnesota will catch on. His days of conning people for Federal dollars would be over.
@Ed -- If AA's recidivism rate was similar to Exodus', would the liberals then be super-critical of AA as a failure, or that drunks can't change?
------
Unlike the head of EI, the head of AA hasn't been spotted cruising a gay bar.
What we need to do --as a SPECIES -- is to learn to stop INTERFERING with one another -- stop trying to MIND OTHER'S PEOPLES' BUSINESS -- stop looking for "good reasons" to DISAPPROVE, CONDEMN, and REJECT others for not fitting into the pigeon holes we so neatly and inconsiderately construct FOR them.
in other words STOP INSISTING that each SQUARE PEG absolutely MUST fit into a ROUND HOLE before "we" can allow ourselves to feel "happy."
Ducky, your left wing propaganda from the HATE MLLS of YOUR kind are of no help whatsoever.
What I just said above applies EQUALLY to the left's constant attempts to gain suzerainty over the lives individuals.
The tyranny implicit in MARXISM is every bit as evil as the tyranny of THEOCRACY.
The enemy is TYRANNY. It is NOT any particular IDEOLOGY.
"Beware of those n whom the instinct to punish is strong."
In that regard there is little difference to be found among the extremes of ancient Rome, Barbarianism, Islamism, Communism, Fascism OR slavish adherents of the Pentateuch.
It's all the SAME DEMON. He just dresses in different costumes at different times and places, but EVIL is still EVIL no matter what ELSE you may choose to call it.
in other words STOP INSISTING that each SQUARE PEG absolutely MUST fit into a ROUND HOLE before "we" can allow ourselves to feel "happy."
Amen.
No, it is perfectly sane.
It's sane for the insane like you. I think we need free-market conversion therapy for you. Wouldn't you like being forced to go through that therapy. You're an dictatorial mind. I wonder why you believe in Jesus sometimes.
No FT, you're spouting a pantload.
Oppression is forcing an adolescent who already has questions about his/her sexuality to undergo the tender ministrations of a con artist.
That's oppression.
Oppression is forcing an adolescent who already has questions about his/her sexuality to undergo the tender ministrations of a con artist.
Your inability to understand English is puzzling to me as a non native speaker.
Are we talking about an obligation of going through that therapy or a ban of it? It's quite different. Doesn't seem to me like anybody's getting forced to go through it.
Maybe time for you to go back to study English as a first language.
Although I put conversion therapy on the same boat as faith healing, it shouldn't be banned.
People should be free to delude themselves or monkey with their wiring as much as they see fit.
Anyone has the right to seek therapy if they're confused, or unhappy with their situation, no matter what it might be!
Furthermore if an adolescent is confused about his/her sexuality, and the parents seek help for their child, it's no one else's business!
Ducky, I'm sure you're ok with activist homosexual teachers who presume they have the right to laud, and teach their class of children all about how great it is to be homosexual.
Frankly, I don't care who is homosexual, it's not my problem. What has happened to minding one's own business?
I put conversion therapy in the same boat as faith healing, but it shouldn't be banned.
People should be able to delude themselves or monkey with their wiring as much as they see fit.
Sorry Pris, it's a well established concept that the state has the right to protect children before the age of majority.
If a parent wishes to harm an adolescent by subjecting the child to "conversion therapy" the state has the authority to step in.
I have no idea what you are talking about when you mention "activist homosexual teachers" but I know in the past you have stated that teachers "recruit". It's utter nonsense and you are going to have to get used to the fact that you hold fringe opinions that aren't going to gain standing in the culture.
Happens to us all, evangelicals are no different.
If a parent wishes to harm an adolescent by subjecting the child to "conversion therapy" the state has the authority to step in.
How do you qualify harm in that case? That's the problem. IT's a very fine line. One could also say parents that force their kids to go to church are harming them. It's a never ending debate.
Likewise teachers giving their political opinion during class could be considered as harmful. Or any adult giving religious or political opinion is any circumstance could be considered as harmful. Because it doesn't allow the child to create its own values based on his very own experience. It really never ends.
Well Ducky, when our children were young Mr. Pris and I were in charge of their welfare. We passed on OUR values to them.
The state had nothing to do with it. It's called freedom, but then you think freedom is a "fringe" concept!
It's been proven that "the state" doesn't know squat when it comes to values. In fact what they call a right, is more likely to be political correctness, and what position they hold is an agenda to get votes! State values? Are you kidding?
My grandson asked me about homosexuality when he was just a boy, and you know what? His teacher was an advocate for it, and taught about it in class.
Ducky, when it comes to teaching these days, you're clueless, but what else is new!!
Well, Ducky dearest, what if The State -- to whom you, apparently, wish to cede ALL power to make our choices and decisions FOR us, because The State is the only possessor of knowledge and true wisdom -- what if The State were to make AVERSION THERAPY to HOMOSEXUALITY -- or anything else The State in Bloombergian fashion decides would be good for us -- MANDATORY?
In other words what if The State were to force YOU to abandon YOUR principles, deny YOUR core beliefs, deprive YOU of the right to mentor YOUR children as YOU see fit? I assure you, YOU wouldn't like it any more than I or any of the REST of us do.
The trouble with YOU, my antagonistic little friend, is your TUNNEL VISION. You foolishly assume that if the DICTATORSHlT you ardently advocate were firmly established, everything would simply go YOUR way forevermore.
'Snot so!
How conveniently you forget that POWER CORRUPTS. It's the POWER, ITSELF, we need to FEAR and to CURB judiciously.
You may not be STUPID, but you sure are BLIND.
Apparently it's the hardest thing in the world—to straighten the bent twig. Refusing a hand up offered in a gesture of obvious good will only shows the intransigent nature of the spoiled brat variety of regressive fudge packer that is well beyond help and insists on embracing the perversion that has somehow smitten the progressive movement from the times of George Bernard Shaw and John Maynard Keynes.
BTW, I think Chris Christie DOES have the RIGHT to be FAT, God bless him!
He also has the "right" -- and the DUTY -- to suffer whatever consequences may come his way as a result.
And so should it be for all of us WHATEVER our flaws and predilections.
@Waylon
From your mouth to God's ears.
As I've stated before...I will never accept legalized sodomy. By anyone.
Ducky, when it comes to teaching these days, you're clueless, but what else is new!!
---
I volunteer teaching film at the local high school and junior college.
For the next junior college film I'm going to show Tanner's Jonah Who Will be 25 in the Year 2000 and discuss whether the story forms a genuine dialectic.
Ohhh, scary word that.
Well, Ducky dearest, what if The State -- to whom you, apparently, wish to cede ALL power to make our choices and decisions FOR us
---
Asinine premise not in evidence.
Imp, I'm not sure that God listens to me. But I thought that I might get a rise out of the progressive contingent, but apparently they don't listen or pay attention either.
"As I've stated before...I will never accept legalized sodomy. By anyone."
And anyone who engages in sodomy [hetero or homo], and most of those who don't.......utters a collective meh.
Someone else consensual actions don't require your approval or acceptance.
Libtards are fascists. Plain and simple.
@ - Impertinent
"Of course...because they've abandoned all morality and have succumbed to PC and resorted to impure, disgusting bestiality."
Civil liberties are 'PC'? I'm also not sure why you're bringing bestiality into this discussion.
... because he's a little unsure of his sexuality. Methinks he does protest too much.
CI
Sodomy is a civil liberty? Since when?
Tell me the freedom to engage in consensual sexual activities is not both a civil liberty and a natural right.......certainly no less than you having your moral compass
FT to Duck:
In other words what if The State were to force YOU to abandon YOUR principles, deny YOUR core beliefs, deprive YOU of the right to mentor YOUR children as YOU see fit? I assure you, YOU wouldn't like it any more than I or any of the REST of us do.
