Ex-Gays Fight LGBT Power Play to Outlaw Conversion Therapy
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
A group including former gays who benefited from reparative therapy is fighting a California bill that would label such therapy a fraudulent business practice and ban counseling aimed at helping people who are unhappy with their same-sex attraction.
More than 350 people rallied at the state Capitol this week to oppose the proposal, claiming that the legislation unfairly limits people’s options to seek psychological help. The protesters included 30 former gay and transgendered people who spoke at a podium outside the California statehouse against the proposed law.
“I did not want to be gay,” said Christian pastor Jim Domen, who said the therapy helped him to marry his wife and have children. “Please do not take away professional help programs that have helped people like me.”
“This legislation actually takes away rights from those who are questioning their sexuality,” said Ken Williams, co-founder of Equipped to Love. “We don’t want to see an America where the government is controlling how people identify sexually.”
Another demonstrator, pro golfer Kris Olsen denounced the bill for making it illegal for former homosexuals like her to freely seek counseling.
“AB2943 violates my right to choose,” she said. “It is a blatant violation of my first amendment rights and I believe there’s a reason why our Founding Father chose to put these rights in the very first amendment.”
The new legislation would ban “advertising, offering for sale, or selling services constituting sexual orientation change efforts to an individual,” which it would include in its list of “unfair or deceptive acts or practices.”
Dr. Joseph Nicolosi is a licensed clinical psychologist who runs the largest reparative therapy clinic in the world. He told Breitbart News that his clinic uses evidence-based treatment interventions, the same interventions used by other clinics throughout the world, to treat trauma and sexual addictions.
“In the client-therapist relationship, the client is in the driver’s seat,” Nicolosi said. “Politicians have no business telling people their therapy goals are illegal.”
“Thirty years of science has shown us that sexuality is fluid and can change for many people,” Nicolosi told Breitbart.
Dr. Nicolosi said limiting people’s legitimate options for ideological reasons is a textbook case of political overreach.
“Sacramento politicians want to deny the people of California the freedom to find joy in living consistently with their values, including as they relate to their sexuality,” he said.
As a clinical psychologist, Nicolosi said, “I help people resolve the issues that are causing them conflict, affirm them in their journey, and help them achieve their goals— not the politician’s goals!”
There are numerous documented cases of persons with same-sex attraction who have been helped by conversion therapy.
In 1997, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) conducted a survey of 882 patients who underwent reparative therapy seeking to modify their sexual orientation.
Nearly half of the patients (47 percent) experienced a significant change in their sexual attraction. Among patients who self-identified as “exclusively homosexual” before treatment, 18 percent self-identified as exclusively heterosexual following therapy, while 17 percent identified as almost entirely heterosexual and 12 percent as more heterosexual than homosexual.
The bigger question is not what percentage of patients are helped by reparative therapy, but why the state would seek to legislate what sort of therapy people are allowed to seek.
There is only one answer, and it is self-evident. The LGBT lobby abhors having the homosexual inclination treated as a pathology and wants to prevent anyone from doing so, by coercion if necessary. The suggestion that people with same-sex attraction can be helped by therapy to modify their sexual orientation is anathema to the LGBT movement.
The current power play is reminiscent of a similar political move in 1973 that eliminated homosexuality from official lists of psychological disorders not because of any scientific discovery that changed the opinion of the medical profession, but because of political pressure from gay-rights activists to reclassify homosexuality as “normal.”
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
On Wednesday the Massachusetts House voted 137-14 to ban "ex-gay" quackery and passage in the Senate and the governor's signature are all but certain.
Good! Harmful practices like that, which have no benefit, should be banned. Massachusetts has always been at the forefront of progressive thinking.
I was a bit surprised to learn that it wasn't already banned there....no doubt due to the adverse influence of Catholicism.
Better late than never I suppose. but then, what is the prevalence of conversion therapy in Mass.? If it was low to none, then there may not have been an immediate incentive to ban it. Still, good for Mass. for doing the right thing.
Locked, seeder hasn't posted for 5 days.
Convo goes off the rails at 16 & 18
Numerous flags for off topic & Tos
Who is online
110 visitors
Great idea. I'm thinking of opening a clinic for thumpers that have previously had to have a bible removed their ass during pursuit of the great commission. If I could get a price point for that pray the gay away conversion therapy, I'll know what to charge thumpers.
The world would be a much better place if we could cure people of both religious belief and ignorance.
The second coming cannot happen because the first coming never did.
The 2nd coming is just a silly superstition. The only thing it or such religious nonsense "cures" is logical and rational thinking.
That's because you're a girl and he's a selfish oaf.
Whatever........
Set the wayback machine to the 70's for me. Get me some windowpane acid and the 3rd and 4th is possible too.
The one that Paul insisted was eminent?
Conversion Quackery is already banned in California for minors but the latest bill in CA extends the ban to also protect adults from this harmful and fraudulent practice. New Jersey also treats it as fraud. So far I think 12 or 13 states have these bans, and Canada is about to ban it entirely even when religious sects do it. Manitoba, Ontario and Vancouver already ban it.
"Treatments" shown to be ineffective and often harmful are banned?!
Next think you know, they won't let doctors prescribe Thalidomide for morning sickness!
What is this world coming to?
In other ludicrous news, a group of ex black people is fighting to keep confederate statues across the nation.
so it states that we don't have people who have changed their sexual orientation - they are just " heterosexual functioning " and pretending to be heterosexual, right Heartland American ? if they truly changed their sexual orientation then they would just be "heterosexual" and not "heterosexual functioning" , correct ?
of course 2 people of the opposite gender who are homosexual can have lasting relationships with enough emotional satisfaction to rate at least a 7 on a 10-point scale - they are called friendships . if you have a relationship with someone who is the same gender as you are and you get enough emotional satisfaction to rate at least a 7 out of 10 - does that make you a homosexual or do you just have a friendship with someone of the same gender, Heartland American ?
wait.. so these " heterosexual functioning " people still need to fantasize about the same gender to achieve sexual satisfaction and you think they " changed " their sexual orientation ??
ah yes.. let's talk about that -
anyone remember John Paulk ? he was a leader in the Christian "ex-gay" movement , thought he was " cured " and had " changed " his sexual orientation , even married a woman to prove it ... and today he's homosexual still
or we could talk about Exodus International - a leading Christian reparative therapy organization to "change" people's sexual orientations to heterosexual .... and how they closed and apologized to the world because they realized they were wrong ...
or we could talk about one of the founding members of Exodus International - Michael Bussee - he was convinced that God helped him change his sexual orientation and that through God he became heterosexual and was happy married to a woman ........ until he fell in love with a guy and they divorced their wives so they could be together .. OOOOPS ! I guess God isn't that powerful after all, huh Heartland American ?
and yet you want to subject innocent people to these "treatments" so you can control their lives and make them worship and believe as you do, isn't that right Heartland American ?
It sure is interesting that so many thumpers are obsessed with sodomy.
