You don't do far or ugly? What the hell is wrong with you man? Think you're normal or something?Originally Posted by Hagbard Celine
Banned
You don't do far or ugly? What the hell is wrong with you man? Think you're normal or something?
Gunny's nightmare
They ain't? Shit I don't think so.
Well she's about 5-8, long stawberry blonde hair, used to model actually. a bit old for you though- turned 40 last summer. She might use you for a boy-toy though.
Southpark Liberal
Your "proof" is constituted of little more than the skewed opinion of right wing-nut demagogues.
Let me offer some facts to deflate you overheated rhetoric...
<center><a href=http://www.apahelpcenter.org/articles/article.php?id=31>Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality</a></center>
The article addresses every one of your issues, and puts them to rest.
Fascism has come to America, wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. His name is Trump.
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. - George Orwell...The New GOP motto.
Gunny's nightmare
From your link:
Opinion, not fact.Is Sexual Orientation a Choice?
No, human beings cannot choose to be either gay or straight. For most people, sexual orientation emerges in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.
By the way, the APA is the largest organization of Queer Enablers on the planet.
Southpark Liberal
The "opinion" of the APA is based on research...repeatable, independently verifiable, peer reviewed, research.
Your statement, however is based upon nothing but your prejudices, ignorance and gross misinformation.
Fascism has come to America, wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. His name is Trump.
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. - George Orwell...The New GOP motto.
Gunny's nightmare
The current opinion of the APA is based on pressure from queer groups. Pshrinks used to cure gays but were forced out of that, in spite of scientific evidence that some queers can be cured.
Southpark Liberal
Ah, more of your uninformed, ignorant, prejudiced, unsubstantiated opinion...Unless, of course, you have citations to prove your assertions.
Last edited by bullypulpit; 12-13-2007 at 11:55 AM. Reason: punctuation
Fascism has come to America, wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. His name is Trump.
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. - George Orwell...The New GOP motto.
Banned
Hot damn glock... she sounds perfect for ME! I love red heads. Hook me up...
Senior Member
Allow me to troll in here... I've been barred from two sites because of my position on gays.In another thread I have been attacked as having "issues" because I have a adverse opinion of queers and post my opinion often on the queer threads. The fact is that I do it because I don't like being lied to, and the entire queer "industry" is based on several huge lies. I would argue that the queer enablers are the ones with "issues", as they don't mind being lied to, and in fact perpetuate the lies.
Some of the Big Lies about Homosexuality. It is:
1. normal
2. natural
3. healthy
4. 10% of the population
5. not a choice
6. moral
7. queers are no more likely to be child molesters
Any that I missed?
My position is as follows: Gays are not normal, they are abnormal because the normal is to be strait.
Gay is natural in that it occurs naturally in nature... it is a alteration of the gonads in the developing fetus.
Gays can be healthy but they are prone to unhealthy lifestyles and are generally more likely to have multiple partners that promotes poor health as it does in straits that live these lifestyles.
Some gay people are not gay but were brainwashed to believe they are gay.
Here is where I refer back to my first point: Gays are not normal, they are abnormal because the normal is to be strait. If you are abnormal then you should not celebrate being abnormal... if you had two noses or four ears it is not time to have a fucking parade.
When I was growing up I thought all gays recognized they were abnormal and that is why they all moved to Greenwich Village and to San Francisco so they could be amongst "their own kind" so they could not be faced by their abnormality. Later my dad told me to watch out for queers in the bus station bathrooms and he was right. I automatically thought, hey these gays ran out of money to their queer heaven and bigger than Stuttgart they all have a gay bar near the bus station across America... some sick puppies...
There is nothing to celebrate when one is gay... get on the fucking bus and complete the trip... you are abnormal and you deserve to live free among people of "your kind" as do straits deserve to live free among people of their kind.
"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers."
---Thomas Jefferson (or as Al Sharpton calls him: Grandpappy)
Banned
Allow me glock... I've read about enough of bully's insults and faggot enabling lies....
