Say Anything Blog

Nieman,

The APA never determined that homosexuality should be taken off the register of mental disorders due to any scientific research, but was bullied into it by strident homosexual activists:

Homosexual militants achieved a significant victory in 1973 when they succeeded in terrorizing the American Psychiatric Association (APA) into removing homosexuality as a mental disorder from the APA’s Diagnostic And Statistical Manual On Mental Disorders (DSM). Homosexuals had lobbied the APA since 1971 and began disrupting APA meetings, grabbing microphones and shouting down any psychiatrist who considered homosexuality to be a mental disorder. The tactics of 60s anti-war protesters worked. The APA caved and homosexuals have used this victory to proclaim that homosexual behavior is normal.

Then again, you could just use your common sense and determine that a man sticking his penis in the anus of another man was simply wrong.

...for great justice

It’s probably the case that the vast majority of homosexuality is adaptive for several environments, so I wonder where the Darwinists are on this one.
The odds are that a tiny fraction of gay people were actually “born that way”, but it’s a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of the overall population, and probably statistically insignificant.
It’s only significance is for the political activist who wish to force their agenda on the rest of us through the courts.

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

R108

(the real R108, for that matter) I read some time back in the 1970’s of a study conducted with rodents.  They found that the incidence of homosexuality increased with environmental stresses, particularly, overcrowding / overpopulation.

The report had as illustration a large plastic case filled with mice.

Evidently, it’s natures’ way of thinning the herd.

It’s been such a long time, I have no idea where to find it again, since I probably came out of a 1970’s-era Britannica or SCIENCE digest, well before the advent of the internet.

...for great justice

It is of some value, IMO, to note that one of the hallmarks of every great empire in human history, is sexual license among the general population (adultery, fornication, orgies, beastiality, etcetera), an increase in feminine influence upon the state (causing a breakdown in the family) and rampant, uncondemned HOMOSEXUALITY. In each case, as these things emerged, the fall of that empire quickly followed.

When we look objectively at the Roman Empire, just before its fall, all these things above were in full bloom, and IMO as well as that of others, America is following an almost identical path towards the sewers of human history, another failed empire, another failed social experiment.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

MZ: I also remember that study; it was about the effects of increasing population density in higher animals, I believe.  I’m reminded of it every time I visit San Francisco; they’re just crammed in there on that little peninsula.  Manhattan, as well.

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

Knee-high-man
I notice you provide no link for the incidence of this

Theses studies are always conducted by people with a strong pro-homosexuality bias, so-called scientists, trying to prove homosexuality by junk science is an innate trait.

Nice bald assertion. I think some scientific studies are done without a particular result predetermined before the experiments are done. You outline the church’s approach, however. Your ‘feelings’ about this could never be effected by the results of scientific endeavors, no matter how legitimate.

Why feign superiority and try to sell us the idea that all psychology experiments are conducted by people who are simply trying to flesh out their pro-Homo agenda. Bullshit.

Sparkie: Get a grip!  As you should know, most universities are awash in political correctness, which includes the mainstreaming of homosexuality, and they don’t tend to get funded if their “studies” produce any information that doesn’t fit the PC template.
It is absolutely correct to suspect any “studies” that deal with a highly agendized issue. God forbid that homosexual behavior is a choice, or even an adaptation to social conditions produced by the leftie agenda!

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

And, of course, studying physical brain structure of adults doesn’t tell you anything about the cause/effect relationship; only DNA can do that. So far, no “gay gene” or genetic combination has been discovered or proved to be determinative.  Environmental causes have been well documented, of course, but that information has been censored in the name of PC.

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

r108
neiman extended his diss to all scientists studying anything of political valence.

apparently you do too. i think that is far from being the case.

i am not familiar with all the homosexual psychology studies, but i am sure there are some that say many silly things. science often goes beyond its empirical foundations. psychology, still coming off freud and all that armchair hogwash, is readjusting.

but to conclude that all scientists are part of some vast conspiracy, as neiman rants, is bullshit.

apparently you do too. i think that is far from being the case.

Try to read the words I wrote, and don’t focus so much on those little voices in your head.  I specifically addressed the bias in university studies, so peddle your mischaracterization crap somewhere else.

I don’t even think it’s any sort of conspiracy, and never said so.  What I said was that they were playing to those who feed them.  It’s really pretty simple.
When you realize that PC originated on college campuses, and that most universities are dedicated to promoting political correctness, especially the social science departments, and if you know that one of the tenets of PC is that homosexuality is “normal”, then even you can do the math.

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

Sparkie:

but to conclude that all scientists are part of some vast conspiracy, as neiman rants, is bullshit.

That acusation against me is not based on fact, I never said all scientists. Nor did I speak of a conspiracy. So, you lose all credibility when you make false accusations like this above.

Those studies conducted to prove an innate causation for homosexuality, with rare if any exceptions, start out with the premise (bias-prejudice) that it is true. In this case there was no randomized, double blind study, but they used carefully chosen subjects, people chosen on the basis they had the characteristics desired and would thereore be useful to produce the results desired.

The truth is these scientists are from liberal universities (where are the conservative or neutral universities?), their research requires approval from liberal professors and they will not get peer review publication if they do not produce the politically correct results demanded. If they do not publish they die in their university careers. Had this been a randomizes, double-blind study involving subjects not engaged in sexual activity or having demonstrated any particular gender based sexual desires, but having these notable differences in brain size and then followed for a period of time, even then the results would have highly limited value, as there was no assessment of cause versus effect.

Why? Because the scientists wanted to leave the impression that this difference in brain size was the cause of homosexuality, not the effect of homosexual desire or conduct. They knew this was dishonest and published this report anyway solely to add to the mountain of other flawed homosexual studies and advance their careers.

You are unhappy because you know this study is flawed, produced false results and cannot therefore support the case of innate homosexual desire.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

but having these notable differences in brain size and then followed for a period of time, even then the results would have highly limited value, as there was no assessment of cause versus effect.

I typed too fast fro my brain. It should have read, “then the results might have some value as it could be used to begin to examine cause versus effect.”

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

“then the results might have some value as it could be used to begin to examine cause versus effect.”

Nieman, I’m curious.

Really, I’m not trying to goof, but my question to that line of reasoning is whether the cause and effect are genetic, e.g. the brain is deformed in such a way as to cause males to think and act like females,

or is it, by engaging in sodomy, the brain alters its configuration to that which is found by pathologists upon dissection?

Either way, I agree, guys looking at other guys with lust just ain’t normal!

...for great justice

Cause would be genetic! If the changes noted in this study and other changes as was suggested about the pons some years ago are an effect, then it is not genetic at all. Thus, in the latter case it is all a matter of lust and that lust, over time, having an effect upon the natural physiology. We know that abuse of the body can cause disease over time and there is no reason to believe that mental/spititual abuse cannot bring about changes in the body as well.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.