Ex-Gay Ministry Works Just Fine

Sarkus said:
The average in the US is around 8% of the population - but then homosexuals (either sex) generally have a hard time of it in the US from the bigotry that is rife in that society - so it is not surprising.
But I certainly wouldn't judge ALL homosexuals on anything other than who they are, not on some statistics.

The statistic is more like 2% to 3% in the US from all the sources I've looked at. You're using the Kinsey statistic which leans heavily toward prison inmate populations, and pro-gay PACS, which obviously have your ear:

The London Daily Mail released last week what it calls `the most exhaustive survey ever conducted into British sexual habits.' The most stunning finding was that only 1.1 percent of British men said they were active homosexuals, a figure similar to the most recent American polls" (World magazine, Jan. 29, 1994, p. 9).

Science magazine, July 3, 1992, reports a very recent French study that found only 4.1% of men and 2.6% of women said they'd had homosexual intercourse at least once in their lives. Only 1.1% of men and 0.3% of women said they'd had homosexual intercourse in the past 12 months (as reported in "Homosexual figures grossly exaggerated," AFA Journal, September, 1992, pg. 9).

and finally the U.S.:

The September 2, 1992, Dallas Morning Times (pg. 4C) reported on a "University of Chicago study aimed to be the most significant study [on American sexuality] since Mr. Kinsey's" and a related study by the National Opinion Research Center. The findings:


"...An estimated 3 percent of the population claimed at least one act of homosexual sex during 1991. Over the respondents' lifetime, 4.5 percent claim some such sex... The final conclusions from the University of Chicago's study may confirm a figure far lower than Mr. Kinsey's. They may also show that American sexual behavior is quite conservative. The mean number of sexual partners over an individual's lifetime is probably around six or seven" ("Study of U.S. sex habits may contain surprises").

So you start yourself out on a limb. But ok, the liberal media lies about it too.


Do you know the average length of a hetero-sexual relationship where they are seen as a "couple"? It is probably around the same.
So again - you need to compare it to the equivalent stats for a heterosexual "couple" (and not just married people!). I can tell you from experience that I have not been in a relationship longer than about 18 months - but in several I have certainly been part of a "couple"!

Are you talking about cohabs?

Funny - 'cos did you know that around 70% of heterosexual women have had sex with boys under 18! The other 30% didn't lose their virginity until they were older!

Yeah, ya know what's really funny: homosexuals usually refers to men, lesbians to women, but they are all called "gay" which is an oxymoron. Some are not gay at all but quite miserable with their unwanted sexual feelings. It's funny how the english means less and less as the diatribes increase more and more to the point where there really is no more intelligible discussion. Take the word "homophobic" for example. It no longer means anything, and look who uses it the most.


Woody - you can pick stats to fit your case - everyone can.
The point is that you seem to tar every person with the stereotypical brush that you are taught to.

Show me the stats that prove your point. Prove to me that the entire psychology profession is a fraud that can't be trusted anymore. That's what you'll prove to me if you are right. I'm getting more convinced of it everyday, regardless of what you find out. This psychologiist says this, that one says that, this gay is now straight, that straight is now gay. Geez what a bunch of confusion. What can anyone believe anymore? Where is the truth in all this confusion? Who's hiding it and why?

Therapists are going to have a worse reputation than CEOs and lawyers if this crap continues, and they'll end up having no credibility at all.

Learn to judge individuals - not groups.

I'm looking out for the kids -- what do they deserve?
 
Last edited:
GB said:

What about a gay couple next door???

What about my step-nephew that was married and now gay? He has the typical pissy attitude. Pissy pissy pissy. He always had the pissy attitude -- you know just snotty about everything. But he was always that way.

My wife had a friend that died from AIDS. She knew him many many years and is still good friends with his family. He was the same way as my step-nephew: Pissy Pissy Pissy.

And his gay room-mate was the same way. My wife sent them an invitation to come to our wedding. They didn't show up or even acknowledge our existence. They didn't have to come, but couldn't her friend just send a gift or something? I thought it was rather rude and uncaring, myslf.

I'm currently talking to some ex-gays on an ex-gay forum. They are so nice and polite. None of this attitude bullshit. One of them tells me her gay friends really came down hard on her. She had to part with them, and she was pretty upset about it, she thought they were real friends, but they weren't.
 
Last edited:
Woody said:
GB said: What about my step-nephew that was married and now gay? He has the typical pissy attitude. Pissy pissy pissy. He always had the pissy attitude--you know just snotty about everything. But he was always that way.

