SkinWalker said:What a screwed up cult you belong to. The first problem that is noticeable with your "unbiased" facts is the lack of a true citation of sources. Indeed, your sources are not only suspect they are absent. You only stated that the source was a "homosexual researcher" who interviewed "144 homosexual couples.
The second problem is, even if we are gullible enough to believe that this information from a cult that is adamantly opposed to homosexuality and envisions a vast homosexual agenda to rule the world, the sample size is far too small to draw any worthwhile conclusions. The data are cursory at best and anyone with a legitimate background in research would agree. Indeed, your data, if it does originate from a "psychologist," doesn't originate from the psychological community itself as I'll demonstrate.
In short: your pastor is full of shit.
This is not far from accurate. Most research concludes that 3-6 % of adult males in the United States are homosexual with females rating at slightly less than that (Fay, Turner, Klassen, & Gagnon, 1989; Lever & Kanouse, 1996; Rogers & Turner, 1991)
Here's where your pastor is full of shit. There actually is some evidence to suggest that homosexuality has genetic roots. Homosexual males have been demonstrated to be more likely than you'd expect by chance to have homosexual brothers as well as homosexual maternal uncles and cousins on the mother's side (Hamer, et al, 1993). Near the tip of the Xq28 region of the sex chromosomes, researchers have found five identical markers shared by a high percentage of homosexual brothers. The evidence of a hereditary nature to homosexuality is clear, moreover, the pattern of incidence confirms this.
Now, having said that, one cannot simply say that because one has the "markers" for homosexuality, one will be homosexual upon maturation. These markers are more analgous to a recipe than a blueprint. Give an engineer a house and he can create a blueprint of it simply by close examination and perhaps by de-constructing it. A chef, however, cannot create a recipe simply by handing him a finished pastry. The parts cannot be closely examined enough or de-constructed to do it. This is what's involved in human maturation: a recipe of parts, isntructions (DNA) and conditions. This is why twin studies don't readily show the homosexual trend.
Again: your pastor is full of shit. Since we don't have an actual citation to the statistics you quote, we can easily toss them out as invalid. Here's a real statistic compiled by an actual researcher and I'll include an actual citation. During a one-year period at the Denver Children's hospital, a researcher reviewed the medical charts of 352 sexually abused children (Jenny et al, 1994). The conclusion was that the molester was gay or lesbian in only 2 of the 269 cases in which the molester could be identified. Using the fallacious logic you've presented to us in the past, you should be able to conclude that in 269 molestations, homosexuals are 267 times less likely than heterosexuals to be the perpetrator, right?
But that isn't exactly the correlation your pastor's provenience-lacking statistic was reaching for. Your pastor was attempting to paint a negative causation for lesbianism –and thus homosexuality in general. However, the data is suspect. Of the 144 gay couples interviewed, we don't know the context that this unknown researcher was working with. Was he a psychologist with an organization that specialized in dealing with abuse victims? What demographic was his sample from? What cross-section of society? What age group? Were age groups evenly represented? Was he a counselor for victims of Christian priests?
We don't know. Because your pastor doesn't want his flock actually using their own thoughts. It's safer to have them stick with the thoughts that have already been approved by the cult center.
Dare I say it? I will: Your pastor is full of shit. The Centers for Disease Control lists (2003) 405,926 living with AIDS. I think we can all agree that AIDS is not discriminatory as to whom it kills. 77% of that 405,926 people were male. Of that 77%, the percentage of men who engaged in sex with men was only 58%. I don't see where the "1 thousand times more likely to die" figure comes from and neither do you.
Again, we have to consider the provenience of the quoted statistic and the lack of context and basically throw it out. It is as much an anecdote as the rest. But since we are on the subject of faithfulness, lets consider the actual and cited statistics of divorce in the United States. The U.S. Census Bureau reports (2002) that 50% of all marriages will end in divorce based on past census data collected. The Barna Research Group (1999) concluded that divorce rates among conservative Christians was much higher than among other faith and non-faith based groups, including atheists and agnostics.