Indeed. And they act like there's something wrong with it. As if it is the worse thing ever. They really need to lighten up.
Seems weird that God would create so many gay people if he hates them so much. Weird, very weird.
According to religious conservatives, only part of us were created in God's image. The other half were created in his apparently closeted self-image.
Temptations? So, you are tempted to have gay sex but resist it?? I'm not, and it's not because I'm right with God or anything, it's because I'm not gay. Gay guys are not tempted by women but are by men because they're gay! Simple. What do you want gays to do, never fall in love, never have sex, because it's a 'sin?' Live and let live HA, there's not nearly enough love in this world, stop pissing on the love and happiness that others may find simply because they find it in a slightly different way than you do.
No doubt that's the correct diagnosis in his case. It seems that all of these anti-gay freaks are in denial about why they're attracted to the same sex.
and yet since your God (supposedly) created everything - that means he is responsible for creating sin as well
this comment highlights an extreme ignorance on the topic of sexual orientation since it is not just a "behavior", but it's not surprising this ignorance exists with the many of the religious
God created everything. Is God omnipotent? Is God omniscient? How is it that an omniscient God creates Adam and Eve and is surprised when they disobey Him? Apparently you must believe that God is not fully omniscient - that He really does not know everything or that God is not fully omnipotent - that He really could not create creatures who would follow His rules.
Something has to give. Either God is not nearly as omnipotent and omniscient as most religious people believe or God set Adam and Eve up to fail.
Logically God also had to create sin if you believe that he is omnipotent and he created the universe. If God did create the universe and he is omnipotent, then who created sin and why didn't God stop them? It is a logical conundrum for you to believe that God is omnipotent, but only part of the time.
Unless you don't know what omnipotent means.
I'm not even sure why this is even a topic.
I'm a hard science kind of girl. The hard science says that when you look at the MRI's the brain of gay individuals, they are structurally different. No amount of "therapy" is going to change that.
Conversion therapy can't fix what mother nature has created.
The people pushing reparative therapy are either very deep in their own closet or religious shysters looking to capitalize on their discomfort. Anyone with even a minimal knowledge of psychology can see them projecting like a 12 screen Cineplex.
And Mother Nature created pedophiles, drug addicts, alcoholics, schizophrenics and other disorders. Do you propose that they not be treated for their ailments?
Why do you try to equate LGBT people with pedophiles, alcoholics and drug addicts?
Who is being harmed by someone being gay and loving another consenting adult?
please explain how the LGBT community can be grouped in the same category as pedophiles, drug addicts, alcoholics, schizophrenics and other disorders. Do all these groups have the same structure to their brains ? what is the common "link" that you think exists to place all of these groups into the same category as people who have "ailments" ?
Cue the crickets.
Or at best some absurd and asinine response.
Thus revealing your own rather profound anti-LGBT bias. Your comment makes as much sense as comparing those categories to left-handed folks, a minority which similarly been irrationally stigmatized by Christianity and related superstitions.
Thus your vote for the thrice-married pussy-grabber who was porking a porn-star while his 3rd wife was nursing her son. That's a true biblical marriage.
What are those dangerous effects of non-heterosexual marriage? Do you also have a problem with recreational sex, even when married?
Where do you get the idea that marrying as a virgin means that people don't cheat on each other? Why do you have a problem with pre-marital sex? Why would you want to marry someone who is as inexperienced as you are and doesn't know what they like? You sound suspiciously like conservative Muslims who punish unmarried women who are not virgins.
Is that why Trump is your avatar? How many threads have you created that support Trump?
There are dangerous side effects from eating bacon. It's caused the death of many people, especially men, at far too young an age. Is eating fatty foods a sin too?
There is that passage in Leviticus, but that would also be restraint of trade for hog farmers and pork processors, as well as trampling on the rights of non-conservative Christians. I wonder which side HA will support?
that don't sound like much fun
But you support everything that orange baby-man does and says. Now explain yourself. Do you honestly think trumpy has the same moral and ethical values as you do?
Stats show that about 1/3 of married HETEROSEXUALS cheat. Looks like HETEROSEXUALS are the majority of the problem.
Thank you for illustrating that conservatives only see in black and white.
There are things like condoms and other ways to prevent STDs.
I wonder why Heartland hasn't replied to this question?
(Skirting the CoC removed) Telo
no comment.
That's interesting HA because on almost every seed you manage to interject your agenda to protest your existing state government, to be as much a thorn in their side and financial burden as possible. So before you start labeling people that you oppose as 'human debris' perhaps a little self reflection is in order.
(Skirting the CoC removed) Telo
Why don't you have a picture of Evan Mullin if you are a supporter of his ideas?
Why are you voting for a former CIA member and a Wall Street banker. This guy is the establishment and the deep state that conservatives constantly rant about. The fact that he is Mormon makes me question your supposed religious claims.
Your preferred POTUS candidate also lost. He is nothing like Trump so why are you supporting Trump?
That is the definition of trolling.
(Skirting the CoC removed) Telo
You cannot help yourself from digging deeper into the hole that you previously created. The first step to getting out of a hole is to stop digging deeper.
You aren't addressing 'them', your calling 'them' names on a website. You have plenty of opportunity to actually address the 'secular progressive left' right there in Redding if you have the gonads to address them as 'human debris' to their face.
Actually, according to many a Facebook page from Redding there HAVE been quite a few noisy protests. One of the recent ones was Redding March for our lives.
Good of you to acknowledge that not all Hillary supporters are human debris. /s
How's THAT working our for you?
Actually, judging from area Facebook pages, there sure as hell HAVE been some noisy protests. One that recently had a very good turn out was the Redding March for our lives.
Well looky there, HA acknowledging that not all Hillary voters are human debris. /s
How's THAT working out for ya?
Actually, the crickets are still chirping loudly since the member NEVER answered the question.
That can't be possible. All of your prior posts prove that the State of CA is the WORST HELLHOLE on the planet. You've insisted ad nauseam that you have no representation and the Democratic majority in the Statehouse ignore your plight. It can't be possible that those horrid secular progressive elites would appropriate that kind of investment into infrastructure in your neck of the woods. It would blow all too many of your whining points out of the water and just about eviscerate your claims that there is a dire need for a 'State of Jefferson'.
I think you should sit down right now and get a grip. You've run off of your 'State of Jefferson' rails and if you don't get back on soon you may never be able to reconnect with your dystopian delusions.
Oh wait, it just came to me that this could be what you meant by being a thorn in the side of CA and costing 'them' as much as possible until they let you leave. Wow, great plan!
Just in case it's not evident, tagged /s
It really shouldn't be but apparently there are still enough quacks out there trying to harm LGBT folks that we need these laws. I don't remember if you're in NY or NJ but the JONAH quacks were recently discovered to still be preying on gay Orthodox Jewish men despite the court order for them to shut down and cease their fraud, and a recent NJ law banning the practice.
