| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"JTEM" |
| Date: |
31 Jul 2005 08:05:33 AM |
| Object: |
CNN Tonight |
CNN is promising to do a special report on (overtly religious)
reparative therapy, and groups like (the overtly religious)
"Love in action" in general.
If the promo is any indication, have some high bloodpressure
medication at the ready, BEFORE tuning in.
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
31 Jul 2005 10:59:35 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 09:05:33 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com>
wrote:
CNN is promising to do a special report on (overtly religious)
reparative therapy, and groups like (the overtly religious)
"Love in action" in general.
If the promo is any indication, have some high bloodpressure
medication at the ready, BEFORE tuning in.
The truth does "Bust" your homo-*****, huh, boy...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
31 Jul 2005 12:06:57 PM |
|
|
wrote:
The truth does "Bust" your homo-*****, huh, boy...
Like a documented 3% "success rate" is gonna have folks hemorrhaging in
the aisles...
--
Civilians, and Grunts, and Zombies, Oh My!
http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?Dionisio
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Buck" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
31 Jul 2005 04:11:32 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 17:06:57 GMT, Dionisio <moc-rr-thgisniTA@5ellimd.com> wrote:
wbt@privacy.net wrote:
The truth does "Bust" your homo-*****, huh, boy...
Like a documented 3% "success rate" is gonna have folks hemorrhaging in
the aisles...
Are there actually studies showing that such "reparative therapy" actually
produces 3% of the individuals who are every bit as genuinely unattracted to
others of the same gender as their life-long hetero peers?
--
L8r,
Uncle Buck
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Bohn" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
31 Jul 2005 05:51:47 PM |
|
|
Uncle Buck <UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote in
news:4ifqe1hn0th7odgg777df3ksvqib0ofrj3@4ax.com:
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 17:06:57 GMT, Dionisio
<moc-rr-thgisniTA@5ellimd.com> wrote:
wbt@privacy.net wrote:
The truth does "Bust" your homo-*****, huh, boy...
Like a documented 3% "success rate" is gonna have folks hemorrhaging
in the aisles...
Are there actually studies showing that such "reparative therapy"
actually produces 3% of the individuals who are every bit as genuinely
unattracted to others of the same gender as their life-long hetero
peers? --
L8r,
Uncle Buck
I suspect it plays on the emotions of the 3% that fear being ostracized
more than anything else. Tell them that their fear is warranted and do
whatever is possible to increase the fear. Very Christian of them.
--
Gary Bohn
Science rationally modifies a theory to fit evidence, creationism
emotionally modifies evidence to fit the bible.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
31 Jul 2005 06:23:09 PM |
|
|
"Gary Bohn" <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> wrote
Uncle Buck <UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote
Are there actually studies showing that such "reparative therapy"
actually produces 3% of the individuals who are every bit as
genuinely unattracted to others of the same gender as their
life-long hetero peers? --
No. The "Sptitzer" study is often reported to have made such a conclusion,
but it did not. In the first place, the Spitzer study was really only
determining if the subjects had suffered from reparative therapy. A second
issue is that the Spitzer study was so bad -- in methodology -- that it
could
not accurately determine even this much.
I suspect it plays on the emotions of the 3% that fear being ostracized
more than anything else.
It's not like "closeted" or even "repressed" gay people are a new
concept....
You've struck on one of the critical flaws of such "studies." That is to
say, they rely entirely on the self-reporting of the subjects, and we (all
of us) know for a fact that people often lie.... even to themselves.
In the case of Spitzer, there were numerous other critical flaws. Like what?
Like....
Like the group that makes it's living selling reparative therapy supplying
all the "success cases." How could you hope to determine a success rate,
or even the less ambitious safetiness of the therapy, if the only people
you talk to are the reported "success cases" chosen by the very people
who make a living out of selling the reparative therapy?
Like many of the test subjects themselves making a living as reparative
therapists.
Like the study consisting entirely of a telephone interview.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Buck" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
31 Jul 2005 09:38:30 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 19:23:09 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Gary Bohn" <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> wrote
Uncle Buck <UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote
Are there actually studies showing that such "reparative therapy"
actually produces 3% of the individuals who are every bit as
genuinely unattracted to others of the same gender as their
life-long hetero peers? --
No.
