Total Posts:226|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Homosexuality: mental dysfunction discloses

MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 4:33:37 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
The gay agenda, like the atheist agenda, are agendas to thwart the good works of God. People have a tendency to become what they see and hear. We can look at the programming of the tell-a-vision, that programs you how to behave by showing you what to accept.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 5:09:33 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

Homosexuality is natures way of preserving the planet from over population. Jesus was gay according to Secret Mark. The world wasn't over populated then. So God must have had a hand in preventing Jesus from having his seed multiply and seeing that he was crucified to remove any remote possibility.
KwLm
Posts: 480
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 5:22:01 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

You should do some light reading before spouting crap https://en.wikipedia.org...
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 5:26:14 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 5:22:01 PM, KwLm wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

You should do some light reading before spouting crap https://en.wikipedia.org...

Do you think you could publish that wiki link in a science journal?

The gay agenda will write anything. Remember, you've been brainwashed to accept the gay agenda.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,609
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 5:28:31 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

Oh excellent, I was starting to think believers were ignoring homosexuals. Whew! Good thing there are still some homophobes here who can step up to the plate.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 5:37:33 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 5:28:31 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

Oh excellent, I was starting to think believers were ignoring homosexuals. Whew! Good thing there are still some homophobes here who can step up to the plate.

It's not homophobia. It's an observation.
Silly_Billy
Posts: 641
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 5:58:34 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 5:37:33 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:28:31 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual.

If Homosexuality is unnatural, then how do you explain Homosexual behaviour amongst animals?

The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction.

EVOLUTION!!! MY GOD, have the Theist finally convinced you that evolution is REAL!!!

The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

The human body was also designed to enjoy sexuality. Homosexuals can enjoy it, therefore it must be natural.


Oh excellent, I was starting to think believers were ignoring homosexuals. Whew! Good thing there are still some homophobes here who can step up to the plate.

It's not homophobia. It's an observation.

And where exactly did you observe that Homosexuality is an unnatural sickness? It seems to me that calling homosexuality a sickness has nothing to do observation or with observation evidence but more with intolerant prejudice caused by religion. And then people like you wonder why some people object to religion? Could it be because some of those who follow religion use that religion to justify being like Nazi sympathizers? If anyone has a mental dysfunction, it has to be you.
matt8800
Posts: 2,077
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 7:38:35 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

10% of all male sheep only have sex with other male sheep. Why do you think only those sheep are influenced by Satan and the others are not?

https://www.newscientist.com...

Can you explain the mechanism that Satan uses to influence those sheep? Please provide sources.
janesix
Posts: 3,460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 7:53:31 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

Homosexuality is natural. 100% of all bonobos are bisexual and commit homosexual acts every single day. Satan sure is busy at work on those bonobos.
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 8:37:25 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 5:58:34 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:37:33 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:28:31 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual.

If Homosexuality is unnatural, then how do you explain Homosexual behaviour amongst animals?

Provide an example please

The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction.

EVOLUTION!!! MY GOD, have the Theist finally convinced you that evolution is REAL!!!

The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

The human body was also designed to enjoy sexuality. Homosexuals can enjoy it, therefore it must be natural.


Oh excellent, I was starting to think believers were ignoring homosexuals. Whew! Good thing there are still some homophobes here who can step up to the plate.

It's not homophobia. It's an observation.

And where exactly did you observe that Homosexuality is an unnatural sickness? It seems to me that calling homosexuality a sickness has nothing to do observation or with observation evidence but more with intolerant prejudice caused by religion. And then people like you wonder why some people object to religion? Could it be because some of those who follow religion use that religion to justify being like Nazi sympathizers? If anyone has a mental dysfunction, it has to be you.

A sickness is the act of being sick. A mental sickness is the mind that is not healthy. If you are not healthy, you are now in an unnatural state. The word "sickness" doesn't sit well with you because of the connotations associated with the word. My assessment of the homosexual has nothing to do with a prejudice towards them. It's simply an unbiased observation.
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 8:43:36 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 7:38:35 PM, matt8800 wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

10% of all male sheep only have sex with other male sheep. Why do you think only those sheep are influenced by Satan and the others are not?

https://www.newscientist.com...


Can you explain the mechanism that Satan uses to influence those sheep? Please provide sources.

Male animals having sex with other male animals can be the act of asserting dominance over the other male, or for a lack of female presence. Animals do not wish to have relationships with animals of the same sex, only diseased humans do because they have been brainwashed by themselves, starting with an outside influence, otherwise known as the gay agenda.
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 8:46:27 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 7:53:31 PM, janesix wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

Homosexuality is natural. 100% of all bonobos are bisexual and commit homosexual acts every single day. Satan sure is busy at work on those bonobos.

This must be one of those voices talking inside your head, telling you to dismiss all considerations. Time to take your meds. You're talking crazy again. A homosexual is a homosexual.
Silly_Billy
Posts: 641
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 8:51:00 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 8:37:25 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:58:34 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:37:33 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:28:31 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual.

If Homosexuality is unnatural, then how do you explain Homosexual behaviour amongst animals?

Provide an example please


Sheep and Bonobo's have already been mentioned above by others.

The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction.

EVOLUTION!!! MY GOD, have the Theist finally convinced you that evolution is REAL!!!

The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

The human body was also designed to enjoy sexuality. Homosexuals can enjoy it, therefore it must be natural.


