My Personal Views On Homosexuality

Scroll to see replies

Two of my friends are in a gay relationship, but even if I did have a problem with it (which I don't)
1. It's not harming anyone
2. It's not affecting me
3. It's not my position to impose my own views on them

Here's it put another way-
My mum likes Marmite.
I don't.
However- I certainly do not confiscate all her Marmite and spend my days trying to pass legislation which discriminates against Marmite-eaters :awesome:

I just let her get on with it :cool:

Brilliant

Reply 401

minimarshmallow

Original post by Stefan1991

It's quite plain to see a sexual attraction does not cause harm in of itself.

I don't understand this sentence.
Paedosexuality isn't a thing. Paedophilia is. But it isn't a sexual orientation, because a sexual orientation is defined by academics as being the sex to which you are attracted to.
If you refuse to accept that then I don't see any point in arguing with you anymore, because plenty of people have tried to explain this to you on plenty of occasions and yet you continue to cling to your incorrect definition and structure an argument based on it...

Reply 402

Pindar

Original post by mmmpie

Yes, they are both sexual preferences, and no they are not matters of conscious choice. I don't think anybody has seriously disputed that. Equally I don't think anybody has failed to grasp the OP's flawed logic in failing to distinguish between sexual preferences and the actions that they motivate, it being only the latter that can be potentially harmful and therefore only the latter (if you accept the harm principle) which can have a demonstrable moral value.

It's only the latter that can be potentially harmful? There is no reason why paedophilia should be considered more or less harmful than homosexuality or any other sexual orientation.

Reply 403

mmmpie

Original post by Stefan1991

It's only the latter that can be potentially harmful? There is no reason why paedophilia should be considered more or less harmful than homosexuality or any other sexual orientation.

Either you need to re-read what I wrote (the whole of the sentence that you bolded half of), or you're suggesting that an adult having sex with a child does not pose a significant risk of harm to the child. I don't really feel the need to say more either way.

Reply 404

sophia_

for the first time ever for me

the term tl;dr has taken full control over my mind

Reply 405

bubelah

The OP takes free speech to a whole new level.

I have never read so much absolute garbage in all of my life.

Reply 406

Pindar

Original post by minimarshmallow

I don't understand this sentence.
Paedosexuality isn't a thing. Paedophilia is. But it isn't a sexual orientation, because a sexual orientation is defined by academics as being the sex to which you are attracted to.

But academics define paedophilia as a sexual orientation.

http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=8934
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pedophilia-a-sexual-orientation-experts-tell-parliament/

Gaither, George A. (2002). "Peer Commentaries on Green (2002) and Schmidt (2002): Pedophilia as a Sexual Orientation?," Archives of Sexual Behavior, 31(6), 486.
"One possible conceptualization of pedophilia is that it is a sexual orientation."

Bailey, J. Michael (2009). "What is Sexual Orientation and Do Women Have One?," in Hope, Debra A. (ed.) Contemporary Perspectives on Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Identities, p. 50.
"Pedophiles are men who are more sexually aroused by children than they are by adults of either sex. That is, their sexual orientation is toward children."

Dr Hubert Van Gijseghem: "For instance, it is a fact that real pedophiles account for only 20% of sexual abusers. If we know that pedophiles are not simply people who commit a small offence from time to time but rather are grappling with what is equivalent to a sexual orientation just like another individual may be grappling with heterosexuality or even homosexuality"

Dr Vernon Quinsey: "I just want to say that you can manage the risk that sex offenders present--even pedophiles. It's a matter of supervision. So it's not necessarily that they need to change their sexual orientation; they need to learn to control themselves, with our help. Pedophiles are not usually the highest-risk offenders."
Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights (2011). 40th Parliament, 3rd Session, February 14.

Howitt, D. (2002). "Social Exclusion--Pedophile Style," in Goodwin, Robin and Cramer, Duncan (eds.), Inappropriate Relationships, p. 232.
"There are several reasons for regarding pedophilia as a sexual orientation rather than as a perverse act of an evil manipulator of children (Howitt, 1995). One of these is that the pedophile orientation is formed by the age of young adulthood or late adolescence--much as homosexual orientation is."

