- Banned
- #6,526
I have a genuine question, and wont attack you over your response. What is your opinion about gay conversion therapy?
Don't know much about it TBH.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have a genuine question, and wont attack you over your response. What is your opinion about gay conversion therapy?
I believe we call out Muslims more readily than Christians over similar beliefs and acts, despite the fact that fundamentalist Christians are more vocal in this nation and hold far more political power.Folau would be lucky to have a couple of functioning neurons to rub together but I think it's a valid point that if you're going to call him out for homophobic comments per his religious beliefs, it's probably incumbent on you to call out other religions also.
I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that standard. Yet the question remains, are those calling out Folau doing so for similar beliefs - and voiced opinions stemming from those beliefs - across the entire spectrum of religions? Doubtful. Folau is just seen as an easy kill because let's face it, he ain't the brightest bulb in the chandelier.
I see good and bad in Christianity and the bible. I also believe the net effect of Christianity on modern society is deleterious.Perhaps agenda is not the best description. Folau & his bible bashing attracting those who want to attack anything involving the bible, anti-theistic even.
I don't share your optimism. Fundies will find gaps within the gaps of the gaps. They're not the sharpest tools in the shed, but by god they're resilient.This whole thing ie. believing in the existence of an omnipresent, omniscient, judgmental creator is a complete load of codswallop. In time Institutionalized religious belief will go the way of the dinosaur, the gap for god to fit into is getting ever smaller.
Six pack short of a carton old Izzy is, a few Roos loose in the top paddock as well.
If we're not animals, are we vegetables? Personally, I like Agent Smith's analogy where he calls humans viruses.
I will be. Tonight. By another guy. Deal with it.
"Homosexuality is not normal statistically and biologically. Statistically, it is not normal since it forms a minority and skewed in the normal distribution. Every biological function has a physiological goal and purpose. Sexual activity has two goals. One is procreation to safeguard the continuation of the species. The second one is the experience of pleasure, which in fact, is to facilitate the sexual activity and to strengthen the bond between husband and wife. Homosexuality negates one of the goals of sexual activity procreation.That which deviates from the standard or normal. Limited to a small minority.
I will quote from a journal of psychiatry ....
"Homosexuality is not normal statistically and biologically. Statistically, it is not normal since it forms a minority and skewed in the normal distribution. Every biological function has a physiological goal and purpose. Sexual activity has two goals. One is procreation to safeguard the continuation of the species. The second one is the experience of pleasure, which in fact, is to facilitate the sexual activity and to strengthen the bond between husband and wife. Homosexuality negates one of the goals of sexual activity procreation.
Homosexuality has therefore, to be considered as an aberration in the psychosexual development ......."
Quoted from your post. Do you have a reference to a scientific journal for that?
Given that homosexuality occurs in other species of the animal kingdom, it should be considered very much normal. Are you going to put your head under the guillotine by telling heterosexual couples who use condoms or other means of birth control that they're abnormal?
Yes and no. We're higher order animals, but we're still animals.I think you know what I meant.
That's a complex issue of its own that isn't really relevant to this discussion imo.If the 13 year old girl that called Adam Goodes an ape had instead yelled out "Animal!" that would have been OK then using your reasoning?
It's clearly a load of bollocks. Using the logic of that study, most sex between a husband and wife is abnormal because procreation isn't the intention.Indian Journal of Psychiatry. I think someone already googled some of the text and posted a link.
Most of us are here for the comedy gold, and Folau keeps providing.How does this guy have a thread that's 262 pages long.
Not at all. Few people with any sense thought that a complex sociobiological aspect like sexuality could be factored down to a single gene.
Look into monozygotic twin studies, especially those raised apart, and you'll find some interesting statistics.
It's important to stress what I didn't find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain. The INAH3 is less likely to be the sole gay nucleus of the brain than a part of a chain of nuclei engaged in men and women's sexual behavior.
LeVay has acknowledged that samples of gay men's brain tissue were readily available to him because they had died of AIDS-related illnesses. [7] Contemporaries of LeVay have questioned his measurements, noting the structures themselves are difficult to see in tissue slices, and LeVay measured in volume, where others state cell count is more accurate. [8] Nancy Ordover notes "he has also been criticized for his small sample size and for compiling inadequate sexual histories."[9] Several of his colleagues have noted that the size of the nuclei could be impacted by AIDS, since INAH-3 is dependent on testosterone levels. [10] Hubbard and Wald note, "Though, on average, the size of the hypothalamic nucleus LeVay considered significant was indeed smaller in the men he identified as homosexual, his published data show that the range of sizes of the individual samples was virtually the same as for the heterosexual men. That is, the area was larger in some of the homosexuals than in many of the heterosexual men, and smaller in some of the heterosexual men than in many of the homosexuals. This means that, though the groups showed some difference as groups, there was no way to tell anything about an individual's sexual orientation by looking at his hypothalamus."
Strange response.Make sure you use protection.
Honestly, I haven't delved into many psychology studies since my tertiary studies finished over 15 years ago, so my memory is a little hazy.Allow me to make just a couple of points about LeVay and INAH3. The main problem is that study is 27 years old and has been debunked quite a few times. As far back as 1994 (the year after the study was published) LeVay said the following about his work;
He was also criticized by other researchers and here is just a small sample;
Strange response.
You should give Folau the same advice. Many married heterosexual couples engage in anal sex too.What's strange about it? Good advice I thought. Anal sex often causes tiny microscopic tears in the lining of the rectum, which can give STD's easier entry into the body.
Honestly, I haven't delved into many psychology studies since my tertiary studies finished over 15 years ago, so my memory is a little hazy.
I'll appreciate it if you can provide a reference for whatever you quote so that I can provide a better reply.
Cheers
LeVay openly related his research to his own homosexuality and to his mourning over his lover's death from AIDS.[4] LeVay cautioned against misinterpreting his findings in a 1994 interview: "It’s important to stress what I didn’t find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain.
It's clearly the work of the debil!The American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders in 1973.
You should give Folau the same advice. Many married heterosexual couples engage in anal sex too.
I heard it was Crankitup ¯\_(ツ)_/¯Is Folau on Bigfooty? Wow! What's his username?
This whole thing ie. believing in the existence of an omnipresent, omniscient, judgmental creator is a complete load of codswallop. In time Institutionalized religious belief will go the way of the dinosaur, the gap for god to fit into is getting ever smaller.
Six pack short of a carton old Izzy is, a few Roos loose in the top paddock as well.
Non-human animals and children can't give consent to have sex with adult humans, mate. Adults are more than capable of engaging in consensual sex with other adults. If you don't like it, nobody is forcing you to participate.
Thankfully we are more enlightened now, having the age of consent at 10 or 12 is just plain insanity and reflects the uneducated times those consent ages came from.Actually for most of its history in Christian Europe the Churches’ age of consent was 12. For much of the history of America it has been 10. It’s only been in the last 100 years or so the the age of consent is where it is now.
So for much of its history the Church sanctioned what we would consider extremely “aberrant” behaviour. Interpretation is a funny thing.