Sincere apologies for taking 5 years to understand NDE comments on Gay Community!

Interesting side-step manuever. Are you Christian? If you are I wouldn't mind an honest answer seeing as that's what your link claimed.

I agree 100%, though I don't believe in the Bible per se.

Psychology isn't a science. And it was removed for much more than political reasons. In fact it was ADDED because there were a lot of intellectual people who thought they could protect gays from being treated as criminals, and instead treated as "Ill", as victims.

 

I haven't seen a single verse.

But I am sure you are going to tell me how wrong you think I am and not listen to a single word I have to say, so let's forgo the incessant need to be right right now and just agree to disagree.

 

I have absolutely no stake in this whatsoever, but I understand Christians who say the Bible is clear on the matter. To me, the Bible mostly reflects the mores of the time - and one of those mores was homophobia.

 

I'm so sick of that made up word. There is no such thing as homophobia. Anyone who uses it is an idiot. Nobody has ever been clinically diagnosed with homophobia. There is no treatment for it.

On the other hand, homosexuality was considered a mental disorder for many decades as little as 40 years ago.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm okay with that. I see no point in arguing the obvious or attempting to dissuade someone of there deeply ingrained fantasies.

 

You aren't okay with it. You are still arguing.

But I don't wish to pull the Sisyphus act, to try and convince you that you only see what you want to in the bible.

But you could agree to disagree if you were mature enough.

- - - Updated - - -

To each their own. To me the bible doesn't mention homosexuality once.

 

Clinical homophobia is a very real and thoroughly documented phenomena. Some people (predominately men) are unusually adverse and even hostile to most forms same-sex physical affection, including platonic contact between family members and friends (hugging, kissing ect), and innocent faux-sexual "messing around" among heterosexual friends (ass slapping ect).

But it has also evolved, as language often does, to describe a more generalised fear and/or dislike or homosexuality or homosexuals, whatever the reason for it is. So it's definitely not idiotic to use a word correctly, as defined by every dictionary I know of. Being peeved at people using a word correctly... that's something I would consider idiotic.

40 years is a long time in psychology. Remember "female hysteria"?

It's easy to pass things off that you cannot understand as "mental".

 

But it actually describes in no uncertain terms homosexual acts, does it not?

"26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error."

 

Yes, it also described acts of heterosexuality, grooming, dressing, and so forth.

I am not going to say this more than once. There is nothing in those verses about homosexuality.

 

???

What is it talking about then?

 

Exactly what it says. Do homosexuals give up natural use of the opposite sex and burn with lust for the same sex? I know I never gave up anything. I don't regularly burn with lust.

 

Logically homosexuality, since these people are born that way, is certainly a psychosexual dysfunction, given that mammalian life is generally developed to be attracted to the opposite sex for the purpose of procreation. Life, in order for it to continue on has to procreate, and develop the correct sexual attraction in order to pull that off. So, homosexuality is a dysfunctional state of consciousness. And being such, the research into trying to find its cause and therefore treatment should have never been stopped by gay activism.

But as you would not discriminate against or mistreat any other psychological dysfunction, homosexuality should never have been treated at it was historically. It was quite cruel, and inhumane, lacking compassion.

Since the creator apparently created homosexuals, it could hardly be a sin, unless god is a cruel joker. But I think the bible has man's fingerprints and foibles all over it, and is not the word of god, but the word of imperfect man. No different than the book of Mormon. So given the book of Mormon was written by joseph smith in the 1800s, we can see how easy it is for a man just to write something and not having any trouble getting loads of people believing it came from god, buried golden plates, with an angel moroni appearing to help Smith translate the ancient text.

 

so you think it's dysfunctional not to procreate?

 

I'm not even going to debate the homophobia comment because it is utter nonsense. As for homosexuality, it is a mental disorder and an abnormality that can be cured. More studies should be done to figure out what that cure is.

 

I don't think that is what he said at all but it is typical of liberals to respond with a non sequitur.

 

That is what he said, and I am conservative.

- - - Updated - - -

if homosexuality is a mental disorder whatis the psychosis?

 

What issue are you conservative on?

The mental diagnosis for it was called HOMOSEXUALITY.

Homosexuality was a mental illness according to the American Psychiatric Association, until 1974.

Then in 1970 gay activists protested against the APA convention in San Francisco.

What’s noteworthy about this is that the removal of homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses was not triggered by some scientific breakthrough. There was no new fact or set of facts that stimulated this major change. Rather, it was the simple reality that gay people started to kick up a fuss.

So homosexuality was cured by a vote of the APA.

Transgenderism is still considered a mental disorder though. I guess they haven't gotten around to a vote on that one.

 

Gun control, abortion, death penalty, taxes, government spending, war, military, national defense, environment, oil, parents rights, private property, constitution, health care, manufacturing... Ect. I honestly can't think of an issue I am liberal on.

Yes but what is the psychosis?

So?

So?

There is the fact that you seem incapable of listing any psychosis.

If you say it was cured, that means that it had a psychosis that was eliminated. So what was it?

Or was it wrongly listed in the DSM in 1952 in the first place?

You really don't understand the subject you are talking about. Plenty of people have mental disorders. There is no cure, there is no treatment you can only help the person cope with them.

Instead of chasing phantoms such as things people claim to be a mental disorder but somehow lack a particular psychosis or even a broad one, which is really for political reasons, don't kid yourself. Let's focus on mental illness that actually cause a psychosis.

I know that claiming back in 1952 homosexuality was a mental illness according to the DSM and for some reason that you can't list it should still remain there really makes you feel like you have a good case, but it's a false cause.

 

An abnormal attraction to persons of the same sex. That is the mental disorder called homosexuality. That's pretty plain English. If you can't understand that, you either cannot read or you don't know what you are talking about.

 

Abnormality isn't indicative of mental illness. People who prefer root beer over coke are abnormal.

It can't be a disorder if there is no psychosis. furthermore there was never adiagnosis of homosexuality. You are full of it.

It's plain in that it is uneducated.

You can't list a psychosis, you clearly don't know what you are talking about.

 

knowledge will beat you out every time

 

As for homophobia, not at all.

http://m.psychologytoday.com/blog/therapy-matters/201104/scientific-homophobia

homophobia
ˌhɒməˈfəʊbɪə,ˌhəʊmə-/
noun
dislike of or prejudice against homosexual people.

Source: Oxford dictionary

As one of our most infamous forum users would say, do you have anything other than the silly thoughts bouncing around in your head to back up your assertions?

And the APA is not the only organisation to de-classify homosexuality as an illness. A mental illness has to hit certain psycho-metric markers. It doesn't bear any of the hallmarks of a "sociopathetic" condition the way we understand them today.

By your logic female hysteria still exists and was "cured by a vote".

The fact is, neither were cured by a vote because neither were illnesses to begin with. Homosexuality has a large biological/hormonal component.

 

DevilMay…. do you think that I am naive to suspect that the Helen Wambach Ph. D. research has at least some relevance to people being born homosexual?

Since well over sixty percent of her volunteers were women….. it sure does seem intriguing that almost exactly fifty percent of "past lives" that people saw while hypnotized…. .were members of the opposite sex.

http://www.carolmoore.net/articles/helenwambach.html

 

Yes. At least once in a person's existence.

 

This is partly a guy thing.

The male volunteers in the Helen Wambach Ph. D. research were totally freaked out when they were hypnotized and regressed to another time period where they saw themselves as women……. and giving birth…. and perhaps even dying during childbirth!

The female volunteers were not so offended by the idea of perhaps being a man in a past life!

 

I did list it. Can't you read? If you can't read what I wrote, that is one thing. If you choose to ignore what I wrote that is your choice.

Either way I think we are done.