Oh excellent, I was starting to think believers were ignoring homosexuals. Whew! Good thing there are still some homophobes here who can step up to the plate.

It's not homophobia. It's an observation.

And where exactly did you observe that Homosexuality is an unnatural sickness? It seems to me that calling homosexuality a sickness has nothing to do observation or with observation evidence but more with intolerant prejudice caused by religion. And then people like you wonder why some people object to religion? Could it be because some of those who follow religion use that religion to justify being like Nazi sympathizers? If anyone has a mental dysfunction, it has to be you.

A sickness is the act of being sick. A mental sickness is the mind that is not healthy. If you are not healthy, you are now in an unnatural state. The word "sickness" doesn't sit well with you because of the connotations associated with the word. My assessment of the homosexual has nothing to do with a prejudice towards them. It's simply an unbiased observation.

So calling someone sick because of what he feels is an unbiased observation? Again, what have you unbiasly observed to conclude that someone is sick because he or she happens to like something else than you? How have you come to the conclusion that they are "sick"? By what standards do you judge them as "sick"? Are you a psychologist with a degree to disgnose mental sickness? And if you do, why don't other psychologists make the same diagnosis? Can it perhaps be that you are the one who is sick and that you have a warped view of the world? If this is so, could it be related to your religious beliefs? And if it is related to your religious beliefs, then why shouldn't those who do not share that religion brand it as a "sick" religion that ought to be rooted out of society as fast as possible?

Matthew 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 9:12:31 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 8:51:00 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 8:37:25 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:58:34 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:37:33 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:28:31 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual.

If Homosexuality is unnatural, then how do you explain Homosexual behaviour amongst animals?

Provide an example please


Sheep and Bonobo's have already been mentioned above by others.

The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction.

EVOLUTION!!! MY GOD, have the Theist finally convinced you that evolution is REAL!!!

The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

The human body was also designed to enjoy sexuality. Homosexuals can enjoy it, therefore it must be natural.


Oh excellent, I was starting to think believers were ignoring homosexuals. Whew! Good thing there are still some homophobes here who can step up to the plate.

It's not homophobia. It's an observation.

And where exactly did you observe that Homosexuality is an unnatural sickness? It seems to me that calling homosexuality a sickness has nothing to do observation or with observation evidence but more with intolerant prejudice caused by religion. And then people like you wonder why some people object to religion? Could it be because some of those who follow religion use that religion to justify being like Nazi sympathizers? If anyone has a mental dysfunction, it has to be you.

A sickness is the act of being sick. A mental sickness is the mind that is not healthy. If you are not healthy, you are now in an unnatural state. The word "sickness" doesn't sit well with you because of the connotations associated with the word. My assessment of the homosexual has nothing to do with a prejudice towards them. It's simply an unbiased observation.

So calling someone sick because of what he feels is an unbiased observation? Again, what have you unbiasly observed to conclude that someone is sick because he or she happens to like something else than you? How have you come to the conclusion that they are "sick"? By what standards do you judge them as "sick"? Are you a psychologist with a degree to disgnose mental sickness? And if you do, why don't other psychologists make the same diagnosis? Can it perhaps be that you are the one who is sick and that you have a warped view of the world? If this is so, could it be related to your religious beliefs? And if it is related to your religious beliefs, then why shouldn't those who do not share that religion brand it as a "sick" religion that ought to be rooted out of society as fast as possible?

Matthew 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."

Exactly the point. Do not judge or now you will be judged. I am judging the disgusting bandits of united judgeship standing against the truth of Christianity. As one of the few bonified initiates of a scarce truth, what I can say is your truth is hereby judged. Animals exert sexual dominance over other animals for rank and order. In no way does this make them homosexuals. The inmate raped in prison is not raped for homosexuality. The rape is the act of punishment, or dominance.
Silly_Billy
Posts: 641
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 9:19:45 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 9:12:31 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 8:51:00 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 8:37:25 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:58:34 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:37:33 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:28:31 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual.

If Homosexuality is unnatural, then how do you explain Homosexual behaviour amongst animals?

Provide an example please


Sheep and Bonobo's have already been mentioned above by others.

The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction.

EVOLUTION!!! MY GOD, have the Theist finally convinced you that evolution is REAL!!!

The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

The human body was also designed to enjoy sexuality. Homosexuals can enjoy it, therefore it must be natural.


Oh excellent, I was starting to think believers were ignoring homosexuals. Whew! Good thing there are still some homophobes here who can step up to the plate.

It's not homophobia. It's an observation.

And where exactly did you observe that Homosexuality is an unnatural sickness? It seems to me that calling homosexuality a sickness has nothing to do observation or with observation evidence but more with intolerant prejudice caused by religion. And then people like you wonder why some people object to religion? Could it be because some of those who follow religion use that religion to justify being like Nazi sympathizers? If anyone has a mental dysfunction, it has to be you.

A sickness is the act of being sick. A mental sickness is the mind that is not healthy. If you are not healthy, you are now in an unnatural state. The word "sickness" doesn't sit well with you because of the connotations associated with the word. My assessment of the homosexual has nothing to do with a prejudice towards them. It's simply an unbiased observation.

