Gay Marriage/Marriage Equality/End of World?

JimiTime

MagicMarker wrote: »

I think you're alone in your opinion pretty much anywhere except your Christian forum.

You say that like its a bad thing:)
It also pretty much puts to bed what Seamus said doesn't it.

Dades

JimiTime wrote: »

Where did I insult everyone?

Okay, not everyone, but you've started getting a little obtuse.

I recommend stepping back and re-approaching the topic.

robindch

JimiTime wrote: »

Its more about manners or unvalued input.

You complain about manners when you insulted a poster, and complain about "unvalued input" when you don't apparently read anything that anybody writes?

Re-engage, Jimi, re-engage.

/sheesh

JimiTime

Dades wrote: »

Okay, not everyone, but you've started getting a little obtuse.

I recommend stepping back and re-approaching the topic.

Come of it Dades. Others started having an attack the poster love in, before that, I was on-topic. More than happy to see an end to the 'Lets all have a go at Jimi being this that or the other'

efb

Jimi- I'm finding your posts offensive

1ZRed

MagicMarker wrote: »

I think you're alone in your opinion pretty much anywhere except your Christian forum.

Which only makes me wonder what kind of backward hole that forum must be if most wouldn't bother to read provided links and base their perspectives/out looks on what they've been told rather than experienced first hand with someone.

JimiTime

efb wrote: »

Jimi- I'm finding your posts offensive

Well thats better than the 'I find your existance offensive' line I get in the real world. You just may be the closest thing I've got to a friend, bo hoo sob

Delirium

Pity Jimi didn't do any legwork to understand what the bill actually bans. Jimi has been complaining that someone who wants to change their sexuality/sexual preferences can't attempt to do this.

Not so.

This law, which goes into effect on Jan. 1, 2013, will prohibit attempts by mental health providers to perform therapy on minors intended to change their sexual orientation, including efforts to “change behaviors or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.”

Source

Full text of the bill

This law is about protecting minors from these "treatments".

ButtimersLaw

I think there should be equality for all and the business of a state should not be to enshrine into law any particular religious organisations views. Just look at the history of Ireland s one case of a country which has been impoverished and the country's progress retarded by the political class allowing itself to be dictated to over decades by unelected clergy.

Most of us are horrified by the way unelected clergy behave nowadays in countries like Iran, yet they are not that dissimilar to they way unelected clergy behaved in Ireland in the 1950’s and 1960’s.

Of course some find it uncomfortable that some others might have an element of choice about being gay or straight. The prevailing wisdom today is that sexual preference is not a choice, and anyone who questions that must not be allowed to do so, or at least be discouraged from doing so, even if they, themselves, feel that they had an element of choice in their personal decision.

It’s often struck me as a little ironic that a group who (rightly) sought equality for themselves are often the most vocal against anyone else who has a different opinion from them on this issue.

Equality is not just for those with whom we agree, but for everyone and we should be especially tolerant towards those with whom we disagree.

We have to accept that sexuality, for some, is not a static thing but can be quite fluid, regarding their position on the spectrum of sexuality.

If we refuse to accept that, or believe it, then are we not ourselves guilty of the same intolerance society once demonstrated again those who defined themselves as homosexual.

efb

There is an acceptance of fluidity in sexuality but the engineering of same is not seen as healthy or good for the human psyche

old hippy

JimiTime wrote: »

I know one exgay man who is happily married with children, and doesn't seem repressed. He had a very hard time being accepted in the church he attended (By accepted, I mean there was always that sense of 'is he Really hetero now?' , but he ended up married to the pastors sister. Again though, you can only go on what the person testifies really in these incidents, and due to the fact that many then come out years later and say that they simply repressed their desires, it, quite fairly, makes people suspicious.

No such thing as an "ex" gay.

Sure, we all have room to manouevere in our sexualities but what you are is always a part of you.