If you refuse to accept this, I don't see the point in arguing with you anymore. If someone is so in denial they are choosing to remain distanced from reality and they refuse to accept testimony of experts who know what they're talking about, then I am afraid you are simply suffering from prejudice, denial, cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias. I recomend you get yourself checked out.

Ignore the experts at your own peril. Feel free to wallow in your ignorance.

Reply 407

Pindar

Original post by Id and Ego seek

Oh... :|
I'm clearly attacking the wrong person here :colondollar:

Sorry.

It's okay, it's reasonable to assume when most people are referring to paedophilia they are portraying it in a negative light. Such are the conditions of their social indoctrination and value-system programming.

It is simply a sublimation of society's previous hatred of homosexuality being displaced by hatred of paedosexuality, since society required a new internal enemy or "boogey-man" to rail against and create fear, insecurity and division for political gain.

This can be seen with the changing of meaning of the word 'nonce', a pejorative term traditionally used to describe homosexuals which with ease changed it's meaning to mean 'paedophile'. The target of hate has simply changed from one to the other.

What these bigots ironically tend to be oblivious to is that their hatred towards other people simply on the basis of their sexual orientation actually causes more of the harm they claim to be against.

Reply 408

minimarshmallow

Original post by Stefan1991

But academics define paedophilia as a sexual orientation.

http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=8934
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pedophilia-a-sexual-orientation-experts-tell-parliament/

Two psychologists who's research I haven't read, so I cannot be sure of their 'expert' status.

Gaither, George A. (2002). "Peer Commentaries on Green (2002) and Schmidt (2002): Pedophilia as a Sexual Orientation?," Archives of Sexual Behavior, 31(6), 486.
"One possible conceptualization of pedophilia is that it is a sexual orientation."

And the rest of that quote says... why is it a sexual orientation? I'd like to see the reasoning behind that.

Bailey, J. Michael (2009). "What is Sexual Orientation and Do Women Have One?," in Hope, Debra A. (ed.) Contemporary Perspectives on Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Identities, p. 50.
"Pedophiles are men who are more sexually aroused by children than they are by adults of either sex. That is, their sexual orientation is toward children."

Their sexual attractions are oriented towards children, yes. But I get the feeling that this quote is leaving out a lot - paedophiles can also be women. They are also usually attracted to children of a particular sex, meaning that their sexual orientation would be homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual, while also being a paedophile - meaning they're not attracted to adults. They're separate.

Dr Hubert Van Gijseghem: "For instance, it is a fact that real pedophiles account for only 20% of sexual abusers. If we know that pedophiles are not simply people who commit a small offence from time to time but rather are grappling with what is equivalent to a sexual orientation just like another individual may be grappling with heterosexuality or even homosexuality"

Dr Vernon Quinsey: "I just want to say that you can manage the risk that sex offenders present--even pedophiles. It's a matter of supervision. So it's not necessarily that they need to change their sexual orientation; they need to learn to control themselves, with our help. Pedophiles are not usually the highest-risk offenders."
Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights (2011). 40th Parliament, 3rd Session, February 14.

Again, two psychologists that you mentioned in the above two links, haven't read their research so cannot say they are 'experts'.

Howitt, D. (2002). "Social Exclusion--Pedophile Style," in Goodwin, Robin and Cramer, Duncan (eds.), Inappropriate Relationships, p. 232.
"There are several reasons for regarding pedophilia as a sexual orientation rather than as a perverse act of an evil manipulator of children (Howitt, 1995). One of these is that the pedophile orientation is formed by the age of young adulthood or late adolescence--much as homosexual orientation is."

That is not a reason to think of paedophilia as a sexual orientation, for starters. That is a similarity between the two, and there are similarities between me and my brother, but we aren't the same.
I also looked at the source and saw no other reason. So moving on.