Intimidating the APA
"homosexuals have gone beyond the plane of defensiveness and now argue that their deviancy is a 'desirable, noble, preferable way of life.'"[69]
"[I]n a deliberately planned campaign of intimidation and disruption, the U.S. National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF), declaring that 'psychiatry is the enemy incarnate,'[25] actually managed to force a 1973 convention of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to declare homosexuality, theretofore defined as deviant, 'a normal condition.'"[G374] It should be noted that only half of the APA members voted, and of these, only 58 percent agreed with the change.[G375] It should also be noted, that the study by the NIMH task-force which recommended the change did not include psychoanalytic clinicians.[R143]
"Only three psychiatrists were participants [in the NIMH study]. One of them, Dr. Judd Marmor, had for years espoused the view that homosexuality is normal. The chairman, a psychologist, Evelyn Hooker, Ph.D., was of the same long-time conviction. The Kinsey-Hopkins faction was represented by Paul Gebhard, Ph.D., Director of the Institute for Sex, Indiana University, and John Money, Ph.D., from Johns Hopkins, a prime mover among the proponents for transsexual surgery."[s86]
"The consequences of this action are of a formidable nature. Not only will the homosexual be victimised, but the entire area of research in the development of gender identity will be damaged. Young men and women with relatively minor sexual fears of the opposite sex will be led with equanimity by psychiatrists and other members of the medical profession who buy this bill of boods into a self-despising pattern and lifestyle. Homosexuality will henceforth be touted as simply an acceptable variation on the norm. Adolescents, nearly all of whom suffer some sort of uncertainty as to identity, will be discouraged from assuming that one form of gender identity (one's own birth-right) is preferable to another.[74] And those persons who already have a homosexual problem will be discouraged from fighting their way out of a self-destructive fantasy, discouraged from learning to accept themselves as male or female, discouraged from all of those often painful but necessary courses that allow us all to function as reasonable and participating individuals in a co-operating society." [s89]
"Even four years later, a survey of 2500 psychiatrists found that 69 percent believed homosexuality was 'a pathological adaptation.' About 18 percent disagreed; 13 percent were uncertain."[G375] The decision was the result of political pressure, not expert consensus.
"And homosexuals tended to feel the same way about themselves. About 25 percent believed their behaviour was an emotional disorder, and 37 percent answered they they were 'emotionally disturbed.' Young male homosexuals (14-21) commit suicide at two to three times the rate of heterosexuals (Paediatrics, June 1991). For all ages, their rate is six times that of heterosexuals."[G375]
"many members of our profession still privately express the opinion that homosexual development is not normal. The 1973 ruling did not resolve the issue --it simply silenced 80 years of psychoanalytic observation."[13]
Politically Correct Research
And what has followed the ruling? Pseudo-scientific garbage written by homosexuals, citing their own work or that of other homosexuals, trying to justify their behaviour which, instead of being based on scientific tradition, is based on political dictate. Post-1973 research is a vast sterile wasteland peppered only by abortive attempts, for how can 22 years of research, stemming from political dictate, even begin to compare with over 80 years of impartial scientific inquiry? It can't, and it shows.
To give one example, I mention the Lavey experiment: a gay physician compared the brains of heterosexual and homosexual men. Never mind the fact that there are large differences in brains between individuals and he used a relatively small sample size, he also has to contend with the fact that many of his "gay" subjects died of AIDS --which frequently causes brain deterioration and that brains literally can change according to use.
This author has worked in the medical community, and knows that there is no medically-acceptable way of "normalising" and comparing brains, let alone functional "parts" of brains. This pathetic and morbid image --the image of a lone homosexual slicing up the brains of his formerly diseased and now dead friends in an effort to justify his behaviour, makes a more vivid statement about post-1973 research than all the words I could ever write in a lifetime.
And how do you identify "pro-homosexual" research? Through the use of politically mandated phrases like "sexual orientation" --which implicitly assume that there is more than one kind of sexuality. Such phrases, when used in an argument about homosexuality, beg the question in favour of the mandated outcome. Likewise, the word "gay": It is a sad attempt to pretend that the homosexual condition is a somehow happier existence than that of common man.
"In 1973 a movement first spearheaded by Vice President Marmor of the A.P.A. and other psychiatrists in league with the Gay Activists Alliance, the Mattachine Society, and the Daughters of Bilitis (the women's arm of the Mattachine Society), undertook to influence the Nomenclature Committee of the association to delete 'homosexuality' from the diagnostic nomenclature."[s88] More recently, homosexuals have been attempting to ADD the word "Homophobia" to the nomenclature --in an attempt to suggest that those who OPPOSE homosexuals are mentally ill.
Another recent study (not worth referencing), is one in which "homophobic" males were subjected to "gay" pornography while a "peter-meter" read their level of arousal. Typically, this study is summarised by saying that it "found that homophobic men became aroused when viewing gay pornography."
Yeah, right... Since the study was intended to prove the existence of homophobia, it is plain question-begging --assuming what you wish to prove-- to categorise certain males as "homophobic" and to then subject them to a test for arousal. The screening method (for "homophobes") could easily be tailored to eliminate problematic individuals.
Also, there is the question of believability: What real homo-hater would consent to have a device attached to his penis, and to be subjected to homosexual pornography? --especially when you consider that the study was probably administered by homosexuals.
In addition to this, we might ask what exactly is meant by "gay" pornography --how we are certain that these images are what gay men prefer --as opposed to homosexual images tailored to arouse normal men; And we might ask what are their comparative reactions to viewing normal pornography.
It is conceivable that the average person might very well become aroused (not noticeably to themselves) by any graphic images, and people who hate homosexuals may very well have a greater overall arousal rate in general. But Homosexuals PREFER sex with other men, and any man whose reaction to homosexual pornography is less than that to normal pornography can not be a homosexual (in the closet or otherwise).
On top of this, the researchers themselves admit: "anxiety has been shown to enhance arousal and erection," and so it is also possible that "a response to homosexual stimuli [in these men] is a function of the threat condition rather than sexual arousal per se. These competing notions can and should be evaluated by future research." And then there's the sample size: 35 "homophobic" men, and 29 "nonhomophobic" men.
Another question which could be asked is just what sort of reputable institution would facilitate a study involving "gay" pornography, penis-meters, and such shoddy, politically-inspired science? (Hint: The University of Georgia.) It probably isn't any place you'd want to send your kids.
The use of terms like "sexual orientation", "gay", and "homophobia", is a form of political pandering to "gay approval". Any so-called "scientist" who resorts to such linguistic trickery or pandering should be recognised as having compromised his scientific objectivity. The correct psychoanalytic term for these people is "homosexual" and what they do is have "intercourse" (although a more accurate term for their practices would be "mutual masturbation") --NOT "sex". All of this linguistic nonsense results from homosexual anxiety about their own behaviour --trying to make the unpalatable more palatable by renaming it.
http://members.tripod.com/british-nation/illness.htm
Gunny's nightmare
You'd like her, but she's high maintenance, both fiscally and emotionally.Hot damn glock... she sounds perfect for ME! I love red heads. Hook me up...
Hahaha! LULzzzzz
Aha! She's a cougah! I love redheads, but I prefer 'em to be young-n-perky.
Southpark Liberal
Let me tell you something about your "source". It's a British ultra right-wing website which is just a gnat's ass to the left of Hitler. The bibliography for their little screed is comprised mostly papers from the 1950's and 60's...long since dated and superceded...with a few more current scholarly articles with sentences taken out of context to lend an air of credibility to the crap this piece really is. But you already knew that, didn't you.
Oh, and you really need to stop posting entire copyrighted articles to the board. That's copyright infringement, and I don't think Jimmy wants to get shut down because of your stupidity.
Fascism has come to America, wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. His name is Trump.
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. - George Orwell...The New GOP motto.
Registered Conservative
Bully, you'd call any source that disputes your view as "ultra right-wing".
PRAIRIE FIRE by William Ayers: Obama's guide to destory America
"Maybe I missed that part of the Constitution"--Joe Steel
You can't spell Liberals without Lies.
Banned
I knew you'd deny, deny, deny. You and liesmatter make a fine pair of dunces that spend far more energy denying the truth than accepting it. Whatever... you're the last person here that I'd try and convince. I know it's impossible. You're too far gone. Liberalism has poisoned your brain to the practical point of worthlessness.
If you clicked the link you'd readily see that what I posted here was but a snippet of the "entire article." Your left wing fever to shut down the truth about homosexuality is real apparent here, so give it a rest pinhead.
Posting Permissions