Dubious statistics. Are we still talking about the 144 couple sample size? From this we are drawing conclusions of the "average homosexual male?" Even you aren't that ignorant, Woody. Give us a citation to this statistic or withdraw it.
I will. I say your pastor is not only a bigot, he's full of shit.
The tactics he uses is that which creates an "other" designed to maintain the integrity of the cult which he leads. The homosexual is demonized and made out to be an "abomination" of a supernatural being that the cult worships, creating a common enemy. This, my friend, is hatred. A very subtle form that has plausible deniability ("hate the sin, not the sinner," etc.), but hatred nonetheless. Homosexuals are effectively excluded and not loved by your cult, indeed misinformation is passed about as if it were scientific in order to give the bigot-pastor / cult leader credibility while simultaneously painting an negative picture of the homosexual. That picture is misinformed and inaccurate, therefore deception is at work, a deception that creates a sentiment of hatred among the cult following that, when challenged about this hatred, presents a very hypocritical display of piety and answers: "I don't hate the homosexual, I hate the homosexual lifestyle."
You are obviously well-indoctrinated and brainwashed into the cult itself. It's really a shame that you don't actually think for yourself, but instead accept the words of your cult leader without question.
What sources did your pastor list? Rather than require everyone to listen to a sermon (your real goal, by the way), why not simply cite these and let us read the original work. Many of us are in academia and have access to wonderful libraries and peer-reviewed journals and would love to read the original sources in their original contexts rather than the biased contexts of bigoted cult leaders. Especially one that begins his sermon trying to sell tapes from the cult's bookstore.
It says far more about adultery, yet this remains a far more common practice than homosexuality. That fact is indicative of the true nature of the hypocritical Christian cult. If they really wanted to promote family values and be paragons of virtue, why don't Christians focus on adultery with the same fervor and energy that they do homosexuality? Adultery has clear problems that can be created within societies where polygamous relationships are taboo, homosexuality, however, does not.
There is absolutely no reason that you can give that can demonstrate homosexuality is bad for society without quoting cult documents from societies that still stoned to death women for adultery, children for being impertinent, and those who failed to keep the Sabbath.
I'm not as forgiving as Stefan. I believe that cult activism needs to be countered by free-thinking people in order to save society from their ignorance. Your words above are indicative of your hypocrisy, since you've done your share of context removal and word-twisting in this forum. That you would characterize and compare someone who was irritated at that practice to a pedophile says more about you than they. Indeed, your credibility may have reached depths from which recovery is not possible.
References
Avert.org (2003). United States HIV and AIDS Statistics: U.S. Summary. found at: http://www.avert.org/statsum.htm
Barna Research Group, (1999) "Christians are more likely to experience divorce than are non-Christians," DEC-21
Fay, R.E., Turner, C.F., Klassen, A.D., & Gagnon, J.H. (1989). Prevalence and patterns of same-gender sexual contact among men. Science, 243, 338-348.
Hamer, D.H., et al (1993) A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation. Science, 261, 321-327.
Jenny, C., Roesler, T. A., & Poyer, K. L. (1994). Are children at risk for sexual abuse by homosexuals? Pediatrics, 94(1), 41-44.
Lever, J., & Kanouse, D.E. (1996). Sexual orientation and proscribed sexual behaviors. In G. Herek, J. Jobe, & R. Carney (Eds.), Out in force: Sexual orientation and the military (pp. 15-38). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rogers, S.M., & Turner, C.F. (1991). Male-male sexual contact in the USA: Findings from five sample surveys, 1970-1990. The Journal of Sex Research, 28, 491-519.
United States (2002). 2002 Census Bureau Report On Marriage And Divorce. found at: http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p70-80.pdf
SkinWalker said:What a screwed up cult you belong to. The first problem that is noticeable with your "unbiased" facts is the lack of a true citation of sources. Indeed, your sources are not only suspect they are absent. You only stated that the source was a "homosexual researcher" who interviewed "144 homosexual couples.