Sounds like you're confused about which party this law applies to. It doesn't prevent closeted gays or closeted straights from trying to "change" their innate sexual orientation (as silly as that would be). All it does is prohibit state-licensed health care providers from engaging in a harmful, ineffective and fraudulent quackery. By the way the same kind of regulation applies to those who try to sell laetrile to treat cancer. The state has a compelling interest in preventing such fraud and quackery, particularly in these cases where death can result from the quackery.
By the way you can still go to the local "witch doctor" at your favorite house of superstition to get your gay demons exorcised, but they can't pretend to be health care providers.
Tell me, when has HA or anyone else that is in the Jefferson movement for that matter rioted, set fires, assaulted police and/or created mayhem in the streets. To date those in favor of a new state have remained calm and peaceful much unlike the destruction and violence we saw after the elections . Writing on an internet blog is a long ways from throwing rocks, road flares and Molotov cocktails .Maybe you should take your own advice and do a little self reflection .
The 'Jefferson movement' STARTED with an armed rebellion. Sheesh read a book, or at least the crib notes.
He asked if it 'EVER' happened, thanks for admitting it STARTED that way. Judging from some of the websites that support the 'State of Jefferson', it's pretty freaking clear that y'all want it to continue that way too. The one for your 'Jefferson State militia' makes it pretty clear what y'all have in mind.
Yes REALLY. I see that you aren't denying that the official websites of the 'State of Jefferson' have links to the 'Jefferson State militia' and that THAT organization is decidedly militant.
I presume that you know of the SOJC MC. They up in Happy Camp, CA. Here is what their website says about their history.
Here's a video from 1941:
Now I'm sure that you've seen this video more than once so I can't help but wonder WHY you would ask me 'where the said guns were'.
The difference today is that y'all have FAILED all these years and are getting frustrated, so you're training and arming up and the next time it ain't gonna be so 'civilized'. That isn't ME talking, that's what's on y'all websites.
BTW, I presume nowadays y'all carry tiki torches...
Did I say anyone was injured or killed in 1941? Why no, NO I didn't.
Not even if you stand in front of it?
So how many fires were started? How much actual violence was done. How many were injured by thrown rocks and bottles? How much property damage was there?
THEY proudly label their actions as an 'ARMED REBELLION'. I can't help but wonder if YOU were stopped by ARMED men at a road block, if YOU would think that was an act of violence. I sure as hell would.
BTW, since you've been welcomed back, how about answering 12.2.2.
Homosexuality is a behavior not an immutable characteristic like race and there is no scientific proof to the contrary. Brain scans have proven absolutely nothing. If homosexuality were genetic, then identical twins would both be either straight or gay but they’re not. The behavior is no more genetic than a foot fetish or any other abnormal sexual behavior. Most of the nonsense passed off as science is psycho-babble from psychologists. However, psychology is not a science and psychologists are not scientists.
The problem with reparative therapy is not that it can’t work but that it might. If it works, then the gay identity narrative falls apart because if homosexuality is immutable, then it can’t be changed but if you change it then it obviously isn’t immutable. What’s curious is that society will believe that a person is gay by nature based entirely on what a person says but, if he says he no longer feels that way, then he can’t be believed because he’s delusional. In fact, he can’t be allowed to change because he will harm the narrative — I mean himself — if he tries. This is ridiculous. People have the basic human right to be normal. Denying them the chance to be normal should be deemed unconstitutional.
If what you say is true, then you, as straight, could choose to be gay. Could you?
I think that is the point,,, anyone can choose anything
but some of us will never choose pralines and dick ice cream.
So you are saying that you could be with a member of the same sex.
It’s just a behavior so I could choose to engage in it just like I could any other sexual behavior but I choose not to do it.
You still confuse sex with orientation I see. Sexual activity might be a behavior. But sexual attraction is an orientation.
Then I would call that bisexual.
And if I do it, would you say it’s genetic? If I decide I don’t want to do it again, did my damn genes change?
Some guys can be with a blow up doll but it’s not because they have a genetic attraction to dolls and they can throw it away when a woman comes along. It’s just a behavior and it’s still a behavior even if the guy says he prefers the doll to a real woman.
I will put it in simple if not crude terms.
Some men cannot get an erection with a woman. Thus gay.
Some men cannot get an erection with another man. Thus straight.
Some men can get an erection with both. Thus bisexual.
People are born the way they are. No amount of regressive (if not harmful) therapy can change the way their body responds.
Getting an erection or not getting one, in and of itself, doesn’t establish anything definitive. People are helped to understand the reason for dysfunctional and aberrant behavior all the time and they can change. Let people who want to change make their own decisions and get treatment if they want it.
I would say that most people that would go voluntarily do so because of societal, peer or familial pressure. Being told that their inner most feelings are wrong because they differ from those that purposefully make them an outcast.
In all fairness, some men may also suffer from erectile dysfunction. Just saying.
That's a typical tactic of bigots, homophobes, or those just willfully ignorant of sexual orientation in general.
The real question is, are you attracted to one gender over the other, or to both?
Why ask me when you can do a brain scan or examine my genes? There’s the gay gene, the straight gene, the bi gene and then there’s the foot fetish gene, and the hop a goat gene, and the incest gene and on and on.
And what if their innermost feeling tells them they want to be normal? You get to say “nope, too bad. Sorry. You’re too delusional to decide anything so I’ll decide for you and you’re going to have to stay as you are.”
The word of the day is epigenetic.
I have to wonder why you and a few others continually try to link being LGBTI with abhorrent behaviors such as bestality, necrophilia and pedophilia? Are you just looking for a reason to hate people who are different or is there something innate in you that you do not want to discuss at this time? Who is being harmed because two adults of the same gender love each other? Who is being harmed because someone decides to correct an incongruent gender identity situation? Do gay/bi/trans people scare you because they are different than you are so you feel the desire to attack what you don't understand? Have you been an unsuspecting victim of a fabulous yet hostile makeover in the past? Were you equally offended by interracial or interfaith couples?
Nice dodge. How about simply answering the question rather than being willfully obtuse! Or perhaps you cannot provide any answer that won't make you look foolish and dig yourself deeper in a hole.
Normal is subjective. Some people hide their feelings and try to push them down. Some people even get married and have children. It usually never works out.
The feelings and attractions remain, whether they want them or not.
That might be too complicated for some people. Especially those who view genetics with a very narrow lens or understanding.
Why would they feel abnormal to begin with? Especially when they're not? Unless certain types of individuals tells them they are abnormal because they are otherwise ignorant about sexuality and sexual orientation and somehow seem to think they themselves are some kind of gold standard to be!
Theyre all behaviors. Whether they’re abhorrent or not is a judgement. Why do you keep equating a perverse sexual behavior to being black?
I want to help them get help. Why do you hate them so much that you would deprive them of it?
How does it harm you if they get therapy to live normally? Why does it bother you so much when it’s actually none of your business?