So calling someone sick because of what he feels is an unbiased observation? Again, what have you unbiasly observed to conclude that someone is sick because he or she happens to like something else than you? How have you come to the conclusion that they are "sick"? By what standards do you judge them as "sick"? Are you a psychologist with a degree to disgnose mental sickness? And if you do, why don't other psychologists make the same diagnosis? Can it perhaps be that you are the one who is sick and that you have a warped view of the world? If this is so, could it be related to your religious beliefs? And if it is related to your religious beliefs, then why shouldn't those who do not share that religion brand it as a "sick" religion that ought to be rooted out of society as fast as possible?

Matthew 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."

Exactly the point. Do not judge or now you will be judged. I am judging the disgusting bandits of united judgeship standing against the truth of Christianity. As one of the few bonified initiates of a scarce truth, what I can say is your truth is hereby judged. Animals exert sexual dominance over other animals for rank and order. In no way does this make them homosexuals. The inmate raped in prison is not raped for homosexuality. The rape is the act of punishment, or dominance.

You haven't answered any of my question so i will ask them again:

What have you unbiasly observed to conclude that someone is sick because he or she happens to like something else than you?

How have you come to the conclusion that they are "sick"?

By what standards do you judge them as "sick"?

Are you a psychologist with a degree to disgnose mental sickness?

And if you do, why don't other psychologists make the same diagnosis?

Can it perhaps be that you are the one who is sick and that you have a warped view of the world?

If this is so, could it be related to your religious beliefs?

If it is related to your religious beliefs, then why shouldn't those who do not share that religion brand it as a "sick" religion that ought to be rooted out of society as fast as possible?
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 9:25:34 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 9:19:45 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 9:12:31 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 8:51:00 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 8:37:25 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:58:34 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:37:33 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:28:31 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual.

If Homosexuality is unnatural, then how do you explain Homosexual behaviour amongst animals?

Provide an example please


Sheep and Bonobo's have already been mentioned above by others.

The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction.

EVOLUTION!!! MY GOD, have the Theist finally convinced you that evolution is REAL!!!

The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

The human body was also designed to enjoy sexuality. Homosexuals can enjoy it, therefore it must be natural.


Oh excellent, I was starting to think believers were ignoring homosexuals. Whew! Good thing there are still some homophobes here who can step up to the plate.

It's not homophobia. It's an observation.

And where exactly did you observe that Homosexuality is an unnatural sickness? It seems to me that calling homosexuality a sickness has nothing to do observation or with observation evidence but more with intolerant prejudice caused by religion. And then people like you wonder why some people object to religion? Could it be because some of those who follow religion use that religion to justify being like Nazi sympathizers? If anyone has a mental dysfunction, it has to be you.

A sickness is the act of being sick. A mental sickness is the mind that is not healthy. If you are not healthy, you are now in an unnatural state. The word "sickness" doesn't sit well with you because of the connotations associated with the word. My assessment of the homosexual has nothing to do with a prejudice towards them. It's simply an unbiased observation.

So calling someone sick because of what he feels is an unbiased observation? Again, what have you unbiasly observed to conclude that someone is sick because he or she happens to like something else than you? How have you come to the conclusion that they are "sick"? By what standards do you judge them as "sick"? Are you a psychologist with a degree to disgnose mental sickness? And if you do, why don't other psychologists make the same diagnosis? Can it perhaps be that you are the one who is sick and that you have a warped view of the world? If this is so, could it be related to your religious beliefs? And if it is related to your religious beliefs, then why shouldn't those who do not share that religion brand it as a "sick" religion that ought to be rooted out of society as fast as possible?

Matthew 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."

Exactly the point. Do not judge or now you will be judged. I am judging the disgusting bandits of united judgeship standing against the truth of Christianity. As one of the few bonified initiates of a scarce truth, what I can say is your truth is hereby judged. Animals exert sexual dominance over other animals for rank and order. In no way does this make them homosexuals. The inmate raped in prison is not raped for homosexuality. The rape is the act of punishment, or dominance.

You haven't answered any of my question so i will ask them again:

What have you unbiasly observed to conclude that someone is sick because he or she happens to like something else than you?

How have you come to the conclusion that they are "sick"?

By what standards do you judge them as "sick"?

Are you a psychologist with a degree to disgnose mental sickness?

And if you do, why don't other psychologists make the same diagnosis?

Can it perhaps be that you are the one who is sick and that you have a warped view of the world?

If this is so, could it be related to your religious beliefs?

If it is related to your religious beliefs, then why shouldn't those who do not share that religion brand it as a "sick" religion that ought to be rooted out of society as fast as possible?

This is not related to my religious beliefs. You cannot understand my beliefs. Religion at its highest level is a truth. A truth is to know, thus all beliefs become absolved through the act of knowing. What you refuse to know, is knowing that some people might know more than you.
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 9:37:03 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

Which is why you're posting this in the religion forum?
Meh!
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 9:44:33 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 9:37:03 PM, Axonly wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

Which is why you're posting this in the religion forum?

The gay agenda is religious in roots to its core. The gay was not born gay but transformed, through all states of media. Hollywood pushes the satanic gay agenda full tilt. Let's first see if we can make a connection to Hollywood being predominantly satanic.

http://spiritspeakstruths.blogspot.com...