The second problem is, even if we are gullible enough to believe that this information from a cult that is adamantly opposed to homosexuality and envisions a vast homosexual agenda to rule the world, the sample size is far too small to draw any worthwhile conclusions. The data are cursory at best and anyone with a legitimate background in research would agree. Indeed, your data, if it does originate from a "psychologist," doesn't originate from the psychological community itself as I'll demonstrate.
In short: your pastor is full of shit.
This is not far from accurate. Most research concludes that 3-6 % of adult males in the United States are homosexual with females rating at slightly less than that (Fay, Turner, Klassen, & Gagnon, 1989; Lever & Kanouse, 1996; Rogers & Turner, 1991)
Here's where your pastor is full of shit. There actually is some evidence to suggest that homosexuality has genetic roots. Homosexual males have been demonstrated to be more likely than you'd expect by chance to have homosexual brothers as well as homosexual maternal uncles and cousins on the mother's side (Hamer, et al, 1993). Near the tip of the Xq28 region of the sex chromosomes, researchers have found five identical markers shared by a high percentage of homosexual brothers. The evidence of a hereditary nature to homosexuality is clear, moreover, the pattern of incidence confirms this.
Now, having said that, one cannot simply say that because one has the "markers" for homosexuality, one will be homosexual upon maturation. These markers are more analgous to a recipe than a blueprint. Give an engineer a house and he can create a blueprint of it simply by close examination and perhaps by de-constructing it. A chef, however, cannot create a recipe simply by handing him a finished pastry. The parts cannot be closely examined enough or de-constructed to do it. This is what's involved in human maturation: a recipe of parts, isntructions (DNA) and conditions. This is why twin studies don't readily show the homosexual trend.
Again: your pastor is full of shit. Since we don't have an actual citation to the statistics you quote, we can easily toss them out as invalid. Here's a real statistic compiled by an actual researcher and I'll include an actual citation. During a one-year period at the Denver Children's hospital, a researcher reviewed the medical charts of 352 sexually abused children (Jenny et al, 1994). The conclusion was that the molester was gay or lesbian in only 2 of the 269 cases in which the molester could be identified. Using the fallacious logic you've presented to us in the past, you should be able to conclude that in 269 molestations, homosexuals are 267 times less likely than heterosexuals to be the perpetrator, right?
But that isn't exactly the correlation your pastor's provenience-lacking statistic was reaching for. Your pastor was attempting to paint a negative causation for lesbianism –and thus homosexuality in general. However, the data is suspect. Of the 144 gay couples interviewed, we don't know the context that this unknown researcher was working with. Was he a psychologist with an organization that specialized in dealing with abuse victims? What demographic was his sample from? What cross-section of society? What age group? Were age groups evenly represented? Was he a counselor for victims of Christian priests?
We don't know. Because your pastor doesn't want his flock actually using their own thoughts. It's safer to have them stick with the thoughts that have already been approved by the cult center.
Dare I say it? I will: Your pastor is full of shit. The Centers for Disease Control lists (2003) 405,926 living with AIDS. I think we can all agree that AIDS is not discriminatory as to whom it kills. 77% of that 405,926 people were male. Of that 77%, the percentage of men who engaged in sex with men was only 58%. I don't see where the "1 thousand times more likely to die" figure comes from and neither do you.
Again, we have to consider the provenience of the quoted statistic and the lack of context and basically throw it out. It is as much an anecdote as the rest. But since we are on the subject of faithfulness, lets consider the actual and cited statistics of divorce in the United States. The U.S. Census Bureau reports (2002) that 50% of all marriages will end in divorce based on past census data collected. The Barna Research Group (1999) concluded that divorce rates among conservative Christians was much higher than among other faith and non-faith based groups, including atheists and agnostics.
Dubious statistics. Are we still talking about the 144 couple sample size? From this we are drawing conclusions of the "average homosexual male?" Even you aren't that ignorant, Woody. Give us a citation to this statistic or withdraw it.
I will. I say your pastor is not only a bigot, he's full of shit.
The tactics he uses is that which creates an "other" designed to maintain the integrity of the cult which he leads. The homosexual is demonized and made out to be an "abomination" of a supernatural being that the cult worships, creating a common enemy. This, my friend, is hatred. A very subtle form that has plausible deniability ("hate the sin, not the sinner," etc.), but hatred nonetheless. Homosexuals are effectively excluded and not loved by your cult, indeed misinformation is passed about as if it were scientific in order to give the bigot-pastor / cult leader credibility while simultaneously painting an negative picture of the homosexual. That picture is misinformed and inaccurate, therefore deception is at work, a deception that creates a sentiment of hatred among the cult following that, when challenged about this hatred, presents a very hypocritical display of piety and answers: "I don't hate the homosexual, I hate the homosexual lifestyle."
You are obviously well-indoctrinated and brainwashed into the cult itself. It's really a shame that you don't actually think for yourself, but instead accept the words of your cult leader without question.
What sources did your pastor list? Rather than require everyone to listen to a sermon (your real goal, by the way), why not simply cite these and let us read the original work. Many of us are in academia and have access to wonderful libraries and peer-reviewed journals and would love to read the original sources in their original contexts rather than the biased contexts of bigoted cult leaders. Especially one that begins his sermon trying to sell tapes from the cult's bookstore.
It says far more about adultery, yet this remains a far more common practice than homosexuality. That fact is indicative of the true nature of the hypocritical Christian cult. If they really wanted to promote family values and be paragons of virtue, why don't Christians focus on adultery with the same fervor and energy that they do homosexuality? Adultery has clear problems that can be created within societies where polygamous relationships are taboo, homosexuality, however, does not.
There is absolutely no reason that you can give that can demonstrate homosexuality is bad for society without quoting cult documents from societies that still stoned to death women for adultery, children for being impertinent, and those who failed to keep the Sabbath.
I'm not as forgiving as Stefan. I believe that cult activism needs to be countered by free-thinking people in order to save society from their ignorance. Your words above are indicative of your hypocrisy, since you've done your share of context removal and word-twisting in this forum. That you would characterize and compare someone who was irritated at that practice to a pedophile says more about you than they. Indeed, your credibility may have reached depths from which recovery is not possible.
References
Avert.org (2003). United States HIV and AIDS Statistics: U.S. Summary. found at: http://www.avert.org/statsum.htm
Barna Research Group, (1999) "Christians are more likely to experience divorce than are non-Christians," DEC-21
Fay, R.E., Turner, C.F., Klassen, A.D., & Gagnon, J.H. (1989). Prevalence and patterns of same-gender sexual contact among men. Science, 243, 338-348.
Hamer, D.H., et al (1993) A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation. Science, 261, 321-327.
Jenny, C., Roesler, T. A., & Poyer, K. L. (1994). Are children at risk for sexual abuse by homosexuals? Pediatrics, 94(1), 41-44.
Lever, J., & Kanouse, D.E. (1996). Sexual orientation and proscribed sexual behaviors. In G. Herek, J. Jobe, & R. Carney (Eds.), Out in force: Sexual orientation and the military (pp. 15-38). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rogers, S.M., & Turner, C.F. (1991). Male-male sexual contact in the USA: Findings from five sample surveys, 1970-1990. The Journal of Sex Research, 28, 491-519.
United States (2002). 2002 Census Bureau Report On Marriage And Divorce. found at: http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p70-80.pdf
I think that contemporary astrology with all it's fuss and flavours, inhibits, supresses, and discriminates individuality. I said that you don't need anything else except yourself if you want to notice yourself, so chill out.SkinWalker said:The value of the Gnostic Gospels isn't in their ability to verify the existence/non-existence of Jesus or any other character in early Christian literature. Their value is what they have to teach society. Just as this is the true value of all biblical liturature, literature from other religions, Fitzgerald, Melville, Twain, Steinbeck, Homer, etc.
