How about this for a scandalous situation?
A married average Joe (guy) goes to a restroom. Of course, like most male restrooms, this restroom has urinals which don't have any doors/privacy. The common rule is not too look at the other man's special "thing." But, Joe accidentally (or purposely? -we can't know for sure) glanced at the man's "down-under" -not knowing that Joe is BEING WATCHED or observed by somebody from a far. This somebody then copies Joe's plate # and tracked his house. Then, under a false identity, "Somebody" interviewed Joe -his background, who he is, what he do, & etc. In fact, Joe told “Somebody” everything fearing that "Somebody" will tell his wife/everybody about what he did at the restroom and accuse him as GAY.
Now, this “Somebody” is Laud Humphrey and he did not only observe one Joe (guy); as a matter of fact, he gathered his information on 50 SEX acts (mostly oral sex) involving over 100 MEN. Then he obtained personal information about these individuals. He copied down their license plate numbers, went to the police and, giving a false cover story, obtained names and addresses based on the license plates, and subsequently interviewed the men. He informed them that it was part of a marketing research project.
His research illustrated that most of these men are well-accomplished, have good jobs, unsuspecting wives at home, and yet they would do this at a public venue.
His research was criticized though because he did not get his participants’ (Joes’) proper consent; it was very unethical.
Also, he made a book titled: “The Tearoom Trade.” He almost lost his job because of it.
But, as much as I want to criticize Humphrey, I won’t. I want to talk about the reasons why these people would commit what other people might call “deviant” acts…
First of all, they're married -but so was Humphrey (married then later on admitted he was gay) -and successful...so what's up with it?
Maybe, one reason might be because what society or what most people think or say about gay people. Also, they (gays) have been previously marked as bad. I mean why call them gay at all? They're just people...
Also, I've heard people saying it's evil or bad being gay...
I mean...Jesus didn't declare Mary M. (a prostitute -but some people would argue that she wasn't but I digress) as an abomination
How much more them....why should people discriminate and cause hatred toward them?
Is it because by doing this they would inflict into society the idea that being gay is an abomination -a sin?
Is it because by doing this they could eradicate gays all over the world so that male will be afraid on showing an signs of being gay?
Well, if society or if the world would like to have a better tomorrow, one should not judge another..
It would be hard...
(Especially if some people think that by stigmatizing gay people would make their child not gay for some people don't want their child gay)
It is a fact that some people don't have any grudge on gay people but they wouldn't want their children turning into one...
Well, I think it's important to remember that no matter someone's status in life, God still loves them just as much as He loves you and me. We are all sinners in one shape or form, and thus cannot condemn these people. We are obliged to inform them that they are committing an immoral act, but we should also seek help. I have read testimonies by people who used to be homosexual, and have stopped practicing homosexuality. Many of them stopped because they had a loving community who accepted them and taught them the teachings of their faith. This brought the people to realize that they should not be acting upon their tendencies. Anyway...so my point is yes, we need to inform them that they are wrong, but we also need to remember that they are still children of God and God loves each and every one of us no matter what we do. Let us only hope that they can recognize that, as well.
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
...and the consistent findings of longitudinal studies into this subject show that these claims do not actually stand up to close scrutiny. There are a lot of religious groups that practice conversion therapy, and yet not ONE of them has ever been able to produce a credible, peer reviewed study that would suggest that people's core sexuality can change. Most of these poor, misguided people are actually being taken advantage of by those "loving communities" and essentially brow-beaten into telling you what you want to here, and the results play with the definition of what it means to be homosexual...i.e. these groups say that if you stop having sex then you stop being gay, which simply isn't true.
I challenge you to provide even ONE solid, credibly peer-reviewed study that actually shows that such conversions are actual.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
There is NOTHING immoral with having a homosexual tendency. The immorality comes upon acting upon that tendency. The same is true of a variety of other things. A heterosexual person may have a tendency to molest children. Again, there's nothing wrong with the temptation being present. The problem comes with giving into the temptation.
Secondly, some people have gone from being homosexual to marrying someone of the opposite sex, and both are happy. I was just reading a testimony of a man who was homosexual and he married a woman who had been homosexual. Through realizing that this wasn't necessarily something they were born with and could not change, they were about to overcome their temptations. All people are called to overcome temptations in one way or another.
Finally, why have science tell you what you can get directly from the source? We have reasoning beyond science, and we should take advantage of it. If x people are saying that they have been able to overcome their homosexual tendencies and get out of homosexual relationships either to be chaste or to marry heterosexually, then why do we have to go ask science whether or not they are telling the truth?