My wife had a friend that died from AIDS. She knew him many many years and is still good friends with his family. He was the same way as my step-nephew: Pissy Pissy Pissy.

And his gay room-mate was the same way. My wife sent them an invitation to come to our wedding. They didn't show up or even acknowledge our existence. They didn't have to come, but couldn't her friend just send a gift or something? I thought it was rather rude and uncaring, myslf.

I'm currently talking to some ex-gays on an ex-gay forum. They are so nice and polite. None of this attitude bullshit. One of them tells me her gay friends really came down hard on her. She had to part with them, and she was pretty upset about it, she thought they were real friends, but they weren't.

*************
M*W: Woody, methinks you doth protest too much. You claim your "step-nephew" is pissy, pissy, pissy, but he's your "step-nephew," and not a genetic relative of yours, god forbid that it should run in your bloodline! But, I do understand what you are talking about -- gays with pissy attitudes. I've worked with them, and they are pests, to say the least! They single us older women out to discuss such things as current fashion styles, job descriptions, love interests, and platonic lunch dates. You can't help but luv'em. They're so "you!"

I've never been as "pissy" as a gay man. In fact, I've been confidant to many gay men in my day, so I feel as if I truly "know" them.

If I wanted an honest opinion about my clothing style or business savvy, I wouldn't hesitate to contact a gay friend, because I would know undoubtedly that he would give me an honest appraisal. If I wanted to hear the lies one thought I would believe, I would contact a girlfriend. They tell you what you want to hear -- and not the truth! So, I can say without a shadow of a doubt, gay men can be brutally honest.

Being "pissy" is not an honest attribute, but let's face it, gay men can be "pissy." The phrase "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned," is exponetially factored for the gay man! A heterosexual woman may be honest, but not as honest as a gay man. She will try to placate the requestor whereas the gay man will relay the bloody truth. Is that so wrong? No! We heterosexual women compete with other heterosexual women, but we know there is no competition with gay men. We can trust them to the ends of the Earth! We may not "like" what they tell us, but we certainly "trust" their opinion!

I really don't know about your "step-nephew," but I can honestly say that being "pissy" is an attribute when it comes to honesty. Gay men hold the trophy for honesty, whereas heterosexual women find it difficult to be honest with other women.

All I can state at this point, is that you, Woody, are the pissiest prig on sciforums. Are you so very sure that you are not gay? I think you have a secretive fetish about homosexuals, and if you were given the least bit of a chance, you would like to turn some hunk over and stick your penis into his rectum and enjoy it... immensely! Something tells me that you are not the macho man you try to deceive to be on this forum! In fact, I would suspect that your wife might find this activity titilating. Have you ever considered a three-some with some macho horny dude? Even if you don't, my guess is that your wife would be willing to get fucked by a real man. Never underestimate the power of a long, supple dick. Wars have been won for less.

Should your wife like to experience ecstasy as only God could create it, I highly recommend the services of any young Puerto Rican gentleman who could undoubtedly take her to Paradise like no other.

Having been there and done that, I wish her well. And for you, Woody, I wish for you a cold, uncaring wench who would drain you of your manhood for a quick suck and spit. That's what you deserve.
 
Woody said:
Pissy pissy pissy.
1. You're a homophobe. This will make them pissy towards you. It's understandable.
2. You're a homphobe. This will cause you to interpret them as being pissy even when they're not being. You will actively look for pissiness as it will confirm your prejudices.

You simply aren't equipped to judge these things objectively.
 
Woody said:
GB said:



What about my step-nephew that was married and now gay? He has the typical pissy attitude. Pissy pissy pissy. He always had the pissy attitude -- you know just snotty about everything. But he was always that way.

My wife had a friend that died from AIDS. She knew him many many years and is still good friends with his family. He was the same way as my step-nephew: Pissy Pissy Pissy.

And his gay room-mate was the same way. My wife sent them an invitation to come to our wedding. They didn't show up or even acknowledge our existence. They didn't have to come, but couldn't her friend just send a gift or something? I thought it was rather rude and uncaring, myslf.

I'm currently talking to some ex-gays on an ex-gay forum. They are so nice and polite. None of this attitude bullshit. One of them tells me her gay friends really came down hard on her. She had to part with them, and she was pretty upset about it, she thought they were real friends, but they weren't.

Hypocrite.

FRAUD.

Hypocrite.