If you refuse to accept this, I don't see the point in arguing with you anymore. If someone is so in denial they are choosing to remain distanced from reality and they refuse to accept testimony of experts who know what they're talking about, then I am afraid you are simply suffering from prejudice, denial, cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias. I recomend you get yourself checked out.

Ignore the experts at your own peril. Feel free to wallow in your ignorance.

The APA are the experts, you're ignoring them. I'm sure if any of the 'experts' you quoted had any paradigm shifting information, they'd know about it before you.

Reply 409

Pindar

Original post by mmmpie

Child sexual activity is not inherently or universally harmful, why would it be?

Reply 410

mmmpie

Original post by Stefan1991

Child sexual activity is not inherently or universally harmful, why would it be?

This is getting nowhere - stop abusing jargon to make yourself look clever and answer this very simple question: Does sexual activity between an adult and a child pose a significant risk of harm to the child?

Reply 411

Friend0007

Original post by RandZul'Zorander

His sexual orientation is a very complex things seeing as it has to do with his sexual practices but also how he self-idnetifies. While there may be women that Mr. Fry is attracted to they may be few and far between. It may be only certain women. It may be only 2 or 3 women that he has ever felt attracted to. This seems a rather silly amount of people to redefine one's identity over. And it hardly seems fitting to redefine one's sexual orientation, unless you want to suggest that someone who has homosexual feelings and felt attracted to only one person of the opposite sex ever should be classified as bisexual. But like I said that seems a bit silly.

Sexual orientation refers to an enduring pattern of emotional, romantic, and/or sexual attractions to men, women, or both sexes.

Now by this definition we can conclusively say, under the information presented in his regard, Mr. Fry's orientation is bisexual because he has demonstrated he is attracted to males and females.

Furthermore, it was stated:

Since according to you the APA is the authority in these matters, how does your defining of Mr. Fry's sexuality relate to the APA's definition?

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 412

ohirome

Original post by Stefan1991

Put down your dictionary and go to bed. Honestly, you're making a right monkey of yourself.

Reply 413

mmmpie

Original post by konvictz0007

Well you tell me, you seem to have all the definitions and keep changing your story. Your argument is falling to pieces. You say Mr. Fry is only attracted to '2 or 3' women. Since he is attracted to at least one woman it follows that it is possible he may be attracted to many women. 2 or 3 could become 20 or 30 or 200 or 300?

A homosexual is only attracted to their own sex.

Let me make this a little easier for you. Since you seem to love this organisation called the APA, let us use their definition of orientation:

Now by this definition we can conclusively say, under the information presented in his regard, Mr. Fry's orientation is bisexual because he has demonstrated he is attracted to males and females.

Furthermore, you state:

Since according to you the APA is the authority in these matters, how does your defining of Mr. Fry's sexuality relate to the APA's definition?

Your problem appears to be that you aren't distinguishing between a person's sexual orientation and the labels that we use to categorise sexual orientation. People don't get tagged as homosexual and then follow some sort of rulebook, people are people and get labeled with whichever category best fits them.

A self-example, and I suspect I'll regret it, but I am gay and have experienced attraction to women (well, one woman) in the past. I consider myself gay and that attraction to be an anomaly because then, as now, my sexual and romantic fantasies were exclusively about men. If I think about sex, it's always with guys. If I think about setting down and living happily ever after, it's still with men and not women. Just because I retain the ability to be attracted to the opposite sex in the case of rare individuals, does not mean I am attracted to the opposite sex in general.

Reply 414

SFsucks

Original post by konvictz0007

Yes my previous thread was deleted with untrue claims. I have done nothing wrong. I should not be punished for having an opinion.

oh I remember you, what is it with people like you who compare thing likes homosexuality to pedophile and other such things.

There is no proven harm in homosexuality while a pedophile is sexuality attractive to someone who is mentally and probably physically not developed for sex. Oh and another thing, I am not a threat to the human race, this world is way over populated with people having too many kids (many who can't look after them), destroying the earths resources. Also are you honestly telling me the only purpose of existing is to reproduce and nothing else, if you think this you sound like a sad person.