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
FCA (fellowship of Christian athletes) advisor.
I asked him why it was ok for Christians to eat meat. He told me because early Christians believed that sin could only be man made, that the stigma placed on meat did not come from God. So, I asked him why there was a stigma on homosexuals, who were also made by God. He was stumped.
And I would refrain from using the argument of stories you've read of gays living in heterosexual relationships. They're hearsay, they really don't bolster your argument.
"How can we win where fools can be kings" Muse
Because just because God created the person does not mean that He created them to be homosexual. For the meat example...yes, God created the meat, but if we humans inject the meat with a bunch of diseases, that takes away from the pure goodness of the meat. Same thing with humans. We all have things that take away from our pureness. Homosexuality, I would argue, is one of them.
Secondly, why should I leave out those types of stories? I could even get the name of the person. I read it at Church during adoration, so I'd have to wait til Saturday, but I could get the guy's name for you. It was in Patrick Madrid's "Surprised by Truth 2".
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
"I heard about a guy.." argument doesn't prove anything. Some one else here could therfore point to the fact that they have heard about gay men who were closeted their whole lives and committed suicide. Or gay men who once lived life as a straight man, left their wive, and now consider their life to be better. The apocrphal does nothing to prove your point. There's always an equally unprovable counter to it.
"How can we win where fools can be kings" Muse
I read about a guy in a published book : P How's that?
Actually, I personally know a family like the latter. Left a wife and 12 kids. IDK what he thinks about it, but it's pretty sucky for his family.
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
"I read about" such and such a case doesn't prove a thing. Like I said, others here may have read about cases which contradict your point.
And my point said nothing of the selfishness of such an action. However, the man in question would not have left his family had he not felt forced into a marriage to begin with...
"How can we win where fools can be kings" Muse
Well, I need to look up the name. I think he founded some organization.
That's ridiculous. You don't just marry someone and be married for 20+ years and then leave your wife and 12 kids. I don't care who you are or what your desires are. You just DON'T do that.
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
...with gay people, but I would suggest that the problem is neither rationally based. For example...
Because just because God created the person does not mean that He created them to be homosexual. For the meat example...yes, God created the meat, but if we humans inject the meat with a bunch of diseases, that takes away from the pure goodness of the meat. Same thing with humans. We all have things that take away from our pureness. Homosexuality, I would argue, is one of them.
If you eat a piece of diseased meat, then you are very likely to become ill. Its child's play to establish an inherent, causal connection between eating diseased meat and getting sick afterwards. Can you demonstrate a similarly inherent, causation between being gay and some other objectively negative outcome?
Secondly, why should I leave out those types of stories? I could even get the name of the person. I read it at Church during adoration, so I'd have to wait til Saturday, but I could get the guy's name for you. It was in Patrick Madrid's "Surprised by Truth 2".
You shouldn't necessary leave these stories "out," but you should take them with a BIG grain of salt unless the testimony is accompanied with a credible, peer-reviewed longitudinal study that objectively backs up the stories claims. Otherwise, you are prone to fall prey to what the evidence suggests is little more than a snake-oil sales pitch. People say all kinds of crap that just isn't true. You might WANT to believe them, but unless these "testimonies" are accompanied with some objective verification, then letting your desire overcome your intellect is a recipe for ignorance.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Meat was mentioned in the previous post. Therefore, I used meat. My point in that was that just because something's created by God doesn't mean that it can't be altered by other factors, for example, something being added to meat.
Why does someone need to include science in their personal testimony of how they feel and how their lives have changed and what caused them to change?
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
Meat was mentioned in the previous post. Therefore, I used meat. My point in that was that just because something's created by God doesn't mean that it can't be altered by other factors, for example, something being added to meat.
I'll take this evasion to mean that no, you cannot think of a inherently causal relationship between being gay and a negative consequence.
Why does someone need to include science in their personal testimony of how they feel and how their lives have changed and what caused them to change?
I really loved sawaboof's answer to this one. +1 to her.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
I told you...my point in that connection is that just because things are created by God doesn't mean that outside forces can't alter the creations. In the case of meat, it could be some kind of poison. In the case of a homosexual, it could be the upbringing, a molestation, ridicule, etc that could have made the person think they are homosexual.
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
It COULD be that tiny magical faeries sprikle pixie dust on people that makes them suddenly start to prefer their own sex over the opposite, but the evidence suggest that same-sex orientations are a common and consistent feature in the populations of many (even most) higher order species. The evidence likewise suggest that these orientations are set at a very early age, are influenced strongly by a variety of biological factors, and are for all practical purposes fixed and unchangeable throughout a persons life. There is on the other hand no evidence at all that being raised by gay parents, being molested or being ridiculed makes you gay. In fact, these are rediculous myths that have long since been dismissed in the relevant fields of study.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Ooh, now you know, I like that theory. : P
Higher order species?