Didn't think so. :-/
The "Sptitzer" study is often reported to have made such a conclusion,
but it did not. In the first place, the Spitzer study was really only
determining if the subjects had suffered from reparative therapy. A second
issue is that the Spitzer study was so bad -- in methodology -- that it
could
not accurately determine even this much.
I haven't actually looked too much into these studies - they sound like very
basic reading for someone interested in this subject. I'll look into them. Do
you know of any other useful resources on the matter? I'm getting more
interested in this issue as time goes on.
I suspect it plays on the emotions of the 3% that fear being ostracized
more than anything else.
It's not like "closeted" or even "repressed" gay people are a new
concept....
You've struck on one of the critical flaws of such "studies." That is to
say, they rely entirely on the self-reporting of the subjects, and we (all
of us) know for a fact that people often lie.... even to themselves.
That's a problem in general for almost all studies, I believe - relying upon the
human subjects to be forthright, at least where their answers or input are
actually relevant to the study. I suppose they take that into consideration
when analyzying their data, but it's still a pretty big thorn in the side for
those who would like to be able to know the true data, the meat of the matter,
etc... etc... etc... And it is certainly more problematic when "sensitive" or
"hot button" issues are addressed.
In the case of Spitzer, there were numerous other critical flaws. Like what?
Like....
Like the group that makes it's living selling reparative therapy supplying
all the "success cases." How could you hope to determine a success rate,
or even the less ambitious safetiness of the therapy, if the only people
you talk to are the reported "success cases" chosen by the very people
who make a living out of selling the reparative therapy?
Like many of the test subjects themselves making a living as reparative
therapists.
Like the study consisting entirely of a telephone interview.
Almost sounds like a pyramid scheme. Hmmmnnnn... :-? Thanks for the info.
--
L8r,
Uncle Buck
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
31 Jul 2005 07:17:29 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Buck" <UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote
I haven't actually looked too much into these studies - they sound
like very basic reading for someone interested in this subject.
I'll look into them. Do you know of any other useful resources
on the matter? I'm getting more interested in this issue as time
goes on.
Here's a few words on the subject by the American Psychological
Association:
http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/justthefacts.html
Here's their take on homosexuality in general:
http://www.apahelpcenter.org/articles/article.php?id=31
As for Sptizer specificially, the religious tolerance website
appears to assemble many of the pieces on one, easy to read
page:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_spit.htm
Sorry, but this battle was fought & lost by the lunatic right-wing
years ago. The result is that many of the links I could once offer
are now long expired. The religious tolerance website is a very
good source, with many citations, but it is not itself a professional
psychological association.
You've struck on one of the critical flaws of such "studies." That
is to say, they rely entirely on the self-reporting of the subjects,
and we (all of us) know for a fact that people often lie.... even to
themselves.
That's a problem in general for almost all studies, I believe - relying
upon the human subjects to be forthright, at least where their answers
or input are actually relevant to the study.
Yes. But Spitzer took it further, made his "study" even worse than the
usual. His subjects were pre-screened/selected by the very people
who make their living off of selling reparative therapy. There are even
reports that many of the subjects were themselves employed as
reparative therapists.
I suppose they take that into consideration when analyzying their data,
Certainly NOT in the case of the Spitzer study. The lunatic right has
been billing it as "proof" of everything they want to believe.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Bohn" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
31 Jul 2005 09:10:34 PM |
|
|
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:IdGdnV2rNbxQ-nDfRVn-ow@comcast.com:
"Uncle Buck" <UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote
I haven't actually looked too much into these studies - they sound
like very basic reading for someone interested in this subject.
I'll look into them. Do you know of any other useful resources
on the matter? I'm getting more interested in this issue as time
goes on.