Reply 415

Pindar

Original post by minimarshmallow

Two psychologists who's research I haven't read, so I cannot be sure of their 'expert' status.

They are reported widely in the mainstream media as being experts.

Original post by minimarshmallow

And the rest of that quote says... why is it a sexual orientation? I'd like to see the reasoning behind that.

"One possible conceptualization of pedophilia is that it is a sexual orientation. This point of view appears to be consistent with Schmidt's reasoning. Although most researchers have tended to discuss sexual orientation in terms of the sexes or gender identities of the individuals involved (most likely assuming that the individual to whom one is attracted is of consenting age), there have been a growing number of researchers who have defined sexual orientation in much broader terms, which include pedophilia (e.g., Barbaree, Bogaert, & Seto, 1995; Berlin, 2000; Feierman, 1990; Laws & O'Donohue, 1997; Suppe, 1984). Barbaree et al. (1995), for instance, stated that "sexual orientation is defined by (1) the ability of a certain class of stimuli to evoke sexual arousal and desire in the individual, (2) the persons or objects toward which sexual behavior and activity are directed by the individual, and (3) the persons or objects depicted in fantasies and cognitions" (p. 358). Pedophilia certainly fits within this definition of sexual orientation. Furthermore, clinical evidence suggests that, similar to homosexual or heterosexual orientations, a pedophilic sexual orientation typically begins by early adolescence, tends to be lifelong, and is resistant to change (Abel & Osborn, 1995; Marshall, 1997), for as Schmidt states, it is part of the person's identity."

Original post by minimarshmallow

Exactly, they are separate. As in a separate sexual orientation. Sometimes sexual orientations can merge, such as bisexuality being both homosexuality and hetereosexuality. It is a fluid concept. In the same way paedosexuality by all means should be considered a separate sexual orientation.

Original post by minimarshmallow

Again, two psychologists that you mentioned in the above two links, haven't read their research so cannot say they are 'experts'.

Hubert Van Gijseghem, Psychologist and Professor Emeritus of University of Montreal

He specializes in psychopathology , developmental psychology and forensic psychology and wrote several books and articles including sexual abuse and parental alienation. He was born in Belgium and still gives regular lectures on, among other things, parental alienation syndrome .
On the theory about the parental alienation syndrome, he added insights on the socio-historical context. In the course of recent history was the position of the child against the parents approached consecutively from the theory of "tender-years presumption," the equality ideology and the " interests of the child . "
Van Gijseghem publishes mainly in French. He wrote in Dutch include an article on the major controversies about parental alienation

Main practice: Expertise psycholégale (Family Law, Criminal, Civil, youth, etc..)

Themes of education, research and practice:

General:

Forensic Psychology (or forensic)
Developmental psychology
Psychopathology

Specific:

Parenting skills and childcare
Intra and extrafamilial sexual abuse
Assessing an allegation
Assessment of alleged victims
Evaluation of alleged perpetrators
Evaluation of the investigative process
Personality of the sexual abuser
Psychopathy (Antisocial Personality Disorder)
Pathological narcissism
Evaluation of the statement in a judicial (Credibility Assessment)
Parental Alienation
Psycholégale expertise and methodologies

Hubert Van Gijseghem earned a degree in psychology at the University of Leuven (Louvain) in 1963 and a doctorate (Ph.D.) in the same discipline at the University of Montreal, in 1970.

Born in Dendermonde in the Flemish region of Belgium, he moved to Montreal where in 1965, 1969 to 1982, he directed the Clinic Counseling Center. Full Professor at the University of Montreal (School of psycho-education), he teaches mainly since 1969, developmental psychology and psychopathology and does research on sexual abuse and the child's testimony. Founding member of the Association of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapists in Quebec (APPQ), he led for twenty years the Training Program in Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Psychology Center Gouin. Since then he has largely abandoned the psychoanalytic paradigm to adopt a much more empirical, that is to say, focusing on scientific research. Retired from the University since 2006 after thirty-five years as a professor, he worked in private practice, currently only psycholégale expertise in different jurisdictions.