Why are you so afraid that this behavior can be changed?
Those aren’t behaviors. If someone said he was sexually attracted to children, would you say “dear that’s just the way your genes made you so you’re going to have to live with it. Sorry”
"you already are normal"
sexual behavior <> sexual orientation.
sexual behavior is not dependent upon, nor exclusive to, nor necessarily an indication of sexual orientation - if you feel otherwise then talk to some prostitutes, they will sexually service (sexual behavior) for money and can easily not be attracted (sexual orientation) to the client due to their gender.
Homosexuality is an immutable SEXUAL ORIENTATION and there is a crap load of scientific proof to support that.
It’s more like the “proof” is load of crap. There is no scienfitc proof AT ALL that has ever established homosexuality is nature and not nuture. By proof, I mean uncontroverted rather than a theory.
You offer no proof whatsoever to discredit the current evidence (by actual scientific organizations no less) supporting sexual orientation is not a choice, much less conclude homosexuality is merely a behavior and not an orientation. So far, you're all talk and all of it is willfully ignorant nonsense!
There is no “evidence.” There are people who say they’re ex-gay just like they said they were gay. To you, I suppose the ex-gays are delusional. To me, they’re no more delusional now than they were when they said they were gay. But the proof is in the pudding. Let them get treatment if they want it. If you’re right, they can’t be changed. If they can change, then you’re wrong and you’ll have your proof. It’s funny that gays will say that nobody should dictate their sexual behavior and then they turn around and dictate somebody else’s sexual behavior by preventing them from trying to change. That’s f***ed up!
And that's where you're wrong! There's plenty of evidence from credible scientific and medical sources.
Yes, that is delusional. or at the very least, self denial. Of course, we see instances like that due to religious pressure. But nothing actualy changes.
They're not delusional to begin with.
I see you've offered none whatsoever!
They have that choice. But such "treatment" is either ineffective or actually harmful. It's not even considered treatment by the medical community. Especially since there is no condition to treat.
Yes, I am right! You, not so much.
There is no objective, empirical proof that any change is successful.
How are gays dictating anyone's sexual behavior?
Reparative therapy absolutely is f***ed up. What's that say about those who advocate it or think it actually works?
Oh, you mean like the 'theory of gravitation'.
You seem convinced that a human being can choose their orientation.
If that had any merit then you would be able to choose to be gay (temporarily). Can you imagine any amount of will power, coaching, etc. that would get you to find women sexually unappealing and men to now be appealing to you?
If heterosexual males (in particular) cannot fathom how they would ever be able to become homosexual then why do these same males think the inverse is possible?
Every theory is not sound. Theories are put forward to be tested. Many fail.
Then make an argument against the theory, don't claim that citing a theory is an unworthy argument.
Where is your proof that homosexuality is a conscious choice that can be changed because medical science and the a former director of Exodus International says that it is not a choice and cannot be changed.
The ex-gays are living proof.
It’s automatically rebutted by the simple observation that nowhere has science ever resolved whether homosexuality is nature or nurture, You offer only speculation and, in the absence of any proof, my speculation is as good as yours.
There is no such thing as ex-gay. They just went back in the closet.
Again, the same can be said about heterosexuality. Do you worry about whether your sexuality is because of nature or nurture? Does it matter to you one way or another? If not, why does it matter to you about anyone else's sexuality?
There is on unequivocal fact. If sexual orientation is a CHOICE, then heterosexuality is a just as much a choice as homosexuality.
You know that the VAST majority of 'ex-gays' admit to still having same sex attraction right? That whole 'lust in your heart' thingy comes to mind.
If a woman is screwing a guy but fantasizing about a woman, she is a lesbian. The rest is just plumbing.
No such thing. Simply saying they're no longer gay is subjective and anecdotal. That's hardly valid proof!
Where's the science that says heterosexuality is nature or nurture?
Your so called speculation is contrasted quite sharply by most reputable and credible medical and scientific organizations! One such study, conducted by Dr. Michael Bailey of Northwestern University and presented in a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, states:
"Scientists tested the DNA of 400 gay men and found that genes on at least two chromosomes affected whether a man was gay or straight."
According to Dr. Bailey, "Sexual orientation has nothing to do with choice. Our findings suggest there may be genes at play - we found evidence for two sets that affect whether a man is gay or straight. But it is not completely determinative; there are certainly other environmental factors involved. The study shows that there are genes involved in male sexual orientation."
This study also affirms other similar studies previous conducted. So the idea that genetics does not play into sexual orientation or that homosexuality is a choice is demonstrably false! It seems actual science beats your mere speculation!
It looks as if you too also confuse behavior with orientation. Why am I not surprised?
Then why is there the CRIME of rape?
Do you not understand the difference between sexual acts and sexual orientation? Acts are (usually) by choice, orientation is not.
NO, that is the opinion of those who support such behavior. There is NO such thing as sexual orientation.
You need to write a paper explaining your findings to the American Psychological Association . What, again, are your research credentials?
You do not consider yourself heterosexual?
Peer Review Study shows NO evidence that Same Sex Orientation if Immutable
The reason was very simple. There is not only no scientific evidence that sexual orientation is immutable, there is conclusive scientific evidence that most people who experience exclusive same-sex attraction end up developing an interest in the opposite sex over time.
This is so well established by now that scholars are busy publishing methods to measure frequency of sexual orientation change in massive longitudinal studies of youth and young adults. (I.e., How many times in nine years can we expect a homosexual sexual orientation to change? Is the change associated with lifestyle habits ? Who changes more frequently: males or females?)
That basic fact was already settled science when Obergefell came before the Supreme Court. Half a dozen rigorous studies could be cited from the late 1990s and early 2000s, but the most noteworthy probably remains a Cornell-led study published in 2007.
A 1 Percent Chance of Consistent Same-Sex Attraction
In this study, Dr. Rich Savin-Williams examined a representative sample of more than 12,000 American youth, following each from the age of 16 to 22. Rather than rely on an individual’s reconstruction of his or her past based on current identity, researchers met with subjects three times throughout the six-year period. Each time, they asked individuals (via a computer, to protect privacy) whether they had had a romantic attraction to a member of the opposite or same sex since their last interview.
For instance, 17-year-old males were asked if, in the past year, they had had a romantic attraction to another male or female. About 1.5 percent reported only having a romantic attraction to other males. Five years later, when that 1.5 percent were asked about their romantic attractions since last interview, the overwhelming majority (70 percent) reported a 180-degree flip in their sexual orientation—they only had romantic feelings for women.
Similarly, among females, about 40 percent switched from exclusive same-sex attraction to exclusive opposite-sex attraction. Most of the rest (45 percent of the total) reported they had feelings for both men and women. Only 1 percent of women who, at 17, reported a full year of exclusive same-sex attraction reported a similar experience in the five years that followed.
