Fudgepack Mountain wins the Globe!!!

[Master Capper]

AR,

I think the movie was called Wild Things, and I believe they came out with two sequels that sucked. Didn't the movie Midnight Cowboy have underlying gay themes? Most people consider that movie a classic!

 

[djv]

Whats that on your chin Bill? Is that really the song for this move?

 

[pirate fan]

, I find it hilarious that people are using belonging to the boy scouts and little league as the most heterosexual of activities. Along with the Catholic Church, those are the most likely places for your child to encounter his first homosexual.
I would just like to give this quote a nomination as the stupidest thing I have ever read in these forums.
Homosexual behavior can happen anywhere and to narrow it down to a few organizations really discredits your other ideas. Being a member of all three groups, it is clear you only believe what you read in the newspaper I guess.
My two cents are the movie is out there, so what, nobody is making you watch it. By watching it, you won't become gay but I think we have to accept that there are gay people in the world. And for all the very religious, me being one, we have to accept everyone as they are and know God loves us all, not just specific groups. Maybe being gay is a sin, I don't know, I'll leave it up to God to judge, it is not my place or anyone else's in this world. Any message of hate is not what Jesus would do, he would love them no matter what. Although Kosar and some others have little or no belief in God, they are doing what is right by accepting people for what they are, gay or straight, any color, etc. I also agree with Kosar that jtc1984 has the best post.

 

[godsfavoritedog]

Hey Pirate Fan, you mean I beat out Beantownjim and CharlesManson and the like? Shit, I'm honored. I was just trying to point out how ridiculous it was for people in this thread to use those activities as examples of the exact opposite of gay by posting something even more ludicrous. Out-dumbassing them, if you'd prefer. Just being sarcastic, ya know? Of course I realize kids can be exposed to homosexuals and/or accosted by abusers anywhere. Actually, it seems like schools are the least safe place for kids lately. But anyway.......

I do agree with a lot of your post, even though I'm not a believer in god. Yourself, jtc, and dawgball seem like sensible people and I'm glad you posted in this thread. It helps counteract all the crap spewed by the less enlightened. :clap:

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

I think your forgetting what boyscouts little league was comapared to==

"Can't believe my narrow minded parents offered me choice of boyscouts or little league (took the latter) ---when others were getting to go see the leather and whips at gay day in San Fran. "

don't pat yourself on back too hard--after all your the one that said same sex parents are better than normal parents.

That ranks right up there with gay rights groups carrying "stop aids" signs at protest.

I'll go back to the live and let live--and agree with JTC 100% on

"As long as they don't impose their will on others and I do the same then I feel it's all fine."

As I said before --I don't care if you hang from ceiling fan with needles in arms and gerbils flying out your ass in your home--its your business--if you want to stroke your partners stalk on beach in front of others--thats a diff story.

 

[pirate fan]

Godsfavoritedog, I said that only because you sound more reasonable and weren't just spewing out hate like Manson and Bean. They post to get reactions and start confrontation, you have more reasoning behind your arguements and even though I may not agree, I can at least respect your opinion, unlike the other two you mention. My apology for not catching onto your sarcasism.

 

[godsfavoritedog]

don't pat yourself on back too hard--after all your the one that said same sex parents are better than normal parents.

No, I never said same sex parents would be better than "normal" parents. What I said was they make better parents than narrow-minded hypocrites. And I'll stand by that. I think a kid would be better off being raised by a loving same sex couple than have to be subjected to the kind of hate-filled dogma some have posted. Neither behavior is normal but one is damn sure more objectionable than the other.

Piratesfan - no harm done. Thank you!

 

[djv]

Maybe we just have to go backto I Love Lucey.

 

[MrChristo]

This is not a fair comment to lump all religious people together no more than it is to lump all homosexuals as sex mongers. There are examples of both, but they are certainly not the norm, imo.

One idea to take into consideration is just because someone thumps their Bible more than the next religious guy does not make him more "religious".

You are right, dawgball...That was a pretty big generalisation, so I apologise.

How about I amend it to, "The more literal a person seems to take pasasages in the bible, the more likely he is to ignore certain others."

...or I could just drop it all together!

 

[forest29]

hey Kosar, you are close

homosexuality is a disease. it was defined as such until the psychiatric profession was sabotaged in the 1970's

why such a behavior so detrimental to one's health should be glorifed is pathetic....and not only pathetic, but is liable for twisting natural behavior and health in our youth/families by portraying such behavior as "normal"....any secular behaviorist/psychodynamic theory in any honest intellectual discussion would label this as an insult on human health

even you agnostic/athiests/intellectual-elitist-arrogant-know-it-alls should be able to see past that one

Dude, you're an ill-informed idiot. What? Did gun-toting leather queens hijack the 1972 APA conference and force the Freudian Ivory-tower types to their knees (pun intended)?