He created and presented training programs on sexual abuse and assault, on hearing and on the validation of statements by victims of abuse, on parental alienation and the methodology psycholégale expertise in family matters and other . These training programs are aimed at both social networks and protectionist than the world record.

He has published in various scientific journals some two hundred articles dealing primarily with delinquency, psychopathology, psychotherapy, sexual abuse, the hearing of alleged victims, the process of investigation of abuse, parental alienation, the psycho-legal expertise. He delivered some six hundred at conferences and at other events and that scientists in both Europe and North America.

He is the author of several books. In 1985, Hurtubise HMH: " The search for the object ", subtitled : "For a psychology researcher's treasure ", dealing with object relations, in 1988, in Meridian:" The personality of the sexual abuser "presenting a typology from the perspective of psychodynamic. Still in Meridian in 1992, he directed "The child laid bare", subtitled : "The allegation of sexual abuse: the search for truth ". Also at Meridien in 1999, appeared " Us and abuse of the verbal description in terms of sexual abuse ". He is also co-editor of five collective books.

Vernon Quinsey Psychologist and Professor Emeritus at Queen's University
B.Sc., University of North Dakota at Grand Forks, 1966
with a psychology major and zoology minor. Summa cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa, Psi Chi, with honours in psychology.

M.Sc., University of Massachusets at Amherst, 1969
University Fellow (1966-69).

Ph.D., University of Massachusets at Amherst, 1970 from the Biopsychology Program

POSITIONS:
Teaching Fellow, Smith College, 1969-70.
Killam Postdoctoral Fellow, Dalhousie University, 1970-71.
Psychologist, Penetanguishene Mental Health Centre, 1971-75.
Director of Research, Penetanguishene Mental Health Centre, 1976-84; 1986-88.
Visiting Scientist, Philippe Pinel Institute of Montreal, 1984-86.
Adjunct Associate Professor, Concordia University, 1984-86.
Associate Professor, Psychiatry Department, University of Toronto, 1986-88.
Professor and Queen's National Scholar, Psychology Department, Queen's, 1988-.
Cross appointed as Professor of Psychiatry, Queen's University, 1994-.
Associate Head, Division of Forensic/Correctional Psychiatry, 1995-98.
Cross appointed as Professor of Biology, Queen’s University, 2003-.
Head of Psychology Department, Queen’s University, 2004-8.
Appointed Professor Emeritus of Psychology, Biology, & Psychiatry, Queen’s, 2009.

Research Interests
Prediction, modification, and management of antisocial and violent behavior, applied decision making, program development and evaluation, sexual preference assessment, sex offenders, forensic/correctional psychology, evolutionary influence on sexual and aggressive behaviors.

Area of specialty
Social-Personality Program

HONOURS:
Gray Lecturer, Canadian Psychiatric Association, 1994.
Significant Achievement Award, Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, 1994.
Ontario Mental Health Foundation Senior Research Fellowship, 1997-2003.
Career Contribution Award, Criminal Justice Section of the Canadian Psychological
Association, 2005.
Don Andrews Lecturer, Correctional Service of Canada, 2005.
Donald O. Hebb Award for contributions to psychology as a science, Canadian
Psychological Association, 2008.

TEACHING EXPERIENCE:
Smith College, Northampton, Mass.: Introductory Psychology and Animal Behavior
section of Experimental Psychology, 1969-70.
Dalhousie: Animal learning portion of introductory psychology, 1970-71.
Wilfred Laurier University: Introductory Psychology, 1977-78.
York University: Abnormal Psychology, 1979-80.
University of Montreal: Graduate Directed Studies course, 1984-85.
Mental Health Centre, Penetanguishene: Crisis intervention and prevention, self defense,
and patient restraint to psychiatric hospital staff, 1980-84.
Karate instructor, 1982-84; 1991-96. First dan, Okinawan Goju-ryu (1988).
Ontario Region, Correctional Service Canada: Correctional Psychology for psychology
staff, 1991-92.
Queen's University: Introductory Psychology, Abnormal Psychology, Psychometrics,
Human Evolution and Behavior, Psychology of Crime, History of Psychology.
Graduate courses in Prediction and Management of Violent Behavior, Juvenile
Delinquency, Human Evolution and Behavior, and Research Skills. Lectures in
various graduate clinical psychology courses, 1988-2004.