In this new world order, only the Left is allowed to pass on their values. The rest of us are invalid and dangerous!
My my my my MY!
Unpleasant topics certainly do bring out the most unpleasant side of reader-contributors, don't they?
What a pitiful exhibition of ill temper and ill will!
The liberals could have a FIELD DAY quoting from this thread -- and probably will if they pay any attention to it at all.
Thanks for performing such fine and noble service to the conservative cause --- NOT.
Duck,
For the next junior college film I'm going to show Tanner's Jonah Who Will be 25 in the Year 2000 and discuss whether the story forms a genuine dialectic.
Open discussion or one guided with a heavy hand (intentionally or otherwise).
It is rare that ANY teacher does not impart his values to his students. When those values are drastically in violation of the parents' values, the parents should seek alternate methods of education.
Soon enough, the government will determine the definition of an individual's weight -- and take enforcement measures.
Time frame? In about 5 years, I think.
Not you, Constitutional Insurgent or AOW, I hasten to add. ;-)
AOW, when the government decides to standardize the HEIGHT of individuals we'll be in REAL trouble. ;-)
I'm sure THAT's coming too. Why not? Everything ELSE is up for grabs.
In the very near future white people will be forbidden to mate with each other. The "fruit" of any such union will suffer mandatory abortion -- or STATE-MANDATED MURDER, should it survive the pregnancy.
If white people want to have children, they will be FORCED by Government Edict to mate only with "persons of color."
If we live long enough, Chicken Little will be exonerated. I have NO DOUBT that one fine day the sky WILL fall.
"And what will Poor Robin do then, poor thing?"
Mankind's primary goal ever since The Fall appears to have been to destroy himself and all his kind.
Twentieth Century Technology is doing a marvelous job of accelerating the process.
Does anyone see that the evil twins SCIENCE and TECHNOLOGY might well turn out to be THE ANTICHRIST?
The ideas of an old British toff have become so ingrained in the culture through education that his premonition that people can be made to believe "snow is black" is evident in the reaction and psychology displayed here on this topic. After a century of this direction in education and culture is it any wonder that our world reels teetering on the edge of the abyss?
Bertrand Russell quote:
"I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is mass psychology.... Its importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda. Of these the most influential is what is called `education.' Religion plays a part, though a diminishing one; the press, the cinema, and the radio play an increasing part.... It may be hoped that in time anybody will be able to persuade anybody of anything if he can catch the patient young and is provided by the State with money and equipment.
The subject will make great strides when it is taken up by scientists under a scientific dictatorship.... The social psychologists of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black. Various results will soon be arrived at. First, that the influence of home is obstructive. Second, that not much can be done unless indoctrination begins before the age of ten. Third, that verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective. Fourth, that the opinion that snow is white must be held to show a morbid taste for eccentricity. But I anticipate. It is for future scientists to make these maxims precise and discover exactly how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black, and how much less it would cost to make them believe it is dark gray.
Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for a generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen."
That is pretty much our current state of affairs. Into this mix add the "economic theories" of another British toff, John Maynard Keynes, the world class pederast, and voila ... paradise for the likes of men of a similar bent to John Maynard Keynes.
Oh dear! Well, it really IS quite hopeless, isn't it?
And what has happened to our weekly Sunday Faith Post?
From the evidence presented on this thread I would say we NEED it TODAY more than ever.
It very well could be hopeless, I'm not sure about that.
Are you implying "lack of faith" got us here, and not a well defined plan that has been in place for more than a century. I've only mentioned a few of the perverted creatures that sought to bring this plague upon the planet ... but anyone can do their own research and, of course, should.
When asked who he thought was responsible for the lamentable condition of the world Gilbert K. Chesterton, ardent Roman Catholic essayist and beloved creator of the Father Brown mysteries, answered without missing a beat:
"I am responsible," was all he said.
There's not one of us who could not benefit from giving that some serious thought.
I do think that you overlook the effects of the deviant "repressed" thinking of homosexuals and the associated inversions of values, FT.
They are socially destructive, if an harmonious cooperative social organization is your ultimate goal.
Example, the coprophagiac deviance of Adolph Hitler.
People who "relish" excrement are likely to bring a lot of it to the surface, NOT easily to be flushed away.
FT, it's not as much Keynes' homosexuality that repels me, but rather his reputation for pederasty, his disgusting foible of using young boys that were "sold" to him for his pleasure in some of the poorest sections of the developing world.
I don't believe it was an accident that somebody like John Maynard Keynes, his whole package, English upper class toff, his lurid perversion and addiction to young and vulnerable boys to be presented and used by Keynes and his associates for their sexual pleasure.And his economic theories are still trumpeted today, by the likes of Paul Krugman, supposedly an educated man, an economist, NYT scribe, today calling for "more economic stimulus. It's not that it's not know that Keynesianism has failed badly from the Weimar Republic, through many applications between then up to today.
Why do you attempt to white wash absolute evil as evident in the likes of Keynes and George Bernard Shaw?
You really should delve into something which reveals much about Keynes, his life and theories ...
"We were told that Keynes, “got to love many Americans with whom he had to deal with during the Second World War.”(3) As the news of his passing reached the United States throngs of Government functionaries gathered at the National Cathedral at Washington D.C., “to do honour to a man whom they had come to love so much.”(4) Americans were told, “He had the most powerful mental machine of any man in public life, exact, lucid and supremely logical.”(5) A Harvard economist repeated the panegyric that, “He (Keynes) strode through life like a gigantic figure of the Renaissance, and he makes all present-day economists and politicans seem poor, sorry figures by comparison.” The same professor proclaimed that, “Millions to whom his name is unknown and his thought incomprehensible live nevertheless in a climate of opinion of his making.”(6)"
http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html
"I am responsible," was all he said.
Well, that depends on the context. In the context of the subject at hand, Keynes and homosexual pederasty, would you say that young boys are "responsible" for being manipulated and assaulted by devious adults like John Maynard Keynes and his associates for their pleasure? I hope not ...
"Keynes’ aversion to human conception and marital fidelity, defeminization of women via state intervention and the shattering of the family as a cohesive unit sound strangely like something out of the Communist Manifesto of 1848. The above item on “sexual offenses and abnormalities” is indeed a strange note. Keynesian apologists have maintained an uncomfortable silence on J.M. Keynes championing the cause of sexual offenders.
In 1967 the world was startled by the publication of the letters between Lytton Strachey and Maynard Keynes. Undisputed evidence in their private correspondence shows that Keynes was a life-long sexual deviate.(12) What was more shocking was that these practices extended to a large group. Homosexuality, sado-masochism, lesbianism, and the deliberate policy of corrupting the young was the established practice of this large and influential group which eventually set the political and cultural tone for the British Empire.
Keynes’ sexual partner, Lytton Strachey, indicated that their sexual attitudes could be infiltrated, “subtly, through literature, into the bloodstream of the people, and in such a way that they accepted it all quite naturally, if need be, without at first realizing what it was to which they were agreeing.” He further explained, privately, that, “he sought to write in a way that would contribute to an eventual change in our ethical and sexual mores—a change that couldn’t ‘be done in a minute,’ but would unobtrusively permeate the more flexible minds of young people.”(13) This is a classic expression of the Fabian socialist method of seducing the mind. This was written in 1929 when it was already in practice for over forty years. It is no wonder we are reaping the whirlwind of student disorders where drug addiction and homosexuality rule the day."
Wrap your mind around THAT, from the above link.
In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed homosexuality as a mental disorder from the APA's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II).