You obviously know NOTHING about the history and practice of psychiatry/psychology, the DSM (probably don't even know what that is...) or the VOLUMES of independent research that indicates that being lesbian or gay is neither abnormal nor deviant nor chosen for most individuals. Add that to the mountain of research from the past two decades or so whose findings CLEARY indicate (and have been replicated many times--do you know what THAT means?) that the children of gay or lesbian parents fare no worse in ANY respect that those of hetero parents. Mind you, many of these findings came at a time in our culture in which it was assumed by a large portion of folks, including researchers, that gays WERE deviant and that their children must therefore suffer/fare worse than kids from straight unions...the findings of many well-respected reasearchers actually stood in stark contrast to what they and the culture at large had assumed and what they hypothesized they would find!

Unless you've got a Ph.D., Psy.D. or M.D. tucked away somewhere in that pathetic, homophobic pea of a brain you've got there, don't come in here and talk about "secular behaviorist/ psychodynamic theory" like you've got a clue about any of it.

If you were such a terrific psychdynamic theorist you would know that in fact FREUD HIMSELF (perhaps you are aware that he is the father of psychodynamism...), in a FAMOUS letter to a mother concerned about her gay son, told her that he was what he was, that his homosexulaity was "nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation, it cannot be classified as an illness...Many highly respectable individuals of ancient and modern times have been homosexuals, several of the greatest men among them (Plato, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, etc.). It is a great injustice to persecute homosexuality as a crime, and cruelty too." THOSE QUOTATION MARKS MEANS THAT IS WHAT FREUD HIMSELF SAID. NOT AN ILLNESS.

Get a grip.

P.S. Do you love my avatar or what ya big homophobic ahole? I thought so, you big hypocritical ahole.

:mj07:

 

[SixFive]

Maybe being gay is a sin, I don't know, I'll leave it up to God to judge, it is not my place or anyone else's in this world.

I think it's pretty clearly laid out in the Bible the answer to this question. There's nothing wrong with saying a said activity is wrong. Whether it be lying, stealing, etc. It is wrong to "judge" whether a person is going to heaven or hell. That's misunderstood by many Christians and leads to a lot of passivity.

As I said before --I don't care if you hang from ceiling fan with needles in arms and gerbils flying out your ass in your home--its your business--if you want to stroke your partners stalk on beach in front of others--thats a diff story.

:mj07: :mj07:

 

[pharlap]

You obviously know NOTHING about the history and practice of psychiatry/psychology, the DSM (probably don't even know what that is...) or the VOLUMES of independent research that indicates that being lesbian or gay is neither abnormal nor deviant nor chosen for most individuals.
:mj07:

I may be wrong, but I thought the research had found that being male and gay was essentially a predisposition (or a "disease" depending on your point of view I suppose), but being a lesbian was a lifestyle choice. Indeed, I have heard many lesbians come out and say that it is a personal choice (e.g. I am sure some carpet munching basketball player said something along these lines recently).

 

[forest29]

I may be wrong, but I thought the research had found that being male and gay was essentially a predisposition (or a "disease" depending on your point of view I suppose), but being a lesbian was a lifestyle choice. Indeed, I have heard many lesbians come out and say that it is a personal choice (e.g. I am sure some carpet munching basketball player said something along these lines recently).

Predisposition=Disease? Are you kidding me? :mj07:

You're probably predisposed to be straight, to eat, to breathe...it's probably all right there on your genetic code. All those your diseases?

"nor chosen for most individuals" That's what I said. Some folks do in fact chose a male or a female partner based on many many factors. To answer your question, what the research indicates (again, we're talking about lots of research over many many years) is that sexuality lies on a continuum, from exclusively hetero to exclusively gay/lesbian, with lots of middle ground. Some folks are attracted to both men and women, but have what is called an "affectional orientation," which means they are sexually comfortable with men and women but form their primary (love) attachments to either one gender or the other.

Not trying to be a smartass pharlap, and you are right in one respect, women in general do show more flexibility (if you will) with regard to where they fall on the continuum. More men than women are either totally gay or totally straight.

 

[pharlap]

Predisposition=Disease? Are you kidding me? :mj07:

You're probably predisposed to be straight, to eat, to breathe...it's probably all right there on your genetic code. All those your diseases?

"nor chosen for most individuals" That's what I said. Some folks do in fact chose a male or a female partner based on many many factors. To answer your question, what the research indicates (again, we're talking about lots of research over many many years) is that sexuality lies on a continuum, from exclusively hetero to exclusively gay/lesbian, with lots of middle ground. Some folks are attracted to both men and women, but have what is called an "affectional orientation," which means they are sexually comfortable with men and women but form their primary (love) attachments to either one gender or the other.

Not trying to be a smartass pharlap, and you are right in one respect, women in general do show more flexibility (if you will) with regard to where they fall on the continuum. More men than women are either totally gay or totally straight.

Does that continuum have a definite ending before we can call it a disease? Do some people feel affection for animals, or children, but form their primary love attachment to an inflatable doll?

 

[forest29]

I'm happy to clarify for you Pharlap. The continuum only relatess to hetero, bi and homosexuality. It has nothing to do with the other things you mentioned. But to answer your question...Pedophilia and bestiality are in fact recognized as psychiatric disorders, not disease. Homosexuality is not recognized to be either.

Bestiality and pedophilia are referred to as paraphilias and are listed along with exhibitionism, masochism/sadism, fetishism (the blow-up doll would fall into this category) and voyuerism in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the tool used by all physicians/psychiatrists/psychologists and other clinicians across the United States to classify and treat everything from depression to drug addiction).

So these activities are recognized as "Mental Disorders," not diseases. Disease typically refers to a bodily dysfunction of some sort, not a mental disorder. And although some mental disorders are also classified as diseases (for example, alcoholism) they involve a problem with the body (in the case of alcoholism/drug addiction, the bodily impact is physical addiction, so---disease).

Hope that clears it up for you.

 

[bjfinste]

Unless you've got a Ph.D., Psy.D. or M.D. tucked away somewhere in that pathetic, homophobic pea of a brain you've got there, don't come in here and talk about "secular behaviorist/ psychodynamic theory" like you've got a clue about any of it.

Shouldn't have posted this

 

[pharlap]

I'm happy to clarify for you Pharlap. The continuum only relatess to hetero, bi and homosexuality. It has nothing to do with the other things you mentioned. But to answer your question...Pedophilia and bestiality are in fact recognized as psychiatric disorders, not disease. Homosexuality is not recognized to be either.

Bestiality and pedophilia are referred to as paraphilias and are listed along with exhibitionism, masochism/sadism, fetishism (the blow-up doll would fall into this category) and voyuerism in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the tool used by all physicians/psychiatrists/psychologists and other clinicians across the United States to classify and treat everything from depression to drug addiction).

So these activities are recognized as "Mental Disorders," not diseases. Disease typically refers to a bodily dysfunction of some sort, not a mental disorder. And although some mental disorders are also classified as diseases (for example, alcoholism) they involve a problem with the body (in the case of alcoholism/drug addiction, the bodily impact is physical addiction, so---disease).

Hope that clears it up for you.

Seems a rather arbitrary and judgemental continuum. But I suppose it suits the purpose for which it was designed.

As for gays on my TV...I'm with Ned here.

http://www.bizinger.com/Audio/nedgaylesbochannel.html

 

[dr. freeze]

Just very disturbed.

lets keep personal information off the forum please

there was NO science involved in removing homosexuality from a sexual DISORDER to otherwise other than political correctness' sabotage on psychiatry and the DSM

a human function is to reproduce. A pathological disorder is one that harms function. Any way you look at it, homosexualtiy harms human function and thus is should justly be classified as a disorder as is pedophilia. Along with the failure to reproduce, many sexual diseases have sprung up because of the bad hygiene mentioned in the title of this thread that runs in the act of male homosexuality. I just don't see how the burden of proof lies in showing that act to NOT be normal rather than normal.

Many diseases have genetic basis, so whether or not it has one (and despite your babblling, there is no good study linking it to genetics that draws any sort of definitive conclusion), that is not the issue.

the DSM was sabotaged, and any historian of pyschiatry knows it.

"homophobia" and "hypocrite" are ridiculous accusations which carry no meaning in any relevant context. I can at least find some meaning in someone telling me I have "neanderthal morals". But calling someone "homophobic" because they are against homosexuality and that they think it is wrong is nonsensical. Then of course, the real neanderthal links this to some sort of "fear"? What??? Absolutely absurd.

Traditional values and morals have been assaulted in this country for nearly 50 years now, so it is a little late and also a lost cause to fight against. And America is going down with it sadly as our leaders reflect the virtue of our country. Sadly, and admittedly, Dr. Freeze does not measure up to any kind of greatness in the moral department, but that does not warrant me or anyone else lowering the bar even further. Nor does it warrant me or anyone else throwing away our conscience and moral code -- whatever that may be, because it is impossible to live by.

 

[forest29]

he did recently graduate from (deleted) Medical School in (deleted) and is doing his residency now.

:scared JEEEEESUS, that's scary. Let's hope he isn't specializing in Psychiatry, he could really F--K some folks up. Sounds to me like he's particularly well-suited to a career in proctology. moon1

So while morally he can seem like a neanderthal, he is a highly-educated individual. Just very disturbed.

:mj07: :clap: Well said.

 

[bjfinste]

Freeze- edited it out of my post. I shouldn't have posted that, and I apologize.