Leftist judges have been bamboozled into basing their legal analysis on the assumption that if an 18-year-old woman has exclusive same-sex attraction, some form of same-sex commitment is her only path to “marriage” because her condition is “immutable.” But, on expert evidence, her condition has only a 1 percent chance of lasting five years!
The AMA and APA, among other organizations, disagree with you!
In Obergefell, Indeed, Kennedy did cite a partisan brief put together by politically active members of the American Psychological Association.
But although this brief confidently combated “stereotype-based rationales that the Equal Protection Clause was designed to prohibit” and was at pains to point out that “most” of the studies and literature reviews it cited had been published in “reputable, peer-reviewed academic journals,” it did not dare to assert that sexual orientation was immutable.
The reason was very simple. There is not only no scientific evidence that sexual orientation is immutable, there is conclusive scientific evidence that most people who experience exclusive same-sex attraction end up developing an interest in the opposite sex over time.
This is so well established by now that scholars are busy publishing methods to measure frequency of sexual orientation change in massive longitudinal studies of youth and young adults. (I.e., How many times in nine years can we expect a homosexual sexual orientation to change? Is the change associated with lifestyle habits ? Who changes more frequently: males or females?)
That basic fact was already settled science when Obergefell came before the Supreme Court. Half a dozen rigorous studies could be cited from the late 1990s and early 2000s,
BTW, that citation is not science, it is opinion.
being heterosexual is not an orientation. It's called normal. Behaving as God created you.
Paraphrasing this: a study cannot find any evidence that homosexuality cannot be changed.
First, this recognizes sexual orientation. So there IS a thing a sexual orientation.
Second, this is basically an argument from ignorance. Not finding evidence that homosexuality cannot be changed is NOT evidence that iit CAN be changed.
Well, at your age, you should have experienced quite a range of changes. Could you explain what your life was like during your gay phase or are you one of the minority whose sexual orientation DID NOT change?
Yes, I know your opinion that there is no such thing as sexual orientation is not science. Demonstrably so. That is why your claim is so ridiculous.
So every homosexual creature (yes, that includes animals other than homo sapiens) is (per you) deliberately going against their God-given nature? How do you explain this to your fellow Christians who happen to be homosexual?
Pro homosexual behavior advocates will cite studies by the American Psychological Association and call them scientific proof.
This is laughable
Psychology isn't science.
Why can we definitively say that? Because psychology often does not meet the five basic requirements for a field to be considered scientifically rigorous: clearly defined terminology, quantifiability, highly controlled experimental conditions, reproducibility and, finally, predictability and testability.
To be fair, not all psychology research is equally wishy-washy. Some research is far more scientifically rigorous. And the field often yields interesting and important insights.
But to claim it is "science" is inaccurate. Actually, it's worse than that. It's an attempt to redefine science. Science, redefined, is no longer the empirical analysis of the natural world; instead, it is any topic that sprinkles a few numbers around. This is dangerous because, under such a loose definition, anything can qualify as science. And when anything qualifies as science, science can no longer claim to have a unique grasp on secular truth.
That's why scientists dismiss psychologists. They're rightfully defending their intellectual turf.
there never has been a majority who "changed". Yes behaviors change. But anyone with any true character and moral discipline will not more engage in homosexual acts then they will murder or rape.
You cannot be a Christian who obeys Jesus and His teachings and engage in homosexual behavior or lifestyle. Jesus condemned it
First of all the AMA has NO scientific evidence or peer reviewed papers proving that there is such a thing as biological same sex orientation
Secondly, Only 20-30% of physicians belong to the AMA
Please provide chapter and verse where Jesus Himself in any way condemns homosexuality.
The NT labels it as a sin. The OT condemned homosexual acts between two males.
You are not going to claim that one cannot be a Christian if one sins are you?
Psychology generally disagrees with your opinion of sexual orientation so in response you dismiss the entire field of psychology.
Not a persuasive argument.
I'm not surprised that there are still Christian extremists who are in denial of the science on this issue given that these are the same people who deny science on climate change and any other topic which doesn't fit into their very narrow Bronze-age view of the world.
Jesus never mentioned homosexuality,
Removed
It sounds to me like someone is struggling with gay desires and trying desperately to stay in the closet. I've never once wanted to kiss a woman and felt the need to suppress it.
Maybe they should be bisexual, just for the weekend in a city a hundred miles away. Attend the Pride parade to dip their toe in the water, so to speak............
Yes. it is!
It's as normal as homosexuality, bisexuality, and asexuality is.
By that reasoning, then gays are being normal, as that's how your so called god created them!
The APA conducts and publishes scientific studies. Apparently, you don't understand what constitutes a scientific study.
Which is demonstrably false. Psychology falls under the definition of a science as it utilizes scientific methodology in its research and therapies.
Behavior isn't the question. It's about orientation.
No True Scotsman.
There are plenty of studies providing evidence from the AMA and APA alone. I cited one such study in a previous post above.
There are over 200,000 AMA members. The AMA also publishes and cites peer-reviewed scholarly works in various scientific journals. Your attempt to dismiss them due solely to membership numbers is quite laughable and seemingly desperate.
In 14.2.20 you said that there is NO SUCH THING as sexual orientation and then in 14.2.22 you post a study about 'SEXUAL OREINTATION' to bolster your position.
It drips with hypocrisy.
What "ex-gays"? The president of the largest such group, Exodus International, said that none of their victims actually changed their sexual orientation. He also apologized for the harm he and Exodus had caused and for the people they had driven to suicide.
What means this, Pastor? For the sake of discussion: What is the meaning in 'saved by faith alone'? (You probably will not care to have this discussion with me - on the other hand my life's experience with the topic has relevance and some surprises.)
You reveal that you don't understand science all that well.
Germ theory is "just a theory".
Well, Pastor. . . .?
This is a PROBLEM I have with sanctimonious, "Do as I say" people, - the one-way communications standard makes me want to gag!
The ones referenced in the article.
What does that have to do with people who tell you they’re no longer gay, especially when the only way you know anybody is gay in the first place is because they tell you.
Perhaps I should have used the word hypothesis because your “theory” has not been substantiated by a body of facts that can be repeatedly confirmed. I’m getting tired of bandying this back and forth. We will never agree so we can just agree to disagree.
That just means they're lying or in denial.
You mean the ones where there is no objective determination to support the assertion of being "ex-gay?"
You're free to be wrong on the issue!
Maybe they were lying and in denial when they told you they were gay. If they say what you want to hear, then they’re being honest. But if they say they’ve changed, they’re in denial. That way you’re always right.
We have no objective proof that anybody is gay. All we have is their belief.
So are you and you get more free each day. Lol
Then they weren't gay to begin with. So they're either straight or gay. Which only shows orientation is not something that can be changed. But then, considering the stigmatization gays feel from bigots and homophobes, especially those who think homosexuality is abnormal or can be "cured," makes it rather odd for someone to claim they are gay when they're not.
They're either lying or they're not.
Since when is sexual orientation a belief? A person usually knows their sexual orientation in their teens.