And why the hell would the chap want to be in such a religious set up? Brrr

JimiTime

koth wrote: »

Pity Jimi didn't do any legwork to understand what the bill actually bans. Jimi has been complaining that someone who wants to change their sexuality/sexual preferences can't attempt to do this.

Not so.



Full text of the bill

This law is about protecting minors from these "treatments".

No, I read the bill, and am well aware that this is about people under 18. This is why I said those claiming that therapies work should present their research, or get cracking as there is also the line.

...........In the last four decades, ‘reparative’ therapists have not produced any rigorous scientific research to substantiate their claims of cure. Until there is such research available, [the American Psychiatric Association] recommends that ethical practitioners refrain from attempts to change individuals’ sexual orientation,.........


I have conceded that its fair enough, but am wary about what would be acceptable research, as the religious seem to be unacceptable in terms of bias. I also however, said I understand why this would be the case, as when people desire a certain outcome, they may lie, and do lie about if its worked or not. These kind of researches are fairly blunt instruments though, and I still detect the politics afoot.

28064212

JimiTime wrote: »

No, I read the bill, and am well aware that this is about people under 18. This is why I said those claiming that therapies work should present their research, or get cracking as there is also the line.

...........In the last four decades, ‘reparative’ therapists have not produced any rigorous scientific research to substantiate their claims of cure. Until there is such research available, [the American Psychiatric Association] recommends that ethical practitioners refrain from attempts to change individuals’ sexual orientation,.........


I have conceded that its fair enough, but am weary about what would be acceptable research.

"Yes, I agree with the bill, and have no problems with what it says, BUT..."

I think we're all weary Jimi

Delirium

JimiTime wrote: »

No, I read the bill, and am well aware that this is about people under 18. This is why I said those claiming that therapies work should present their research, or get cracking as there is also the line.

...........In the last four decades, ‘reparative’ therapists have not produced any rigorous scientific research to substantiate their claims of cure. Until there is such research available, [the American Psychiatric Association] recommends that ethical practitioners refrain from attempts to change individuals’ sexual orientation,.........


I have conceded that its fair enough, but am wary about what would be acceptable research, as the religious seem to be unacceptable in terms of bias. I also however, said I understand why this would be the case, as when people desire a certain outcome, they may lie, and do lie about if its worked or not. These kind of researches are fairly blunt instruments though, and I still detect the politics afoot.

It would probably have to be rigorous scientific research as mentioned in your post. If the reparative can provide that sort of evidence/data, then I imagine the issue would be revisited.

How can you claim there is politics afoot when evidence hasn't been provided to show the reparative therapies work?

mewso

Jimi I'll ask one more time. You want treatment to help convert homosexuals to heterosexual to be available to those who desire it. Do you also want treatment (if it exists) to be available to do the reverse to those who desire it?

JimiTime

old hippy wrote: »

No such thing as an "ex" gay.

Sure, we all have room to manouevere in our sexualities but what you are is always a part of you.

And why the hell would the chap want to be in such a religious set up? Brrr

Its not cold towards him now by all accounts, just the intial while. As for being part of the religious setup, well Christianity is about putting God first and seeking first the kingdom, he obviously did not square his homosexuality with this, so looked to rid himself of such desires.

old hippy

JimiTime wrote: »

Its not cold towards him now by all accounts, just the intial while. As for being part of the religious setup, well Christianity is about putting God first and seeking first the kingdom, he obviously did not square his homosexuality with this, so looked to rid himself of such desires.

Once he fell in line with group thought, hmm?

The kingdom of heaven is within... free your mind... and your ass will follow

I wonder how the militant anti-gays in the various churches will react when it all comes out about Jesus

In all seriousness, I would say what the church put him through sounds more like abuse to me and certainly not very "christian".

JimiTime

old hippy wrote: »

Once he fell in line with group thought, hmm?

The kingdom of heaven is within... free your mind... and your ass will follow

I wonder how the militant anti-gays in the various churches will react when it all comes out about Jesus

In all seriousness, I would say what the church put him through sounds more like abuse to me and certainly not very "christian".