As part of an interdisciplinary team, designed, implemented, and supervised on-ward behavioral
programs on a 150-bed maximum security psychiatric unit, 1971-75. Directed the
Research Department at the Penetanguishene Mental Health Centre, 1976-84; 1986-88.
Head of Psychology Department, Queen’s University, 2004-2008.

SCIENTIFIC AND PROFESSIONAL COMMITTEES:
Member, Canadian Psychological Association Scientific Affairs Committee, 1979-80. 3
Participant, Canadian Psychological Association (CPA) State of the Discipline Review,
1984.
Chair, CPA committee for response to the Mental Disorder Project draft, 1984-85.
Member of the Research Committee of the Philippe Pinel Institute, 1982-86.
Member, Research Center Technical Advisory Committee of the American National
Committee for Prevention of Child Abuse, 1986.
Co-chair, New York Academy of Sciences meeting on Human Sexual Aggression, 1986.
Member, American Psychiatric Association Committee to Revise DSM III Advisory
Subcommittee on the Paraphilias, 1986.
Co-chair, NIMH meeting on standardization of measures of sexual preferences, 1987.
Member, Working Group on Services for Mentally Disordered Offenders, Ontario
Ministry of Health, 1989.
Member, Research Advisory Committee, Sex Offender Treatment and Evaluation Project
funded by the California Department of Mental Health and NIMH, 1990-92.
Chair, Committee on Aberrant Behavior, OMHF, 1991-94.
Consultant, Working Group on High Risk Offenders. Reported to the Solicitor General of
Canada. 1993.
Member, Ad Hoc Committee of the Criminal Justice Psychology Section dealing with
dangerous offender legislation. 1993.
Member, Research Committee, Kingston Psychiatric Hospital. 1995-.2004.
Member, Advisory Board, Pacific Institute for the Study of Conflict and Aggression.
2000-2006.
Member, Academic Advisory Committee, Applied Degree, St. Lawrence College, 2001.
Participant, Ontario Mental Health Foundation Consensus Building Special Initiatives
Consensus Building Workshop, 2001.
External Review Team. Psychology Department, University of Montreal, 2005.
EDITORIAL BOARDS:
Crime and Justice, 1977-79.
Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 1979-88.
Treatment of Sexual Aggressives Newsletter, 1980.
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 1982-94.
Sexual Coercion and Assault, 1985-88.
Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1985-2010.
Annals of Sex Research, 1986-94.
Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 1989-2010.
Violence Update, 1989-94.
Sexual Abuse: Research and Treatment, 1994-2010.
Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal, 1995-2010.
Acta Sexologica, 1995-97.
Trauma, Abuse, and Violence: A Journal of Reviews, 1998-2010.
Legal and Criminological Psychology, 2000-2010.
International Journal of Forensic Psychology, 2001-2010.
The Open Journal of Criminology, 2007-2010. 4
CONSULTANT POSITIONS:
Behaviour Management Services, York Central Hospital, Richmond Hill, ON, 1982-90.
Mental Health Centre, Penetanguishene, Ontario, 1988-92.
Kingston Psychiatric Hospital, 1988-2001.
Mental Health Facilities Branch of the Ontario Ministry of Health, 1990-94.
Correctional Service Canada (Ontario Region), 1990-95.
Supervising Consultant, Tri-Ministerial Facility Population Review (Ontario), 1997.
Institute for Social Policy, Evergreen State College, Olympia, Washington, 1997-2000.
Consultant in connection to a genocide trial to the Senior Trial Attorney, Office of the
Prosecutor, ICTR, Arusha, Tanzania, 1998.
President, Q & A Consultants Incorporated, 1999-2005.
SELECTED EXPERT TESTIMONY:
Canadian Parliamentary Committee on Sentencing, 1989.
Committee of the Colorado State Legislature on Criminal Sanctions, 1990.
Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons Disciplinary Review Panel, 1990.
Ontario Lieutenant Governor's Board of Review, 1991.
Temporary Absence Review Panel (reporting to the Solicitor General), 1992.
Coroner's Inquest into the death of Christopher Stephenson. Brampton, ON, 1992).
Coroner's Inquest into the death of a Brockville Psychiatric Hospital patient. Brockville,
ON (1993).
Ontario Criminal Code Review Board, 1994-9.
King County Superior Court, Seattle, WA. In Re the Detention of Aqui, 1996;
Henrickson, 1997, and Soliz, 1999.
Circuit Court of Scott County, Missouri, In Re Nelvin Spencer, 2002.
McLellan vs Attorney General of Canada, 2005.
Ewert vs. Attorney General of Canada, 2006.
Canadian Parliamentary Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, 2011.