I can post an ungodly sum of links, linking Hollywood to being satanic. This posted link just happens to be the one I'm reading at the time of this post, but I have better ones.
Silly_Billy
Posts: 641
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 9:47:32 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 9:25:34 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 9:19:45 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 9:12:31 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 8:51:00 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 8:37:25 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:58:34 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:37:33 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:28:31 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual.

If Homosexuality is unnatural, then how do you explain Homosexual behaviour amongst animals?

Provide an example please


Sheep and Bonobo's have already been mentioned above by others.

The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction.

EVOLUTION!!! MY GOD, have the Theist finally convinced you that evolution is REAL!!!

The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

The human body was also designed to enjoy sexuality. Homosexuals can enjoy it, therefore it must be natural.


Oh excellent, I was starting to think believers were ignoring homosexuals. Whew! Good thing there are still some homophobes here who can step up to the plate.

It's not homophobia. It's an observation.

And where exactly did you observe that Homosexuality is an unnatural sickness? It seems to me that calling homosexuality a sickness has nothing to do observation or with observation evidence but more with intolerant prejudice caused by religion. And then people like you wonder why some people object to religion? Could it be because some of those who follow religion use that religion to justify being like Nazi sympathizers? If anyone has a mental dysfunction, it has to be you.

A sickness is the act of being sick. A mental sickness is the mind that is not healthy. If you are not healthy, you are now in an unnatural state. The word "sickness" doesn't sit well with you because of the connotations associated with the word. My assessment of the homosexual has nothing to do with a prejudice towards them. It's simply an unbiased observation.

So calling someone sick because of what he feels is an unbiased observation? Again, what have you unbiasly observed to conclude that someone is sick because he or she happens to like something else than you? How have you come to the conclusion that they are "sick"? By what standards do you judge them as "sick"? Are you a psychologist with a degree to disgnose mental sickness? And if you do, why don't other psychologists make the same diagnosis? Can it perhaps be that you are the one who is sick and that you have a warped view of the world? If this is so, could it be related to your religious beliefs? And if it is related to your religious beliefs, then why shouldn't those who do not share that religion brand it as a "sick" religion that ought to be rooted out of society as fast as possible?

Matthew 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."

Exactly the point. Do not judge or now you will be judged. I am judging the disgusting bandits of united judgeship standing against the truth of Christianity. As one of the few bonified initiates of a scarce truth, what I can say is your truth is hereby judged. Animals exert sexual dominance over other animals for rank and order. In no way does this make them homosexuals. The inmate raped in prison is not raped for homosexuality. The rape is the act of punishment, or dominance.

You haven't answered any of my question so i will ask them again:

What have you unbiasly observed to conclude that someone is sick because he or she happens to like something else than you?

How have you come to the conclusion that they are "sick"?

By what standards do you judge them as "sick"?

Are you a psychologist with a degree to disgnose mental sickness?

And if you do, why don't other psychologists make the same diagnosis?

Can it perhaps be that you are the one who is sick and that you have a warped view of the world?

If this is so, could it be related to your religious beliefs?

If it is related to your religious beliefs, then why shouldn't those who do not share that religion brand it as a "sick" religion that ought to be rooted out of society as fast as possible?

This is not related to my religious beliefs. You cannot understand my beliefs. Religion at its highest level is a truth. A truth is to know, thus all beliefs become absolved through the act of knowing. What you refuse to know, is knowing that some people might know more than you.

In other words, you have no answers. You are just one sick prejudiced small man who can not defend his own biasm.
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 9:53:30 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 9:47:32 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 9:25:34 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 9:19:45 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 9:12:31 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 8:51:00 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 8:37:25 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:58:34 PM, Silly_Billy wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:37:33 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 5:28:31 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual.

If Homosexuality is unnatural, then how do you explain Homosexual behaviour amongst animals?

Provide an example please


Sheep and Bonobo's have already been mentioned above by others.

The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction.

EVOLUTION!!! MY GOD, have the Theist finally convinced you that evolution is REAL!!!

The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

The human body was also designed to enjoy sexuality. Homosexuals can enjoy it, therefore it must be natural.


Oh excellent, I was starting to think believers were ignoring homosexuals. Whew! Good thing there are still some homophobes here who can step up to the plate.

It's not homophobia. It's an observation.

And where exactly did you observe that Homosexuality is an unnatural sickness? It seems to me that calling homosexuality a sickness has nothing to do observation or with observation evidence but more with intolerant prejudice caused by religion. And then people like you wonder why some people object to religion? Could it be because some of those who follow religion use that religion to justify being like Nazi sympathizers? If anyone has a mental dysfunction, it has to be you.

A sickness is the act of being sick. A mental sickness is the mind that is not healthy. If you are not healthy, you are now in an unnatural state. The word "sickness" doesn't sit well with you because of the connotations associated with the word. My assessment of the homosexual has nothing to do with a prejudice towards them. It's simply an unbiased observation.

So calling someone sick because of what he feels is an unbiased observation? Again, what have you unbiasly observed to conclude that someone is sick because he or she happens to like something else than you? How have you come to the conclusion that they are "sick"? By what standards do you judge them as "sick"? Are you a psychologist with a degree to disgnose mental sickness? And if you do, why don't other psychologists make the same diagnosis? Can it perhaps be that you are the one who is sick and that you have a warped view of the world? If this is so, could it be related to your religious beliefs? And if it is related to your religious beliefs, then why shouldn't those who do not share that religion brand it as a "sick" religion that ought to be rooted out of society as fast as possible?

Matthew 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."

Exactly the point. Do not judge or now you will be judged. I am judging the disgusting bandits of united judgeship standing against the truth of Christianity. As one of the few bonified initiates of a scarce truth, what I can say is your truth is hereby judged. Animals exert sexual dominance over other animals for rank and order. In no way does this make them homosexuals. The inmate raped in prison is not raped for homosexuality. The rape is the act of punishment, or dominance.

You haven't answered any of my question so i will ask them again:

What have you unbiasly observed to conclude that someone is sick because he or she happens to like something else than you?

How have you come to the conclusion that they are "sick"?

By what standards do you judge them as "sick"?

Are you a psychologist with a degree to disgnose mental sickness?

And if you do, why don't other psychologists make the same diagnosis?

Can it perhaps be that you are the one who is sick and that you have a warped view of the world?

If this is so, could it be related to your religious beliefs?

If it is related to your religious beliefs, then why shouldn't those who do not share that religion brand it as a "sick" religion that ought to be rooted out of society as fast as possible?

This is not related to my religious beliefs. You cannot understand my beliefs. Religion at its highest level is a truth. A truth is to know, thus all beliefs become absolved through the act of knowing. What you refuse to know, is knowing that some people might know more than you.

In other words, you have no answers. You are just one sick prejudiced small man who can not defend his own biasm.

I was clear from the beginning that being gay is a created mental disorder. A mental disorder can easily be seen as unbiased from the mind that is well. Are you gay?
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 10:04:03 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com...

"According to the American Psychiatric Association, until 1974 homosexuality was a mental illness. Freud had alluded to homosexuality numerous times in his writings, and had concluded that paranoia and homosexuality were inseparable. Other psychiatrists wrote copiously on the subject, and homosexuality was "treated" on a wide basis. There was little or no suggestion within the psychiatric community that homosexuality might be conceptualized as anything other than a mental illness that needed to be treated. And, of course, homosexuality was listed as a mental illness in DSM-II. (The DSM " Diagnostic and Statistical Manual " is the APA"s standard classification of their so-called mental disorders, and is used by many mental health workers in the USA and other countries.)

Then in 1970 gay activists protested against the APA convention in San Francisco. These scenes were repeated in 1971, and as people came out of the "closet" and felt empowered politically and socially, the APA directorate became increasingly uncomfortable with their stance. In 1973 the APA"s nomenclature task force recommended that homosexuality be declared normal. The trustees were not prepared to go that far, but they did vote to remove homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses by a vote of 13 to 0, with 2 abstentions. This decision was confirmed by a vote of the APA membership, and homosexuality was no longer listed in the seventh edition of DSM-II, which was issued in 1974.

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. They gained a voice and began to make themselves heard. And the APA reacted with truly astonishing speed. And with good reason. They realized intuitively that a protracted battle would have drawn increasing attention to the spurious nature of their entire taxonomy. So they quickly "cut loose" the gay community and forestalled any radical scrutiny of the DSM system generally."

The APA claimed that they made the change because new research showed that most homosexual people were content with their sexual orientation, and that as a group, they appeared to be as well-adjusted as heterosexual people. I suggest, however, that these research findings were simply the APA"s face-saver. For centuries, perhaps millennia, homosexual people had clung to their sexual orientation despite the most severe persecution and vilification, including imprisonment and death. Wouldn"t this suggest that they were happy with their orientation? Do we need research to confirm this? And if we do, shouldn"t we also need research to confirm that heterosexual people are happy with their orientation? And if poor adjustment is critical to a diagnosis of mental illness, where was the evidence of this that justified making homosexuality a mental illness in the first place?

Also noteworthy is the fact that the vote of the membership was by no means unanimous. Only about 55% of the members who voted favored the change.

Of course, the APA put the best spin they could on these events. The fact is that they altered their taxonomy because of intense pressure from the gay community, but they claimed that the change was prompted by research findings.

So all the people who had this terrible "illness" were "cured" overnight " by a vote! I remember as a boy reading of the United Nations World Health Organization"s decision to eradicate smallpox. This was in 1967, and by 1977, after a truly staggering amount of work, the disease was a thing of the past. Why didn"t they just take a vote? Because smallpox is a real illness. The human problems listed in DSM are not. It"s that simple. You can say that geese are swans " but in reality they"re still geese.

The overall point being that the APA"s taxonomy is nothing more than self-serving nonsense. Real illnesses are not banished by voting or by fiat, but by valid science and hard work. There are no mental illnesses. Rather, there are people. We have problems; we have orientations; we have habits; we have perspectives. Sometimes we do well, other times we make a mess of things. We are complicated. Our feelings fluctuate with our circumstances, from the depths of despondency to the pinnacles of bliss. And perhaps, most of all, we are individuals. DSM"s facile and self-serving attempt to medicalize human problems is an institutionalized insult to human dignity. The homosexual community has managed to liberate themselves from psychiatric oppression. But there are millions of people worldwide who are still being damaged, stigmatized, and disempowered by this pernicious system to this day.
VirBinarus
Posts: 323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 10:10:45 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

woah, you've taken it a bit far...

Can I recommend you have a read of 1 Peter Ch 1-2?

While I am with you that homosexuality is wrong, is calling them "diseased" and "infected" going to do anyone any good?
"Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing."
1 thessalonians, 5:11
missbailey8
Posts: 1,881
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 10:35:14 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.
What evidence do you have to support this claim. scientifically? I don't mean anything that you've expressed in this post, but actual research to prove your point. I'd love to see it, if you do manage to find it.
~missbailey8~

Me: What is the weirdest thing I have ever done?
Solon: Agreeing to date me.

Skep: Bailey, you have sardonic written all over your face.
Annie: She has gorgeous written all over her face!

"[M]en are weak. All of us are weak."
-Fatihah

If you ever just want someone to vent, rant, or discuss anything troubling you, my PMs are always open. Have a fabulous day!

The Clown Queen of DDO
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 10:46:54 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 10:10:45 PM, VirBinarus wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

woah, you've taken it a bit far...

Can I recommend you have a read of 1 Peter Ch 1-2?

While I am with you that homosexuality is wrong, is calling them "diseased" and "infected" going to do anyone any good?

I'm judging the judges as they see fit to judge.
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 10:50:30 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 10:35:14 PM, missbailey8 wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.
What evidence do you have to support this claim. scientifically? I don't mean anything that you've expressed in this post, but actual research to prove your point. I'd love to see it, if you do manage to find it.

"According to the American Psychiatric Association, until 1974 homosexuality was a mental illness. Freud had alluded to homosexuality numerous times in his writings, and had concluded that paranoia and homosexuality were inseparable. Other psychiatrists wrote copiously on the subject, and homosexuality was "treated" on a wide basis. There was little or no suggestion within the psychiatric community that homosexuality might be conceptualized as anything other than a mental illness that needed to be treated. And, of course, homosexuality was listed as a mental illness in DSM-II. (The DSM " Diagnostic and Statistical Manual " is the APA"s standard classification of their so-called mental disorders, and is used by many mental health workers in the USA and other countries.)

Then in 1970 gay activists protested against the APA convention in San Francisco. These scenes were repeated in 1971, and as people came out of the "closet" and felt empowered politically and socially, the APA directorate became increasingly uncomfortable with their stance. In 1973 the APA"s nomenclature task force recommended that homosexuality be declared normal. The trustees were not prepared to go that far, but they did vote to remove homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses by a vote of 13 to 0, with 2 abstentions. This decision was confirmed by a vote of the APA membership, and homosexuality was no longer listed in the seventh edition of DSM-II, which was issued in 1974.

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. They gained a voice and began to make themselves heard. And the APA reacted with truly astonishing speed. And with good reason. They realized intuitively that a protracted battle would have drawn increasing attention to the spurious nature of their entire taxonomy. So they quickly "cut loose" the gay community and forestalled any radical scrutiny of the DSM system generally.

The APA claimed that they made the change because new research showed that most homosexual people were content with their sexual orientation, and that as a group, they appeared to be as well-adjusted as heterosexual people. I suggest, however, that these research findings were simply the APA"s face-saver. For centuries, perhaps millennia, homosexual people had clung to their sexual orientation despite the most severe persecution and vilification, including imprisonment and death. Wouldn"t this suggest that they were happy with their orientation? Do we need research to confirm this? And if we do, shouldn"t we also need research to confirm that heterosexual people are happy with their orientation? And if poor adjustment is critical to a diagnosis of mental illness, where was the evidence of this that justified making homosexuality a mental illness in the first place?

Also noteworthy is the fact that the vote of the membership was by no means unanimous. Only about 55% of the members who voted favored the change.

Of course, the APA put the best spin they could on these events. The fact is that they altered their taxonomy because of intense pressure from the gay community, but they claimed that the change was prompted by research findings.

So all the people who had this terrible "illness" were "cured" overnight " by a vote! I remember as a boy reading of the United Nations World Health Organization"s decision to eradicate smallpox. This was in 1967, and by 1977, after a truly staggering amount of work, the disease was a thing of the past. Why didn"t they just take a vote? Because smallpox is a real illness. The human problems listed in DSM are not. It"s that simple. You can say that geese are swans " but in reality they"re still geese.

The overall point being that the APA"s taxonomy is nothing more than self-serving nonsense. Real illnesses are not banished by voting or by fiat, but by valid science and hard work. There are no mental illnesses. Rather, there are people. We have problems; we have orientations; we have habits; we have perspectives. Sometimes we do well, other times we make a mess of things. We are complicated. Our feelings fluctuate with our circumstances, from the depths of despondency to the pinnacles of bliss. And perhaps, most of all, we are individuals. DSM"s facile and self-serving attempt to medicalize human problems is an institutionalized insult to human dignity. The homosexual community has managed to liberate themselves from psychiatric oppression. But there are millions of people worldwide who are still being damaged, stigmatized, and disempowered by this pernicious system to this day."

The American Pyschiatric Association
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 11:04:11 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
Find a TherapistTopicsGet HelpMagazineTestsExperts
Find a Therapist
Neel Burton M.D. Neel Burton M.D.
Hide and Seek
When Homosexuality Stopped Being a Mental Disorder
Not until 1987 did homosexuality completely fall out of the DSM.
Posted Sep 18, 2015 www.psychologytoday.com

In the 1950s and 1960s, some therapists employed aversion therapy of the kind featured in A Clockwork Orange to "cure" male homosexuality. This typically involved showing patients pictures of naked men while giving them electric shocks or drugs to make them vomit, and, once they could no longer bear it, showing them pictures of naked women or sending them out on a "date" with a young nurse. Needless to say, these cruel and degrading methods proved entirely ineffective.

First published in 1968, DSM-II (the American classiifcation of mental disorders) listed homosexuality as a mental disorder. In this, the DSM followed in a long tradition in medicine and psychiatry, which in the 19th century appropriated homosexuality from the Church and, in an "lan of enlightenment, transformed it from sin to mental disorder.

In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) asked all members attending its convention to vote on whether they believed homosexuality to be a mental disorder. 5,854 psychiatrists voted to remove homosexuality from the DSM, and 3,810 to retain it.

The APA then compromised, removing homosexuality from the DSM but replacing it, in effect, with "sexual orientation disturbance" for people "in conflict with" their sexual orientation. Not until 1987 did homosexuality completely fall out of the DSM.

Meanwhile, the World Health Organization (WHO) only removed homosexuality from its ICD classification with the publication of ICD-10 in 1992, although ICD-10 still carries the construct of "ego-dystonic sexual orientation". In this condition, the person is not in doubt about his or her sexual preference, but "wishes it were different because of associated psychological and behavioural disorders".

The evolution of the status of homosexuality in the classifications of mental disorders highlights that concepts of mental disorder can be rapidly evolving social constructs that change as society changes. Today, the standard of psychotherapy in the U.S. and Europe is gay affirmative psychotherapy, which encourages gay people to accept their sexual orientation.
missbailey8
Posts: 1,881
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 11:06:02 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 10:50:30 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 10:35:14 PM, missbailey8 wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.
What evidence do you have to support this claim. scientifically? I don't mean anything that you've expressed in this post, but actual research to prove your point. I'd love to see it, if you do manage to find it.

"According to the American Psychiatric Association, until 1974 homosexuality was a mental illness. Freud had alluded to homosexuality numerous times in his writings, and had concluded that paranoia and homosexuality were inseparable. Other psychiatrists wrote copiously on the subject, and homosexuality was "treated" on a wide basis. There was little or no suggestion within the psychiatric community that homosexuality might be conceptualized as anything other than a mental illness that needed to be treated. And, of course, homosexuality was listed as a mental illness in DSM-II. (The DSM " Diagnostic and Statistical Manual " is the APA"s standard classification of their so-called mental disorders, and is used by many mental health workers in the USA and other countries.)

Then in 1970 gay activists protested against the APA convention in San Francisco. These scenes were repeated in 1971, and as people came out of the "closet" and felt empowered politically and socially, the APA directorate became increasingly uncomfortable with their stance. In 1973 the APA"s nomenclature task force recommended that homosexuality be declared normal. The trustees were not prepared to go that far, but they did vote to remove homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses by a vote of 13 to 0, with 2 abstentions. This decision was confirmed by a vote of the APA membership, and homosexuality was no longer listed in the seventh edition of DSM-II, which was issued in 1974.

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. They gained a voice and began to make themselves heard. And the APA reacted with truly astonishing speed. And with good reason. They realized intuitively that a protracted battle would have drawn increasing attention to the spurious nature of their entire taxonomy. So they quickly "cut loose" the gay community and forestalled any radical scrutiny of the DSM system generally.

The APA claimed that they made the change because new research showed that most homosexual people were content with their sexual orientation, and that as a group, they appeared to be as well-adjusted as heterosexual people. I suggest, however, that these research findings were simply the APA"s face-saver. For centuries, perhaps millennia, homosexual people had clung to their sexual orientation despite the most severe persecution and vilification, including imprisonment and death. Wouldn"t this suggest that they were happy with their orientation? Do we need research to confirm this? And if we do, shouldn"t we also need research to confirm that heterosexual people are happy with their orientation? And if poor adjustment is critical to a diagnosis of mental illness, where was the evidence of this that justified making homosexuality a mental illness in the first place?

Also noteworthy is the fact that the vote of the membership was by no means unanimous. Only about 55% of the members who voted favored the change.

Of course, the APA put the best spin they could on these events. The fact is that they altered their taxonomy because of intense pressure from the gay community, but they claimed that the change was prompted by research findings.

So all the people who had this terrible "illness" were "cured" overnight " by a vote! I remember as a boy reading of the United Nations World Health Organization"s decision to eradicate smallpox. This was in 1967, and by 1977, after a truly staggering amount of work, the disease was a thing of the past. Why didn"t they just take a vote? Because smallpox is a real illness. The human problems listed in DSM are not. It"s that simple. You can say that geese are swans " but in reality they"re still geese.

The overall point being that the APA"s taxonomy is nothing more than self-serving nonsense. Real illnesses are not banished by voting or by fiat, but by valid science and hard work. There are no mental illnesses. Rather, there are people. We have problems; we have orientations; we have habits; we have perspectives. Sometimes we do well, other times we make a mess of things. We are complicated. Our feelings fluctuate with our circumstances, from the depths of despondency to the pinnacles of bliss. And perhaps, most of all, we are individuals. DSM"s facile and self-serving attempt to medicalize human problems is an institutionalized insult to human dignity. The homosexual community has managed to liberate themselves from psychiatric oppression. But there are millions of people worldwide who are still being damaged, stigmatized, and disempowered by this pernicious system to this day."

The American Pyschiatric Association
This source is rather misleading. It wasn't directly said by The American Psychiatric Association, but about APA. Also, you provided no link. Please do so; I'd love to continue the discussion that way.
~missbailey8~

Me: What is the weirdest thing I have ever done?
Solon: Agreeing to date me.

Skep: Bailey, you have sardonic written all over your face.
Annie: She has gorgeous written all over her face!

"[M]en are weak. All of us are weak."
-Fatihah

If you ever just want someone to vent, rant, or discuss anything troubling you, my PMs are always open. Have a fabulous day!

The Clown Queen of DDO
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 11:13:06 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 11:06:02 PM, missbailey8 wrote:
At 10/29/2016 10:50:30 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 10/29/2016 10:35:14 PM, missbailey8 wrote:
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.
What evidence do you have to support this claim. scientifically? I don't mean anything that you've expressed in this post, but actual research to prove your point. I'd love to see it, if you do manage to find it.

"According to the American Psychiatric Association, until 1974 homosexuality was a mental illness. Freud had alluded to homosexuality numerous times in his writings, and had concluded that paranoia and homosexuality were inseparable. Other psychiatrists wrote copiously on the subject, and homosexuality was "treated" on a wide basis. There was little or no suggestion within the psychiatric community that homosexuality might be conceptualized as anything other than a mental illness that needed to be treated. And, of course, homosexuality was listed as a mental illness in DSM-II. (The DSM " Diagnostic and Statistical Manual " is the APA"s standard classification of their so-called mental disorders, and is used by many mental health workers in the USA and other countries.)

Then in 1970 gay activists protested against the APA convention in San Francisco. These scenes were repeated in 1971, and as people came out of the "closet" and felt empowered politically and socially, the APA directorate became increasingly uncomfortable with their stance. In 1973 the APA"s nomenclature task force recommended that homosexuality be declared normal. The trustees were not prepared to go that far, but they did vote to remove homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses by a vote of 13 to 0, with 2 abstentions. This decision was confirmed by a vote of the APA membership, and homosexuality was no longer listed in the seventh edition of DSM-II, which was issued in 1974.

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. They gained a voice and began to make themselves heard. And the APA reacted with truly astonishing speed. And with good reason. They realized intuitively that a protracted battle would have drawn increasing attention to the spurious nature of their entire taxonomy. So they quickly "cut loose" the gay community and forestalled any radical scrutiny of the DSM system generally.

The APA claimed that they made the change because new research showed that most homosexual people were content with their sexual orientation, and that as a group, they appeared to be as well-adjusted as heterosexual people. I suggest, however, that these research findings were simply the APA"s face-saver. For centuries, perhaps millennia, homosexual people had clung to their sexual orientation despite the most severe persecution and vilification, including imprisonment and death. Wouldn"t this suggest that they were happy with their orientation? Do we need research to confirm this? And if we do, shouldn"t we also need research to confirm that heterosexual people are happy with their orientation? And if poor adjustment is critical to a diagnosis of mental illness, where was the evidence of this that justified making homosexuality a mental illness in the first place?

Also noteworthy is the fact that the vote of the membership was by no means unanimous. Only about 55% of the members who voted favored the change.

Of course, the APA put the best spin they could on these events. The fact is that they altered their taxonomy because of intense pressure from the gay community, but they claimed that the change was prompted by research findings.

So all the people who had this terrible "illness" were "cured" overnight " by a vote! I remember as a boy reading of the United Nations World Health Organization"s decision to eradicate smallpox. This was in 1967, and by 1977, after a truly staggering amount of work, the disease was a thing of the past. Why didn"t they just take a vote? Because smallpox is a real illness. The human problems listed in DSM are not. It"s that simple. You can say that geese are swans " but in reality they"re still geese.

The overall point being that the APA"s taxonomy is nothing more than self-serving nonsense. Real illnesses are not banished by voting or by fiat, but by valid science and hard work. There are no mental illnesses. Rather, there are people. We have problems; we have orientations; we have habits; we have perspectives. Sometimes we do well, other times we make a mess of things. We are complicated. Our feelings fluctuate with our circumstances, from the depths of despondency to the pinnacles of bliss. And perhaps, most of all, we are individuals. DSM"s facile and self-serving attempt to medicalize human problems is an institutionalized insult to human dignity. The homosexual community has managed to liberate themselves from psychiatric oppression. But there are millions of people worldwide who are still being damaged, stigmatized, and disempowered by this pernicious system to this day."

The American Pyschiatric Association
This source is rather misleading. It wasn't directly said by The American Psychiatric Association, but about APA. Also, you provided no link. Please do so; I'd love to continue the discussion that way.

You should have paid attention to the post above that directly sources where I got it from. I even provided the link. I should not have to provide this information for each person walking in blind. It's not like this thread has a million pages to sift through.
janesix
Posts: 3,460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2016 11:24:53 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/29/2016 4:29:01 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
Homosexual behavior is not natural. The homosexual is the diseased mind infected with outside satanic influences. The human was not born a homosexual. The human was influenced to become a homosexual. The evolution of the human is the product of the survival of the fittest, yet the homosexual would make itself the product of its own extinction. The human body was designed for reproduction, thus making heterosexuality natural while homosexuality becomes a sickness.

You need to make up your mind. Is homosexuality a mental disorder, or evil voodoo from satan?