The church didn't put him through anything but their suspicions, which were reasonable I suppose, and by all accounts he understood them. He came to the church already having made up his mind with regards to sexual appetite. I also have no idea if he went through professional counselling or what. I was just answering the question if I knew anyone who was 'ex-gay'.

1ZRed

JimiTime, Being gay is genetic, unavoidable and undeniable.

If scientists don't fully understand the extremely complex fundamentals of what causes somebody to be gay, then how could therapy ever work against your nature? Your sexual preference and leanings are hard wired into you. No avoiding that.

It doesn't matter how much therapy or gay cures you take, you're still going to be the same person with the same basic attractions. If it was ever that easy to change your sexuality, then so many would already be doing it in their teens when you do go through a self destructive time of rejecting your sexuality. It never works no matter how many women you get with or how much you block out those thoughts.

Those men that claim to be straight after the cures are not. Many men in the past married women and fathered children -all still gay, but with women to avoid dealing with themselves. You don't have to be straight to sleep with a woman. It's all a wrong route to go down and you're hurting many more people once a family is involved if their father is playing away with men to satisfy his basic attractions.

Bar the obvious damages those gay cures do, it doesn't benefit anybody in the end. And most importantly, those cures are not needed because being gay is not the end of the world. Until some people stop thinking otherwise, this kind of damaging BS mentality will keep going on.

ShooterSF

Jimi I'm curious IF it was possible and was scientifically proven that we could alter people's sexualities would you be ok with adolescents actually going through with it? We don't allow minors to get vasectomies or tubectomies (I hope that's right, had to google it). I wouldn't be too keen on allowing them to go through some forms of cosmetic or gender changing surgery either as these seem like decisions to be made as an adult.

We also have to take on board the situations that could push them to it. One, religious. Most teens are brought up in their parent's religion and don't often take the time as teenagers to explore their beliefs and I'd be concerned they might feel forced to change even if sexually they're happy for a belief they haven't fully investigated. Don't get me wrong by the time they're an adult I'd be much happier to let them follow their beliefs as they'd have had time if they chose to investigate and question them.
Secondly, you have peer pressure. Unlike others here I can only imagine how hard it is to grow up in a world that still isn't too welcoming to you and often treats you as a leper. Id bet some happy gay people here, if during adolescents were offered a working fix and had the added pressure that such fix was available may have done so not because they weren't happy with their sexuality but because they weren't happy due to their treatment by others because of it. As adults you can only hope people will see bigotry for what it is and ignore it.

The second point leads to a more philosophical question about such treatments and the reason people take them up in the first place. Do people look to change sexuality because they are truly unhappy with theirs or do they do it to conform to other people's wishes and if the latter are we ok with it. That one's just me thinking out loud though unlike my first question.

robindch

old hippy wrote: »

In all seriousness, I would say what the church put him through sounds more like abuse to me and certainly not very "christian".

The term "christian", despite general usage until fairly recently, is not a synonym for "kind" or "decent" or any other attribute that everyone would agree is admirable. As Jimi correctly points out, the aim of the religion is to glorify what the religion says about itself -- that's what "christian" really means.

old hippy

JimiTime wrote: »

The church didn't put him through anything but their suspicions, which were reasonable I suppose, and by all accounts he understood them. He came to the church already having made up his mind with regards to sexual appetite. I also have no idea if he went through professional counselling or what. I was just answering the question if I knew anyone who was 'ex-gay'.

Why would they be suspicious of a member of their flock? Had he done anything "bad"? Had he killed or maimed anyone?

Anyway, you don't know any ex gays - there's no such thing.

ButtimersLaw

efb wrote: »

There is an acceptance of fluidity in sexuality but the engineering of same is not seen as healthy or good for the human psyche

SO are you saying that if someone seems professional help over issues of sexuality, any advice which might be seen as "engineering" should be banned by law?

If that is your position, then I disagree, as I think we should all be allowed to seek and give whatever advice we think is important, without someone else preventing us from doing so.

efb wrote: »

Jimi- I'm finding your posts offensive

I make it a golden rule not to find offence where it is not meant, and especially not to take offence where it is meant

1ZRed wrote: »

JimiTime, Being gay is genetic, unavoidable and undeniable.

.

It seems you want that to be the case. I know people who disagree with you and who have at different stages and times considered themselves to be predominantly gay, and at other times predominantly str8.

Why it’s important to you to decide that they are not allowed to think that, and to deny they think that, is uncertain.

efb

ButtimersLaw wrote: »

SO are you saying that if someone seems professional help over issues of sexuality, any advice which might be seen as "engineering" should be banned by law?

If that is your position, then I disagree, as I think we should all be allowed to seek and give whatever advice we think is important, without someone else preventing us from doing so.




I make it a golden rule not to find offence where it is not meant, and especially not to take offence where it is meant




It seems you want that to be the case. I know people who disagree with you and who have at different stages and times considered themselves to be predominantly gay, and at other times predominantly str8.

Why it’s important to you to decide that they are not allowed to think that, and to deny they think that, is uncertain.

Not at all, counselling to help coming to terms with your sexuality and accepting same is fine. Trying to engineer a person into a sexuality they are not is dangerous and been proven so.

ButtimersLaw

efb wrote: »

Not at all, counselling to help coming to terms with your sexuality and accepting same is fine. Trying to engineer a person into a sexuality they are not is dangerous and been proven so.

My question was someone seeking help and not about "engineering". While the words we use are important, do you consider it engineering if someone seeks help because they are having homosexual thoughts or urges which they do not welcome.

If that person is 90% str8 and 10% gay, is it permitted for them, in your opinion, to seek help and advice?

If they are 50% str8 and 50% gay, is it permitted for them, in your opinion, to seek help and advice?

If they are 90% gay and 10% str8, is it permitted for them, in your opinion, to seek help and advice?

1ZRed

ButtimersLaw wrote: »

It seems you want that to be the case. I know people who disagree with you and who have at different stages and times considered themselves to be predominantly gay, and at other times predominantly str8.

Why it’s important to you to decide that they are not allowed to think that, and to deny they think that, is uncertain.

That wasn't my point and that wasn't what I was saying.

I think I'd know best considering I am gay.

Sexuality is completely fluid and fluctuates a little or a lot depending on the person. When I was younger I was predominantly straight but I always had a slight attraction to men, as I grew older that side grew and my attraction to men become stronger until I was genuinely bisexual and then gay, for the most part.

My point is, my sexuality didn't come out of nowhere. The attraction to men was always there and my attraction to women is still there. I couldn't change that and I had no control over what happened to me, no matter how hard I fought being gay.
It is just hard wired into me, and it naturally developed. I don't believe any sort of therapy could ever change me or influence my sexuality because that's just the way I'm built physically.

Nodin

ButtimersLaw wrote: »

My question was someone seeking help and not about "engineering". While the words we use are important, do you consider it engineering if someone seeks help because they are having homosexual thoughts or urges which they do not welcome.

If that person is 90% str8 and 10% gay, is it permitted for them, in your opinion, to seek help and advice?

If they are 50% str8 and 50% gay, is it permitted for them, in your opinion, to seek help and advice?

If they are 90% gay and 10% str8, is it permitted for them, in your opinion, to seek help and advice?

Do please be as good as to define what you mean by "help".

Galvasean

bluewolf wrote: »

BUT I don't know BUT"

bluewolf wrote: »

BUT

Stop yelling 'BUT' in the gay thread!

Bannasidhe

Galvasean wrote: »

Stop yelling 'BUT' in the gay thread!

Yeah - if she keeps that up it will attract a certain poster with a thespian themed user name who will start going on about buggery again.

:pac:

28064212

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Yeah - if she keeps that up it will attract a certain poster with a thespian themed user name who will start going on about buggery again.

:pac:

*sodomy. But fortunately, they got themselves perma-site-banned