And has published hundreds of studies, research papers and publications. If you want me to list them, I will.

Original post by minimarshmallow

Yes continue to ignore all the evidence like you have been doing :rolleyes:

Original post by minimarshmallow

The APA are the experts, you're ignoring them. I'm sure if any of the 'experts' you quoted had any paradigm shifting information, they'd know about it before you.

The APA are not the experts, they are the same people who claimed homosexuality was a mental illness and fought to keep it considered one. When a group is found to be biased, lying and suppressing the truth, the trick is not to instantly forget and then take everything they say as gospel forever on.

Reply 416

Pindar

Original post by ohirome

Put down your dictionary and go to bed. Honestly, you're making a right monkey of yourself.

You don't need a dictionary to understand simple and commonly used words. If you do, maybe you should read a little.

Reply 417

SFsucks

Original post by tufc

Thatcher had it right on the issue. She said all these liberals everywhere were teaching children that they had an inherent right to be gay. Let them do what they want, I say, but don't let them adopt children for crying out loud.

So you prefer a child to never have parents rather than have 2 loving parent. To be stuck in a children's home for the rest of his/her childhood, maybe stuck with other kids they don't get on with.

You sir sound like a traditional idiot.

Reply 418

Chrosson

Original post by RandZul'Zorander

The problem is that there is no counter-example that I have ever found. The APA has made it clear that there is really no choice about sexual orientation. They need to be somewhat conservative but so far no research has shown any choice in the matter. The choice that some people have maybe would be bisexuals, and for some reason many people believe that a bisexual individual who enters a relationship with someone of the same sex makes them homosexual....if you subscribe to that then they are in fact 'choosing' their sexuality. However that wouldn't make sense. So I see little to no point in acknowledging any form of choice on the subject. There has been no credible evidence to suggest that it even could be, whereas there is overwhelming evidence saying that it is not.

Also the APA did say that trying to change one's sexual orientation has no evidence to show it works. Please don't tell me to read a source that I have read many many times. I know exactly what it says.

Not shown to be effective. Meaning there is no evidence to say that one can change their sexual orientation.

Let me make sure I'm interpreting you both correctly. You both accept that this organisation is a definitive source of information. You both say that the APA is 'conservative'. But you seem to completely miss that the APA might actually have a reason for being conservative?

You also claim that your stronger statements (that homosexuality is absolutely not a choice) are backed up by the APA when they're not - the APA carefully does not concretely say homosexuality isn't a choice for everyone (which is what you seem to be doing). Of course, it might well not be, and in the next 10 years incontrovertible proof may be found to that effect (in which case 'most' would apply to 'all' etc). Until that point you have to at least accept the possibility (as the APA's wording does) that there may be some element of choice somewhere for some people.

I don't even know why I'm arguing. It's a minor point, but if you're going to cite a source then you should be completely faithful to it, even if your personal opinion is that it's conservative...

Reply 419

ohirome

I see. Wonderful input there, thanks. You can quote yourself silly, but its not going to make your point any less ridiculous, hence why theres a strong majority here (and of course across the professional psych world) telling you that you're wrong. Its cool though, you're entitled to your opinion however ridiculous it may be. Keep spreading the paedophile love.