And you do know it.

FRAUD.


:mad:
 
Giambattista said:
Hypocrite.

FRAUD.

Hypocrite.

And you do know it.

FRAUD.


:mad:

So I guess you are saying I made it all up. It's really hard for me to interpret anything meaningful from your diatribes. One thing I've noticed about homosexuals on the television debate shows like Rickki Lake -- man these guys just can't control themelves. It doesn't matter what they say when they're going ape-shit -- their actions speak for them. Are you gay too?

BTW, I'm participating on an ex-gay forum. The ex-gays and ex-lesbians over there are laughing about the reports that say it's impossible for a homosexual to change -- reports pandered by the pro-gay community in their own defense:

Born Gay

I noticed one of their prized links concerns Dr. Baile'ys 60 minutes interview where he says:

"To me, cases like that really scream out, 'Hey, it's not out there. It's in here.' There's no indication that this mother is prone to raise very feminine boys because his twin is not that way," says Michael Bailey, a psychology professor at Northwestern University and a leading researcher in the field of sexual orientation.

Bailey says he doesn't think nurture is a plausible explanation.

It's like duh, Bailey, the identical twins have opposite sex-orientation, and you're saying gay orientation is genetic. Like Duh, Duh, Duh Bailey you just proved that heredity plays little importance in gay orientation, just look at the twins. BTW, the twins didn't even have a father present in their child rearing.

No wonder he (Bailey) is under investigation for his fraudulent studies. He resigned his position at Northwestern as a result of the "twin" scandal.
 
Last edited:
redarmy11 said:
Is this where you get all your information?

I get my information from the way I see people behaving, whether they are standing in front of me or they are debating on a television show. I don't watch the Lake show anymore -- way too liberal for me,
 
Woody said:
I get my information from the way I see people behaving, whether they are standing in front of me or they are debating on a television show. I don't watch the Lake show anymore -- way too liberal for me,
The people on Rikki Lake are hardly representative of the general public. Most of them are happy to air their personal problems on TV, for one thing. Also, shows like Rikki don't look for sensible people with a cool-headed, rational approach to debating; they look for demented nutcases who could cause a row in an empty room.
 
redarmy11 said:
The people on Rikki Lake are hardly representative of the general public. Most of them are happy to air their personal problems on TV, for one thing. Also, shows like Rikki don't look for sensible people with a cool-headed, rational approach to debating; they look for demented nutcases who could cause a row in an empty room.

Yeah, the audience gave the two gay guy debaters a standing ovation, and booed at the "christian" debaters: shouting biggot, homophobes, etc. you know, the same ole same ole. I just remember theose two gay guys couldn't wait to get up there on stage aftre hearing the opening remarks from the christians about the bible sending homos to hell.


Man those guys ran out there like their pants were on fire, with their sissy little butts just a shaking in their extra tight shorts. I couldn't help but laugh. It's a wonder they could even sit in a chair. One of them looked like his butt was sore.
 
Last edited:
Woody said:
Yeah, the audience gave the two gay guys a standing ovation, and booed at the "christian" debaters.
That's because Christians' views on this are 2000 years old and slightly outmoded, Woody. They're in serious need of updating.
 
redarmy11 said:
That's because Christians' views on this are 2000 years old and slightly outmoded, Woody. They're in serious need of updating.


Yeah, when the christians talked about the risk of AIDS for gay men, their view wasn't politically correct, and needed to be updated as you say. They were booed and called liars. JUst needed some updating eh redarmy?
 
Woody said:
Man those guys ran out there like their pants were on fire, with their sissy little butts just a shaking in their extra tight shorts. I couldn't help but laugh. It's a wonder they could even sit in a chair. One of them looked like his butt was sore.
All this hatred, Woody. Such bile. Such ugliness. Do you feel justified in it? Hating people that you've never met and who've done you no harm (or perhaps they have - do tell..)? It may be in the Bible but it's not in the Christian spirit, is it? You do realise that the Bible was written by men? Do you honestly think that your God, who you would have us believe is all-loving, would condone such hatred? Woody... you're gonna burn...
 
I thought Jesus said gave the Greatest Commandment... love your enemies.

Oh well, I think homosexuals should finally learn that any person who is stupid enough to say, without a doubt, that he will burn in hell is stupid, ignorant, an asshole, i-am-holier-than-thou POS who doesnt know anything and who should be ignored for eternity.

Or atleast thats my view :p
 
Back
Top