Except I'm not. Big difference!
You seem to be contradicting yourself. In another seed, you said that they make their bedroom behavior public and then demand that society accept it as normal.
So WHICH is it. Do only know people are gay because the TELL you or do you know because they're fucking in front of you and demanding applause?
Please pick one.
You're referring to the small handful of bible-babblers who claim to be "ex-gay" or "ex-trans"? Seems like anti-LGBT groups recycle the same handful of folks at Christian extremist events all across the country, yet none of these folks have ever provided any evidence to support their claims. Extraordinary claims like this require some degree of actual evidence, like having an independent psychologist test their degree of arousal to same-sex images using a plethysmometer. So far none of these "ex-gay" nuts have done so. Get back to me when they have.
.
Sounds like you're now claiming that sexual orientation isn't a "behavior" but a neurological trait. You seem either quite confused or extremely ignorant and thus are contradicting yourself.
.
Note that the hate group which organized the event described in the seed was NARTH which was founded by several homophobic and superstitious quacks like Joseph Nicolosi (dead) and George "rent boy" Rekers who was recently caught parading through Europe with a same-sex prostitute he had hired as his traveling companion. They founded NARTH not only to scam superstitious gay folks out of their money, but also because no credible peer-reviewed scientific journal would publish their nonsense. Pretty much all of these anti-LGBT hate groups seem to be run by psychologically disturbed and superstitious gay folks who are in deep denial of their own sexuality. Now that the lead quack is dead it's not clear if NARTH still exists. Rekers is still alive but NARTH dropped him from their list of founders because he's still screwing same-sex prostitutes. Rekers also lost credibility a decade or so ago when the courts no longer were willing to treat him as an expert witness on this or any other issue after his claims were fully debunked by a Florida court in an adoption case. At this point he's nothing more than a punch line, just like Marcus Bachmann and all the other "ex-gay" nuts.
So they spend the time and money trying to convert, but they were just "lying" about being gay? I think it's far more likely they are lying to themselves that it worked because that's what all their friends and family and whoever paid for their conversion therapy wants to believe.
This reminds me of a TV advertisement for a drug rehab program in my area that one of the main spokesman says "I used to be addicted to drugs, now I'm not...". It always hits me because most real addicts admit that they are still addicts, it never really goes away completely, they can now just deal with not being an active user. So yes, I believe some who go through conversion therapy can change to be non-active homosexuals, blocking their innate desires and not acting on their impulses, but that's not really being "cured" of being gay. They're still gay, they're just non-practicing homosexuals now. Some in my old church even got married to other non-practicing lesbians because having a butch and an effeminate male married is as close as they could get to the desired relationship they were naturally inclined to while still being accepted in the religious community. It's sad that they can't just be who they were born to be but have to suffer at the hands of bigots and assholes who refuse to accept them and ridicule, discriminate and castigate them for being themselves. Very sad.
There you go again. You said that they make their bedroom behavior public and demand that society accept it.
Now you say there is no objective proof that they are gay.
I don't know about you but I would say that having sex with someone of the same sex in public, which you insist that they do, is a pretty fucking good objective indication that you're gay.
So again, I ask you to PICK ONE.
That describes Alan Chambers, the president of by far the largest (and now defunct) "ex-gay" group in the world, Exodus International.
He's still married to a woman but now admits that he's not sexually attracted to women at all and never has been. Several years ago he also admitted that none of the victims of Exodus had ever changed their orientation, and he apologized to the families of the gay folks who committed suicide due to their involvement with Exodus.
I do give the guy credit for finally accepting himself and being honest about it, as well as for his apology for all the harm he caused other people. But I sure couldn't stay in a marriage like that. Seems pretty twisted although I know it was once common for gay folks in denial to marry the wrong gender.
Too bad for you that most reputable organizations like the AMA and APA among others all disagree with you. There is no scientific proof that sexual orientation is a choice!
Except that there are differences in brain structure.
Identical twins are more likely to have the same sexual orientation. According to Dawood, Bailey, and Martin (2009), studies have found significantly higher concordance in sexual orientation among identical compared to non-identical twins. What this means is that the more genes two people share in common, the more likely they are to have the same sexual orientation. So, identical twins are more likely to have the same sexuality than non-identical twins.
You confuse behavior with orientation.
In other words, they prove you wrong and so you're automatically dismissive and prefer to keep your head buried in the sand on the subject. And yes, psychology is considered a science because it utilizes the scientific method for measuring outcomes and treatments.
Reparative therapy is quack "medicine." Not only does it not work, it has been shown to cause harm. No reputable medical organization supports or advocates reparative therapy.
Much like all your arguments and posts.
Who are you to say who or what is "normal?" Who are you to make that determination for anyone else? Are left handed people abnormal? Or redheads?
References:
Dawood, K., Bailey, J. M., & Martin, N. G. (2009). Genetic and environmental influences on sexual orientation. In Y. Kim (Ed.), Handbook of Behavioral Genetics (pp. 269– 280). New York, NY: Springer.
Science has never established that homosexuality is nature and not nurture. At best, the matter is unresolved.
A brain scan has never been determined to establish anything conclusive. You can’t identify a homosexual by scanning his brain.
If homosexuality were genetic, then they would always either be homosexual or heterosexual because they share the same genes. But they aren’t the same.
The only thing reparative therapy harms is your narrative. The biological purpose of sex is to perpetuate the species. Every other use of our sexual organs is, to one degree or another, deviant and abnormal by definition. In any event, if other people want to conform to nature and be normal, why do you have to stick your nose in it? Let them choose, not you.
By that *logic* science has also never established that heterosexuality is nature and not nurture either. but science does say sexual orientation has a genetic component.
Wrong again! National geographic even published an article centered on such a study, and stated "researchers found resemblances in the brain's physical structure and size as well as the strength of neural connections among gay people and straight people of the opposite sex." And that was from 10 years ago too.
Your understanding of genetics is elementary at best.
Not according to the medical community. The APA itself even reports:
The potential risks of reparative therapy are great, including depression, anxiety and self-destructive behavior, since therapist alignment with societal prejudices against homosexuality may reinforce self-hatred already experienced by the patient. Many patients who have undergone reparative therapy relate that they were inaccurately told that homosexuals are lonely, unhappy individuals who never achieve acceptance or satisfaction. The possibility that the person might achieve happiness and satisfying interpersonal relationships as a gay man or lesbian is not presented, nor are alternative approaches to dealing with the effects of societal stigmatization discussed. Therefore, the American Psychiatric Association opposes any psychiatric treatment, such as reparative or conversion therapy which is based upon the assumption that homosexuality per se is a mental disorder or based upon the a priori assumption that the patient should change his/her sexual homosexual orientation.
in other words, there is no credible science or study which supports reparative therapy as a beneficial "treatment" in the slightest. Neither have you offered anything to support your own assertions!
The issue is sexual orientation, not sex or procreation. Besides, homosexuals are capable of reproduction too. Homosexuality does not equal infertility.