This decision was a significant victory for homosexual activists, and they have continued to claim that the APA based their decision on new scientific discoveries that proved that homosexual behavior is normal and should be affirmed in our culture.
This is false and part of numerous homosexual urban legends that have infiltrated every aspect of our culture. The removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder has given homosexual activists credibility in the culture, and they have demanded that their sexual behavior be affirmed in society.
What Really Happened?
n Chapter 4, "Diagnostic Politics: Homosexuality and the American Psychiatric Association," Dr. Bayer says that the first attack by homosexual activists against the APA began in 1970 when this organization held its convention in San Francisco. Homosexual activists decided to disrupt the conference by interrupting speakers and shouting down and ridiculing psychiatrists who viewed homosexuality as a mental disorder. In 1971, homosexual activist Frank Kameny worked with the Gay Liberation Front collective to demonstrate against the APA's convention. At the 1971 conference, Kameny grabbed the microphone and yelled, "Psychiatry is the enemy incarnate. Psychiatry has waged a relentless war of extermination against us. You may take this as a declaration of war against you."
Homosexuals forged APA credentials and gained access to exhibit areas in the conference. They threatened anyone who claimed that homosexuals needed to be cured.
Kameny had found an ally inside of the APA named Kent Robinson who helped the homosexual activist present his demand that homosexuality be removed from the DSM. At the 1972 convention, homosexual activists were permitted to set up a display booth, entitled "Gay, Proud and Healthy."
Kameny was then permitted to be part of a panel of psychiatrists who were to discuss homosexuality. The effort to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM was the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation, not scientific discoveries.
Prior to the APA's 1973 convention, several psychiatrists attempted to organize opposition to the efforts of homosexuals to remove homosexual behavior from the DSM. Organizing this effort were Drs. Irving Bieber and Charles Socarides who formed the Ad Hoc Committee Against the Deletion of Homosexuality from DSM-II.
The DSM-II listed homosexuality as an abnormal behavior under section "302. Sexual Deviations." It was the first deviation listed."
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20America/Sodomy/homosexuality_and_psychiatry.htm
@AOW --- Open discussion or one guided with a heavy hand (intentionally or otherwise).
It is rare that ANY teacher does not impart his values to his students. When those values are drastically in violation of the parents' values, the parents should seek alternate methods of education.
----
Absolutely open. Students are not afraid to disagree with me and I welcome it.
Understanding the meaning of dialectic is not going to turn the class into Marxists any more than showing Tootsie would turn them into transvestites despite what Pris thinks.
This particular semester dealt with political themes in film and I believe the conservative opinion is represented. The next film is My Man Godfrey which can be enjoyed as a comedy (Carole Lombard forever!) but also as an anti FDR polemic.
FT to Duck:
In other words what if The State were to force YOU to abandon YOUR principles, deny YOUR core beliefs, deprive YOU of the right to mentor YOUR children as YOU see fit? I assure you, YOU wouldn't like it any more than I or any of the REST of us do.
In this new world order, only the Left is allowed to pass on their values. The rest of us are invalid and dangerous!
----------------
What a pant load.
In this case the state has ruled that a cult which damages adolescents is not going to be allowed to continue harming them.
If you decide as an adult that you want to waste your time being "prayed straight" you are quite free to do so.
Now the conservative reaction does bring out some interesting points:
1. They are anti science. Demonstration that the "pray them straight" movement is an abject failure is not considered relevant to the young earth crowd.
2. They would rather cause an adolescent more misery with the scam therapy than accept his sexuality.
Neither reflects well on the strange, strange world of evangelicals and their aversion to knowledge and tolerance.
For lack of a Sunday Faith Blog, please keep Rita and her husband in your prayers.
http://ihavearighttospeaktoo.blogspot.com/?m=1
... strange world of evangelicals and their aversion to knowledge and tolerance.
-----
Since I'm not an evangelical, here's my take, Ducky.
The world has been under a consistent and constant onslaught for more than a century to effect change in the world and in the lives of all that inhabit the planet. One of the more powerful influences were the Fabian Socialists who have tried to pretend they are different from the slave creating statists of communism and fascism—the difference being only one of radical revolution vs. imposing slavery gradually via the Fabian way. I've named a few of the so-called all stars from the Fabian lineup in some above posts. It doesn't surprise me that you'd defend Keynsiansim and its author, the surprise for me is that you've found an ally in FT who seems to agree with GBS and Keynes on many points. Yet you think he's walking around with a "pantload". A pantload of what?
"Gay Conversion Therapy"
I have no idea how successful this may be but if, as has been postulated, male homosexuals have a significantly lowered life expectancy, I'd say it's worth a try.
If this "Therapy" actually works, I can envision a reason why the agenda of some would require that it be banned. After all an "agenda" requires strength-in-numbers!
@FT, "And what has happened to our weekly Sunday Faith Post?"
Z's computer is down. She hopes to get it up and running as soon as possible.
Waylon, Keynes at Harvard is a product of the John Birch society.
Even on this board it might be a bit much.
Duck,
My comment about the double standard is NOT a pant load. In fact, your reaction goes to PROVE what I was saying. A worldview different from yours, and you quack, ridicule, and denigrate.
I hope that you don't carry on that way in the classroom should views different from yours arise.
Duck,
the strange, strange world of evangelicals and their aversion to knowledge and tolerance
I'm one of those "strange" evangelists, but I'm not anti-knowledge and quite tolerant (as you well know).
Keynes at Harvard is a product of the John Birch society.
------
Ducky, Keynes at Harvard is being sold by respectable book sellers including Amazon. You can also purchase copies from the Ludwig von Mises Society, the followers of Austrian economics.
Falling back on the old Marxist-Leninist ploy to attack the source instead the argument presented, I see. Nothing new there, I guess.
Ducky, I doubt you can refute any argument from Keynes at Harvard, so go ahead and resort to your usual histrionics ...
... Dobbs was the pseudonym of Archibald Bulloch Roosevelt (1894-1979), Teddy and Edith Roosevelt’s fourth child and third son, a second cousin of FDR, (and sometimes member of the John Birch Society).
Seems to me that Dobbs, aka, Archibald Roosevelt, comes from a stock line of |"progressives" in America, no? So that apple fell further from the tree, or what?
AOW, there was a time when students had no idea what their teachers personal values were. As for sex, it was not discussed in classrooms, period!
Their job was teaching the three R's to the young children. It's no wonder that nowadays too many children are illiterate, and the drop out rate has skyrocketed.
One size does not fit all. Parents are much more in tune with when their children are ready to learn about sex. Now, sex education begins very young, and it's provocative because five year olds aren't mature enough to handle it.
They're being robbed of their innocence when they should be allowed to be children!
Also, I'm sure if many parents could afford to send their children to private, or parochial schools they would, if they care. Easier said than done!
Besides, it's our tax money which supports the educational system, yet more and more, parents, taxpayers, are shut out of curriculum decisions.
Waylon, it was written by afriend of Archie Roosevelt, an early founder of John Birch and was published by a publishing arm of John Birch.
The fact it is being sold (not in bulk I imagine) hardly has anything to do with its origins.
I'm am not going to read it just as I wouldn't read anything else bu John Birch.
Free Thinke has it in a nutshell:"STOP INSISTING that each SQUARE PEG absolutely MUST fit into a ROUND HOLE"
... or something like that.
1. Those who think that gay conversion therapy is a valid therapy just don't understand. Sexual preference in some cases is just that, a preference. In most other cases, we are hard-wired genetically.
2. When I asked my gay son the question, "When did you decide to be gay?", his answer was. "I didn't!" His name was Matthew, and he was the kind of boy that could never throw a ball, or walk like a boy. He was as effiminate as any little sissy has ever been. He never made the decision to be gay. He was born that way, and unless you have had the experience of raising a young one like that, you have no clue.