You said early age...thus, my point...it's not necessarily the way you were created. Regardless of the evidence, I think it's possible. I mean, you were just telling me that children generally adopt the religion of their parents. Why then, is it not a possibility that they would adopt the sexual orientation of their parents?
Being molested or raped can be a physiologically scarring event for a child, so I think being molested at an early age could be a factor if the child grows up to be homosexual.
Then the whole ridiculed thing...sometimes, if you're told something enough times, you begin to believe it. Such could be the case in a guy who doesn't like girls or something like that. For example, I know a guy who's 18 and had a problem with a movie because he didn't want to see so much of a woman's body. Another guy I know accused him of being gay because who wouldn't want to see a woman's body. The first kid isn't gay, he just doesn't appreciate the immorality of seeing a woman's intimate parts. However, if enough people told him that he was gay, it's possible that he might begin believing it.
Make sense?
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
Higher order species?
Generally speaking, the higher order species are defined to include animals that experience the world in a subjective manner, i.e capable of feeling emotions and experiencing pain. The definition is also extended to include the fetuses of these species beginning during the later stages of their development.
You said early age...thus, my point...it's not necessarily the way you were created.
This just accentuates the fact that you aren't familiar with the subject matter. "At a very young age" includes the predominant theory that one of the main biological factors is a series of conditions that exist in the mother's womb (i.e. hormone and temperature levels that affect the growth of the brain) during the fetus' development. The reference does not imply any volutary or normally controllable factor that can predictably influence the development of early stage human sexuality.
Regardless of the evidence, I think it's possible.
Typical.
I mean, you were just telling me that children generally adopt the religion of their parents. Why then, is it not a possibility that they would adopt the sexual orientation of their parents?
The obvious reason is that religion is a purely cultural affectation, while sexual orientation is a combination of biologial and early environmental (in the scientific sense of the natural environment...not with how a child is raised) factors.
Being molested or raped can be a physiologically scarring event for a child, so I think being molested at an early age could be a factor if the child grows up to be homosexual.
You think a lot of things that is not supported by the evidence. This is one of them.
Then the whole ridiculed thing...sometimes, if you're told something enough times, you begin to believe it. Such could be the case in a guy who doesn't like girls or something like that. For example, I know a guy who's 18 and had a problem with a movie because he didn't want to see so much of a woman's body. Another guy I know accused him of being gay because who wouldn't want to see a woman's body. The first kid isn't gay, he just doesn't appreciate the immorality of seeing a woman's intimate parts. However, if enough people told him that he was gay, it's possible that he might begin believing it.
Make sense?
Not really. The evidence strongly suggests that sexual orientation is set at a very early age, probably before birth, and that this orientation remains fixed throughout the life of the subject. A person in the situation you describe may find themselves in psychological conflict due to external social pressures, but their core sexuality remains, regardless.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
They don't need to include science in their testimony, but when every piece of credible scientific literature goes against what their testimony claims, there's no reason to just believe them.
I can say I've been to the edge of the world, and seen that it is, indeed flat. Water falls from the ocean straight into space. But the only people who are going to believe me are people who want to believe that the world is flat. It doesn't matter that every piece of credible literature states that the world does not have an edge. If someone is able to give a personal statement, then it must be true.
Nail biting and overeating are modifiable behaviors. Homosexuality is not. People can't be "cured' from it. Studies have actually been done to see if they could be. Studies using specific research methods and control groups and dependent, independent, and confounding variables. The results of all these studies go against what these people are testifying.
So, when people give testimony that they used to be homosexual and were saved, I have a tendency to believe that they're either lying to themselves or lying to everyone else. I don't take their word on it just because it aligns with my belief, and then try to use their words to prove a point.
"What a crazy random happenstance!"
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog
Read my Blog!
Who says it does?
Look, when I go back to church, I'll find the book and reread the testimony so that I can tell you exactly what he said, and we can debate that then.
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
I know what it says.
In a nutshell, he was living a life of sin and immorality, lusting after other men, engaging in immoral sexual acts, oh... let's throw in drinking and possibly drug use as well. Can't give a testimony about how homosexuality was the demon in your life without including marijuana and Jack Daniel's. Then he found Jesus and now, through the saving power of God's infinite mercy and grace, he has a wife and [insert number] beautiful children.
Maybe he plays the piano while talking. Not your guy, though, because it was written in a book.
I've heard it before. With my own ears. And when I heard the other 150 people in the youth group applauding him for his testimony, that's when I realized I never actually believed any of the bullshit being taught about homosexuality. I felt bad for the guy.
If you have to live a lie to find the truth, what's the point?
I wasn't debating you on this. You asked a question, I answered it. If you didn't want an answer, you shouldn't have asked. You can post whatever you you want, but nothing in that guy's testimony could possibly make me think that he is a credible source of information.
"What a crazy random happenstance!"
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog
Read my Blog!
There is NOTHING immoral with having a homosexual tendency. The immorality comes upon acting upon that tendency.
I would suggest that there is nothing particularly immoral about acting on a homosexual tendency either, but I would suggest that it is unbelievably cruel in consigning someone to a life of celibacy and emotional loneliness in order to uphold some imaginary "moral" code.
The same is true of a variety of other things. A heterosexual person may have a tendency to molest children. Again, there's nothing wrong with the temptation being present. The problem comes with giving into the temptation.
The difference, of course, is that child molestation is not a feature of human sexual orientation. Another difference is that a person in a gay couple isn't preying on his or her partner. The comparison is inflammatory, bigoted and frankly offensive.
Secondly, some people have gone from being homosexual to marrying someone of the opposite sex, and both are happy. I was just reading a testimony of a man who was homosexual and he married a woman who had been homosexual. Through realizing that this wasn't necessarily something they were born with and could not change, they were about to overcome their temptations. All people are called to overcome temptations in one way or another.
Perhaps you missed the part where I pointed out that "testimony" is anecdotal. Unless that couple participated in a scientifically credible, longitudinal study that bears out your claim, then I will remain skeptical of the veracity of your anecdote, due to its variance with the extant scientific research that suggests that it is false. The effects of reparative theapy have been studied, and the evidence does not suggest that these programs are in the least bit effective in producing the kind of changes the purport.
And of course, it is simply possible that your anecdotally "homosexual" friend may have in fact been bi-sexual. The existence of bisexuality is commonly ignored in religiously-based conversion therapy material. A bisexual person can fall in love with a partner of either sex. They do not become homosexual or heterosexual just because when that happens, they fall for one sex or the other. I HOPE this is the case for the people in your story (if they're even real). At least then the danger of suicide is less likely for your poor convert. Per the American Psychological Association...
Finally, why have science tell you what you can get directly from the source? We have reasoning beyond science, and we should take advantage of it. If x people are saying that they have been able to overcome their homosexual tendencies and get out of homosexual relationships either to be chaste or to marry heterosexually, then why do we have to go ask science whether or not they are telling the truth?
What do you expect when you're surrounded by people (often family members) who are ringing their hands and on the verge of a having a conniption over the belief that you're going to hell? People have a tendency to lie, sometimes even to themselves, and you really can't trust people's ability to speak objectively when directly questioned about complex psychological issues. In many cases, "testimonies" of this sort are sought under conditions of extreme pressure and expectation. They are often illicited just as a subject completes a program of conversion therapy, while the brainwashing is still fresh. A good study, however, tracks the subject over time and doesn't rely on things that the subject thinks that the researcher wants to hear. In a really good study, the subjects may not even known what it is the scientist is actually studying, further keeping at bay the intrusion of expectation into the results.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
very interesting story.
it is just another reason why our society should be open to homosexuals. becuase if not they may marry a straight person and then potentially hurt them and themselves in the future.
it is disturbing
But was the guy (Joe) really gay? Just because he glanced around doesn't make him gay. It's wrong to interpret his actions in such a negative way. What that Humphrey guy did was just awful.
RESPECT LIFE
http://progressiveu.org/blog/respectlife
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
...but it illustrates one of the trickier aspects of this problem, rather than clearly supporting what
(I think) you are trying to say.
"But, as much as I want to criticize Humphrey, I won’t."
Criticize him for what? Shedding some light on a 'taboo' subject? Research that is ethical with regard to privacy into topics that the subjects wish to keep hidden is impossible. Thus his unethical behavior was required. You do not have to condone it, but without his willingness to break a few eggs we all remain ignorant.
Intollerence comes from ignorance.
Feelings of guilt reenforce self destructive high risk behavior.
Shedding light on the facts is the only thing that leads to progress.
Actually, Humphrey was being unethical. The ethics of experimentation say subjects must be made aware of the "experiment". In this case, no one was given a chance to consent or deny consent, so what Humphrey actually did was illegal. In naturalistic observation, which Humphrey didn't do, the subject must be made aware at some point.
Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see.