Here's a few words on the subject by the American Psychological
Association:
http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/justthefacts.html
Here's their take on homosexuality in general:
http://www.apahelpcenter.org/articles/article.php?id=31
As for Sptizer specificially, the religious tolerance website
appears to assemble many of the pieces on one, easy to read
page:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_spit.htm
Sorry, but this battle was fought & lost by the lunatic right-wing
years ago. The result is that many of the links I could once offer
are now long expired. The religious tolerance website is a very
good source, with many citations, but it is not itself a professional
psychological association.
You've struck on one of the critical flaws of such "studies." That
is to say, they rely entirely on the self-reporting of the
subjects, and we (all of us) know for a fact that people often
lie.... even to themselves.
That's a problem in general for almost all studies, I believe -
relying upon the human subjects to be forthright, at least where
their answers or input are actually relevant to the study.
Yes. But Spitzer took it further, made his "study" even worse than the
usual. His subjects were pre-screened/selected by the very people
who make their living off of selling reparative therapy. There are
even reports that many of the subjects were themselves employed as
reparative therapists.
I suppose they take that into consideration when analyzying their
data,
Certainly NOT in the case of the Spitzer study. The lunatic right has
been billing it as "proof" of everything they want to believe.
They used a phone survey as proof? Hahahaaaaahaaaaaaaa.....
--
Gary Bohn
Science rationally modifies a theory to fit evidence, creationism
emotionally modifies evidence to fit the bible.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Buck" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
01 Aug 2005 12:31:26 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 02:10:34 +0000 (UTC), Gary Bohn
<garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> wrote:
"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:IdGdnV2rNbxQ-nDfRVn-ow@comcast.com:
"Uncle Buck" <UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote
I haven't actually looked too much into these studies - they sound
like very basic reading for someone interested in this subject.
I'll look into them. Do you know of any other useful resources
on the matter? I'm getting more interested in this issue as time
goes on.
Here's a few words on the subject by the American Psychological
Association:
http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/justthefacts.html
Here's their take on homosexuality in general:
http://www.apahelpcenter.org/articles/article.php?id=31
As for Sptizer specificially, the religious tolerance website
appears to assemble many of the pieces on one, easy to read
page:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_spit.htm
Sorry, but this battle was fought & lost by the lunatic right-wing
years ago. The result is that many of the links I could once offer
are now long expired. The religious tolerance website is a very
good source, with many citations, but it is not itself a professional
psychological association.
You've struck on one of the critical flaws of such "studies." That
is to say, they rely entirely on the self-reporting of the
subjects, and we (all of us) know for a fact that people often
lie.... even to themselves.
That's a problem in general for almost all studies, I believe -
relying upon the human subjects to be forthright, at least where
their answers or input are actually relevant to the study.
Yes. But Spitzer took it further, made his "study" even worse than the
usual. His subjects were pre-screened/selected by the very people
who make their living off of selling reparative therapy. There are
even reports that many of the subjects were themselves employed as
reparative therapists.
I suppose they take that into consideration when analyzying their
data,
Certainly NOT in the case of the Spitzer study. The lunatic right has
been billing it as "proof" of everything they want to believe.
They used a phone survey as proof? Hahahaaaaahaaaaaaaa.....
You know, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if some of these "reparative
therapy" schemes were actually cons being pulled off by a few disgruntled gay
people. You know - pretend to go straight so some fanatical parent can pay you
to teach their miserable queer offspring how to go straight _also_, but in
reality all you're basically doing is teaching them how to _pretend_ to be
straight while you reel in mommy & daddy's money.
It reaches the same conclusion whether the program is a legitimate effort or a
scam - the parents are out some money, the kids don't really "change" they just
grow up either hating their parents, hating themselves or both, and some will
commit suicide from being brainwashed into being so self-repressed and
self-loathing. Oh, yeah, not to mention those who will become serial killers
because, while still self-repressed and self-loathing, they for whatever reason
are not suicidal.
Pfeh... humans. Can't live with 'em, can't perform bizarre medical experiements
without 'em...
--
L8r,
Uncle Buck
BAAWA
a.a. #88
UU Minister # "=" - "Grand Equivocator of the Balanced Equal Sign"
~=^*=^=~-=^=-~=^=*^=~=-^=-=~^=*=^~=-=^-=~=^*=^=~-=^=-~=^=*^=~=-^=-=~^=*=^~=
"Surrendering To The Fall" - A blog about - what else? - me:
http://surrenderingtothefall.blogspot.com
(perpetually under construction)
~=^*=^=~-=^=-~=^=*^=~=-^=-=~^=*=^~=-=^-=~=^*=^=~-=^=-~=^=*^=~=-^=-=~^=*=^~=
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
31 Jul 2005 11:30:34 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Buck" <UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote
You know, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if
some of these "reparative therapy" schemes were
actually cons being pulled off by a few disgruntled
gay people. You know - pretend to go straight so
some fanatical parent can pay you to teach their
miserable queer offspring how to go straight _also_,
but in reality all you're basically doing is teaching
them how to _pretend_ to be straight while you reel
in mommy & daddy's money.
CNN had Dr. Throckmorton on -- darling of the lunatic
right -- who expressly stated that there is a difference
between being gay and being attracted towards members
of your own gender.
It was in a response to a direct question from the host.
This is how they can claim "success" and still pretend that
they're not immoral twats. They simply re-define
homosexuality in such a way that excludes attractions. Thus,
a "homosexual" becomes someone who engages in sexual
acts with members of their own gender. If a man doesn't
have sex with men -- regardless of his attractions -- he is
a heterosexual.... according to the immoral twats.
Apparently there is no such thing as a gay virgin.
What I'm thinking -- and this is only a guess (but an
educated guess) -- is that it all comes down to intent for
Dr. Throckmorton and the "ex" gay crowd. If you
express your intent to never have sex with a member
of your own gender (or never again), then you are
straight... even if there is the occasional (or semi regular)
"backsliding" going on.... and I do mean "backsliding."
This would explain why so many "ex" gays keep popping
up in gay cruise sites, yet remain an "ex" gay even after
they get caught tooting a meat whistle.
Example? You want an example?
Check out this site:
http://www.anotherway.com/pages/john.html
As you're looking at it, please keep in mind that this man was
not only caught inside a Washington D.C. gay bar -- where
he tried to pick up a man -- but was photographed... as he
tried to run from the camera as fast as he could.
He gave no less than three separate excuses for being in the
gay bar. Oddly, not one of them explained the man he tried
to pick up, or why he identified himself as gay.
The gay bar incident is already old news -- and I'm sure
he'd brush it off as "ancient history" -- but it took place
AFTER he appeared on the cover of Newsweek AS AN
EX GAY.
It's sick, but cruising for gay sex hasn't hurt his "ex" gay
career any. I guess we call them the "lunatic right" for
a reason, huh?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Buck" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
02 Aug 2005 12:22:40 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 00:30:34 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Uncle Buck" <UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote
You know, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if
some of these "reparative therapy" schemes were
actually cons being pulled off by a few disgruntled
gay people. You know - pretend to go straight so
some fanatical parent can pay you to teach their
miserable queer offspring how to go straight _also_,
but in reality all you're basically doing is teaching
them how to _pretend_ to be straight while you reel
in mommy & daddy's money.
CNN had Dr. Throckmorton on -- darling of the lunatic
right -- who expressly stated that there is a difference
between being gay and being attracted towards members
of your own gender.
Oh, yes, I forgot.
It was in a response to a direct question from the host.
This is how they can claim "success" and still pretend that
they're not immoral twats. They simply re-define
homosexuality in such a way that excludes attractions. Thus,
a "homosexual" becomes someone who engages in sexual
acts with members of their own gender. If a man doesn't
have sex with men -- regardless of his attractions -- he is
a heterosexual.... according to the immoral twats.
Apparently there is no such thing as a gay virgin.
And apparently, I haven't been gay for the past four years. :-( <sniff> I
_so_ want to be gay again... and again... and again... ;-)
What I'm thinking -- and this is only a guess (but an
educated guess) -- is that it all comes down to intent for
Dr. Throckmorton and the "ex" gay crowd. If you
express your intent to never have sex with a member
of your own gender (or never again), then you are
straight... even if there is the occasional (or semi regular)
"backsliding" going on.... and I do mean "backsliding."
This would explain why so many "ex" gays keep popping
up in gay cruise sites, yet remain an "ex" gay even after
they get caught tooting a meat whistle.
Example? You want an example?
Not particularly, but since you offered. ;-)
Check out this site:
http://www.anotherway.com/pages/john.html
As you're looking at it, please keep in mind that this man was
not only caught inside a Washington D.C. gay bar -- where
he tried to pick up a man -- but was photographed... as he
tried to run from the camera as fast as he could.
He gave no less than three separate excuses for being in the
gay bar. Oddly, not one of them explained the man he tried
to pick up, or why he identified himself as gay.
The gay bar incident is already old news -- and I'm sure
he'd brush it off as "ancient history" -- but it took place
AFTER he appeared on the cover of Newsweek AS AN
EX GAY.
It's sick, but cruising for gay sex hasn't hurt his "ex" gay
career any. I guess we call them the "lunatic right" for
a reason, huh?
This is, I suppose, what one might call the ultimate "Queen of denial"? :-#
I'm not the least bit surprised - being a low-down lying skank piece of *****
hypocrite is about the only way to be a fundamentalist Christian.
--
L8r,
Uncle Buck
BAAWA
a.a. #88
UU Minister # "=" - "Grand Equivocator of the Balanced Equal Sign"
~=^*=^=~-=^=-~=^=*^=~=-^=-=~^=*=^~=-=^-=~=^*=^=~-=^=-~=^=*^=~=-^=-=~^=*=^~=
"Surrendering To The Fall" - A blog about - what else? - me:
http://surrenderingtothefall.blogspot.com
(perpetually under construction)
~=^*=^=~-=^=-~=^=*^=~=-^=-=~^=*=^~=-=^-=~=^*=^=~-=^=-~=^=*^=~=-^=-=~^=*=^~=
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
01 Aug 2005 09:32:36 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Buck" <UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote in message
news:hk0ue1h1g7pr581du66c3dbl6sg7jn36f5@4ax.com...
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 00:30:34 -0400, "JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Uncle Buck" <UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote
You know, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if
some of these "reparative therapy" schemes were
actually cons being pulled off by a few disgruntled
gay people. You know - pretend to go straight so
some fanatical parent can pay you to teach their
miserable queer offspring how to go straight _also_,
but in reality all you're basically doing is teaching
them how to _pretend_ to be straight while you reel
in mommy & daddy's money.
CNN had Dr. Throckmorton on -- darling of the lunatic
right -- who expressly stated that there is a difference
between being gay and being attracted towards members
of your own gender.
Oh, yes, I forgot.
It was in a response to a direct question from the host.
This is how they can claim "success" and still pretend that
they're not immoral twats. They simply re-define
homosexuality in such a way that excludes attractions. Thus,
a "homosexual" becomes someone who engages in sexual
acts with members of their own gender. If a man doesn't
have sex with men -- regardless of his attractions -- he is
a heterosexual.... according to the immoral twats.
Apparently there is no such thing as a gay virgin.
And apparently, I haven't been gay for the past four years. :-( <sniff>
I
_so_ want to be gay again... and again... and again... ;-)
Yes, but according to Throckmoron (I refuse to refer to him as "Dr.") you
can't be gay, unless you have someone to be gay with, so you shouldn't be
attracted to a member of your same gender, because you're not really gay....
HUH? Yeah, I was right, that sounds just as stupid when I say it as when he
says it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "towelie" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
01 Aug 2005 11:03:35 PM |
|
|
TV's Uncle Buck wrote:
It was in a response to a direct question from the host.
This is how they can claim "success" and still pretend that
they're not immoral twats. They simply re-define
homosexuality in such a way that excludes attractions. Thus,
a "homosexual" becomes someone who engages in sexual
acts with members of their own gender. If a man doesn't
have sex with men -- regardless of his attractions -- he is
a heterosexual.... according to the immoral twats.
Apparently there is no such thing as a gay virgin.
And apparently, I haven't been gay for the past four years. :-( <sniff>
I
_so_ want to be gay again... and again... and again... ;-)
Then I haven't been hetero for about the same amount of time....does this
make me gay?
--
Beliefs are dangerous. Beliefs allow the mind to stop functioning.
A non-functioning mind is clinically dead. Believe in nothing.
- Maynard James Keenan
aa #2133
ap #19
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Secretary of HomIntern" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
02 Aug 2005 03:29:18 PM |
|
|
I'll never know another towelie like towelie in alt.politics.homosexuality,
they're so drad:
TV's Uncle Buck wrote:
It was in a response to a direct question from the host.
This is how they can claim "success" and still pretend that
they're not immoral twats. They simply re-define
homosexuality in such a way that excludes attractions. Thus,
a "homosexual" becomes someone who engages in sexual
acts with members of their own gender. If a man doesn't
have sex with men -- regardless of his attractions -- he is
a heterosexual.... according to the immoral twats.
Apparently there is no such thing as a gay virgin.
And apparently, I haven't been gay for the past four years. :-( <sniff>
I
_so_ want to be gay again... and again... and again... ;-)
Then I haven't been hetero for about the same amount of time....does this
make me gay?
<cue John Shocked> "Heterosexuality is the status quo." </JS> Or some such
BS.
--
_______________________________________________
Hail Eris! "The personal _is_ political."
Superfaggot; GGGHD; MWFA; HCNB; MU; BCB; FI
Economic Left/Right: -7.63
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.38
Killfiled by: directory
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff North" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
02 Aug 2005 06:32:09 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 23:03:35 -0500, in alt.politics.homosexuality
"towelie" <bugoNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:
| TV's Uncle Buck wrote:
| >>It was in a response to a direct question from the host.
| >>
| >>This is how they can claim "success" and still pretend that
| >>they're not immoral twats. They simply re-define
| >>homosexuality in such a way that excludes attractions. Thus,
| >>a "homosexual" becomes someone who engages in sexual
| >>acts with members of their own gender. If a man doesn't
| >>have sex with men -- regardless of his attractions -- he is
| >>a heterosexual.... according to the immoral twats.
| >>
| >>Apparently there is no such thing as a gay virgin.
| >
| > And apparently, I haven't been gay for the past four years. :-( <sniff>
| > I
| > _so_ want to be gay again... and again... and again... ;-)
|
| Then I haven't been hetero for about the same amount of time....does this
| make me gay?
If you're not straight them you must be gay.
---------------------------------------------------------------
jnorthau@yourpantsyahoo.com.au : Remove your pants to reply
---------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
02 Aug 2005 07:02:21 AM |
|
|
"Jeff North" <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> wrote
If you're not straight them you must be gay.
This must be true, because there's no such thing as bisexuality.
Well, at least according to the lunatic right-wing.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Skywise" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
01 Aug 2005 10:04:04 PM |
|
|
The truth regarding Homo's
it is evident that pro-homosexual
people
are extremely desperate and insecure because they put a tremendous
amount
of effort into suppressing or censoring many inconvenient truths about
pro-homosexual movement.
Some vital facts pro-homosexual people try quasi-pathologically hard
to
suppress are: One, the average lifespan of a homosexual is 20 to 30
years
shorter than normal, largely due to abnormally high AIDS and anal
cancer
and prostate cancer rates in homosexuals. (Even smokers, who liberals
love
to "discriminate" against by restricting their rights, on average live
a
little longer than homosexuals.) Two, thousands of innocent American
hemophiliacs died of AIDS because homo/bisexuals infected our blood
supply
with HIV in the early stages of the AIDS epidemic when AIDS was almost
exclusively a homo/bisexual disease. And three, the "homosexual
lifestyle"
is costing this country several billion dollars a year (mainly due to
government funding of anti-AIDS drugs for homosexuals and
hospital/hospice
care for homosexuals dying of AIDS).
Another glaring reality they want everyone to ignore is how many
homosexuals and their supporters take this hypocritical stance in
practice: It is okay to discriminate against sexual deviants like
exhibitionists (e.g., people who have sex in public) and incestuous
people
and necrophiliacs, even if they are consenting adults and even if they
aren't hurting anybody; but it is NOT okay to discriminate against
homosexual and bisexual deviants. (They try to rationalize this
untenable
position by saying things like "Exhibitionists disturb or offend
people."
We can simply respond with the obvious fact that tens of millions of
Americans and several billion people in the world are disturbed by
homosexual activity.)
It is relatively easy to prove that the "homosexual lifestyle" is
immoral
and abnormally disease-ridden. What kind of people would promote such
indefensible behavior? What does their desperation and insecurity say
about them? They are regressives who might as well be promoting
smoking.
I just wanna eat ***** while paying less tax. while my wife screams '*****
god, ***** him in the ear' as she comes. mmmm, *****.
you know, marriage existed before the old testament was written
As clearly recorded in the old testament. thanks for your input.
I said queer bait you queer bait. Go in the gay bars and see how many
different lust crazed losers you can ENTICE with your tight jeans.
One day one of them will get a hold of your bait and after that you
may not be able to use it no more.
It's obvious that
you go in them filthy gay bars just to tease the perverts that can't
control their lusts.
You sure must be tired after yet another wild night of orgy going HUH?
Did you finally give and/or get any?
You share in his scorn and sin. Maybe
you'll find each other in hell if you all just happen to be impaled on
adjacent stalagmites down there.
Our Holy Church ain't no cult. It's the One True Church. And there's
been branches in New Sodom for TWELVE long years and we ain't never
had this volume of nasty phone calls since YOU and you alone pointed
out that the number was there.
Ain't none of us in NO cult. And we don't rant nor rave neither. We
preach and share the Word of God with filth and scum like you out of
our deep Christian compassion for the lost. How do you repay us?
With obscenity's and death threats.
A loving your neighbor doesn't mean a tolerating his sin. If you love
your neighbor and he's a running a kiddie porn ring - does your love
keep you from a turning him in to the cops? What about a crack house?
What about a ***** house? What about a queer orgy house? When are
you a gonna learn that homo sexual lust is a spiritual illness that
leads to mental and physical illness too?
And who are your enemies? Homosexuals? Only because you've made them
your enemy.
All evil doers are homo sexuals. They're the enemy's of God on
account of they ignore His Word and put their flesh above all faith
and obedience. They're sex addicts and orgasmoholics.
To you they may seem that way. You got your head buried SOMEWHERE.
Probably in the trough at the local gay bar.
As long as you give ME all the credit. You're the one that doesn't
have no original thoughts in your tired old brain. Your busy schedule
down at the Cork and the Eagle and the Falcon and the Cockpit and the
Ramrod and the Club Baths and the Encounter Room must really wear you
out. In Dayton, the hot places to go for queers is the YMCA on
Monument Ave. and Today's Adult Books on 3rd St. In Columbus there's
the Flex on East Livingston. Do you have cards for all three places
and then some?
Orgy??? Casual sex with strangers???
Both are very common among homo sexuals 'til they get old, fat, ugly,
sick, poor or demented - in which case SOME of them is forced by
circumstances to slow down. Bill Baker says quite specifically that
he was a going to an orgy with FIVE other men. Now does that or does
that not equal promiscuity to you? If he was just a GOING with five
other men there could have been FIFTY at that orgy! He also goes to
gay bars just to attract attention. Like we all know, most people go
to gay bars to pick up new sex partners. In a whole lot of them bars
said sex takes place right there - usually in the back room, the side
alley, the parking lot, or down in the bushes by the side of the road.
HOMOSEXUALITY
Imprecise. Homosexual acts are no better than other acts of fornication
and sexual perversion. Right up there with Incest, Bestiality, and the
like. Objectification for personal sexual gratification is sinful. Woe
unto those who raise up sin and call it good, or those who raise up good
and call it sin.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jenn" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
02 Aug 2005 01:23:17 AM |
|
|
In article <xoBHe.88$lj4.10401@news.uswest.net>,
"Skywise" <Skywise@feet.com> wrote:
The truth regarding Homo's
it is evident that pro-homosexual
people
are extremely desperate and insecure because they put a tremendous
amount
of effort into suppressing or censoring many inconvenient truths about
pro-homosexual movement.
Some vital facts pro-homosexual people try quasi-pathologically hard
to
suppress are: One, the average lifespan of a homosexual is 20 to 30
years
shorter than normal <snip>
Stopping here at the first lie. You can't support this statement. It's
a lie. Why do you lie?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
02 Aug 2005 05:36:40 AM |
|
|
Skywise wrote:
The truth regarding Homo's
Great, just great. Tom Cruise found Usenet.
--
Civilians, and Grunts, and Zombies, Oh My!
http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?Dionisio
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dennis Kemmerer" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
02 Aug 2005 01:14:12 PM |
|
|
"Dionisio" <moc-rr-thgisniTA@5ellimd.com> wrote in message
news:Y0IHe.46629$zY4.6409@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
Skywise wrote:
The truth regarding Homo's
Great, just great. Tom Cruise found Usenet.
Give him some Ritalin and send him off to your killfile.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "towelie" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
01 Aug 2005 11:05:26 PM |
|
|
TV's Skywise wrote:
The truth regarding Homo's
it is evident that pro-homosexual
people
are extremely desperate and insecure because they put a tremendous
amount
of effort into suppressing or censoring many inconvenient truths about
pro-homosexual movement.
It's the other way around. Anti-homos are insecure because they know deep
inside that they want something deep inside...of them.
Personally I couldn't care less what 2 adults do to each other as long as it
doesn't involve me. It's not insecurity, it's a cross between apathy,
empathy, and minding one's own business.
--
Beliefs are dangerous. Beliefs allow the mind to stop functioning.
A non-functioning mind is clinically dead. Believe in nothing.
- Maynard James Keenan
aa #2133
ap #19
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Bohn" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
31 Jul 2005 10:38:22 PM |
|
|
Uncle Buck <UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote in
news:lqbre1hgmehfkqlhl5kuh4gec62q6vq95u@4ax.com:
Pfeh... humans. Can't live with 'em, can't perform bizarre medical
experiements without 'em...
--
Logical fallacy. You've set up a false dichotomy here UB. There is a
third option available. Grilled with a little sage, whole pepper and
olive oil. Do not over cook! I can't stress that enough - do not over
cook.
--
Gary Bohn
Science rationally modifies a theory to fit evidence, creationism
emotionally modifies evidence to fit the bible.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: CNN Tonight |
31 Jul 2005 09:29:32 PM |
|
|
Uncle Buck wrote:
Are there actually studies showing that such "reparative therapy" actually
produces 3% of the individuals who are every bit as genuinely unattracted to
others of the same gender as their life-long hetero peers?
No. One. Singular.
Exodus International sponsored it. And none of them have ever made that
mistake again. There was another that made the news, some years ago,
with preliminary results. Curiously, the final results never made it to
print. Go figure.
--
Civilians, and Grunts, and Zombies, Oh My!
http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?Dionisio
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Ellen Johnson on the CNN-Paula Zahn Show tonight -- Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Dawkins to be on CNN tonight (Thor's day)
Ellen Johnson on CNN, the Paula Zahn Show tonight - Monday, Feb. 12, 2007
Dave Silverman tonight (Friday, Dec. 21) on CNN
AA Media Alert: Ellen Johnson TONIGHT on CNN, Utah cross case
Ellen Johnson on CNN tonight (Tuesday, Nov. 13, 2007)
Mark Twain Tonight and Tom Lehrer
"stump the pastor" at 7:30 tonight!! Input needed ASAP!!!
| Heidi Klum on Jay Leno tonight!
Media Alert! Silverman tonight on Hannity & Colmes
Re: 7 years tonight
# Barnes on 60 Minutes Wednesday [ TONIGHT at 8 p.m. ET/PT ]
Dave Silverman to debate "Intelligent Design" tonight on MSNBC
Silverman on MSNBC tonight -- Tim LaHaye, Tsunamis...
Jerry Springer - Tonight
|
|
|