According to whose definition? Yo0urs? How laughable! And what difference does it make how sexual organs are used? Do you consider hetero couples that use their genitals for oral/anal sex to be deviant?
They already are normal. It's people like you and those who advocate reparative therapy who say they are not! Why do you care or have to stick your nose into their business or sexual relations?
I never said they couldn't choose. They are free to do so. But give them ALL the correct information so they can make an informed choice: sexual orientation is inborn and normal, regardless how it's expressed and reparative therapy is quack medicine and potentially harmful.
Good, then you agree that conversion therapy should be a choice.
A personal choice. Not a medical option.
The EXACT same can be said about heterosexuality.
The exact same cannot be said of heterosexuality. It is obviously nature because it’s the only means by which we perpetuate our species.
Conversion therapy is both ineffective and dangerous. The former leader of Exodus International aggrees with the APA on this matter,
There is absolutely no medical evidence that supports the claim you can modify your sexual orientation, and it is very dangerous to attempt it
The Earth is currently overpopulated with humans so that is not a problem. We have become a pest species because of both our population and our destruction of the environment that we depend on to survive.
overpopulation is the biggest problem and multiplies all other problems
That's just a biological function. Lesbians get pregnant and Gay men impregnate women all the time. I know dozens of LGBT people that have kids. That doesn't mean they're heterosexual.
BTFW, a turkey baster works just fine...
Sexuality is NOT a biological function.
Spot on!!!!
Excellent comment, and nothing could be more truthful. Humans are destroying themselves by destroying the very environment they must depend on to survive on this planet. Yet, those who are so greedy for the money they can garner from its destruction continue to deny that fact. But, humans are not the only ones that depend on a healthy environment for survival, and without all the other living species that share this planet, man alone can not survive.
There is a Native American saying; "We do not inherit the world from our ancestors. We borrow it from our children."
Homosexuality also exists in nature and has been observed in thousands of species.
Exactly. And with many species it is due to their own nature, not something they chose to be, not that any amount of 'therapy' will change. Bonobos are a prime example. And the human specie is simply one of the thousands, if not millions, of other species here on earth. Some of which are in their own way more advanced than the human specie.
I love this statement. It needs to be better known by the population at large because it is perfect description of what it means toi be an enviromentalist.
Nonsense. Overpopulation is a myth
You can fit the world's population in the State of Texas and EVERY individual would have 1000 SQ FT of living space.
Deleted, skirting & sweeping {SP}
Animals don't make moral choices. Dog's hump legs and furniture, does that make it a normal animal "orientation" for humans?
Deleted, skirting & sweeping {SP}
you want to live in 1000 SQ FT? I don't want to and I need space for my dogs, garden, workshop and stuff.
Overcrowding is bad
I think so too. However, there are too many who think that anything that does not agree with their take on the environment is not worthy of being repeated or seen.
In most Native American Tribes are guardians of Mother Earth, and taking good care of Mother Earth is an essential part of their life, as they know that the only way mankind can survive is by having a healthy environment.
It is also important that we leave the world a better place for the future generations than when we got it. But, the attacks by our government on our National Parks by opening them up to mining and oil drilling, and disregarding the safety and health of our environment in general, is putting future generations at risk. Clean air, clean, safe water, and healthy food sources is the only way to sustain our own generation and those to come.
However, the money grubbers and their greed for more of it is taking over hte common sense of our government. And they will soon find out that Karma really is a B*tch.
Resources are the issue, not space.
You forgot the food to feed them all and the pollution that our lives create.
Animals do exhibit morality. Elephants and dolphins are famous for their morality, both among the species and toward others.
Fuck that!
That's false, both for heterosexuality and homosexuality. The sexual orientation of mice can be consistently controlled via a hormonal switch during a critical development period in utero. There's no reason to expect that underlying mechanism is any different in humans but it would be unethical (and illegal) to perform those experiments on human fetuses. However there's still quite a lot known about the mechanism(s) in humans:
It also helps explain the genetic and epigenetic statistical correlation to sexual orientation (like Xq28 for gay men) and explains why the correlation isn't absolute, because it depends on the prenatal hormone environment during a specific development period.
Please practice safe sex 'cause we don't need more humans.
Would a family be able to live comfortably in 1000 sq. ft.? Even a family of 2 would find that cramped. Never mind the family of 3 or 4 or more. Overpopulation is not just a numbers game. it's also about the scarcity of resources and the provision of basic needs. You seem to ignore quality of life over quantity. And at almost 8 billion people, it's safe to say the Earth is over populated.
So the dog who defends or saves their owner isn't moral?
No, that just makes humans (like dogs) horny! Dog humping various things is analogous to humans using sex toys to pleasure themselves. nothing wrong with that.
As near as I can tell, your article simply reviews some “evidence” in support of nature but it’s nothing that remotely approaches being conclusive. All this effort to prove the unprovable. It’s a behavior.
In the real world, most people would probably prefer more living space if the option was available, especially for families. The effects of overcrowding can be quite detrimental to both individual health and the environment. Overpopulation only exacerbates those effects.
Your evidence for that claim is what exactly? It's quite odd to describe attraction as a "behavior" or to claim that one has conscious control over which gender one is attracted to.
Perhaps you speak from personal experience? If so then you might actually be bisexual and are misinterpreting your attraction to both genders.
What happens when the parents of gay children wish to subject those children to mental abuse touted as "treatment" that may lead to their harm?
And where would they grow their food?
The resources would run out in a day. There are towns in Texas that are ALREADY out of water. Add that to the FACT that Texas has allowed fossil fuel producers to shit all over their environment and Texas will be 'enjoying' sick people and flora and fauna into perpetuity. In short, Texas can't even sustain the people already living there.
Here is an article about the 'geniuses' that are supposed to 'protect the environment' in Texas have allowed to happen:
Radioactive Waste Dump over Ogallala Aquifer?
BTW, here is a map of the states that use the Ogallala aquafer for DRINKING water:
If those parents are Christian extremists they'll just murder their gay kids as we've seen in several recent cases, or they'll try to drive them to suicide through "conversion" quackery.
The question is based on an implicit assumption that the child doesn’t have a problem and the treatment doesn’t work. I’d leave it to the parents to figure out what’s best and I’ll assume that it doesn’t include torturing their own children.
Seems to me that you are missing the point. It's a frame of reference. it doesn't mean putting the entire world in Texas. It means the world is not overpopulated. it's a leftist myth.
And we still need to be able to produce food. And provide water. And the resources to build shelters. Are you under the illusion that the planet's ability to provide such resources is limitless? Many areas already have water shortages. Hell, Ireland is even under water restrictions, and it typically has a damp climate. Large areas of the Earth are not suitable for agriculture of any kind. Having space to occupy does not equate to having the resources to live.
But it does. And the children don't have a problem, except in the bigotry they encounter.
If variations in sexual orientation aren't natural then how do you explain the 1500+ other animal species in which same-sex sexual behavior has been observed, including same-sex pair bonding? Are those animal species going to too many pride parades or is it due to "bad" parenting like Christian extremist quacks like Nicolosi claimed? Maybe those animals aren't reading their bible-babble enough so they don't realize what's "natural"?
Or could it be that your Bronze-age superstitions are inadequate and preventing you from comprehending the current science on these issues?
You mean a "treatment" which has no evidence whatsoever of producing the claimed results, but which tends to drive folks to suicide or other self-destructive behavior?
The good news is that the witch doctor at your favorite house of superstition is free to exorcise your straight demonz or your gay demonz, but they just can't charge you for the privilege of harming yourself in that way. But by all means go for it!
It's a moronic frame of reference. Resources MATTER. Arable land MATTERS. Humans do not live on 'space' alone.
Wrong! When there are billions of people worldwide living in famine, poverty, or in overcrowded areas, then that means there is an overpopulation. Resources are becoming increasingly scarce. Adequate food or fresh water is not always available or in abundance. Natural habitats are being destroyed to accommodate increasing number of people or because of pollution associated with large populations. Tell me, at what point do you think the world will be overpopulated? With almost 8 billion people now, it's obvious and logical that continued population growth cannot be sustained indefinitely. Neither can the consumption of natural resources.
Too many voices. I will wait for the next 'train' on this topic. Try to catch it early! (Smile.)
I am surprised you let this stand:
I did not see it, because I became overwhelmed by the volume and simply stopped reading. I 'missed' the discussion. But thanks for informing me. (Smile.)
Sigh! I will write,. . .something, to our resident Pastor. (Peace.)
The way their God Evolution, deals with Deviance,
Question::
Why does evolution keep that " infection " lower then 4%?
What is apoptosis and how do CD 4 T cells Activate it and why?
Odd that heterosexuals still get infected, if heterosexuality is supposed to protect us from infection.
I notice you don't post any stats concerning HIV rates for lesbian women. Why is that?
By EA's logic, lesbians must be God's chosen people!
E.A Why do YOU not do it?
And I think you accusation IS false!
Shows what YOUR Agenda is all about, does it not?
What accusation have I made?
Guilty conscience?
That would be very inconvenient for his bizarre obsession with HIV, wouldn't it?
Wouldn't it, though?
E.A Care to tell us how they can get HIV/AIDS from their Dentist?
I thought the only way to get HIV was from gay sex, right? Isn't that the reason for your obsession with it?
Hundreds of VA dental patients possibly exposed to HIV, hepatitis
By Samira Said and Madison Park, CNN
Updated 0216 GMT (1016 HKT) December 3, 2016
How does this relate to homosexuality?
E.A So again HOW do Heterosexual get HIV/AIDS?
Weekly
May 15, 1992 / 41(19);344-346
Persons using assistive technology might not be able to fully access information in this file. For assistance, please send e-mail to: mmwrq@cdc.gov. Type 508 Accommodation and the title of the report in the subject line of e-mail.
Update: Investigations of Patients Who Have Been Treated by HIV-Infected Health-Care Workers
Investigation of the patients of a Florida dentist with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) concluded that human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) was transmitted to five (0.5%) of approximately 1100 patients who were evaluated (1-3). Although the precise events resulting in transmission of HIV to these patients are not known, the findings of the investigation support direct dentist-to-patient transmission, rather than a patient-to-patient route. This report summarizes information from other published studies of patients who were treated by HIV-infected health-care workers (HCWs) (4-10), as well as from completed and ongoing unpublished investigations that have been reported to CDC.
Was the dentist gay?
It does not follow. . . . What is your "COMPLAINT"?
E.A Got caught with more Misinformation want to dig some more?
Are you incapable of recognizing sarcasm?
You're the one who has a problem with LGBTQ people, and has demonstrated that problem all over two websites that I know of. I'm the one who recognizes that there are other means of transmission of HIV besides homosexual sex, and furthermore, who recognizes what you'd rather ignore - lesbian sex is linked to very low infection rates with any STD. If "our god" deals with "deviants" so harshly, why aren't lesbians getting infected at high rates?
Or were you just posting bigoted bullshit?
Yep. That's all he ever does. There's clearly some odd psychological motivation underlying his bigotry.
Now EA, don't be talking about deviance again, it always gets you in trouble!
How exactly does that relate to the topic of nutty superstitious folks who are in denial of their sexual orientation?
If anything their agenda and yours seem to clash........or do you also want gay folks to have sex with straight folks of the opposite gender?
E.A Source: CDC. Diagnoses of HIV infection in the United States and dependent areas, 2016
What is this about? And, why do think you have a right to exploit it?
What have we learned over Time?
Remember that the Education System and the Media both have had over Half a Century to educated about " High Risk Activities " and " safe Sex " !
Source: CDC. Diagnoses of HIV infection in the United States and dependent areas, 2016
Shouldn't you be citing your sources?
E.A Source: CDC. Diagnoses of HIV infection in the United States and dependent areas, 2016
E.A So nothing about Prevention but so much about ????
Thanks for fixing your plagiarism, albeit belatedly.
Now, as regards the infection rates - young people make stupid decisions. That's been going on since there were young people and stupid decisions. That's how both homosexual and heterosexual people generally end up getting infected with any STD.
And it's very revealing that he's only concerned about gays despite the overwhelming majority of cases in the world being contracted via sex between opposite-sex couples.
Plus he still hasn't explained what relevance it has to the topic, perhaps because that might reveal what his twisted obsession is really all about.
We've learned that some folks have a bizarre obsession with HIV even when it's completely irrelevant to the topic.
I remember him linking gays to dental infections on Newsvine. It was pathetic then, too.
deleted
That's a good reason not to allow dentists to marry.
removed for context
E.A so one can get infected, by Saliva, cough droplets ( Eyes are more likely to be entry points ) Dandruff, etc::
So what does that say about those that are in the Hospitality Industry, serving the Public?
Any one have any DATA on those infection rates?
Are you serious? Are there hysterical and paranoid people surrounding in real life? Hypochondriasis?
RED FLAG: PARANOIA CAN BE CRIPPLING!
deleted
And you 'said' that to 'say' what? Because, what I interpreted from this presentation of yours, is YOU should watch out where you present and place any UNPROTECTED receptive cavities!
E.A Both the CDC and the Site I posted to You earlier stated ANAL Sex as a High risk!
So what is it that you do not understand?
Can you rephrase your Question?
Better still if YOU have some Medical Information from a Suitable site Post the LINK, Many thanks!
On Wednesday the Massachusetts House voted 137-14 to ban "ex-gay" quackery and passage in the Senate and the governor's signature are all but certain.
.
In Australia some states like New South Wales are planning to criminalize the practice but in the meantime that quackery has gone underground and remains widespread. One Senator recently exposed how much this quackery had harmed one of her constituents when he was a teen: