RE: Talk about science denial (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


DomKen -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 4:07:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

of all gay, lesbian, and gay-affirming psychologists, with no dissenting viewpoints allowed onto the panel. And almost every one of them had a long, proud, and well-known history of gay psychological activism. Yes, this was the APA’s handpicked task force to investigate whether gays could change their sexual orientation. ~Source

I clicked your source link, and it took me to an Amazon page for a A Queer Thing Happened to America: And What a Long, Strange Trip It's Been by Michael L. Brown. Is the quote from the book or from the webpage?

Brown's author page on Amazon includes an interesting quote: "My heart beats to see a gospel-based moral and cultural revolution -- in my lifetime -- and I'm praying that you will be part of this Jesus Revolution too."

Kirata wouldn't be supporting the completely discredited exgay therapy movement. Or an actual anti gay hate group.
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/profiles/michael-brown




DomKen -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 4:09:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

If the therapy is out there then parents will force it on their kids. How many times does this have to be said? How many kids have to die or wind up on the streets before we stop this crap?



So we shouldn't allow anyone to try it because some parents might abuse it? Sorry but it still sounds like you approve of freedom of choice only if its something you think they should choose to do.

There is no science saying it works. So it is simply abuse of children and defrauding of self hating adults. How is that a good thing?




Kirata -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 4:11:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Once again, if idiots like you insist that these sorts of things be available then parents will force their gay children into them and that way leads to runaway and suicide. Better and safer to simply ban these sorts of "therapy" out right. If homosexuals choose not to have sex they don't need special therapy to do that.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. ~William Pitt

K.




Kirata -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 4:17:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

I clicked your source link, and it took me to an Amazon page for a A Queer Thing Happened to America: And What a Long, Strange Trip It's Been by Michael L. Brown. Is the quote from the book or from the webpage?

The quote was from the book. I deleted the link in favor of another because of the author's background, though facts remains facts no matter who states them, and then decided to leave the second link out too. But if you're interested, it was to a rebuttal of the APA's claims (here) which makes largely the same assertion among other more direct criticisms. As usual, there are two sides to every story.

For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. ~Arthur C. Clarke (Clarke's Fourth Law)

K.




Kirata -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 4:31:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

Is there a lot of science backing up the efficacy of gay-to-straight therapies?

Not that I know of, but would you expect there to be? I would expect that only a small portion of gays would want to change, and only a small portion of them would be successful. But that's not the point, is it? Banning even the attempt is an attack on individual freedom and a suppression of science. We should tolerate this why? Ken claims it's necessary, because otherwise parents will inflict misery on their children by forcing them into reparative therapies. But will they? How many parents would do that? And how many would succeed? My parents never had much luck forcing me to do something I didn't want to do.

K.




PeonForHer -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 4:35:01 PM)

Nah, feck it. Carry on.




Kirata -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 4:38:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. ~William Pitt


Wasn't that line cited recently by an anti-gunner in a gun thread? Can't quite remember.

I doubt it would have been an anti-gunner. One instance was me, but in a different context (here).

K.




dcnovice -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 4:40:44 PM)

quote:

Not that I know of, but would you expect there to be?

Well yes, actually. If something's being offered as a medical/psychological treatment, I would hope there was some scientific basis to it.




DomKen -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 5:25:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

Is there a lot of science backing up the efficacy of gay-to-straight therapies?

Not that I know of, but would you expect there to be? I would expect that only a small portion of gays would want to change, and only a small portion of them would be successful. But that's not the point, is it? Banning even the attempt is an attack on individual freedom and a suppression of science. We should tolerate this why? Ken claims it's necessary, because otherwise parents will inflict misery on their children by forcing them into reparative therapies. But will they? How many parents would do that? And how many would succeed? My parents never had much luck forcing me to do something I didn't want to do.

K.


lots.
http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/the-lies-and-dangers-of-reparative-therapy

But even one dead kid is one too many




Kirata -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 5:44:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

But even one dead kid is one too many

Ah, the old "one dead kid" argument. On that basis we should outlaw swimming pools. Lose the clown suit, bozo. All you're trying to do is imply that anyone who disagrees with you wants kids to die. Choke on it.

K.





dcnovice -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 5:50:53 PM)

FR

A few things from a recent Newsweek story on this caught my eye:

Reparative therapy—more often called “conversion therapy” in the scientific literature—has been declared invalid by nearly all the relevant medical organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the World Health Organization and the National Association of Social Workers.

* * *

In actuality, the laws in California and New Jersey have not banned conversion therapy in entirety. What they have done, however, is prohibited it for minors. (Emphasis mine.)

* * *

California and New Jersey, meanwhile, have followed a professional trend in recent years, where advocates have become outspoken about the risk of long-term psychological damages that can be wrought on minors forced to undergo conversion therapy by their parents or communities. One study, for example, found that conversion therapy patients are six times more likely than their homosexual peers to report depression and eight times more likely to attempt suicide.

* * *

Many former members of the “ex-gay” community that rose to prominence in the mid-to-late 1990s agree. “I have met over 1,000 people who have been harmed and damaged by this kind of therapy,” John Paulk told Newsweek. Paulk is a former leader of one of the most influential ex-gay groups, Exodus International who has since divorced his wife and now lives as an openly gay man.




PeonForHer -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 6:05:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

I doubt it would have been an anti-gunner. One instance was me, but in a different context (here).



It would have completely made sense to me as an anti-gunner's comment. Still, not germane to this thread.




dcnovice -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 6:16:26 PM)

FR

Here's the language from the Texas GOP's draft platform pertaining to homosexuality:

Homosexuality must not be presented as an acceptable alternative
lifestyle, in public policy, nor should family be redefined to
include homosexual couples. We believe there should be no
granting of special legal entitlements or creation of special status
for homosexual behavior, regardless of state of origin.
Additionally, we oppose any criminal or civil penalties against
those who oppose homosexuality out of faith, conviction, or
belief in traditional values. We recognize the legitimacy and value
of counseling which offers reparative therapy and treatment to
patients who are seeking escape from the homosexual lifestyle.
No laws or executive orders shall be imposed to limit or restrict
access to this type of therapy.


The opening sentence makes me wonder if the support for reparative therapy is truly or solely motivated by concern for individual freedom.




thompsonx -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 6:26:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

If the therapy is out there then parents will force it on their kids. How many times does this have to be said? How many kids have to die or wind up on the streets before we stop this crap?



So we shouldn't allow anyone to try it because some parents might abuse it? Sorry but it still sounds like you approve of freedom of choice only if its something you think they should choose to do.



Are there any other forms of poison that you feel parents should be allowed to force on their children?




PeonForHer -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 6:34:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

"Homosexuality must not be presented as an acceptable alternative
lifestyle, in public policy, nor should family be redefined to
include homosexual couples. We believe there should be no
granting of special legal entitlements or creation of special status
for homosexual behavior, regardless of state of origin.
Additionally, we oppose any criminal or civil penalties against
those who oppose homosexuality out of faith, conviction, or
belief in traditional values. We recognize the legitimacy and value
of counseling which offers reparative therapy and treatment to
patients who are seeking escape from the homosexual lifestyle.
No laws or executive orders shall be imposed to limit or restrict
access to this type of therapy."



That's just astonishing. What a bunch of children!




Kirata -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 6:45:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

Not that I know of, but would you expect there to be?

Well yes, actually. If something's being offered as a medical/psychological treatment, I would hope there was some scientific basis to it.

Well that sounds good, but lots of things were once considered to be unscientific woo. After all, what possible good can come from what amounts to little more than counting the hairs in your navel, or sticking needles into fictional "energy meridians" that don't exist? Would you have argued for arresting meditation teachers and shutting down acupuncture clinics until the priests of "science" gave their approval? Moreover, a law banning so-called "reparative therapy" creates a situation where an individual can seek help for virtually any possible unwanted sexual attraction except to partners of the same sex. That is just so transparently political that I'm surprised anyone would even question the fact.

K.




DomKen -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 6:48:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

But even one dead kid is one too many

Ah, the old "one dead kid" argument. On that basis we should outlaw swimming pools. Lose the clown suit, bozo. All you're trying to do is imply that anyone who disagrees with you wants kids to die. Choke on it.

Then explain what you want in some other way. I've given you several chances and it still boils down to you would let parents force kids into these programs which inevitably leads to dead kids. You oppose the bans in California and New Jersey but those bans are only against doing this to minors. 




Kirata -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 6:49:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

The opening sentence makes me wonder if the support for reparative therapy is truly or solely motivated by concern for individual freedom.

I'm sure it isn't, and the wording leaves little doubt. But the larger question of bans is a separate matter.

K.





dcnovice -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 6:50:49 PM)

quote:

Are there any other forms of poison that you feel parents should be allowed to force on their children?

Your question makes me wonder about other examples of parental involvement in a minor's care.

Last year, there was a case in Texas where parents tried to coerce their daughter into having an abortion (CNN). How do we feel about that?

Then there are the cases at the other end of the spectrum when parents--often for reasons of faith/morals, iirc--oppose their child's receiving a transfusion or other form of medical care. Is that their right? Even if doctors say the decision may kill the kid?




Kirata -> RE: Talk about science denial (6/12/2014 6:51:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

You oppose the bans in California and New Jersey but those bans are only against doing this to minors. 

I do? Well, that's interesting. I have no memory of saying so. But if we assume that you aren't hallucinating again, or just making shit up, I'm sure you can link the post for me. Thanks in advance.

K.





Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875