3. There is no conclusive science as to the physical mechanisms that determine the sexual preference of an individual. There is also no scientific evidence that gay conversion therapy is more than scattered anecdotal events.
So, since nobody knows nothing, why don't we all take Free Thinke's advice. Let others live their lives, and stop being judgmental.
So, since nobody knows nothing, why don't we all take Free Thinke's advice. Let others live their lives, and stop being judgmental.
----
Because we are an advanced civilization that does not depend on the writings of bronze age tribes for our attitudes toward sexuality.
Gay conversion has never been able to produce a study that shows increases in heterosexual behavior after the therapy. However it does teach aversion to homosexuality sometimes using drugs or electric shock. In other words our dear Christian brethren administer torture and consider it acceptable behavior.
Now if you consider teaching an adolescent to be disgusted with himself is going to produce a healthy adult then you demonstrate why it is appropriate for the state to step in and curb the practice.
We have agencies that try to prevent all types of medical fraud and there is no reason "pray 'em straight" should be exempted.
I wish the Christian right in America could redirect their faith to serious problems facing us but they seem intent on trying to control sexuality, even in instances where they are profoundly wrong.
... it was written by afriend of Archie Roosevelt
----
Ducky, Archie seems to be much more informal that Archibald. How close were you to 'Archie' and by all means, please name that friend of Archie's that penned "Keynes at Harvard".
Who thinks that homosexuals should be foisted upon members of the Armed Service, not so inclined, who have no choice, whatsoever, in compulsory arraignment such as billet and other close quartered, required, situations?
Pris,
I well recall when sex was not discussed in the classroom.
I grew up in those times and prefer them to what I'm seeing now.
I have seen for myself what nonsense ensues when The Catcher in the Rye is assigned to junior high school students.
I also recall when teachers' contracts included morals clauses. In fact, when I went to work for a public school system in 1973 here in Northern Virginia, my contract had such a clause. I don't recall the wording. Within a few short years, that clause was gone from the contracts.
Thank you, BOB, and God bless you. You -- and possibly Pris -- may be the only ones who understand what this is really all about.
I understand Waylon's concerns very well, and have to agree that the sordid details he provides about Keynes's personal life -- as presented are at best unsavory and at worst demonic, but almost everyone else seems to be motivated either by irrational hatred born of ignorance and prejudice or a slimy, leftwing, power-grabbing political AGENDA determined to EXPLOIT the concerns ad grievances of minorities for self-serving purposes -- and yes that means YOU, Duckywucky.
Folks, Here's the latest thinking on homosexual at birth. Yep, it's a defect.
Since it's short, here's the text.
A new study suggests that homosexuality can be explained by biology, though not by genes specifically. Instead, the researchers propose that there are sex-specific epi-marks on the genes that are triggered during fetal development to maintain a hormone level balance. These switches cause fluctuations in DNA expression that impacts sexual development, including sexual identity and various other gender characteristics. These switches help protect both the fetus and the mother from the natural variation in sex hormone levels present during fetal development, which could help explain why homosexuality has evolved as a common variation of human identity.
Thanks for the news about Z's computer, Pris. It's so unlike her to miss a Sunday post, I was beginning to worry she might be ill.
'Puters can be fixed or replaced. Unfortunately the same can't be said for people -- especially those we know and love.
Here's a more scientific presentation From a link in the above article.
FreeThinke said...
"I am responsible," was all he said.
Very, very true. We all are.
(....)what if The State were to make AVERSION THERAPY to HOMOSEXUALITY -- or anything else The State in Bloombergian fashion decides would be good for us -- MANDATORY?
Deny this, if you like, but that is precisely what is going on. Oh, it's mostly subtly done, of course, in the name of tolerance and I have no doubts that some teachers actually believe that. Just as it is abhorrent to browbeat one into one religious belief or the other, it is equally so, when pushing sexual matters down a prepubescent throat.
Pushing a sexual preference, and they are, is not within the highly dubious right of State protection.
Sex in schools now starts in kindergarten now in some places. I guarantee you no 5 yr old's are even thinking about sex.
It's absurd. We have children in charge with losers and morons propping them up.
"A new study suggests that homosexuality can be explained by biology...."
Interesting study. I agree with the technicality of homosexuality being a birth defect....now the burden is even greater on some to justify denial of the rights, privileges and responsibilities of a citizen, based on a defect that in no way limits their ability to engage in them.
There is no proper burden.
The choice here is between those who believe their religious dogma should be allowed to trump medical science.
Simple.
For all the whining here you'd think everyone lived in New Jersey. Don't worry folks, if you want your child to be given intense aversion therapy you can always ship him to enlightened states like Oklahoma.
I think that it's time we gave ducky the "Breathless" Ludovico treatment... ;)
Aversion to Godard? Not possible.
CI, Agreed. I've always said I don't care what people do as long as it's legal and even illegal in some cases.
Just don't demand that I like it, accept it in my square, etc.
Farmer, I'm surprised you didn't pick La Chinoise.
@AOW --- hope that you don't carry on that way in the classroom should views different from yours arise.
----
By the bye, AOW, when I used Robert Bresson's Pickpocket a few years back I opened a minority line of discussion that the film presented a definite homosexual subtext and Bresson may have been suggest with the rather abrupt ending that "conversion" was necessary to achieve grace (grace being a constant in his films).
First of all, I love that this "lesbian woman" decided to follow Christ and turned her life around.
And it is the choice of the person to convert.
We can witness and plant seeds, but that's all we can do. God must do the rest to move a person's heart that is willing to change.
Thanks, Leticia.
Yeah Ed, you've come a long way from the days when you burned witches.
Ducky's chosen role is to try to CONFUSE everyone as much as possible, Waylon.
From the little I know about him I could never support Keynes or any of his theories.
George Bernard Shaw and Oscar Wilde are in a different category. I insist when it comes to works of art and literature -- or genuine intellectual and scientific advances -- that the personal tastes and activities of creative genius are irrelevant to their work.
Some very bizarre and often unpleasant individuals have contributed greatly to the Civilization. Just as millions upon millions of nice, perfectly decent, but ordinary individuals have counted for practically naught.
Life is full of facts we may find disagreeable, but when it comes to serious achievements good is good no matter what.
That's ALL I'm trying to say.
Brilliant people often appear intolerably eccentric -- even mad.
Too bad! They're still brilliant.
Let there be peace on earth
And let it begin with me.
Let there be peace on earth
The peace that was meant to be.
With God as our father
Brothers all are we.
Let me walk with my brother
In perfect harmony.
Let peace begin with me
Let this be the moment now.
With every step i take
Let this be my solemn vow.
To take each moment
And live each moment
With peace eternally.
Let there be peace on earth,
And let it begin with me.
~ Vincent Gill
@FT --- From the little I know about him I could never support Keynes or any of his theories.
----
Then if you know little why not learn?
You don't want to end up like Waylon do you?
Hey, Kid! Thanks for the heads-up on that paper on homosexuality.
If you want to read the actual paper here is the link: http://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Rice-et-al.-2012.pdf.
The paper is some pretty rough reading on genetics, and some of the reading is almost comic. Here is an extract from the abstract: " Our model predicts that
homosexuality is part of a wider phenomenon in which recently evolved androgen-influenced traits
commonly display gonad-trait discordances at substantial ..."
Gonad-trait discordances is downright scary. It is all the fault of those damned gonads!
This is interesting stuff, and it obvious that homosexuality is a natural mutation, and is carried forward in families. This can show that "Gay Conversion Therapy" is not likely with those who are "hard wired" in their sexual preference.
Of course, all this is still theoretical and has yet to be proved or falsified. Anything that can explain our lives and state of our health should be welcome news.
Why not earn more about Keynes?
The SHORT ANSWER:
"By their fruits ye shall know them," Ducky.
I have enough sense not to eat skunk cabbage, drink urine, or dine on thistles, etc.
In discussing homosexuality everyone seems to have forgotten that in the The Golden Age of Pericles -- a time of high achievement and remarkable development in all fields -- it was considered perfectly normal and desirable for esteemed males in the community to marry, have children and enjoy sexual intercourse with an adolescent male. Such relationships were considered an essential part of the mentoring process.
As Shakespeare said:
"There's nothing either right or wrong, but thinking makes it so."
Now if the priestS could stay away from little boys
So you're suggesting FT that men should mentor boys by exploiting them sexually? If high achievement is your reasoning than I suggest this is a cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy
How gay marriage affects society
Fascism will more likely come via the left jack boot and not that on the right.
I am suggesting that a closer reading of history might help to provide a broader perspective on LIFE and a greater understanding of TRUTH.
"Normal" is simply whatever the majority of a particular population believes it is at a given time.
You choose to accept the views of an ancient tribe of nomads with barbaric, hyper-aggressive temperament and an infinite capacity for self-justification that is clearly reflected in their painfully limited understanding of Reality and narrow, self-serving concept of Truth.
"There are more things in heaven and earth than are included in your philosophy, Horatio."
Those who feel certain they know everything, usually know very little.
FT: "Normal" is simply whatever the majority of a particular population believes it is at a given time.
And oftentimes, what the population believes is established by the elite first. I tend to agree with Nietzsche's take in his history of morality.
Ducky: Then if you know little why not learn?
The guy who refuses to look at the opposing sides' point of view objectively is asking us to learn. Funny.
Ducky, as much as I do not like the John Birch Society, when one like you is inspired by the works of Mao and other murderers, he has no right to criticize a book on the grounds it was published by the JBS.
By the way I am surprised nobody mentioned the gender neutrality issue. It's amazing that gender neutrality theories would not cause any trauma but that gay conversion therapy (as stupid as it sounds) would do. Teaching a boy who sees his penis every day that he can decide if he's a girl is as, if not more, confusing. Unless we erase from books that a penis means being a male. That's possible. I guess that would solve the gay issue if nobody knows what her or his gender is.
But i don't expect much from a Libertarian. You posit the perfect market, incapable of failure
See, you're not getting it. We don't say the market can't fail. We're saying failure is part of it and we accept it as creative destruction and a way towards improving things. Because only by failing can you learn.
Apparently you haven't learned much about your own idiocy and inability to understand basic English when you read. You can mention Godard as much as you can to sound educated, well read and smart, but that's only to cover many inabilities. Pretty sad.
You are a freaking low functioning coward.
No because I accept personal responsibility vs you advocating for democratic socialism where one is spoon fed by the state. What's more cowardly?
Ducky, if you've got the sack for it, go and get a few copies of Keynes at Harvard and teach your s-called students something abut the real world and the REAL John Maynard Keynes.
They might even erect a statue in your honor in The Common.
I say as long as there is no government subsidization, let there be both gay aversion therapy and normal aversion therapy competing in a free market.
But truth is always exclusive
beamish,
Are you suggesting that "gay" and "normal" aren't synonymous? Well, well how utterly un-PC of you!
Are you suggesting that "gay" and "normal" aren't synonymous? Well, well how utterly un-PC of you!
I strive for accuracy.
In choosing that standard (of which that nomadic tribe is no different than you or I, as explained fully in their scriptures) its always clear that choosing the Truth is always the ideal. Moral relativism is a huge danger, tomorrow duhkkky and his ilk decide we all go to the gulag.
Survival of the fittest is an evolutionary concept
The oppression is someone believing that my child belongs to the state
Loshon Hora and Happy Passover to those that do that.
AOW, I think we both know that group of "Christians" is NUTS and most Christians (99.999999999999% honor chastity until marriage).
Repeating it makes all good Christians look nuts.
I'm glad she's fine now!
sad, I found time to read this thread and got so turned off I gave up.
My God, it gets to be a chance for people to spout their prejudices, try to prove they're right and everybody else is wrong, give Ducky another chance to try to prove he's much brighter andmore open minded than anybody else, and ...more............
I did see the discussion between Pris and AOW about sex taught in schools. SO odd, isn't it, that the more sex IS discussed in schools, the more screwed our kids are becoming.
WHY can't the left acknowledge facts like that?
Who CARES what anybody's doing in private, by the way?
Just don't ban HELP if they WANT IT. That is IF they want it.
Man, what's it take to understand that?
Hey Bob. It is interesting. This is such a multi-faceted issue.
As far as "true gay-conversion therapy" in its pure sense, I believe it is necessary because of how much the gay lifestyle is being pushed as an "alternative" [for people who might not gravitate to it otherwise]
I personally know women who have 'tried lesbianism'. I dont' personally know any guys, but believe there are guys who 'try it' because of it being pushed into the popular culture.
I also believe the gays are WAY over-represented in media, hollywood, government. Congress, and various government departments. 90+ % of obama's cabinet picks and 100% of his 2 supreme court picks are homo.
THEY are working a gay agenda, attacking the schools, AND creating a culture that stifles anyone who objects with all the standard tools - accusations of non-diseases for example like "homophobia."
I'm here to tell you. I'm "homophobic". There is nothing more disgusting to me than some guys a** or even intimacy with another male, and nothing more disgusting than sodomy with either sex.
I'd rather swim around in a septic tank.
Z - I agree with you that it's the role of parents to teach issues of sexuality to their children.
But you must have a far narrower vision of Christians than the number of people who call themselves Christian...if you think that is the number who abstain from sex until marriage.
Kid - I think there is a distinct difference between sexual experimentation and a biological sexual orientation. Culture may play a role in the former, but not the latter.
Z, why can't he left acknowledge that by paying useless lazy stupid POS women to pop out democrat voters like pieces of toast, actually Paying for child abuse with OUR money, that they accelerate society's problems Exponentially.
My conclusions ? They don't give a * about anything but their own a**, and frankly they're too stupid to see it anyway.
CI, Kid - I think there is a distinct difference between sexual experimentation and a biological sexual orientation. Culture may play a role in the former, but not the latter.
I couldn't agree more. So, I'm not sure why you felt the need to point it out. ?
"I couldn't agree more. So, I'm not sure why you felt the need to point it out.?"
Because many people who have an animus against homosexuals, proffer that sexual orientation [only homo, not hetero for some reason] is merely a lifestyle choice. You wrote:
"As far as "true gay-conversion therapy" in its pure sense, I believe it is necessary because of how much the gay lifestyle is being pushed as an "alternative" [for people who might not gravitate to it otherwise]"
If I misinterpreted that, I apologize.
@Kid
"I'd rather swim around in a septic tank.''
Which is exactly what the demrat / dembagger "party" of fools, losers, idiots, clowns and deviants has become.
CI, OK, I see. I was responding to Bob who was responding to my link to the biological element. I didn't mention it in my reply as it was assumed in that way.
Yea, many faceted issue or non-issue. Non-issue for me unless someone wants to push it into my life.
I've been totally non-activist about it, though not afraid to point out how I feel as that is my right in this country.
I may not stay non-activist though as I've pointed out, I feel [fairly recently] that I absolutely believe gays are WAY over-represented in positions of authority and influence.
IMP, Those folks? Much worse than a septic tank.
"I may not stay non-activist though as I've pointed out, I feel [fairly recently] that I absolutely believe gays are WAY over-represented in positions of authority and influence."
Absolutely your right, though representative inequity is found in many other places as well. Christians are overrepresented in our political class, for example.
IMP. These people are destroyers of civilizations.
Any history buff will know what I'm talking about. The rest of them? Hey, for a consulting fee.
CI, Hmm, I'm not so sure. Republicans attempt to appear Christian. I lean towards them doing a dog an pony here just like all the others.
My view lately, is that both parties are sociopath (in simple terms) and just use demographics to stay in office for the purpose of self-gratification and enrichment.
If demographics screamed that people were deeply interested in keeping the fur clean on a sloth, we'd have politicians taking passionate positions on sloth fur.
Seriously.
people VOTE for Christians because America's largely Christian...
that's who usually runs, though there are plenty of Jews and Muslims running, too.
Very different than over representation of GAYs ... on Television, every single show has a gay relative or neighbor; not true in real life; the numbers just don't support that.
Kid, and, of course, most Democrats, the VAST MAJORITY, are Christians as well. Or not as well, any way you want to look at it :-)
Z, most politicians are both Lawyers and Felons from what I understand. :)
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.
It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.
The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences."
CS Lewis
Bloomturd and Feinstein are perfect examples of this tyranny.
My view lately, is that both parties are sociopath (in simple terms) and just use demographics to stay in office for the purpose of self-gratification and enrichment.
Amen. It's disheartening. I think the sentiment is growing here and across the Western world when I hear reactions in Europe.
It's because we're not in a Republic or a democracy. We're in an elected bureaucracy. That's the new regime.
FrogBurger "It's because we're not in a Republic or a democracy. We're in an elected bureaucracy. That's the new regime."
If not an outright banana republic.
FrogBurger, I also read some England written blogs and the feeling is like America is the last bastion of hope going down the drain.
An inconclusive scientific paper doesn't prove anything. There's been 3 other studies done, all with either a selection bias or poor sampling. The agenda is to try and prove a biological reason in order to further the agenda, including recruiting in the public schools. I don't care what anybody does in their bedroom, but you try to force those values on my child. And you've now stepped out of the bedroom
"elected bureaucracy"...well said, FB.
Imp...so true! But, any time anybody quotes C S Lewis, I'm all for it :-)
Elbro, I'm BAAACK :-) (great to talk to you yesterday!
And yes...you are SO RIGHT.
By the way, consider how long sex has been talked about in schools and how long true immorality has happened to our kids, and I think "enough said," huh?
Absolutely Z.
Yeah, I'm inspired by Mao
duhkkky's inspired by a mass murderer and we're the bad guys....oy vay
Disk drive finally give out, z?
modem, Ducky.
I watched WINGS OF DESIRE yesterday...it's not satisfying, but it's a wonderful mood piece and has some fantastic lines in it.
Four people were stabbed at a Target Store in PA today.....
STABBED? Didn't they get the meme that it's SHOOTING that's cool these days?
What's the gov't going to do with this, bad knives?
Being anti knife isn't sexy
Curious that you're luke warm about Wigs. Cinematography is outstanding but maybe you're not as big a Peter Falk fan as myself.
@Z
"What's the gov't going to do with this, ban knives?"
Of course not...they just don't have the cache that "assault weapons" do...although it's clear that knives fit the bill too...as well as hammers, baseball bats, tire irons, hickory sticks, bricks, stones, rocks...and so on.
Every inanimate object is an assault weapon when it's roused from it's sleep as a weapon.
BTW..."AR???" stands for Armalite...the original makers of the knockoff the M16.
Ducky, I'm not a huge Falk fan, no. Don't dislike him, just never warmed up that much...I do think he's a good actor.
And the cinematography was good...as was the acting.
The girl's soliloquy at the end was very touching and very smart.
There were lots of very compelling and thought provoking lines, but I thought the angels listening in to peoples' thoughts never really 'paid off' somehow...almost as if it didn't matter if they did or didn't. In that way, it was unfulfilling.
Z,
"Four people were stabbed at a Target Store in PA today.....
STABBED? Didn't they get the meme that it's SHOOTING that's cool these days?
What's the gov't going to do with this, bad knives?"
OK, here is the problem, as I see it. The perpetrator must have had a "high capacity" collection of knives. Solution: restrict possession of knives to only one knife per perpetrator-Problem Solved. Just ask any Liberal/DemocRAT and I'm sure that you will get concurrence.
Kid,
A lot of conservatives are not the least bit concerned about Islam and creeping shari'a. And I'm speaking of evangelical Christians who are conservatives.
Recently, I said, "Islam is a pagan religion," followed up by specific examples of paganism within Islam, and several evangelical Christians in the room wore expressions indicating that they thought was I had said was distasteful in the extreme. That recent experience brought home to me just how far even people of faith have slid.
A few days later, I had a similar experience with in a discussion of gay marriage with a group of evangelical Christians. Moral relativism has overtaken the majority of our society.
Right AOW, forsaking the truth so as not to offend.
AOW....there are churches now where the pastors preach that Jesus was probably divine!
Elbro, I fear AOW's story is far worse than the christians don't want to offend; they don't read Scripture enough to know the truth and stand by it, you know?
Yes I know and you're right
I see what you mentioned in young people who are Christians, but I have discuses this issue with several pastors who will not confront this issue for fear of offending. Ill ask them if they would confront an adulterer or a thief and they say of course but not this one. The Church has become irrelevant as it ignores these issues.
CONGRATULATIONS!
Yet-another marathon Idolization of Ignorance and Carnival of Contempt in a seemingly endless has been produced.
What a wonderful way to bring unbelievers to Jesus Christ!
I'm sure it could never fail to help bring in the Millennium.
So, after 160 comments does anyone have any idea if there was a consensus about gay conversion therapy?
Even in the first comment, Ed got political. It seems that we are framing everything in political terms, and isolating ourselves to the point that if and when conclusive science comes about with regard to human sexual preferences, most people here would ignore the evidence because they are dug into their positions.
Elmers Brother correctly points out that studies that point to genetic or biological reasons for human sexual preference have not been verified. It is equally true that so-called gay conversion therapy is only an anecdotal proposition. It is not scientific at all.
Z got answers to her question, "What do you think?" Unfortunately, many think of sexual preference in only political terms.
Ignoring Gods Word as it relates to our sinful nature is just as dangerous. Moral relativism has no place in the Christs economy. Otherwise He died for naught
If indeed its true that scientific/biological evidence for homosexuality is lacking than the answer is a spiritual one or for those who are not of faith, a political one
AOW, I could be wrong, but I believe few people know the truth about islam because the people they get their information from - gov and media, are both too cowardly and PC braindead.
I'd say the Christians you mention are victims of this absurd propaganda fantasy that muslims are just like any other 'followers'.
Because of all the hypocrisy, I can't see how it's anything else.
FT, I have no idea what you're talking about but I do believe everyone here has a right to their opinion.
Bob, did you see my comment above?
When I first got back on line, I read a few comments and wrote: "My God, it gets to be a chance for people to spout their prejudices, try to prove they're right and everybody else is wrong."
It was more than that, however, and you picked up on it..it became POLITICS when, really, all I wondered was how anybody could BAN a therapy only offered to those who ask for it. It seems incredible to me. Nobody's forced into it.
But, of course, we got the highly stupid remarks about Bachman and her husband because they have been fairly successful in leading people from the homosexual lifestyle. God forbid those people might be happier, huh?
And, of course, there are people who don't WANT to be straight. FINE, they shouldn't seek therapy and don't need to go to Bachmann's clinic, right? DON'T GO! WHo's forcing you to?
But, if people want to go, why should they be blocked from it by law?
My Sunday Faith Post will be an eye opener and it's sort of on this subject...at least it dovetails it.
Elbro; beautiful point about ignoring God's Word.
And, of course, those who are not believers don't have to.
Kid, that's the fallacy the left likes to spout about muslims BUT I'd say that most muslims in this country are NOT terrorists and therefore don't deserve the hateful looks, etc.
Sadly, we must be on guard because we will never know which ARE plotting. And, of course, their faith literally SAYS to lie to us if it serves their allah. Scary stuff.
Kid, my opinion has always been; where are the American muslims who are just as worried by muslim terrorists as we are, and why are they not marching against them in droves? That would, or at least COULD, show Americans that they're with us.
Still, there are stories of muslims who HAVE turned islamists in and we've benefited by that. they should be touted but they can't be known or they'd die.
Some religion, huh?
And then hateful people with a secular agenda liken it to Christianity because one nutso idiot "christian" kills her children every 10 years.
Kid "for animal happiness"...:0)
I think you're absolutely right about the two kinds of Democrats.
Heck, Ducky thinks Obama's on the RIGHT, so you know where Ducky is ...and he's not alone, sadly.
Sadly, both are furthering the agenda right now...the politicians and their idiot childish followers who are asleep at the wheel just believing that "at least the animals will be happy"
Oh, and we won't have RACISM, as if Republicans LIKE racism. Man.
I see your point on Islam, but cult or not, I know there are muslims who do NOT want you and me dead.
well, maybe not me :-) HEH HEH!!
"muslims who do NOT want you and me dead."
Agreed Z..
Note to Ducky
Gay conversion idea is a stupid idea that doesn't work. We should extend this to teaching Marx whose stupid ideas have been proven lethal.
Gay conversion is stupid, but not lethal. Gay conversion nuts have not committed mass crimes against humanity or treason in the USA.
Marxists should have to wear the letter M for moron on all their clothing. They should be required to
pay additional taxes for their stupidity.
The above is inspired by the Jim Crow dhimmi laws that Ducky thinks are peachy when applied to Jews and Christians.
Marxism=Stupidity=Treason=Death
As for the Duck on gays, he is quite
fond of throwing the term out as a cause of shame. There are many cool gay people and some are my friends and coworkers. There is no such animal as an intelligent Marxist. Sheep and lemmings are not known for
intelligence.
The folks in Van Nuys make a product
that is purchased by many. What has Bill Ayers, Chomsky or your average
Marxist hack produced that is valued.
Kid, EB, and Z,
The Christians of whom I was speaking in comment above are committed to study of the Scriptures and claim to believe that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life (literally). The claim to believe in the Ten Commandments as the moral compass for their lives.
Still, they are mealy mouthing around.
One of these parents named her son Elijah because the Old Testament prophet was strong enough to stand up to the prophets of Baal.
Clearly, she admires the prophet Elijah. Yet, she thinks that Islam is "okay." She's not alone in failing to recognize the similarities between Allah and Baal -- and gets very uncomfortable when I say that Allah is a pagan god. They seem to have no difficulties in recognizing that other gods are pagan gods. But not Allah!
I have no desire to persecute Muslims. But any criticism of Islam -- even a study of the history of Islam -- is seen by most people as persecuting Muslims.
All this compromise and moral relativism = boiling the frog. The frog never knows that he's being boiled, but rather is only happy that he's nice and warm. Sheesh.
POINTS YOU MAY NOT HAVE PONDERED on the ISSUE GAY MARRIAGE
Does no one see the incredible irony of congress -- the supposed representatives of the CITIZENRY as a WHOLE -- having abdicated their responsibility and handed over their authority to a de facto oligarchy of NINE quasi-dictators in black robes?
Your right to pursue happiness -- my right to pursue happiness -- and the rights of any and all minorities to pursue happiness are now defined, determined, restricted and controlled by loose consensus among NINE little people each of whom steps into his trousers or her panties one leg at a time just like the rest of us.
Often it works out that FIVE little people in black robes determines the fate of a nation comprising more than THREE-HUNDRED MILLION souls.
Whether these de facto oligarchs do the "right thing" according to your understanding, or my understanding, or not is not -- nor should it be -- our main concern.
If we abandon the concept of Separation of Powers and permit any one of the three branches of government to assume dictatorial control over the others, we are in grave danger of losing our Representative Republic -- and thus losing any measure of control we, as citizens, have over the powers that govern us.
We may love this phwnomenon when it appears to work in "our" favor, but in abandoning Principle in favor of Sentiment -- even the noblest, most generous, most merciful, most high-minded sentiment -- we also abandon our Liberty.
This Gay Marriage issue might purport to be about achieving "equality" for a misunderstood, traditionally despised minority --- and I'm sure for many ill-informed individuals, who do not care about anything that does not appear to affect their little lives directly that is true --- but regardless of anyone's personal feelings and fondest wishes, the movement is rooted NOT in a passion for "Social Justice," but in a fiendish desire to assume DICTATORIAL POWER and thus the ability to push perceived ideological enemies around at will.
THREE RELEVANT QUOTATIONS from DISTINGUISHED SAGES:
"The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions."
~ Socrates (470-399 B. C.)
"We can never be sure that the opinion we wish to stifle is a false opinion; and if we were sure, stifling it would be an evil still."
~ John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)
"The only prize much cared for by the powerful is power. The prize of the General is not a bigger tent, but command."
"If there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other it is the principle of free thought –– not free thought for those that agree with us, but freedom for the thought that we hate."
~ Oliver W. Holmes (1841-1935)
And finally an observation from Alexis de Tocqueville that ought to pique our interest and spur serious thought and sober conversation:
"Democratic nations care little for what has been but are haunted by visions of what will be . . . Thus not only does democracy make every man forget his ancestors, but it hides his descendants and separates his contemporaries from him; it throws him back forever on himself alone and threatens in the end to confine him to the solitude of his own heart."
~ Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859)
Ours is an age where ethics has become obsolete. It is superceded by science, deleted by philosophy and dismissed as emotive by psychology. It is drowned in compassion, evaporates into aesthetics and retreats before relativism. The usual moral distinctions between good and bad are simply drowned in a maudlin emotion in which we feel more sympathy for the murderer than for the murdered, for the adulterer than for the betrayed, and in which we have actually begun to believe that the real guilty party, the one who somehow caused it all, is the victim, and not the perpetrator of the crime- Robert Fitch
Ethics apart from God is wrong headed because its up for grabs. Ravi Zacharias
FT, you think the GAY MARRIAGE "movement" is fiendishly go dictatorial??
And I don't believe gays are "traditionally despised"...for YEARS, I've known gay men who just lived their lives, who didn't march, didn't make demands, nobody hated them at all.
Whether they really wanted to marry is up for grabs because gay men I've known have told me they wouldn't want to marry.
Perhaps that's because marriage seemed like a total pipe dream but they told me it was because they liked being with different men. I don't nkow.
When still young, Gore Vidal, already gaining celebrity and a degree of notoriety, was asked in an interview about his as-yet-undetermined sexual orientation -- a very delicate subject in those days. After managing to evade the question adroitly, the interviewer grew exasperated, and finally asked him point blank, "Okay, was the first time you had sex with a man or was it a woman?"
Vidal without missing a beat smiled wryly and said, "I'm not sure, I was too polite to ask."
There are thousands of former homosexuals. The strongest scientific evidence of this was provided by one of the most unlikely sources. Robert L. Spitzer is a psychiatrist who was instrumental in pushing for the controversial 1973 decision of the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. That event was a crucial early victory for homosexual activists.
Nevertheless, Dr. Spitzer had the intellectual honesty to accept a challenge to study the results of what is called “reparative therapy” for homosexuality. Reparative therapy is a mental health treatment designed to reduce unwanted homosexual attractions and behavior.
Dr. Spitzer studied 200 people who had reported some measure of change from a homosexual to a heterosexual orientation. He published his conclusions in 2003:
This study indicates that some gay men and lesbians, following reparative therapy, report that they have made major changes from a predominantly homosexual orientation to a predominantly heterosexual orientation. The changes following reparative therapy were not limited to sexual behavior and sexual orientation self-identity. The changes encompassed sexual attraction, arousal, fantasy, yearning, and being bothered by homosexual feelings. The changes encompassed the core aspects of sexual orientation.25
Spitzer also notes that a survey of the literature in 2001 by another researcher found at least 19 studies that include tangible data suggesting a homosexual orientation can be changed.
" ... whether you think gay conversion therapy is good or bad, isn't it nuts to ban it by law?"
Since you brought it up, I think it was "nuts" to legislate AGAINST homosexual activity in the first place.
"To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction."
Isn't that one of the primary laws of Physics?
It applies also to the presumption that any one of us has the right or the duty to inveigh against private concerns few are equipped to understand.
To use the Bible as justification for persecuting and restricting the rights and privileges of others deemed "suspicious" "inappropriate, or "undesirable" by the ignorant majority should be regarded as a deadly sin of mammoth proportions.
[Please review "It's the Belligerence, Stupid!" published at FreeThinke's Blog last summer.]
There's a great deal MORE evidence that apparently HETEROSEXUAL orientation can be changed also, EB.
Everything written by the "Let's Get Rid of Gayness, Because It's Evil" faction is tendentious in the extreme, and I believe the findings of people like Dr. Spitzer -- and the stories told by Michele Bachmann's embarrassingly effeminate husband -- are largely spurious -- the result of self-delusion and wishful thinking on the part of "patients" and therapists alike. Even if sincerely motivated, this is still charlatanism of a particularly cruel nature.
Neglected too in this prolonged discussion is the widespread phenomenon of BISEXUALITY.
You never really know what your brother, husband, uncle, grandfather, boyfriend, girlfriend, son, daughter, niece, nephew -- or WIFE -- is capable of.
Confronting REALITY instead of living in a world of FANTASY fueled by a certain type of religious conviction might might prove revelatory.
Better to deal with life as it is rather than as you wish it could be.
There's a great deal MORE evidence that apparently HETEROSEXUAL orientation can be changed also, EB.
In either case it's clear that what changes us isn't biological though. Romans chapter 1 says that God gives them over to a depraved mind.
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
If the Bible won't suffice perhaps the conjugal argument would
Civil rights issue? Not really.
All that's left is some morally relativistic argument that based on what?? Empiricism? Reason? Emotion? Science? Existentialism....????
Shifting sands FT...not a tenable argument when the foundation might be different tomorrow.
I do know what anyone is capable of. It's spelled out in the very Book that spells out God's ideal.
and of course you understand that Spitzer has more some emotional appeal to back up what he said.
The strongest scientific evidence of this was provided by one of the most unlikely sources...
If the flawed studies that are appealed to by homosexuals as evidence for a biological reason then shouldn't the evidence to the contrary be given equal weight?
So you may argue with your emotional appeals but even the Supreme Court asked the very same questions in which revisionists often call homophobic.
Confronting REALITY instead of living in a world of FANTASY fueled by a certain type of religious conviction might might prove revelatory.
The world as it is...is fallen. I wouldn't expect anything less. Does this make hanging a sign on a horse that says "cow" make that horse a cow?
and what will happen when bigamists want to be included in that definition? Would you be like Ted Olsen and say that those relationships would be excluded also? If so why? What will be the foundation on which you make your appeal?
To use the Bible as justification for persecuting and restricting the rights and privileges of others deemed "suspicious" "inappropriate, or "undesirable" by the ignorant majority should be regarded as a deadly sin of mammoth proportions
If there were only religious appeals you may have a point. see my comments above
I would ask in what way would this benefit society as a whole? Gays will benefit very little as few of them would actually want to marry. (assuming the research in proclivity for promiscuousness in homosexuals is true).
Congress rested its authority to pass the Civil Rights Act not on the Constitution’s guarantee of the “equal protection of the laws,” but on its power to regulate interstate commerce. When such a “right” is extended (for the individual to be free from “discrimination” in employment), it infringes upon what would otherwise be the customary right of the employer to determine the qualifications for employment. The extension of historic constitutional rights is a “win-win” situation, but the extension of laws against employment discrimination is more of a “zero-sum” game—when one (such as the employment applicant) wins more protection, another (the employer) actually loses a corresponding measure of freedom. It is because of this that lawmakers should be exceedingly cautious, rather than generous, about expanding the categories of protection against private employment discrimination.
Because of our national shame at the historic legacy of racial discrimination against blacks, many people have come to think of “discrimination” as inherently evil. However, the basic meaning of “discriminate” is simply “to make a distinction.” To compare and evaluate candidates based on their education, experience, intelligence, and competence is inherently “discrimination.” The question, therefore, is not whether “discrimination” will take place—it can, it will and it must. The question for public policy is: which forms of “discrimination” are so profoundly offensive to the national conscience that they justify government action that interferes with the rights of employers and other private entities and gives special protections to certain classes of people?
In the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Congress answered that question by including only five categories of protection. As noted above, those categories were: “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” For instance, a banker could deny an applicant a loan because the applicant was not credit-worthy, but not because he or she was Jewish or black. What do these protected categories have in common?
While there is no definitive legal answer, the most logical answer would seem to be that the case for granting legal protection against “discrimination” is strongest when based on a personal characteristic that is:
• Inborn, involuntary, and immutable (like race and color);
• Innocuous (because it does no harm to the employer, to the individual, or to society as a whole); and/or
• In the Constitution.
Is “sexual orientation,” like race and sex, a characteristic that is inborn, involuntary, immutable, innocuous, and in the Constitution? Is it, like religion (which is not inborn, involuntary, immutable, or necessarily innocuous, but is in the Constitution), a characteristic that meets even one of these criteria?
The only truthful answer is no.
To use the Bible as justification for persecuting and restricting the rights and privileges of others deemed "suspicious" "inappropriate, or "undesirable" by the ignorant majority should be regarded as a deadly sin of mammoth proportions
if this were the case then one doesn't understand neither the Bible nor it's message. The much larger sin would be equating love with condoning what is clearly not endorsed in the Bible. To God all our works are as filthy rags.
Christians couldn't condone homosexuality anymore than they could condone adultery, fornication or thievery. The Bible points out that this is our human condition - one that neither seeks God nor desires what's really best for us. It's all part of our fallen nature. We're not ignorant, to the contrary....we understand the nature of all of us as human beings. Especially apart from God.
10 For the person who keeps all of the laws except one is as guilty as a person who has broken all of God’s laws. 11 For the same God who said, “You must not commit adultery,” also said, “You must not murder.”[e] So if you murder someone but do not commit adultery, you have still broken the law.
12 So whatever you say or whatever you do, remember that you will be judged by the law that sets you free. 13 There will be no mercy for those who have not shown mercy to others. But if you have been merciful, God will be merciful when he judges you.
Confronting REALITY instead of living in a world of FANTASY fueled by a certain type of religious conviction might might prove revelatory.
God's ideal is hardly fantasy neither is it a certain TYPE of religious fantasy. Marriage has always been defined as between a man and a woman. You're the revisionist, yours is the fantasy.
The alternative to God's ideal is the whims of men. Hardly a foundation worth standing on.
Post a Comment