The beauty of good literature is that it can be read without believing that Ishmael actually witnessed Ahab's obsession; that Tom really witnessed a murder by an angry Native American; that George really killed a mouse that he loved; or that Odysseus outwitted a giant cyclops. These stories, while the reader is in full-knowledge that they are fiction, tell us much about the human condition, human strength, and human weakness.
The Gospels -Gnostic, Cannon, or otherwise- do the same for the reader that is capable of critical reasoning. So one need not believe that Jesus actually walked the Earth and that the main character is based upon a real person in order for the stories to have value and teach.
With regard to the early Christian literature, I take the stand that many agnostic-atheists such as myself take: there may or may not have been a person named Jesus. That person, if he existed or not, was legendary and has a following that is clearly present in antiquity. That following created various texts, some of which were decided by committe (a human, thus biased, committe) to become Cannonical and formed the basis of the current Christian bible.
From the perspective of the agnostics and atheists who are participatng in discussion here, the validity of the Gnostic Gospels isn't based on whether or not the stories are factual in their entirety. It's based on an understanding or assumption that the early Christian priests and authority were clearly biased and did not want certain messages or perhaps certain people included.
Beyond that, these gospels can be evaluated not only on their literary value, but on their philosophical value -as can all the early Christian writings.
I think what really irritates you (and you clearly are irritated), is that the agnostics/atheists have the audacity to form opinions about religious texts of cults in which they do not have faith.
Your non sequiter about "how can you say GG are valid when you don't believe in Christ" notwithstanding, I think your credibility in this forum is quite low. In another thread and at some point, several months back, you stated that your purpose here at sciforums was (and I paraphrase) to "witness" to all those you can. On a great many occasions, you cite "truth" and resort to begging the question in order to demonstrate that truth rather than use empiricism.
Woody said:You also seem to be confusing two issues: on the one hand all people commit sin (1st John 1:9). As a christian I am supposed to confess my sins on a daily basis. On the otherhand, you consider this equivalent to a lifestyle of sin, but It is not the same thing. Sin lifestyles include alchoholicism, drug addiction, prostitution, homosexuality, habitual adultery, sleeping around with various sex partners, etc. etc.
Woody said:Woody: I said they are rare. But the whole issue of gay marriage is a smokescreen. How many do you think will really last, maybe 1%?
Woody said:Woody: again here are the stats: 1/3 of all homosexual men in the USA will either have AIDs or be dead by age 30. More than 50% by age 40.
Woody said:What do you suppose the average life expectancy is for a homosexual male? Let's hear you statistic?
Woody said:Woody: Then perhaps you would be interested in the truth, instead of trashing someone before you've even heard them at all. That's called "poisoning the well" where I come from. Where you come from that must be called "enlightenment."
Woody said:The main point here is that homosexualtiy is not compatible with the christian lifestyle.
Woody said:If non-christians want to be gay, abort their children, make excuses for substance abuse, whatever, then fine, they aren't going to heaven anyway.
Woody said:What should we expect anyway in a non-christian world?
Woody said:The way of sin leads to death, but the gift of God is eternal life.
Woody: Homosexual males are 1,000 times more likely to die from AIDs, just for a starter, according to the US department of health statistics.
Listen to the audio from our pastor. If you have any credence in the field of pshchology, you'll know where homosexuality comes from. It's a behavioral choice based on complicated circumstances. You being a pshycologist should know this. There is no homosexual gene.
Woody: Our pastor covered that subject very well today. There are laws that transcend grace
but the laws you mentioned have been trumped by grace.
Your understanding of grace is a big fat zero.
I asked you to explain grace the last time around, and I'm still waiting.
Woody: As I said before, explain grace. You have no concept of it. Homosexuality is a transcendent law (meaning that it is still wrong to do).
shut up you 'ironical' boring bastardSkinWalker said:Smokescreen? To obscure what, exactly? First, marriage is a civil responsibility, not a religious one. Religion is irrelevant when two people decide to make a contract of marriage. Second, marriage as a civil institution provides certain civil and legal benefits and rights that aren't afforded to non-married persons. This is the reason why gays want to be legally allowed to marry, a right which they have according to the Constitution -laws prohibiting same-sex marriages are unConsitutional.
How many will last? I couldn't say. I'm not clairvoyant and neither are you. However, if I had to place a bet, I'd say that the success rate of same-sex marriages would reflect the success rates of heterosexual marriages. There's no reason to think otherwise. Success rates of marriages has no more bearing on same-sex marriages than heterosexual marriages. If marriages are to be disallowed because they might not work, then even you shouldn't be married. The success of your marriage is just as at risk as anyone elses. More so since you are Christian, actually.
These aren't the same statistics you quoted in a previous post. If you want to change your mind, that's fine, but I still expect you to cite sources to back your claim.
I don't have a statistic. I'm not making a claim, I'm refuting one. And quite effectively, I might add. Your claims are but words without sources. Are they still forthcoming?
No, it's called debunking. I've debunked your silly pastor and you quite well. Where's the sources? By continually adjusting and changing the requirements to your bigotted stand against homosexuals, you are presenting a pseudoscientific attempt at justifying your cult's discrimination. White's used to do this in North Carolina with black Americans by claiming that their intellects were inferior to the white man's; that they all steal, lie, and cheat; that misogyny would create impure bloodlines; etc.
If the "truth" were of interest to you, you would be more interested in reviewing the sources of the information that your cult leader is giving and using critical thinking instead of regurgitating them without review in a science forum.
If the "truth" were important, instead of attempting a refute by saying, "your sources are old," you would review them and see if any new or contrary information has been discovered.
If the "truth" were significant to a hypocrit such as yourself, you'd tell us all why your cult spends significantly more time on battling the "homosexual agenda" rather than rampant adultery, the latter being far more common and problematic to christians -and equally "sinful," I believe.
Then, as a society, we must do away with christianity. Homosexuality isn't something that one chooses. Regardless of whom they chose or refuse to have sex with, they are still homosexual in their orientation. But your comment above also reflects the serious hypocritical nature of the christian cults that reject homosexuality: because adultery is no more compatible, yet far more tolerated.
Heaven? Where's the evidence to support that wild claim. Upon death, the body decomposes and it's components return to the earth from which they came. This existance is probably all we get, since there is no evidence of anything else. Citing a discredited and unreliable religious text doesn't make it any more possible.
Relief. Morality. A society that can finally get on with progress instead of trying to reclaim the ignorance and superstition humanity was stuck with 2 to 4 thousand years ago.
Blaah, blaah, blaaah... go preach that shit somewhere else. This is a science forum. In the religion subforum, we discuss the anthropological and sociological values and effects of religion. Preachers aren't welcome.
stretched said:*I feel deeply sorry for you woody. It seems you missed out on a lot of "natural" good things. Is it ok to wank? The unnatural repression of sexuality in the Catholic Church is nicely illustrated in abberant outcomes. Can you not see the prison that you dwell in?
Allcare.
This is human kindness. I get it. I understand it. I even believe it up to the point where Christianity involves invisible deities that are omniscient/omnipotent. Common sense tells us the world would be more habitable if its residents treated each other as the alleged Christ taught.TheAllegedChrist said:Whoever loves God must also love his brother
(1 John 4: 20-21). Therefore, I say to you all:
Feed the hungry.
Give drink to the thirsty.
Clothe the naked.
Shelter the homeless.
Visit the sick.
Visit the imprisoned.
Bury the dead.
Counsel the doubtful,
Instruct the ignorant,
Admonish the sinner,
Forgive injuries,
Bear wrong patiently,
Pray for the living,
Pray for the dead.
.
Love your enemies; pray for those who persecute you; do good to those
who hate you. If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him
something to drink. Do not be conquered by evil, but conquer evil with good
(Rom. 12:17-21). Do not return evil for evil, or insult for insult. Return a
blessing instead.
Neo-Christian fundamentalists justify their hatred and bigotry against homosexuals several ways, two of which are to deny that they "hate" homosexuals and to simply state that homosexuals aren't their "brothers."Matt. 22:37-40 said:. If anyone says, 'I love God,' yet hates his brother, he is a liar. One who has no love for his brother whom he sees cannot love God whom he does not see.
[quote="Dr." Laura] "A huge portion of the male homosexual populace is predatory on young boys."[/quote]Benny Hinn said:Orlando Christian Center, 12/31/89. "The Lord also tells me to tell you in the mid-90’s, about ’94, ’95, no later than that, God will destroy the homosexual community of America."
Rev. Fred Phelps said:
These quotes demonstrate the fear and hatred that neo-Christians have for the statistically very few homosexuals that reside in the United States compared to the number of adulterers and thieves.Robert Knight said:WorldNetDaily.com "[Demand] that schools stop promoting "safe sex" and homosexuality in the name of "AIDS education" or "safe schools." These are recruitment schemes into early sex and homosexuality, with documented, ghastly results."
I doubt the kind of haters that killed Matthew Shepard, or want to prevent gays from having civil rights stop to ask them wether they are celebate or not. And, no, they would not necessarily live longer if celebate.Woody said:There is a solution for the homosexual -- to become celebate. I remained celebate the whole time I was a christian and unmarried. I did not give into temptation for the opposite sex, and I have the same nature most other guys have. Couldn't a homosexual do the same thing if they weren't turned on by the opposite sex? Just be celebate. They'd live a lot longer if they were celebate.
Our path is, admittedly, not for everyone. Anyone who is motivated primarily by shame to seek change is not only likely to fail at change but risks actually making the cycle of shame worse. Shame never motivates lasting change. Likewise, those who pursue change to satisfy other people -- whether family, friends, religious institutions or society at large -- are likely to find neither success nor satisfaction in trying to change when doing so is not truly their heart's desire.
But if you truly are self-motivated to change…if homosexuality just doesn't "work" for you…if it doesn't feel like who you really are, or conflicts with what you believe in and most want out of life…we invite you to explore the healing journey of change that worked for us. For through it, we found the love, peace, brotherhood, wholeness and joy that we had been seeking all our lives.
"Low levels of education, high levels of multiple sexual partnering, high rates of homosexuality/bisexuality and high rates of injecting drug use account for the relatively high rate of new infections among blacks and Hispanics in the U.S.," Bloom said.
The national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that 800,000 to 900,000 people in the United States are currently infected with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. Each year, another 40,000 people become infected.
Woody said:S/G and S/W
Oh I see, Anyone that disagrees on morality issues is a "hater."
a god: "When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand."
Woody said:Here are the facts from the U.S. Center for Disease Control:
Woody said:The gay gene is false propaganda from gay scientists using biased sampling methods on prison populations in the 90s.
Woody said:The results could not be reproduced in the science/medical community, and this hypothesis has gone to the junk-science garbage can:
Woody said:
Woody said:If there is any doubt about the choices made in sexual orientation read this article:
Gay Sex is a Choice
Woody said:There are counseling services for people that want to change from homosexual to heterosexual. It is more than 50% effective:
Gay men that go straight
If homosexuality is genetic then how are they able to change back to heterosexual behavior? Spidergoat, Skinwalker, anybody? Your arguments are obsolete rants from the pro-gay community.
Woody said:It's not genetic, and the life expectancy of a gay man is only about age 41.
Woody said: