text:
NHS 'paying for ex-gay therapy'
Post your comment
Comments on this article are now closed.
Reader comments
these 'doctors' need to be struck off
I read this very good article in the independent. Does this not have a hint of an aryan race. Those that do not conform to an ideal must be changed? and if they do not change what next? Disgraceful. I noticed in the artcile that relgion was invovled somewhere along the way. People are born gay and should not be treated like this. FULL STOP
WHAT?!?!? That just takes the cake. It's bad enough that NARTH are selling their snake oil on these shores in the first place, but to have the NHS abused like this? Why haven't these therapists been struck off the register? It goes against every officially recognised psychological study.
Leave this kind of medieval crap to the evangelical churches, don't give it the false stamp of scientific authority.
What next? Witchdoctors on the NHS?
Here's a link to the independent article…
so thats why taxes are so high then….
That is disgusting. Trust the NHS who bad gays from donating blood to fund this sort of rubbish.
get those Yank cranks out of this country!
here is a link to the facebook group against this:
please join, as it is the best way we can have a strong voice.:D
Totally shocking that this should be happening in the UK in the 21st Century. It's shows, disturbingly, how out of touch some of the people that are there to help us are. They need to be either re-educted or if they refuse then struck off!
Yet again it also shows how the NHS wastes money that have could be much better spent!
I'm signing up for this tout suite darlings! I'll also be requesting that my eyes turn blue instead of green, I get to be right handed instead of left cos that's way more convenient, and that my no-no hole gets to be a bit pinker. I tell you it will be a relief because I am spending way too much on fashion and skin care to look this hot, and I better ask for an under developed personality to go with my new lady liscious loving peen.
So I can set myself up as a therapist to cure people from heterosexual attraction and religious belief then? and get NHS funding!
We need to save all these deviant heterosexuals and christians :D
if this is getting paid by the NHS then NICE has approved it therefore the Government of today (Labour, incase anyone's confused) support it.
Things are going to get a hell of allot worse for us Queers, I can feel it in my bones :-(
@ Abi: even gay Christians?
Homophobia is only one of the issues. The point is that unscientific hokum should NOT be paid for with our tax money, especially in today's public spending climate. Witchcraft, voodoo, homeopathy, 'healing' crystals, 'reparative therapy', tarot cards – they should all be sent back to the the fairground booth or the Church hall and we shouldn't be paying for them.
Apart from that, the fact that there are still takers for this homophobic mumbo-jumbo is a sad indicator of a society which can still teach gay people not to value their own sexuality.
This is outrageous – how can these people be getting NHS referrals and funding? Good for Patrick Studwick for writing this article.
Are ex-gay 'therapists' always religious people?
A very interesting article. I'd hope that the vast majority of people reading it would realise how stupid and pathetic the 'therapy' sounds. Using that same ridiculous method, I could attempt to 'cure' people of being straight.
I also object to the deceit of advsing the patient to say they're depressed so that the therapist can get be sure of 4 sessions with their victim, all paid for by the NHS. Disgusting.
I hope any therapists who act in this manner are immediately struck off.
Rehan – interesting question. I've no idea but I'd say 'yes' because such a vendetta has to be justified by something – god is the perfect excuse for sucg bigotry. I also think that many such people are suffering from internalised homophobia.
This is outrageous. These quacks do not deserve to be pushing their hocus pokus here!
Interesting that these practitioners are advising people to lie to their GP´s about their ´problem´..
"I´m actually going to fu-k you, but tell your GP that you think you might have prostate cancer, then the NHS will pay for it!"
As with the popes visit, this has no business being funded by the taxpayer!
"The newspaper claimed that the co-ordination of the American 'ex-gay' movement is inspiring UK therapists to seek more credibility through research and government funding."
"Gay writer Patrick Studwick posed as a man struggling with his sexual orientation and visited two therapists after attending a talk in London by Dr Joseph Nicolosi, the founder of the American National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH)."
"One therapist, named only as Lynne, told him he was experiencing "same-sex attraction" because emotionally, parts of him had not developed."
"Strudwick was told that it was "very likely" he was sexually abused by a family member as a child. He was also told that HIV-positive people can be healed by the power of prayer."
"When Strudwick asked how a friend could be referred to her for help with homosexuality, she said: "I think it would be better to say anxiety and depression [to a GP] initially and then we can take it from there."
Are we not missing the point that any 'ex-gay therapist' who advises clients to seek treatment from any NHS doctor under the premise of depression and anxiety, so they can secure funding is committing a fraud. Any such 'ex-gay therapist' if reported to the NHS or police would face a criminal prosecution for fraud and faces being struck from any professional body they belong to.
I urge Patrick Studwick to report this 'therapist' to the NHS and the police.
"He was also told that HIV-positive people can be healed by the power of prayer."
Indeed…. and that is precisely why religion dominated Africa, with only 14.7% of the world's population, is estimated to have more than 60% of the global AIDS-infected population.
"The physical act for male homosexuals is physically damaging and is the main reason in this country for AIDS/HIV. It is also perverse."
And this one, clearly he found his scientific qualification in a bin behind the head office of an internet university.
This is just another case of Lorenzo's Oil without the happy ending. Appalling these people can legally operate this sham in a civilised country.
strike. them. off.
then name and shame these dangerous charlatans.
Excellent article. This is something that the government needs to clamp down on. And not just on the NHS, either. Any medical practitioner who advocates this kind of brainwashing should have their license revoked.
Also, why doesn't the Independent article have a comments section? If it does, I sure can't find it. Do they not open all of their articles for comment?
I think you're right, Iris (15), that internalised homophobia being cultivated with depressing efficiency by the religious bigots.
I for one don't belive this report at all. If this was April 1st? No it's just the silly season for this kind of hoax Boys 'n Girls.
Well now we really know who the "PHYSCO" Therapists are
I assure you, Brian (22) this kind of thing is happening, as it's pretty prevalent here in the states too. I've seen the kind of damage this sort of thing can do to not only a person (My loving boyfriend still has issues with the 'repair' they tried to pull on him) but to a community.
I hope that this sort of thing is blown wide open for you all over there, and that these sort of 'doctors' are, as you all put it 'struck from the register'.
Where's your tolerance and sympathy for any gays/lesbians who
are truly unhappy with their sexual inclinations/behavior/lifestyle and who would truly want to
change to a heterosexual person?
There must be some individuals who deeply dislike being homosexual (and not only because of negative pressure from society, which is too often claimed to be the cause of depression/self-loathing, unhappiness, etc.}
Sexuality is an intensely strong human drive, and if one feels
that being homosexual is wrong/not desired/ etc. these
people should have choices to change their feelings/beliefs/
behavior, and there are examples of people who have made that
change and are happy being heterosexuals and do not fall back
into homosexuality.
I'm certain the process is difficult and must be handled by fully qualified psychiatrists or those trained in sexual behaviors
that patients do not desire.
I have seen lots of deeply unhappy hetrosexuals who worry about their sexuality, so should we cure them also hank?
Lets face it the majority of deviant behaviour is carried out by heterosexuals!
He surfaces every now and then with his trollery!
Hank: Based on your principles, people of colour that don't like it should be able to go to a hospital and be "recoloured".
We all know that is a stupid analogy, but the concept is the same. If you are gay, like it or lump it, you are stuffed. You either accommodate the fact and get on with your life, or lie about it have sex with women, get married and hope some idiot quack can 'cure' you. Of course we all know that's not going to happen, and sooner or later they will be out in some public park on their knees.
"This is outrageous – how can these people be getting NHS referrals and funding?"
The same reason transgender people get referrals – NHS customers ask for it.
I don't understand why some people think they have the wrong sexuality – but I don't understand why some people think they have the wrong body either.
Hey Abi1975 you said, "I have seen lots of deeply unhappy hetrosexuals who worry about their sexuality, so should we cure them also hank?
Lets face it the majority of deviant behaviour is carried out by heterosexuals!"
I don't understand your point.
If a person has a sexual problem whether hetero or homo, sure
they should see expert help to resolve it. Nobody should live
with an unwanted sexual behavior. There are treatments for
every type of sexual behavior..
My point is that any person who's unhappy with their sex life,
should be able to seek qualified help — what your attitude is
"once homosexual — always homosexual" — there's no hope! What
a defeatist attitude toward a human life.
Hey RobN, you said, Hank: Based on your principles, people of colour that don't like it should be able to go to a hospital and be "recoloured".
I know you're being facetious, but my point follows that since
Mendel's time, our knowledge of the mechanisms of genetic inheritance has grown tremendously.
I quote from a medical website, "Researchers have identified more than 5,000 genetically inherited human diseases and abnormalities…
It continues, "However, it is important to keep in mind that there are at least 18,000 human traits controlled by genes that follow the basic Mendelian rules of inheritance."
My question is why hasn't there been a gene discovered that
shows a "gay gene?" I'm sure there's been a great deal of
trials to find such "evidence."
Without that sort of medical/biological evidence you cannot
state that homosexuals inheret their homosexuality in such a manner that it's not possible to change one's sexual preference/desires/behavior, etc.
Nothing that you offer carries the scientific credibility/studies
that make your point that homosexuality is indelibly imprinted/ingrained in a human being before/at birth.
I'm familiar with all the so-called studies done in the past and
none of them have been accepted by the scientific community as
definitive in your favor.
Also, I don't know what the below comment is supposed to mean, as
I'm interested in asking questions and getting answers
He surfaces every now and then with his trollery! "
by Simon Murphy
So the NHS is expected to pay for people who aren't happy with their sex (gender) to have drastic, and often traumatic and irreversible, surgery. But it's deemed to be a waste of NHS money when someone seeks therapy to change their "sexual orientation" (i.e. become "sexually mature" and able to reproduce, aka heterosexual)!
I was listening to Radio 4 the other week. There was a programme about a man who'd had surgery to become a woman. This happened several decades ago. S/he said that it was something that they regretted every day. After waking up without a penis, the day after the op, he realised that he'd made one hell of a mistake! Wow… The thing is, this person is not a lone voice – many, many transgendered people bitterly regret surgery, and spend the rest of their lives in a living, and traumatic, hell. The vast majority of men who have had corrective therapy for homosexuality, though, don't claim to have been traumatised by the process. The only ones that do are those who were put through gay-to-straight therapy against their will, and no one denies that would have been a very wrong thing to do anyway.
There are many men and women who do not want to be homosexual. They see it as a dysfunction and want help to change. This is not because of culture, religion, or society…It's just what they want. Even if it were for any of the above reasons, what's wrong with that? If someone's faith is more important to them than "being gay" then why shouldn't they want to seek change? I think it's evil to deny these many people the help THEY want, and force them to accept what they see, and what is in fact an artificial lifestyle – based on a "sinful" (i.e. unhealthy) sexual attraction.
Britain has become a mad, mad place recently…many people can't wait for the inevitable backlash, so that some sanity is finally restored!
Basic argument: if it's ok for the NHS to fund gender re-modification, then surely it's ok for it to pay for therapies designed to help modify sexuality!? To deny one group the help they feel they need is just fascistic.
Hank: And it costs us nothing to convert 'him' back to homosexuality again ;)
There is no scientific evidence to show that sexual orientation can be changed. http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19826612.800-editorial-why-homosexuality-is-not-unnatural.html
There is scientific evidence to show that sexuality is hard wired at birth. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3008-homosexuality-is-biological-suggests-gay-sheep-study.html
Therefore, by trying to change a person's sexual orientation, the individual will suffer undue psychological stress
one in six UK psychiatrists and psychotherapists
are sick we should change them into humans
they are sick
us gay are fine thanks
"Also, I don't know what the below comment is supposed to mean, as
I'm interested in asking questions and getting answers"
No, your not Hank. We've covered this ground before.
Folks, Iris and myself had a long running "debate" with this troll recently. Basically, we've managed to establish, Hank is:-
(a) schizophrenic
(b) suffered a failed marriage possibly due to his "gay inclinations", which he sought cure from.
Which explains why he so adamant we support this unproven nonsense.
Of course, the schizophrenia kicked in fairly early in the "conversation" which also led him to tell us all about how the "New World Order", being run by the queers, is poised to take over the world and kick off "armageddon" as he has worked out the code in revelations.
And I'm not joking either. This is Hank:- paranoid schizophrenic. This is exactly what he's told us.
The expression "what the f***" came to mind more than once. You can see why its of little relevance to us what Hank thinks…. I'm sure he's busy in his darkened room, which his tin-foil hat, painting up a new batch of signs for the next traffic intersection shouting session.
Surely the problem isn't to 'cure', whatever that means. We are born what we are. The main reason people are unhappy with being who they are, in this case gay, is because of the negitive attitudes and abuse those people see towards others and maybe towards themselves. Because of that, closet gays fear being who they are and deny themselves to right to live their life to the very fullest. Pressure dictates what they are is wrong and in some cases (me included) it must be an illness. This of course comes from the hetrosexual community and religious nuts. Slowly things are turning though was recently disturbed to hearing some teens who clearly think anybody sleeping with the same sex has AIDS. Education is a good answer but I fear it's not just children who need it. If people knew that they could truely live their lives without discrimination, well maybe, just maybe those 'unhappy gay' people wouldn't exsist!
Hank, I'm sure more gay people 'feel bad' about their sexuality in the US than in the UK. That's because of hateful brainwashing by religious nutters there, which starts very early. Imagine growing up hearing that what you are is wrong/evil/abnormal every day of your life. Of course you'd have low self-esteem and dislike yourself – but for no reason except brainwashing.
Gay people cannot change their sexuality and do not need to. All they can do is repress it and feel miserable and deceive those around them by misrepresenting themselves, eg by getting married to someone of the opposite sex.
The problem isn't gay people, it's a culture that makes gay people hate themselves for ABSOLUTELY NO REASON.
Nicely said, Iris. (As I have the impression our friend Hank, despite his protestations, has already stubbornly made up his mind and nothing short of a thunderbolt from
JupiterJehovah will change it, alas your reason will miss its mark. But we appreciate it!)
I have had to wait three weeks for an appointment with a diabetic nurse to get my blood sugar properly regulated. If NHS money wasn't being spent on nonsense like this, I would already have the treatment I need by now and be spending more time on Pink instead of being ill all the time!
Thank you, Rehan. I live in hope that Hank will realise that we're not bad and that there is no 'agenda', no threat from us. It's sad that he lives his life in fear.
At least he's willing to enter into discussions and doesn't make excuses not to answer like some fundies I could mention. Is his mind closed? I hope not…
seb – the self-hate is cos of culture, society and religion plus the ex-gay movement is a lie
"appeal to majority; is a failed fallacy
So the NHS is expected to pay for people who aren't happy with their sex (gender) to have drastic, and often traumatic and irreversible, surgery. But it's deemed to be a waste of NHS money when someone seeks therapy to change their "sexual orientation" (i.e. become "sexually mature" and able to reproduce, aka heterosexual)!
Sex does not equal gender. You've proved your ignorance right off the bat: the former refers to the physical characteristics of the body, the latter refers to brain patterns, personality and behaviour. Sex reassignment surgery is not drastic or traumatic, either. And neither the desire nor the ability to procreate is regarded as the definition of "sexual maturity". A person's sexuality has absolutely no bearing on their sexual maturity.
I was listening to Radio 4 the other week. There was a programme about a man who'd had surgery to become a woman. This happened several decades ago. S/he said that it was something that they regretted every day. After waking up without a penis, the day after the op, he realised that he'd made one hell of a mistake! Wow… The thing is, this person is not a lone voice – many, many transgendered people bitterly regret surgery, and spend the rest of their lives in a living, and traumatic, hell.
Preposterous lies. The amount of people who regret transitioning is practically infinitesimal and only ever comes up when people who were very confused about their gender didn't recieve proper counselling, which is extremely rare, given that monitoring by mental health professionals is a requirement for qualification to have the surgery. Second, some trans people do resent the surgery, but not the transitioning. SRS is not magic. It does not magically transform your body into that of the opposite sex. It is fallible and not perfect, which is why not every trans person goes through with it (and of course many simply can't get the funding), and why it is important they are familiar with the process and results beforehand.
The vast majority of men who have had corrective therapy for homosexuality, though, don't claim to have been traumatised by the process. The only ones that do are those who were put through gay-to-straight therapy against their will, and no one denies that would have been a very wrong thing to do anyway.
Of course they wouldn't. It's coercion and re-programming, that's how it works and that's why it's been slammed by every mainstream mental health organisation in the western world. Besides, these "happy" zombies are the minority of ex-gays. Even ex-gay therapists themselves have had to admit that ex-gay therapy has a terrible "success" rate, even when they define success as "being able to ignore homosexual urges". No, most of the people who went through this barbaric "therapy" are the sorts who frequent sites like this: http://www.beyondexgay.com/ Furthermore, nobody does this willingly. There's a reason why all ex-gay groups are religious, you know. Nobody ever feels bad about their sexuality unless made to feel bad by outside sources. Please, try and prove me wrong. Such a bizarre concept is almost literally impossible.
There are many men and women who do not want to be homosexual. They see it as a dysfunction and want help to change. This is not because of culture, religion, or society…It's just what they want. Even if it were for any of the above reasons, what's wrong with that? If someone's faith is more important to them than "being gay" then why shouldn't they want to seek change? I think it's evil to deny these many people the help THEY want, and force them to accept what they see, and what is in fact an artificial lifestyle – based on a "sinful" (i.e. unhealthy) sexual attraction.
Yeah, already covered this above. Outside influences are ALWAYS why people want to change their sexuality. And it is IMMENSELY unhealthy. Just imagine if your faith demonised heterosexuality. Would you really think it would be healthy for you to try and change yourself so drastically for your beliefs? Also, "sinful" does not equate to "unhealthy". Biology decides what is unhealthy, not theology.
Britain has become a mad, mad place recently…many people can't wait for the inevitable backlash, so that some sanity is finally restored!
People who say such things are usually imbeciles or bigots. You're both. Pathetic little fascists living the priveleged life who don't want to be bothered by the plight of the underpriveleged.
Basic argument: if it's ok for the NHS to fund gender re-modification, then surely it's ok for it to pay for therapies designed to help modify sexuality!? To deny one group the help they feel they need is just fascistic.
Rubbish. The NHS should follow medicine and science, not witchcraft. Transsexuality is a condition where the body has developed in a way inconsistent with a person's brain (male and female brains work slightly differently). Brainwashing is NEVER to be tolerated, and it is NOT therapy. Ergo, SRS is fine because it is fixing a physical problem, conversion therapy is not fine because it is coercive.
I don't usually humour the abnormal intelligences of bigots, but it's been a while. I hope my wonderful attention makes you feel all special inside.
Hey Squidgy, you said, "We are born what we are. The main reason people are unhappy with being who they are, in this case gay, is because of the negitive attitudes and abuse those people see towards others and maybe towards themselves"
Let me probe your comment a bit.
Are you saying that the phenomenon of homosexuality is a perfectly acceptable behavior with every homosexual and that every one of them would be totally happy, well adjusted, highly productive individuals — if only society and non-homosexual pressures would just "stay out of their lives."
Is that a valid assesment of your thinking?
Hank, most people just want to find that someone special. For gay people that's someone of the same sex. It's no different from being straight – the emotional needs are the same.
I won't answer for Squidgy, but I believe that a society where people weren't brainwashed into feeling bad about their sexuality would mean that no-one would be unhappy with it. You're not unhappy about being straight, are you? But if you grew up being made to feel wrong/evil/abnormal, I'm sure that you'd be unhappy or at least unsure of your sexuality.
Ex-gay therapy is total rubbish. It seeks to make people feel bad, usually using religious lies. See how this is far less common in the UK? Lots of it in the US, isn't there? That's because it has more victims to feed on. Ex-gay therapy feeds on the vulnerable by making them feel crap about who they are, usually by citing religious 'proof'. It's disproven and it's pointless. It replaces self-hate with self-deception.
The History of NARTH and the NHS
Charles W. Socarides was a Past-President of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), which he helped found in 1992. He reported that "about a third" of his patients became heterosexual after treatment
He lectured on his research findings in London at the Anna Freud Centre, the Portman Clinic, the Tavistock Clinic NHS Trust, and before the British Psychoanalytical Society.(BPAS)
All of the above psychotherapy training institutes belong to the British Psychoanalytic Council (BPC), this organisation was previously called the British Confederation of Psychotherapists (BCP). They claim that this has not influenced or that it does not continue to influence their practices and philosophy. http://www.psychoanalytic-council.org/main/index.php?page=15043
A study in the The British Journal of Psychiatry (2001) 179: 545-549, Micheal King, Annie Bartlett and Peter Phillips found the following in relation to the BPC then the BCP
"Gays and lesbians seeking psychoanalysis or psychotherapy in the National Health Service or outside it for personal and/or training purposes will be unlikely to find a gay or lesbian therapist if they want one. The British Confederation of Psychotherapists' practitioners (now the BPC) take on gay and lesbian clients/patients, although many do not see these social identities as relevant to the therapeutic process. Evidence from this study indicates that such clients/patients may encounter overt or covert bias, including the pathologisation of homosexuality per se."
Socarides was honoured by the Association of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapists, an organization formed of members of the English NHS and NHS Wales, in April 1995.(Made up mainly of BPC psychoanalytic psychotherapists and psychoanalysts)
The award from the APP created controversy. Following a meeting of Psychotherapists and Counsellors for Social Responsibility, a Letter of Concern by Andrew Samuels, Joanna Ryan, and Mary Lynne Ellis expressing dismay at the invitation to Socarides to give the annual APP lecture was circulated.
NHS Consultants in psychoanalytic psychotherapy train predominately at BPC organisations
John, nice comment there. NARTH blatantly unscientific research is like an insidious virus.
Also, notice how Hank deflects from answering the questions put to him? Evasion then attack…. classic strategy.
Iris:- I was going to reply to Hank but you actually put how I feel into words, perfectly. Thank you :o)
That was supposed to be a smile :)
Hank- to further my point look at the negative remarks from people like Anita Bryant, Iris Robinson (to help my point within the Pink News site) and tell me how that doesn't damage people who feel they can never 'come out'. Tell me where straight people have to justify themselves for being to they are?
Hi Will . . . more online Hanky Panky – Is if we have not been here before, a bit like a broken record.
I totally agree John…. as Iris put is so perfectly before on a similar thread, just ONCE can one of these fundamentalist christians explain how they resolve their literal interpretation of condemnation of homosexuality in the bible with the rest of Leviticus…. especially in light of many scientific (NARTH is not scientific) studies that suggest homosexuality is a proven natural state in nature [Homosexual selection: The power of same-sex liaisons – December 2009 by Kate Douglas]
Squidgy, you're welcome. Glad you didn't think I was butting in :D
"Are you saying that the phenomenon of homosexuality is a perfectly acceptable behavior with every homosexual and that every one of them would be totally happy, well adjusted, highly productive individuals — if only society and non-homosexual pressures would just 'stay out of their lives'."
There will always be homosexual people who are dissatisfied with their sexual orientation, simply because there will always people who don't like not being exactly like the majority. This is a perfectly normal feeling, especially during childhood and even more during adolescence. It's one of the things – among others – that can lead ordinarily sensible young people to do stupid and dangerous things, like taking drugs. For some, unfortunately, this desire to conform at all costs lasts throughout their lives.
As long ago as 1960 Gordon Westwood wrote in "A Minority: A Report on the life of the Male Homosexual in Great Britain":
"It should not be supposed that most homosexuals continue to combat their homosexual desires for the rest of their lives. Like all human beings, they share that valuable ability to adjust themselves to the situation in which they find themselves. And so, in the course of time, most of them realize that if they are to enjoy their share of health and happiness, they must learn to live with themselves, and this means that they must also learn to live on terms with their homosexual condition."
The language is dated, but the point is well made. Similarly, Martin Weinberg and Colin Williams wrote in "Male Homosexuals: Their Problems and Adaptations" (1974):
"The homosexual should try to rid himself of notions that homosexuality is 'sick' and that he would necessarily be better off if he were heterosexual. If he seeks counseling, he should try to avoid practitioners who subscribe to these views."
Sadly, there will be some who just can't do it. They either can't or won't accept that, no matter how much they might have preferred to be "just like everyone else", they're not, and that they would have happier and more productive lives if they stopped trying to conform. I feel sorry for them, but offering them fraudulent "therapy" to change their natural sexuality is not a solution to anything.
Hey Deeside Will.
Thanks much for your rational comment — those are the kinds that
I appreciate because I'm here to comment/understand well-thoughtout comments. For one thing, I've never said I disliked
homosexuals, though there are some super activists who do cause
physical problems with the general population as when they've
attacked churches (don't have specifics, but can get them if you
want, but that's very uncommon, but those I don't condone.)
There are some other issues where they've secretly given
presentations advocating pro-homosexual and sexually graphic topics (well beyond youngster level of understanding) in lower grade school classes without parental consent.
I'd like to comment on your other detailed issues on homosexuality and problems, as they're interesting and deserve more response after I do some research.
Hey Squidgy
No I don't go along with comments by people like Anita Bryant,
Iris Robinson, Pat Robertson, etc. –I consider
these kinds of people immature in Christianity and don't really
understand the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Apsotles.
I study the Scriptures and read the Bible 2-3 hours daily and listen to a big variety of Bible experts who present a wide variety of discussions/ interpretations/ understandings of all topics pertaining to "true" Christianity.
Not trying to say I'm any kind of expert but I'm learning more every day and am far advanced than I was 2 years ago.
I also have an open mind toward reading about homosexuality and
do read pro-homosexual arguments, some evolution sites, etc.
Get back with you later as I'm having connection problems.
Hank wrote
"I study the Scriptures and read the Bible 2-3 hours daily and listen to a big variety of Bible experts who present a wide variety of discussions/ interpretations/ understandings of all topics pertaining to "true" Christianity."
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Hank if you allowed your self time to read over books, you would probably feel better about your self, your sexuality and other homosexuals. . . the only person who is persecuting you is your self.
John….I subscribe and read Time, Discover, Health, Smithsonian,
Forbes, USA Today,…listen to classical music, jazz, big band,
enjoy mystery, and crime stories…workout at the gym 3 times
weekly, bike ride 10 miles daily, have cookouts with friends,
so I feel good about myself, my sexuality and still like to
try to understand a variety of topics.
Homosexuality is simply one interesting subject, as is health, nutrition, relationships, as well as Christianity… and I could go on, but this should suffice.
Hank said: "There are some other issues where they've secretly given
presentations advocating pro-homosexual and sexually graphic topics (well beyond youngster level of understanding) in lower grade school classes without parental consent."
Certainly not in the UK, Hank. I presume you mean in the US? Let's have more details of that, please.
But, in general, informing children about LGBT people (at a level suitable for their age) is not 'promoting homosexuality' – all it's doing is promoting tolerance of people who are different to them (bearing in mind that the vast majority of those children will be straight). That's no different from children learning about different ethnicities to their own or, indeed, learning about different faiths. As a teacher, let me say that the hope is that those children will grow up unprejudiced, understanding that we have more in common with those that are different to us than we might think. That's how you build a world free from hate and discrimination, where people are respected no matter what their race, age, gender, sexuality, etc.
I know you don't hate gay people, and I do respect your courtesy and your willingness to answer difficult questions, but I would like to know – apart from Christian sites, do you visit other sites in an attempt to 'preach' (I don't mean that in a derogatory way) to the people there? Or are LGBT people your main focus? If so, why? (and do remember that a number of people here are Christians too)
Hey Iris….always nice to hear from you and your rational presentation and questioning:
I don't know how well the UK is following our ideological battle in the US, but over the past 20 years things have gotten fierce concerning issues of religion, education, politics, parental rights, law, and privacy, just to name a few categories. From what I read, we have much more heated clashes than do you in the UK.
The following are some topics that are regular events.
I'm offering them as how I see some of the struggling views dealing with homosexuality in our country.
Death threats target opponents of 'gay' promotionPosted: April 18, 2009 12:15 am Eastern
By Bob Unruh WorldNetDaily
At least one pro-family organization that has opposed the pro-homosexual "Day of Silence" is being targeted with hate e-mails and telephone calls, including suggestions that officials go and kill themselves.
"You may not be gay, but you may be next," said one e-mail, which included a photograph of a casket, according to Karen England, executive director of the Sacramento-based Capitol Resource Institute
Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute noted the goal cited by GLSEN is to reduce bullying on school campuses, especially bullying perceived as targeting homosexual students or those with other "alternative' sexual lifestyles.
"No one supports bullying," England continued, "Every school has more than ample anti-bullying policies in place. … For GLSEN, the means by which they want to end bullying is to normalize volitional homosexual conduct."
England said that another message was, "I wish you would just go kill yourself."
"If this is the kind of atmosphere we get just for asking kids to stay home, in an e-mail, can you imagine what is like for kids refusing to stay silent?" she said.
She also said teachers should focus on academic subjects, not changing minds about sexual issues.
"The actions of Day of Silence supporters are speaking louder than the silence," England said. She said she is urging the walkout "because students should be free to support traditional marriage and relationships, without their peers seeing them as bigots."
. "Many people who support traditional values are called right wing extremists, and Homeland Security says it is concerned about us. Maybe Homeland Security should be more concerned about assessing the threats we are receiving than about us as a threat to others," England said.
GSLEN has sponsored the nationwide silent protest every April for the last 12 years. The event is said to be a showing of support for "gay," lesbian, bisexual and transgender victims of violence and bullying. According to GSLEN's 2005 National School Climate Survey, four out of five LGBT children experience harassment in school. The organization claims 64 percent of "gay" students feel unsafe at school because of their sexual orientation and 41 percent because of their "gender expression."
GLSEN claims there are about 4,000 homosexual clubs now in American high schools and middle schools.
District bans 'John 3:16,' promotes demonic symbols… so a Court filing seeks elimination of penalties for Christian art
Posted: April 17, 2008
By Bob Unruh © 2010 WorldNetDaily
A court in Wisconsin has been asked to suspend immediately a policy in the Tomah Area School District that bans Christian symbols in students' artwork, but allows Hindu, Buddhist and satanic representations.
The ADF launched a lawsuit on the student's behalf after a teacher refused to give him a grade on a project because his work included "John 3:16" as well as "As sign of love."
Artwork banned because of the inclusion of a biblical reference and the message: "A sign of love"
The school district, however, openly acknowledged and publicized various pieces of art representing Buddhism, and Hinduism as well as several demon faces that appeared satanic.
Iris, because you are a school teacher, this should have greater meaning to you:
The California Legislature and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger worked together to establish Senate Bill 777 and Assembly Bill 394 as .law, plans that institutionalize the promotion of homosexuality, bisexuality, transgenderism and other alternative lifestyle choices.
"First, [California] law allowed public schools to voluntarily promote homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality. Then, the law required public schools to accept homosexual, bisexual and transsexual teachers as role models for impressionable children. Now, the law has been changed to effectively require the positive portrayal of homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality to 6 million children in California government-controlled schools," said Randy Thomasson, chief of the Campaign for Children and Families.
In my view Iris, because of human nature, many of these teachers will present (and be more impressionable on youngsters) a skewed "picture for questioning one's sexuality" because they themselves are homosexual, bisexual and/or transsexual.
Unless handled honestly, this can easily be viewed as a form of persuasion, indoctrination, sentiment, etc. that can either cause serious confusion or a desire for a form of sexual experimentation, etc. much earlier than most children should/would do in relation to their maturity and full understanding of what is involved.
There's certainly much more that we can discuss rationally because this is an issue that will continue to grow and get more heated in the coming years. So whatever you decide Iris, we can take from there.
Hi Hank :) Thank you for all that. I'm just about to leave the house and I'll be away for the next 24 hours or so, but I WILL respond in the next couple of days.
But I must just quickly say that I object to your suggestion that LGBT teachers present a 'skewed' view of homosexuality. That's absolutely untrue. As a teacher, you have to remain neutral – that counts for things like that, politics, religion, etc. I NEVER – let me repeat that – NEVER – impose my views on the children I teach. Such a suggestion is offensive to all professional, qualified teachers. Nobody would have a job if they did that – it's not allowed.
Hi Iris…when I included the item on school teachers, I certainly didn't imply that you were included in such behavior, but it does exist in certain cases. Below is a critical view on part of this problem, along with other problems. While it comes down hard on homosexuality and the education system, there's much to consider after you read it. But it does present some specific data that isn't created without professional direction. I know you'll respond to it and I welcome your reaction because there's
much discussed.
Schools withhold sad facts about homosexual lifestyle Teachers are being irresponsible when they teach that homosexuality is a healthy lifestyle.
When parents in the Philadelphia School District received an official calendar recently marking October as Gay and Lesbian History Month, they were confronted with a trend that is gathering momentum in many countries. In Victoria, Australia, family groups are up in arms over instructions to celebrate homosexuality in the classroom to counteract "homophobic bullying". Something similar is happening in England, where new sexual orientation laws may force primary school teachers to make books such as Hello Sailor and Daddy's Roommate available in class.
Challenges to these moves are occurring in forums ranging from school board meetings to the courts, but parents are losing ground. And yet, says a psychiatrist who specialises in this field, the health and even the lives of their children may be at stake. In this interview with MercatorNet, Richard P Fitzgibbons MD explains why — and what can really help children vulnerable to same-sex attraction.
MercatorNet: Any health intervention these days requires informed consent. Does this apply to the promotion of homosexuality in schools?
Rick Fitzgibbons: It's a matter of great concern that educators are presenting homosexuality and same sex attraction to young people as a healthy lifestyle when the medical literature shows it is not. Numerous studies show an inability to maintain a commitment, rampant promiscuity and resultant serious depressive illness. In his book, The Sexual Organisation of the City, E. Laumann reported that among homosexuals in five urban areas the average length of a relationship was six months. M. Xiridou in 2003 reported that a long-term relationship among those he studied was 18 months, and overall they had an average of 18 to 26 partners per year. Consequently, due to AIDS and other diseases sexually active homosexual and bisexual males can lose up to 20 years of life expectancy.
The inability to maintain commitment and promiscuity contribute to sadness, anger and mistrust leading to hopelessness and suicidal ideation. Many studies also demonstrate that these conflicts lead to a high prevalence of abuse in same sex relationships which is not communicated to students. In 1999 three very well-designed studies were published in the Archives of General Psychiatry — one from New Zealand, one from the Netherlands and one on twins. These showed there is a much greater prevalence of psychiatric disorders among homosexual population — more than six times the general risk of suicide among young adults.
Dr John Diggs has assembled overwhelming medical evidence on the serious health risks of the lifestyle in his article, "The Risks of Gay Sex". And yet young people are not being informed about this. They are being denied the truth. Instead, they are told being homosexual is as normal as the heterosexual lifestyle. It really seems that educators are teaching bad science and that political correctness is trumping science here.
Now, it's not clear whether teachers are bound by informed consent principles legally, but school psychologists certainly are. I would say the schools, particularly school psychologists, are very vulnerable to litigation if they don't inform young people, as well as principals and school superintendants, about the serious health risks associated with the homosexual lifestyle. Some people are working to warn national organisations of school psychologists of their liability if they fail to provide informed consent to students.
MercatorNet: Are teachers the best group to be dealing with this subject?
Dr Fitzgibbons: Evidently not. Dr Charol Shakeshaft of Hofstra University, the leading expert on public school sexual misconduct in the United States, has testified that 7 per cent of students nationally report being victims of sexual abuse by an employee of a public school. In 1998 the US Department of Justice reported 103,000 credible cases of sexual abuse by public school employees against children. This is a higher rate than any other professional group, and much higher, by the way, than that of the Catholic clergy. So it should be of the greatest concern to parents, school boards, school superintendents and elected officials that this profession is the one leading the homosexual agenda against children.
Again, if these educators knew the medical and psychological studies of the serious health risks associated with homosexuality one would hope that they would stop teaching that the lifestyle is equal with heterosexuality. My own view is that among educators much of the homosexual agenda is driven by a hostility towards Judaeo-Christian morality. Many believe a similar dynamic of secular fundamentalism is present among health professionals, members of the media, as well as those in the legislative and judicial branches of government. They may all be using this issue to attempt to undermine Judaeo-Christian morality in the culture and particularly among the young.
MercatorNet: Is there a problem with a young person's identifying as gay or lesbian while still in high school? Can same-sex attraction be a phase or a fad at this age?
Dr Fitzgibbons: Yes, there is a fair amount of research showing that same-sex attraction (SSA) is not something that is locked in at a certain stage, but it can be fluid and actually change over the course of a person's life. But young people are being told by educators, the media and health professionals that SSA is genetic so they will be that way for the rest of their lives. In fact, there is no proof that it's genetic. If it were, then all identical twins should be completely concordant for homosexuality, and no study has shown more than 50 per cent concordance. Last year the first genome scan of male sexual orientation was published in Human Genetics (No. 116) and the conclusion was there is no genetic basis.
The thing that troubles me greatly is that in asking young people to embrace a particular identity at an early age they're denying that child the right to self-knowledge. It's easier to think, "Oh, I have same sex attractions," rather than, "I was deeply lonely for a male friend when I was growing up," or, "I was too afraid to trust men, to trust my father."
Another issue is the danger of entering a relationship where you use another human being as a sexual object. A utilitarian sexual philosophy permeates the homosexual lifestyle, as evidenced by numerous studies which document a high level of promiscuity, and it can be very traumatic for a young person to be repeatedly used sexually by another person. Ultimately this trauma can lead to severe depressive illness and even suicidal ideation and excessive anger with abuse of others in the lifestyle.
MercatorNet: One reads various claims about the prevalence of homosexuality in the population. A Philadelphia group said 5 to 6 per cent. What does the research show?
Dr Fitzgibbons: Numerous international studies put it at 1-3 per cent. In a study of 5,898 adults in the Netherlands by T. Sandfort only 2.1 identified themselves as homosexual. Among 15,705 adults with a median age of 35, B. Cochran found less than one per cent were homosexual: 0.99 per cent of males and 0.75 of females.
MercatorNet: What factors prepare the ground for same sex attraction in an adolescent?
Dr Fitzgibbons: There are a number — weak confidence in one's masculinity, poor body image, being sexually abused, father conflicts, mother conflicts… Many people with SSA report significant same sex peer rejection. The major issue we've found among adolescent males is a terrible loneliness because of lack of male friendships, and this may sound strange, but it's usually because of a lack of eye-hand co-ordination. It's referred to as the sports wound. If a little boy by age 3 or 4 doesn't have eye-hand co-ordination, by age 7 most of his friends are females; he doesn't feel confident to enter into the male world and fears being rejected. And then by age 10 or 12 they begin to be attracted to males who have the body and the physical abilities they so desperately want.
As an aside, my personal belief is that there may be a series of genes that influence eye-hand co-ordination, because there are some males who really try to learn it and they just can't seem to develop it.
At national meetings of Courage or PFOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays) where there are several hundred men (and some women) who are struggling with same sex attractions, I've asked how many played sports as boys. In some cases no more than five men in the audience raised their hands.
A father conflict may develop here. If a boy is not good at sports, many fathers simply don't know how to bond with the boy. So we coach fathers to do other things with their son — go fishing, spend time doing the things he enjoys, always affirming his masculinity and getting him to realise that his masculinity is not determined by his body or by sports ability but by virtue — courage, wanting to protect others and so on.
It's wonderful when fathers can really bond with these boys. Every male is looking for his father's approval, and if the father lacked this from his own father then he has to transcend that somehow. If he has faith he can ask the Lord to make him more giving and affirming than his father was.
MercatorNet: What about girls?
Dr Fitzgibbons: With females it's usually different. The most common cause of SSA in females, we find, is a mistrust of male love. Their fathers may have been overly angry, alcoholics, left their mothers, were narcissistic — and they've become afraid of male love. Some women with SSA report the absence of a close mother relationship. There's also more fluidity between homosexual and heterosexual relationships with the women, because there is a significant amount of abuse among female SSA relationships — emotional abuse, physical abuse — and they find they feel safer with the men. And it's is easier for a woman to move out, whereas for men it has a lot more to do with their masculine identity.
In addition to all of that, there is the issue of gender identity disorder in children. I'm referring, mainly, to little boys who act feminine. In our practice we find that when fathers get very involved in the lives of these boys, teaching them how to kick a soccer ball at an early age — 4 or 5 — these children over the course of a year or two can change remarkably. They begin to feel comfortable with their masculinity, confident to fit in with other boys, and in many cases their effeminate mannerisms resolve. Not surprisingly, political correctness is leading many mental health professsionals to try to remove the GID diagnosis from the diagnostic manual (DSM IV R) in spite of the serious suffering in these children and good prognosis with effective treatment.
MercatorNet: Even in adult life can one's sexual attraction can be changed successfully?
Dr Fitzgibbons: Yes it can. The major evidence here is Robert Spitzer's study published in the Archives of Sexual Behaviour, October 2004. This is very significant because Spitzer led the taskforce which removed homosexuality from the diagnostic manual of psychiatry in 1973. Thirty years later he was going to a meeting of the American Psychiatric Association in Washington where there was an attempt to pass a resolution that no one should be allowed to treat patients with unwanted SSA. Outside there were people who had overcome their same sex attractions who were picketing and he walked over and talked to them. They said, "Study us." Spitzer, a professor at Columbia University, said, "All right, I'll study you." Among 200 men and women out of the lifestyle at least five years, he found 61 per cent of the males and 44 per cent of the females met criteria for good heterosexual functioning. His conclusion was that people have the right to pursue their heterosexual potential.
My own clinical experience is this. If there's significant self-knowledge, forgiveness of offenders in one's life and a spiritual component to the treatment, as there is in the treatment of compulsive behaviours in substance abuse disorders — in Alcoholics Anonymous, for example — we find the emotional pain that causes the SSA can be healed. A person thinks he is powerless over his emotional pain and compulsive behaviours, turns them over to God and begins to practice meditation — which is also used now in the treatment of hypertension and coronary artery disease — for 15 minutes twice daily, with the help of a spiritual director.
It's a process in which the adolescent or college student works at understanding those who have hurt or rejected him, and works at forgiving them. Then, as well, if they can grow in the sense that God is a loving Father and Christ is their friend and brother, the inner emptiness can be filled, the loneliness healed and the confidence strengthened. No longer does the person feel angry with his father or peers for not building or for damaging male confidence. Instead, he appreciates that his male gifts and identity are special, God-given and meant for a particular mission in life.
Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons is a psychiatrist and Director of Comprehensive Counselling Services in W. Conshohocken, Pennsylvania and was a major contributor to Homosexuality and Hope, published by the Catholic Medical Association of the United States.
Forgive me Hank but all you seem to do is copy and paste other people's opinions. Not a lot is actually your own. You seem to want to prove something but never something from your own mind.
Isn't that the real problem? religious people have to read and quote what other people say. Gay people think for themselves. That must be difficult for religious people to understand being that there lives and rules are all written in text.
God gave us a brain. It's there to be used, to think for ourselves. It He wanted us to copy and paste he'd have replaced it with a printer!
Mind you a spell check would have been good!
Hank . . . as Squidgy has pointed out – So you can cut and paste from the internet!
Hank, you do not seem to have views of your own, and this is even more distrurbing than your "ExGayness".
If you were able to think for your self . . . you might actually feel better about your self.
The American Family Association have called for homosexuality to be criminalised, and LGBT people to be forced to receive "Reparative Therapy".
Hi again, Hank. I too would prefer it if you gave us some of your own opinions and feelings.
But, to address your comment above – basically, it's crap. What you've quoted is untrue. I can find 'proof' that women are inferior to men (produced by misogynists who either fear or hate women) on the internet. That doesn't make it true. The same goes for what you quoted. But let me respond to some obvious things:
1)Homosexuality IS a healthy lifestyle – just as much as heterosexuality. Now, amongst gay and straight people there are those who practise unsafe sex but THAT is the 'unhealthy' thing, NOT the sexuality of the person in question. Most people – gay and straight – are aware of safe sex, are respectful of their sexual partners and are sensible with regard to their health.
2) Schools are NOT NOT NOT promoting homosexuality – they are promoting tolerance. They are also indirectly reassuring any children (this would be OLDER children) that might be LGBT that they are OK. I grew up knowing nothing about LGBT people and feeling very confused and upset because I was unsure of myself. It's a hundred times worse in some of the US states. You asked if a more accepting society would stop people being unhappy with their sexuality – yes, it would undoubtably. I've heard of black and Asian children in largely white areas putting bleach on their skin in order to 'be right', to hide from the bullies who've taunted them about their difference. The problem there, like the LGBT one, is NOT the child's colour, but the intolerance of the other children who are too ignorant and insecure to comprehend that different doen't equal wrong. It would be ridiculous to 'help' those children by, for example, painting them white. Same goes for gay people. Giving them confidence, stopping bullying – these are the answers.
3)All those things you quote about boys being gay because their fathers weren't manly enough with them, etc etc are utter, utter rubbish. Seriously, Hank. Believe me, please. I'm incredulous that you could swallow such crap. While abusive or absent parents might cause psychological problems for children, they do NOT make them gay. One's sexuality is innate. All those things you've said were disproven years ago. If I took a thousand children from broken homes, only a small percentage of them would be LGBT – in fact, the same percentage as in the general community. If a boy is innately gay, no amount of sports, hunting, male-bonding will 'ungay' them, it'll just make them less likely to confide in their father and miserable. Most LGBT people had perfectly normal childhoods with normal, loving relationships with both parents.
4) The only 'emotional pain' in homosexuality is caused by worry about being different when the person in question has had little knowledge of gay people, or by the vile attitude of society that rpomotes intolerance in the name of religion – a doubly disgusting practice, in my opinion.
Have a read of this article where you can see 'ex-gay' counsellors at work. Concentrate particularly on 'David' who seems to get off on male arousal. Does that seem like an ex-gay to you?:
Most adults are not interested in what other people do in bed. If they are, it's them that has the problem.
Finally, read this online leaflet below. It's a pdf (text file) that opens like a web page. You can magnify the print so you can read it (75% was good for me). Please read it all with your open mind and see how easy it is to spread lies and how familiar some of the 'proofs' sound:
I am studying health and social care at college one of our units we study is sociology for care, I discussed with my lecturer the other day about discrimination in health care in relation to sexual orientation, she told me they respect everyone and don't discriminate. reading this article gives me absolutely no faith in the health care service especially when homophobic people are working in it. so much for the six principles in care dignity, privacy, choice, safety, equality and diversity and realising potential. If they can't follow the equality and diversity principle what others are they not following. this should not be happening in health care. these people need re-educated. this is just SICK.
Hi Chelle . . . sorry to hear this has been such a shock, and rude awakening with regards homophobia and instituionalised homoophobia in health care.
I agree that it is SICK that some people do not also practice what they preach.
Hey Squidgy and Iris:
I'm not a teacher and I'm not a health counselor, so I don't have first-hand, qualified comments to add to these types of issues – my opinions are not worth more than one person's view. I read various sites, articles, books, etc. to get my information. So what's wrong if I submit an article that covers a topic that I don't have personal experience with – that's why I read and listen and
post information that I believe is reliable. Rejecting views by psychiatrists – both pro and con regarding homosexuality is something that is our right as long as we're open to hearing both sides of the issue – but we both have a special agenda and belief system that we use for making our decisions and doing what we do.
I don't simply accept any anti-homosexual article, but when studies are done and are offered as qualified results, I'll view and consider them until they're shown to be bogus or unreliable. I'm well aware that much information offered, both homosexual and anti-homosexual can be biased – I give it more credibility when it's backed up with genetic, medical, biological, etc. findings. But as yet there's no absolute "proof" that a genetic, medical basis is at the foundation of all homosexuality.
In my early article, Iris, the quotes, studies, research was offered by:
Philadelphia School District….Victoria, Australia, Archives of General Psychiatry 1999, New Zealand, Hofstra University, Human Genetics, Netherland Study, PFOX, Archives of
Sexual Behavior Oct. 2004. They offered information they found through their research, etc.
You say all the above is "crap." It's untrue. So you're saying none of the above have their facts straight. I will admit that I did not try to examine all the quotes/facts/figures used in the above article, I simply used it because it all seem plausible to me. For me to check out every quote in an article is too much – so if you disagree with those authorities and their studies, that's your right, and if you can quote some opposing sites to "correct" them, I'm open to reading them Iris.
Iris….OK, I agree that "All those things you quote about boys being gay because their fathers weren't manly enough with them, etc. are utter, utter rubbish"… is too far out for me to accept, but it was part of the article so I included.
I read the below site you offered and I don't give much credence to the entire approach or any information it offers. I think these types of assistance are of no value – my belief is in an entirely different area. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/the-exgay-files-the-bizarre-world-of-gaytostraight-conversion-1884947
I don't think those types of "reparative or corrective" approaches are the answer. In fact, I don't think there's much that psychiatrists or sex counselors can do to help a homosexual – in my opinion it can only be found in a true conversion that acceptance in what Jesus Christ offered us during His life over 2,000 years ago. And that's where you and I can't arrive at a solution to what a person who truly wants to change and what a 'miracle" means in a Christian's life and radically a person can change, all without professional, medical assistance. Unless you truly
study what happened in the lives of the Apostles, you and I will never understand why anything it possible for a true believer. This I know, because it's happened to me just as the Bible says can happen. If you don't/can't understand this, we'll never come to any mutual understanding of human behavior – its foundation and its everyday action.
I couldn't download the below site but will try again.
I'll offer more comment later.
Hank – so you're saying that you don't believe 'ex-gay' therapy works and that the only answer is to convert to Christianity? Yes? I respect your faith and the polite way you talk about it, but that statement doesn't make sense.
Firstly, many LGBT people ARE Christian.
Secondly – and I'm sure you don't want to start all our Bible quotes to and fro again :D – the idea that the Bible says being gay is wrong is, well, WRONG. It refers to temple sex (usually between STRAIGHT men), power rape (eg Sodom – straight men raping other men as a show of power and to humilate them), etc.
NOWHERE in the Bible does it condemn loving relationships between two people of the same sex.
(And please do read my last link above – I think you'll find it interesting)
P.S – a thought. My link was to a pdf file. You need something like Adobe Acrobat Reader to read those (they open like a scanned pamphlet which you can scroll through page by page). I kind of assumed you'd got that because I think most computers do, but maybe you have an old version? Here's a link to software:
Click Get Adobe Reader on the right – top left of the four buttons. Untick (uncheck?) the free Mcafee thing it offers with its download and just get the Adobe Reader. After you've installed that my link above should open fine. Here's info about Adobe if you'd like to read it first:
Hey Iris:
Thanks for your reply – it's going to lead to some interesting discussion for both of us and
I'll simply reply to one part – others will soon come.
You said, …"Firstly, many LGBT people ARE Christian"
That statement has much for debate, question and refutation as I quote some figures from a recent survey – much of which I've seen in other studies and believe to be representative of the meaning of Christianity.
Most Americans (don't think this applies to UK) see themselves as Christians. But when you dig deeper we see a wide range of what it means to be a Christian.
67% of adults in the US say they have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ and it's important in their life today..
But 41% of these same people say they are "absolutely committed," while 44% say they're "moderately committed."
Also, only 33% of our adults identify themselves as a "born-again Christian."
66% of all Americans had no ides what the term "evangelical" means.
Americans swear by the Bible; over 80% believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God , but only 20% of us have read the whole Bible. 17% read it daily, and 50% rarely or never read the Bible. 60% say they don't have the time…and 40% said it's too hard to understand.
Americans believe in the power of prayer 82%), but 53% agree that "all people pray to the say god or spirit, no matter what name they use for that spiritual being."
81% of us believe in the existence of heaven and 60% think that's where they will go immediately after death (another 15% said purgatory)
63% believe in hell, but only 1% believe that'll be their final destination.
When asked "which of the following do you believe are in heaven?" Along with angels and St. Peter, 43% said harps, and 36% halos.
So Iris, when you say… "Firstly, many LGBT people ARE Christian" – this covers such a broad spectrum, as you can see, it means nothing to me as to knowing who (homosexuals, or heterosexuals) know what Christianity truly is and whether they indeed are "true" Christians when you look at what the Bible says is the foundation of a believer.
All the above shows me that the huge majority of Christian believers are truly ignorant of what a deeper study of the Holy Bible will reveal of Christianity and of understanding human nature, which is the basis of my viewing, understanding and living a life that gives the most to myself and to society in general (but of course not accepted by atheists, agnostics, and those who simply don't care to do any self-examination). I'll give you some more detailed observation on this subject in my next comment.
I do enjoy communicating with you Iris.
Hi Iris.
I finally got boxturtlebulletin and am reading it now. I have
some definite questions/arguments with it and will get back to
you sometime today.
Also, in an above comment you said, "Homosexuality IS a healthy lifestyle – just as much as heterosexuality"
I would like to know how you arrived at it being a healthy lifestyle? You can't just compare it "just as much as heterosecuality." and accept it that way. Because neither of them in totality is "a healthy lifestyle," — but because of the wide diversity of sexual behavior, both lifestyles can be destrctive, self-defeating, unhappy. etc. You cannot generalize with the word "healthy," because this subject is much too complex and you have to measure each of the componets that make it all up to see what in fact is good and what is bad, and what is healthy and unhealthy, etc.
But I'll get into that soon.
Thanks for clearing that up, Hank. All those odd statistics and dissent and lack of consensus about what Christianity actually is just shows up how silly lots of people are not to have realised that you knew what the real thing was all along. Since neither the Bible intself,nor the Church which cobbled its motley constituent documents together and called them 'Holy', has ever offered an intelligible, coherent or morally credible view of what this supernatural farrago is, allow me to hail your achievement.
"I would like to know how you arrived at it being a healthy lifestyle? You can't just compare it "just as much as heterosecuality." and accept it that way. Because neither of them in totality is "a healthy lifestyle," — but because of the wide diversity of sexual behavior, both lifestyles can be destrctive, self-defeating, unhappy. etc. You cannot generalize with the word "healthy," because this subject is much too complex and you have to measure each of the componets that make it all up to see what in fact is good and what is bad, and what is healthy and unhealthy, etc."
Precisely, Hank. Yet you quoted something that strongly implied homosexuality IN ITSELF was an unhealthy lifestyle. As you've agreed above, it's not. BOTH LGBT and straight people may engage in unhealthy practises, so a person's sexuality is utterly irrelevant.
It was interesting to read your different Christians list above. I'd like to know in which group you categorise yourself.
Glad the pdf is working OK for you now.
Hey Rionda:
My earlier description was not to denigrate the value of having a Christian belief system to follow in one's life. It was meant to show a true picture of how people act in a religious manner.
All the confusion or "weak" spirituality in Christianity can also be seen in all religions mainly because it involves human beings and their inadequacies, immaturity, laziness,
self-deceitfulness, etc. – it's a serious and great challenge to understand human behavior as it's revealed by any religion. There's as much and sometimes more authentic writings uncovered dealing with early Christianity than there is about Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Nero, Aristotle, Plato and Socrates, and yet those people are studied without hesitation.
The Bible is explicit with how people will view and "live" their Christianity – in years gone by, in today's world, and in the future years. It's too bad that more people (whether they're religious-minded or not) will not see what the Bible and Scripture writings present to an open-minded person.
Regardless what many people think and believe there's much interesting history and philosophy, moral standards, social behavior, etc. (most validated by archeological findings 1,000+ years old) and this can be found in the Biblical writings.
Whether you treat Christianity as having much myth or superstition, you're missing out by never seriously reading some of the Bible scholars, ancient history experts, etc. Some of these researchers read and understand 5,6, and 7 ancient languages and with 50 years of diggings have uncovered writings that have given us "secrets about the past" that can broaden our understanding of human nature and make it more revealing for today. But, I know for a fact, that most people will not accept this challenge
That topic is filled with deep meaning that I'll try to explain later if you so desire.
But now I'll to try to give you a view of what some of the categories are that show the differing faith groups in America – these are important in understanding one's statement on Christianity and they've been widely surveyed and have come up with these profiles.
1. Biblical Christianity: Full acceptance of the authority of the Bible, total trust in Christ for salvation, involvement in evangelism, active participation in the life of the church, desire for intense spiritual l development, life informed by faith principles, moral absolutes exist.
2.Conventional Christianity: total trust in Christ for salvation, involvement in church life, appreciation for the Bible, general privatization of faith, life only vaguely influenced by faith views, morality is relative..
3. Cultural Christianity: universalism and works-based theology, nominal church involvement ("Christmas Christians"), non-practicing, Christian in name and (perhaops) heritage only, morality is relative.
4. New Age Practitioner: faith as a private matter, religious principles from variety of sources, no centralized religious authority, deity intermingled with self, more focused upon religious consciousness than religious practice.
I think you can discern where and what level of Christianity a person is by seeing how they fit into one of these 4 categories.
While they're not completely definitive and can have some carryover from one to another, I think most of the time a person can be judged using these categories.
Hey Riondo:
A bit more to add to my point about Christianity.
Just because many Americans are weak in their belief system of Christianity — I see it as a shame. But the history of our nation shows how important is was for great leaders to take the Bible seriously and to use in their daily lives.
This to me is indicative of the validity of Holy Scripture and how intelligent people have used it for governing and leading our country.
While the common/average person may be weak, inconsistent, or totally ignorant of the value of believing in the Holy Bible, most of our outstanding men have known the importance of accepting the truths and principles in the Bible. Below are just a few names:
George Washington – first President of the United States of America
What students would learn in American schools above all is the religion of Jesus Christ.
– George Washington
Samuel Adams, Signer of the Declaration of Independence
I … [rely] upon the merits of Jesus Christ for a pardon of all my sins.
– Samuel Adams
Congress passed this resolution:
"The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools."
We recognize no sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus.
– John Adams and John Hancock
The Declaration of Independence laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity.
– John Adams
I have examined all religions, and the result is that the Bible is the best book in the world.
– John Adams
The Christian religion is, above all the religions that ever prevailed or existed in ancient or modern times, the religion of wisdom, virtue, equity and humanity.
– John Adams
[The Fourth of July] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.
– John Adams
Patrick Henry, Early America Leader
There is a book [the Bible] worth all the other books ever printed.
– Patrick Henry
It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great Nation was founded not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
– Patrick Henry
John Jay, First Chief-Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court
The Bible is the best of all books, for it is the word of God and teaches us the way to be happy in this world and in the next. Continue therefore to read it and to regulate your life by its precepts.
– John Jay
John Hancock, Signer of the Declaration of Independence
We recognize no sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus.
– John Adams and John Hancock
Benjamin Franklin
"Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God."
– Benjamin Franklin
The Christian religion is the best religion that has ever been given to man
– Thomas Jefferson, Jefferson Memorial
Daniel Webster, Early American Politician
Education is useless without the Bible.
– Daniel Webster
Noah Webster, American Schoolmaster
Education is useless without the Bible. The Bible was America's basic text book in all fields. God's Word, contained in the Bible, has furnished all necessary rules to direct our conduct.
– Noah Webster
National Anthem of the United States of America, Francis Scott Key
"And this be our motto, 'In God is our trust'"
– USA National Anthem, Third Verse
Andrew Jackson, President of the United States of America
"[The Bible] is the rock on which our Republic rests."
– Andrew Jackson
Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States of America
In regards to this great Book [the Bible], I have but to say it is the best gift God has given to man. All the good the Savior gave to the world was communicated through this Book. But for it we could not know right from wrong. All things most desirable for man's welfare, here and hereafter, are found portrayed in it.
– Abraham Lincoln
We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.
– Abraham Lincoln, Lincoln Memorial
"Praise be to God" (engraved on the monument's capstone in Latin as "Laus Deo")
– Washington Monument
James Madison, A Primary Author of the Constitution of the United States of America
"We have staked the whole future of our new nation, not upon the power of government; far from it. We have staked the future of all our political constitutions upon the capacity of each of ourselves to govern ourselves according to the moral principles of the Ten Commandments."
– James Madison
Calvin Coolidge, President of the United States of America
"The foundations of our society and our government rest so much on the teachings of the Bible that it would be difficult to support them if faith in these teachings would cease to be practically universal in our country."
– Calvin Coolidge
Harry S. Truman, President of the United States of America
"This Nation was established by men who believed in God. … You will see the evidence of this deep religious faith on every hand.'
– Harry S. Truman
Dwight D. Eisenhower, President of the United States of America
"Without God there could be no American form of government, nor an American way of life. Recognition of the Supreme Being is the first, the most basic, expression of Americanism. Thus, the founding fathers of America saw it, and thus with God's help, it will continue to be."
– Dwight D. Eisenhower
"I believe that the next half century will determine if we will advance the cause of Christian civilization or revert to the horrors of brutal paganism."
– Theodore Roosevelt, President
"[The United States is] founded on the principles of Christianity"
– Franklin D. Roosevelt, President
Ronald Reagan, President of the United States of America
Of the many influences that have shaped the United States into a distinctive nation and people, none may be said to be more fundamental and enduring than the Bible.
– Ronald Reagan
Inside the Bible's pages lie the answers to all the problems that mankind has ever known. I hope Americans will read and study the Bible.
– Ronald Reagan
So regardless of what many of our people today say about the Bible, I'll stand with those named above and believe and live by the principles offered throughout the Bible
Ropy list of authorities to cite, Hank. Jefferson only thought Christianity was the best of a bad bunch and was pretty sceptical about religion full stop, like many of your Founders, who were often typical 18th century deists and rationalists. The United States was a creation of Enlightenment rationalism and pluralism, not authoritarian monotheism, no matter how much a lot of its credulous religious citizens try to claim otherwise today. The legal and philosophical assumptions underpinning the creation of your country have nothing to do with the Bible. Lincoln certainly had no Evangelical-style beliefs about the Bible and his abolition of slavery was hardly motivated by this collection of ancient Near Eastern texts, which legislate for slavery and take it for granted (like most people and books from that time and place). Admittedly he was a late convert to the cause, since his main priority was holding the Union together, by bloodshed if necessary, which is just what he did.
You need to take what canny politicians say to a (not entirely) pious public with a much larger pinch of salt. And not assume that they share your view of the Bible even when they are sincere in some religious belief or other.
Oh, and I would imagine that 'living by Biblical principles' is the usual mask for text-chopping selectivity, though you will of course correct me if I am wrong; but let me take a wild guess that you do not consider slavery morally acceptable, that you do not condemn the lending of money at interest, or that women speaking in church is especially wicked, and that you have not sold all your goods and given the proceeds to the poor.
Hey Riondo: You said, . "Jefferson only thought Christianity was the best of a bad bunch and was pretty sceptical about religion full stop, like many of your Founders, who were often typical 18th century deists and rationalists."
I never said that the named people were "born-again" and followed unwaveringly all the sayings of Jesus Christ — I only said that they believed the Bible to be an important part of their life as to guidance in their belief and leadership. Even many Deists held the Bible in strong belief though they weren't considered "born-again" believers and followers.
Shown in the quote below "which came from a non-religious site", I ask, Why did Jefferson even keep a copy of a Bible, though he removed parts of it? If he didn't believe in most of the principles, he shouldn't have kept a copy at all.
"At times, the Christian right has sought to rewrite history by posthumously converting Thomas Jefferson into a Christian. Throughout his life, however, Jefferson strenuously denied that he held orthodox Christian beliefs or that he desired the mixing of politics and religion in government. Instead, Jefferson's religious philosophy centered on 18th century concepts of natural law. Jefferson placed significant value on the ability of human beings to use reason to understand their world. In fact, Jefferson was so opposed to mysticism that he removed from his bible any account of the miracles that Jesus is alleged to have performed. The resulting Jefferson Bible, contained only those precepts that Jefferson believed were integral to the moral philosophy of Jesus Christ"
It still shows Jefferson having a strong belief in the overall view of the Bible and of Jesus Christ's principles. Just because people have varying degrees abuot Jesus Christ or some things in the Bible, it doesn't mean they don't hold the Bible to being of extraordinary writings and having absolute truths for human guidance
You also said, "though you will of course correct me if I am wrong; but let me take a wild guess that you do not consider slavery morally acceptable, that you do not condemn the lending of money at interest, or that women speaking in church is especially wicked, and that you have not sold all your goods and given the proceeds to the poor"
I reply to the above just as Jesus Christ did regarding those
issues and when He didn't specifically address them, I follow what
the Apostles expanded on those subjects as they learned from His example and teachings.
You can interpret and make your own judgement as you see fit as to what the Bible tells me to do on these matters.
Jefferson: "Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one-half the world fools and the other half hypocrites."
Jefferson insisted on the separation of Church and State. The Declaration of Independence is clear about that, and emphasised it after too:
"Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. *Religious institutions that use government power in support of themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths, or of no faith, undermine all our civil rights*. Moreover, state support of an established religion tends to make the clergy unresponsive to their own people, and leads to corruption within religion itself. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society"
Note the bit I've enclosed between two asterisks….
Hank, you've mentioned 'born again' Christians more than once. I'm genuinely interested in what you consider a person must be/do to be a born again Christian, and why you think this is necessary.
Hey Iris.
Sorry I haven't responded to your much earlier comments/questions, seems like I focused on Riondo. But
I'll get to your "original site" and respond fully — I haven't
ignored you, just seems like time is too short during the day.
Above, you said, "Jefferson: "Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, and imprisoned."
I won't argue that statement because using "Christianity" as a
motivation/reason/justification, etc. has caused much heartache.
But the problem arises in who, what, why the grounds for conducting harmful acts is done in the "name of Christianity," True believers in what Jesus Christ taught will never
justify, approve, or support such non-Christian behavior, but
those doing such are not followers of Jesus, but or their
deluded interpretation of what they want to get out of their
I've learned to accept that knowing what Christianity really
means is that one has to give up one's self and turn everything
over to doing what Jesus preached, not what man has interpreted
Christianity to mean.
Basically, man doesn't search or desire God. That's mankind's
basic nature — to make themselves gods and deluded themselves
into thinking they're doing "God's" work.
This is a very serious thing and causes the downfall of most of
humanity — in the past, today, and in the future. This is why
it's fascinating to read the Book of Revelation (and to get
authoritative comments by qualified Biblical scholars who've
studied the writing for most of their lives. These dedicated
teachers have so much to offer and yet most people are ignoring
it, for whatever reason. Well, it's their loss, and I've learned
so much in the past couple of years — it's done more to broaden
my understanding of human nature than all my years of college.
I'll also comment on "born-again" shortly.
"Sorry I haven't responded to your much earlier comments/questions, seems like I focused on Riondo. But
I'll get to your "original site" and respond fully — I haven't
ignored you, just seems like time is too short during the day."
No problem, Hank. I totally sympathise – time flies by for me too (I never understand how people can say they're bored – there's always too much to do, I find!) Just reply as and when you can.
Hey Iris, when you ask about "born-again" in Christianity, you're getting at "the heart" of Christianity. In my view there's only one kind of Christian – a "born-again" one. Otherwise they're living "CINO" – Christian In Name Only, and they're deluding themselves thinking otherwise – I've heard that term used a couple of times and it's a meaningful one to me.
Actually, I look at a strict usage of being called a Christian – you can only call yourself that if you're "born-again." If you aren't, you don't deserve to call yourself a Christian, as I'll try to explain.
To be "born again" comes out of the passage from the Bible that Jesus spoke.
Iris…I'll quote Scripture and then I'll give you my personal testimony.
John 3:1-21. The Lord Jesus Christ is talking to Nicodemus, a prominent Pharisee.
As Jesus talked with Nicodemus, He said, "'I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.
How can a man be born when he is old?' Nicodemus asked. 'Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb to be born!'
Jesus answered, 'I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again'" (John 3:3-7).
The phrase "born again" literally means "born from above." Nicodemus had a real need. He needed a change of his heart—a spiritual transformation. New birth, being born again, is an act of God whereby eternal life is imparted to the person who believes (2 Corinthians 5:17; Titus 3:5; 1 Peter 1:3; 1 John 2:29; 3:9; 4:7; 5:1-4, 18). John 1:12,13 indicates that "born again" also carries the idea "to become children of God" through trust in the name of Jesus Christ.
The question logically comes, "Why does a person need to be born again?" The Apostle Paul in Ephesians 2:1 says, "And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins…" (NKJV). To the Romans in Romans 3:23, the Apostle wrote, "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." So, a person needs to be born again in order to have their sins forgiven and have a relationship with God.
My testimony:
I believe all that's above and that it has changed my life entirely. I used to give in to my fleshly desires and was my "own god" and did whatever I wanted. I had my "self" govern my life.
I had my share of enjoyment and also my share of unhappiness. At different times, I paid dearly for my sinful behavior, hurting myself and others. Then after many years, I looked at my life and what I was and what I had to look forward to.
It's not as if I didn't have a full life, but something deeply was missing and I started to go to a fundamental church – one that preached the basics – sometimes hell, fire and damnation which really got to me. I finally looked at the Bible seriously and studied it deeply. To me, the reality of heaven and hell came to be real. I admitted to myself, the life I'd been living
was leading me to hell, and from what I read about hell, scared me. Because you begin to understand that after this life, there is an eternal afterlife, and I'll spend it in heaven or hell –
the choice is mine.
So after studying and soul searching, I knew what I had to do – turn my self and my life over to
following Jesus Christ. To ask Jesus to "come into my life and to take it over from that day on."
I can't explain the peaceful feeling that started to take over my life. I had a strong feeling that I wasn't living for myself, but that I was "born again" with Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior and with a new purpose for me. Not that everything turned "into roses" and I didn't feel thorns at different times of my life, but there was a deep sense that I would never be alone – that Jesus was with me today, and more importantly after I die and actually be with Him for eternity. It's a satisfied feeling that's impossible to put into words, but I have all the
confidence that my future is sealed in Christ.
Again Scripture, because it says it perfectly.
Ephesians 2:8-9 states, "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast." When one is "saved," he/she has been born again, spiritually renewed, and is now a child of God by right of new birth. Trusting in Jesus Christ, the One who paid the penalty of sin when He died on the cross, is what it means to be "born again" spiritually. "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation: the old has gone, the new has come!" (2 Corinthians 5:17).
Because I trusted in the Lord Jesus Christ as my Savior, I have been "born again."
"But the good news is that "to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God" (John 1:12-13).
Iris, I hope that gives you a better understanding of who I am, and what I try to do when I post my comments. All I want to do is offer this experience to people who don't know Jesus Christ,
and that doesn't necessarily mean what many erroneously think about Christianity.
I know this won't make sense or any meaning to readers here,
but I have to say to atheists and agnostics, I once felt, thought,
and believed as you do now…but to me I found the Truth and
that's the important thing in my life.
Hi Iris:
I came across this and it's an important part of knowing if one is "born again." or "saved" as some people use either phrase but they mean the same thing
George Fox was a distinguished writer and 17th-century Christian leader. When George Fox was approached by people pleading that they were saved because they believed in Jesus, Fox's response to them was: where is the evidence of your belief?
Jesus himself said: The evidence of belief of a true follower is to produce much fruit, John 15:8,
The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faith, Gentleness [or meekness], and self-control.
This involves ridding yourself of the sinful nature which includes adultery, sexual immorality, uncleanness, lack of restraint, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, arguments, jealousies, rage, selfishness, divisiveness, envies, murders, drunkenness, revelries [partying], and the like.
Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. Gal 5:19-24
Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Mat 7:19
So, you must crucify your sinful nature to produce fruit.
This is a great summary that a person should use to see where they stand in their belief system.
Hi Hank. I really appreciate your thorough and honest comment #84. I was interested to read the biblical passages you quoted so I understood where the idea of 'born again' came from. But, most of all, I was very pleased to read your own testimony. It's good to know what you feel, and that was what I meant when I said I'd like to hear your opinions. I'm very happy that you wrote all that because I feel it was an honest summary of how you feel. Thank you.
I see what you mean about CINO, as you call them. But don't you ever worry that some of the people calling themselves born again Christians are just saying that without committment? I ask that because people could, just as they say they're Christians but only in name – so they could also do that with the born again idea. I specifically ask that because I've met a most repulsive, nasty and, by any judgement, totally unchristian person who claimed he'd been 'born again'. While I don't doubt your committment to Christianity at all, he is, in my opinion, less of a Christian, than me in the way he speaks, thinks and acts.
I guess you'll say that God knows who's a true Christian so he'll be caught out in the end, but I'm sure he's not the only one bigging himself up and saying he's a Christian when he's not. We talked about TV evangelists once, didn't we, and you said that most didn't impress you. Now, what I hope you'll consider is that the ideas you have about LGBT people could have been planted in your head by unscrupulous 'christians' like those mentioned above – people who pretend they're Christian to make themselves seem important, yet have only chosen Christianity as a route to their own aggrandisement. People like that would still have their all to human prejudices and nastiness, and, by saying that they 'spoke for god' they could use God's name to advance their own bigotry.
I do NOT think that's what you're doing, by the way. I think you're a genuine Christian.
I understand what you wrote about fear. Everyone feels afraid and uncertain at some point in their life, especially as you get older (you feel immortal when you're young :D). Most people are afraid of death – life's too short and the future's unpredictable. Who wouldn't want to live forever? In a nice place, of course! I know you'll say that you have total faith in God and total belief in Heaven and Hell, and maybe you're right, who knows? But, to me, the idea of Hell, of punishment, is a human one – or at least, it's been manipulated by humans. It's a good threat to make to a child, isn't it? "Don't do that else you'll burn in HellIt can be a way to make people obey – not God's laws, men's laws. It stifles dissent. It's a tool of power.
I have nothing against God or Gods, but I do have a problem with religion. I think it's often cruel, exclusive and motivated by human greed for power.
You talk of sin in #85 (thank you for the explanation of what being born again means with regard to a person). I know you'll probably say that 'sexual immorality' includes homosexuality – but I don't think it does (and my position would be the same if I was straight). Loving another adult in a faithful, caring, respectful and consensual relationship isn't wrong.
So – can you explain why you think it is? And, when you have time, can you respond to the section above, which I hope I expressed clearly, where I said that human beings are using god as an excuse to promote their own prejudices?
Thank you again for your frank comments above. I may come back to them – a lot to say :D
Hey Iris. Thanks for your comment and questions – they're excellent and we'll have much to discuss as time goes. I'll still get to your question about boxturtlebulletin and heterosexual behavior.
You now asked, "I see what you mean about CINO, as you call them. But don't you ever worry that some of the people calling themselves born again Christians are just saying that without committment"
I'm not sure that I "worry" about that, but I definitely question their sincerity and wonder if they know the true meaning of being a Christian ….or are they just fooling themselves without commitment. This is a very dangerous situation because Jesus made the below comment that should make a person do serious introspection about their beliefs.
Scripture: Matthew 7:21-29
21 "Not every one who says to me, `Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' 23 And then will I declare to them, `I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers.'
The Bible definitely has a black/white statement as to how and what a "Christian" should believe, think and act. A person can "fool themselves and others" but when it comes down to the bottom line, they'll answer to God without any kind of excuse.
Yes, I believe there are way too many CINO who don't go beyond the surface in self-examination about their belief. Not that I'm anywhere near being a non-sinning person, though I do try – we're all sinners throughout our lives, but we should be "less sinners" as we become stronger in our Christian walk.
And yes, when those kinds of CINO do hurtful things against others, it casts a poor picture about Christianity for society, and even makes it harder for others to accept the good that Christianity does offer. Those kinds of people will have a more severe judgment to face after they die.
I'll get back to you about your questions about hell, God, religion, sexual immorality, but right now that'll take more time as it'll be more detailed.
Also, I came across a fascinating article "A study of altruistic punishment" that opened up a totally new view to me that might have some meaning as to why many Christians are so opposed to homosexuality. I may be way "off base" as I read into it, but it's very challenging to see if there's a connection and it's rather detailed and will take time to "digest" and put it to use.
"One anonymous therapist wrote. "The physical act for male homosexuals is physically damaging and is the main reason in this country for AIDS/HIV. It is also perverse.""
Anonymous Sources = Lies
Hank, I'm still here. Thank you for comment #87. I'm pleased to have it confirmed that such a nasty, foul-mouthed, violent man can't just call himself a Christian and get away with it. Got to work over the weekend so can't post now, but I'll be back to respond when I can.
Matthew 7:21 is firmly lodged in my brain now as a retort to that most unchristian of men :D
But – to continue my comments – I was interested that you chose the Bible and Christianity as a way of improving your life. We all (I hope) try to make ourselves better people by trying to avoid the mistakes we've made before, especially when we've hurt others, and by trying to live well, but not all of us choose as you did. In fact, I would guess (and it's only a guess) that most people fix on something else for self-improvement, eg diet, exercise, voluntary work, studying, a new hobby, etc.
I was trying to understand why you chose Christianity and I think that maybe the clue was in what you wrote – you said that you read the Bible and were scared to read about Hell, and that inspired you to concentrate on being a proper Christian in order to get to Heaven. Please correct me if any of that's wrong.
But when I re-read the Bible as an adult, it made me believe LESS not more. This was because of the contradictions, the amount of killing, the historical inaccuracies, the omissions, the misogyny, the downright weird things it said in some places. This convinced me that the Bible wasn't an accurate representation of the 'word of God' and was, indeed, a convenient tool of power for men.
So, I don't think Christianity is necessarily what one needs to improve one's life and be a good person (although I respect your right to belief it is).
But – 1)where do LGBT people fit into this? Where's the bit in the Bible condemning loving, adult, consensual relationships??
2) Is your belief in the NWO sanctioned by the born again Chrstianity you believe in? I accept that you use Revelation as proof of that, but it that accepted and allowed by your religion, or is it something that you personally have added to your own belief? (and that's not a criticism)
3) Did you see, when reading the pdf link above, how easy it is to twist and distort things to suit one's own prejudices, and to make non sequitur type generalisations?
4) I understand that you come here to open our eyes to the good things that you think Christianity has provided you with – so are you saying that you can't be gay and Christian?
Take those questions one at a time if it's easier. I do sympathise about your time issues. I look forward to your replies, and to more information about that @Altruistic Punishment' study you mentioned above.
A good book is, the battle for normality, by Gerard Van den Aardweg. It will help you if you desire it.
Hey Rich, my library doesn't have the book you suggested,
but they have " On the origins and treatment of homosexuality : a psychoanalytic reinterpretation" which I've requested and should
get next week — will definitely read it.
Having trouble sending my comment Iris — refused it twice.
Hey Iris…happy to see your comments/questions and I'll get
back to you later this afternoon. I truly enjoy communicating
with you and you do have a "teacher's mind" so to speak, from
what you ask and how you're thinking.
Very briefly, he reason I look to the Bible as a primary source for my direction and understanding of life, is that I approach it with an open mind because it has great philosophical principles,
deep psychological understanding about human nature
behavior in today's world, it even gives some diet information
And how can anyone argue with the Christian tradition of pointing out the serious impact on spiritual/social development that's listed as as "deadly sins." While not inclusive, wouldn't the world be better by following and obeying this list of
negative and hurtful acts: gluttony, fornication, avarice, anger, dejection , sloth , vainglory and pride. (Who of us
wouldn't be better (and our fellow man), if we didn't do any of the above?)
Anyway Iris, I'll be back shortly — don't some short trips now.
Hey Iris,
…you said, "I was trying to understand why you chose Christianity and I think that maybe the clue was in what you wrote – you said that you read the Bible and were scared to read about Hell, and that inspired you to concentrate on being a proper Christian in order to get to Heaven. Please correct me if any of that's wrong."
No, that wasn't the motivation for my making my decision for accepting Christianity, though there's a valid purpose for my "fearing Hell, and desiring Heaven." in my Christian behavior.
First, I have to believe there is a rationale for punishing evil and rewarding good.
The only major differences are what standards a person uses in judging an evil deed and in a good deed. By using Biblical standards I have less problems in having making judgments about absolute and relative acts and their value.
Also, I believe human life is the greatest creation, and taking somebody's life is the ultimate in rejecting God or rejecting one's philosophical, psychological, sociological, or intellectual standard that exists in civilized life. And I feel justified that the punishment of execution is in accordance with act, but of course it has to be 100% confirmed that the person was guilty. I realize there are a variety of circumstances in each case, but it some cases, there is no question as to the evil behavior.
I believe mankind has degenerated to where it no longer views life as precious and crucial beyond all value. And later I'll connect the NWO and its goal as it's involved in this lowering view of life. There are some serious and evil activities dealing with population problems, worldwide war issues, diminishing individual privacy, education, and so many major topics that are increasing and are being recognized by more experts in all areas. That in itself is an extremely fascinating examination of the direction of countries and societies worldwide. Much of it is being organized and carried out in the USA.
I'll send this comment for now and get back again soon with other
issues you've brought up.
Thank you, Hank. I look forward to your comments on the other issues. Have a good weekend.
Hey Iris. About the NWO, there's so much more I could offer but it's too lengthy but there's so much on the Internet, that anyone with an open mind can see that there are too many facts,
theories, projects, research, to ignore there has been a long-term movement by certain powerful forces, and humans goals that have been moving for many generations.
Too many people think it's bizarre to talk about the reality of the New World Order, that it's a silly conspiracy theory or something similar. But a person has to look into it with an open mind and be observant enough to see all the connections of what's going on – many of the earliest actions that began well over a100 years ago – involving specially-motivated people and groups , which changes as time goes on, but the goal hasn't changed.
"New World Order," is a term used to describe the uniting of the world's superpowers to secure and maintain "global peace." World leaders are excited at the prospects for peace and there has been much talk about entering a "new era" and the establishment of a "New World Order."
A New World Order has been a long time in the making – sometimes its action and behavior is apparent and sometimes can only be understood by "reading outside the box," and looking at how various acts are heading toward a certain direction and goal.
One part of the agenda is economic control of the world. The Bible states that one day the antichrist will be able to track and control all financial transactions and that NO MAN will be able to buy or sell anything unless he has the mark of the beast.
As we can see, there's worldwide financial problems, with countries heading toward bankruptcy .How many banker bailouts will it take before people understand the international financial elites are stealing our pension funds and enslaving us to a lifetime of debt?
"SIGNIFICANT QUOTE: "It is well the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." – Henry Ford (said this around 1900 – very prophetic as we see things happening today).
To add more to the progressing NWO goal, To go along with a financial crisis, it was necessary to have an "internal government crisis" that will permit the country more control over American citizens – and this crisis came from a group of Muslims on Sept. 11, 2001 with their highjacking and crashing airplanes into our major buildings.
Reading various websites worldwide, NWO globalists everywhere celebrated the attack on America as their goals were now being accomplished — and they saw their desire to instill fear into the hearts of Americans beginning to be accomplished because Americans now were willing to exchange their freedom for a false feeling of security through government setting up various controls.
It's always been the NWO's goal to destroy our free constitutional Republic. And we're not only allowing the government to further intrude into our private lives in the name of "national security" but we're demanding that they continue to expand whatever they want to give us "greater security.".
The NWO's agenda is being further advanced with the "War on Terror", and by the "Patriot Act" – all with significantly increased surveillance and investigative powers of law enforcement agencies in the United States. Then the emergence of "Homeland Security" further permitted government intrusion into the private lives of Americans
To show how desperate the NWO powers are in furthering their goals, look at just a few things that have happened in the USA in our recent history:. There are so many "secret" experiments that have been part of the control of Americans.
In preparing America for nuclear attack during the Cold War years following World War II, thousands of US citizens became the innocent victims of over 4,000 secret and classified radiation experiments conducted by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and other government agencies, such as the Department of Defense, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, the Public Health Service (now the CDC), the National Institutes of Health, the Veterans Administration (VA), the CIA, and NASA
Secret Radiation Experiments
Only recently, with the forced release of Top Secret documents, have details been revealed about the unethical and inhumane radiation studies conducted during the Cold War years from 1944 to 1974. The initial story broke in November 1993 in a series of articles in the Albuquerque Tribune which identified the names of 18 Americans secretly injected with plutonium, a key ingredient of the atomic bomb and one of the most toxic substances known to man. Some, but not all, of the patients were terminally ill. This horrifying story by journalist Eileen Welsome (who later won a Pulitzer Prize) unleashed a storm of nationwide protest prompting Department of Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary to order the release of secret files and documents pertaining to these Cold War experiments.
The extremely dangerous plutonium experiment was performed under the auspices of the government's Manhattan Project, which brought together a revered group of distinguished scientists to develop and test the atom bomb. The purpose of these secret experiments was to establish occupational standards for workers who would be producing plutonium and other radioactive ingredients for the nuclear energy industry.
Some of the classified government experiments included:
* Exposing more than 100 Alaskan villagers to radioactive iodine during the 1960s.
* Feeding 49 retarded and institutionalised teenagers radioactive iron and calcium in their cereal during the years 1946-1954.
* Exposing about 800 pregnant women in the late 1940s to radioactive iron to determine the effect on the fetus.
* Injecting 7 newborns (six were Black) with radioactive iodine.
* Exposing the testicles of more than 100 prisoners to cancer-causing doses of radiation. This experimentation continued into the early 1970s.
* Exposing almost 200 cancer patients to high levels of radiation from cesium and cobalt. The AEC finally stopped this experiment in 1974.
* Administering radioactive material to psychiatric patients in San Francisco and to prisoners in San Quentin.
* Administering massive doses of full body radiation to cancer patients hospitalised at the General Hospital in Cincinnati, Baylor College in Houston, Memorial Sloan-Kettering in New York City, and the US Naval Hospital in Bethesda, during the 1950s and 1960s. The experiment provided data to the military concerning how a nuclear attack might affect its troops.
* Exposing 29 patients, some with rheumatoid arthritis, to total body irradiation (100-300 rad dose) to obtain data for the military. This was conducted at the University of California Hospital in San Francisco.
The Internet has revealed many horrible experiments conducted on Americans, and probably similar things have/are happening in other countries.
Hi Hank. Thank you for expanding on your NWO view. I do understand where you're coming from much better after reading that. I'm still not sure how you're so certain that the NWO is linked to Revelation though. I know you'll say that the Bible mentions specific things and there are signs that these are happening, but many of those things would happen at any fall of society, wouldn't they? You covered a lot of material in your comment, but let me make some comments of my own (and pose some questions, as always :D) that occurred to me on reading what you wrote.
I agree that many people in power may not always act in the right way or in the best interests of the general public. I think that's a given really. They have their own interests to promote (eg multi-national companies) and even individuals can be swayed by their own views or beliefs. Also, power can corrupt – sometimes horribly so.
You talk of a global conspiracy, but, to be honest, I don't believe such a level of co-operation would ever exist. Each country/company/person would have their own interests to look after, and would always protect their own interests from any real or perceived threat. Therefore a global conspiracy wouldn't work because of self-interest and mistrust.
Finance/Economy – not my specialism, I'm afraid :D But I see the collapse of various banking systems around the world and the ensuing recessions as more of a domino effect (if that's the right phrase) because they are connected. Loss of faith in one country's economy will have a knock-on effect on other countries. Trade between countries will be affected, as will stocks and shares (because they're owned by those outside the affected country aswell as inside), and something like, say, a fall in the price of oil will affect many countries in many ways. I see this as just the way finance works, not as some kind of planned conspiracy.
"The Bible states that one day the antichrist will be able to track and control all financial transactions and that NO MAN will be able to buy or sell anything unless he has the mark of the beast."
Ah, now isn't that the barcode bit? Barcodes being believed to have the mark of the beast and to be being used to track people? Well, I don't believe that's true personally. Also, even if it was, it'd be a pretty poor system as not everything has a barcode (eg the loose vegetables I bought today). If you're talking about tracking people through the banking system by noting when we use our bank cards, then that'd work poorly too because people can and do use cash.
*A question – why do you think the Anti-Christ would be so interested in money? Isn't that a very HUMAN concern?
"To add more to the progressing NWO goal, To go along with a financial crisis, it was necessary to have an "internal government crisis" that will permit the country more control over American citizens – and this crisis came from a group of Muslims on Sept. 11, 2001 with their highjacking and crashing airplanes into our major buildings.
Reading various websites worldwide, NWO globalists everywhere celebrated the attack on America as their goals were now being accomplished — and they saw their desire to instill fear into the hearts of Americans beginning to be accomplished because Americans now were willing to exchange their freedom for a false feeling of security through government setting up various controls."
Now I do PARTLY agree with this. I have NOT seen any evidence to suggest that the 9/11 attacks were anything other than the work of Islamic terrorists, so I don't believe that that attack was engineered by the US Governemnt in any way. However, I DO believe that many Americans live in a state of fear and insecurity. There's always an 'enemy', whether it be Communists or Terrorists – or, dare I say it, LGBT people…. I DO agree that it can be to a Government's benefit to maintain a sense of general fear and unease (because that makes people easier to govern). But – and this isn't an attack on your faith – I also believe that the Christian Right are guilty of this same fear-mongering.
An example is gay marriage. There's no way that that would harm 'traditional' marriage – no way at all. Nor would it bring down society or whatever. To say that it would is just fear-mongering by picking an easy target (the LGBT minority) and playing on people's natural fears about anything or anyone different to themselves. This is how some fundies spread lies. They whip up a state of fear (just like you're saying that the US Government has done) by spreading mis-information.
Don't fall for it, Hank. I respect your Christian faith and I respect your right to believe in the NWO, but don't let people with their own agenda mislead you. I'm talking about groups like Focus on the Family and NARTH, to name just two. I admire you for coming onto Pink News so that you can see both sides, and I hope you've been reassured that LGBT people are no threat to you or the world.
The experiments you've listed there are quite obviously deplorable, but why they were done, I don't know. Certainly governments were more paternalistic in the past ("We know what's best for you") and less concerned with individual's rights – especially if they were disabled/black/female/children maybe. I think the situation has improved greatly, but part of the reason for the improvement is the understanding that all humans are equal and deserve to be treated with respect and dignity.
The society I hope to see is one where everyone is always treated as equal, no matter what their gender, race, sexuality, age, ability, etc. Gay Rights movements are part of the push towards that equality and towards ending discrimination. That's a good thing for everyone.
*Do you still think that LGBT people are part of the NWO conspiracy? And if so, why do you think that?
Again, I look forward to your reply when you have time. I know we always cover a lot of subjects! :D
Hi Iris. Just a very brief reply to your comment,, "You talk of a global conspiracy, but, to be honest, I don't believe such a level of co-operation would ever exist. Each country/company/person would have their own interests to look after, and would always protect their own interests from any real or perceived threat. Therefore a global conspiracy wouldn't work because of self-interest and mistrust"
Iris…I know it's difficult for most people to be aware/accept a selfish, controlling, abusive, detrimental power that has a destructive attitude towards the majority of our world's population, , but throughout history, there have been knowledgeable, intelligent leaders who have seen this movement and they've expressed their views and fears. I've finally arrived at a similar view (which I also see that the Bible acknowledged and informed us would be happening with mankind)
I know that most often people look at this be "conspiracy stupidity" but once you start delving into this area, you come across too much to write if off as a "improbable plot theory."
Just for starters, here's one interesting site I located "World Leaders and Famous People Promoting a New World Order and a One World Government" – it was compiled by Wes Penre, in February 2004.
It could be updated with many more recent pronouncements by prominent persons but I know you see my point without going into a longer list of quotes.
Let the truth speak for itself:
* * *
The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since the days of Andrew Jackson."– U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt in a letter written Nov. 21, 1933 to Colonel E. Mandell House
* * *
"Fifty men have run America, and that's a high figure."
Joseph Kennedy, father of JFK, in the July 26th, l936 issue of The New York Times
"From the days of Sparticus, Weishaupt, Karl Marx, Trotski, belacoon, Rosa Luxenberg and
Ema Goldman, this world conspiracy has been steadily growing. This conspiracy played a definite recognizable role in the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the 19th century. And now at last, this band of extraordinary personalities from the under- world of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their head and have become the undisputed masters of that enormous empire."–Winston Churchill to the London press in 1922
* * *
"The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise their power from behind the scenes."– Justice Felix Frankfurter, U.S. Supreme Court
* * *
"Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it." – Woodrow Wilson
* * *
"I believe that if the people of this nation fully understood what Congress has done to them over the last 49 years, they would move on Washington; they would not wait for an election….It adds up to a preconceived plan to destroy the economic and social independence of the United States!" –George W. Malone, U.S. Senator (Nevada), speaking before Congress in1957.
* * *
"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans…"
Bill Clinton (USA TODAY, 11 March 1993, page 2A)
People of such caliber can't be dismissed without seeing what
they're talking about.
Iris, I'll get to your other comments shortly.
Hey Iris;
Just received this joke from my daughter and I know you'll
get a laugh from it too.
"I was in a restaurant yesterday when I suddenly realized I desperately needed to pass gas.
The music was really, really loud, so I timed my gas to the beat of the music.
After a couple of songs, I started to feel better.
I finished my coffee and noticed that everybody was staring at me.
It was then I suddenly remembered that I was listening to my iPod!"
What do you think….brought a chuckle didn't it?
Hi Hank – yes, iPods can be deceiving! I've been known to sing along to mine in the supermarket and have only realised when I see the horrified glances coming my way!
I read #98 with interest and did some reading myself. I always like to read around a subject. I did come up with more questions though, but – with difficulty :D – I'm going to refrain from asking them because I don't want to overwhelm you with questions when you're still dealing with previous ones. It gets muddly that way. I'll let you continue and post my questions later.
Still there, Hank? I keep checking back to see any comments you make, so please continue.
These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.
More like this
- Ex-gay mother given 30 days to appear before court
- Ex-gay therapy survivor testifies at gay marriage trial 8
- Report: Ex-gay therapy does not work 17
- Normal again: The reasons and realities behind the ex-gay movement 132
- US student 'forced' into ex-gay therapy 81
- Ex-gay therapy survivor to speak at psychotherapy conference 3
Most commented this week
- 7-year-old put into father's custody after mother 'raised him as female' 101
- More than a billion people are still living under British anti-gay laws 91
- Trans teen refused service because staff didn't believe his ID belonged to him 58
- Gay couple receive death threats after showing support for Donald Trump 58
- Simon Cowell apologises for gay joke 52
- Straight people getting AIDS is a 'left-wing lie', pro-Trump radio host claims 40
- Bishop of Liverpool: Gay Christians have a right to be angry with the Church 36
- Jazz Jennings gets real on dating as a trans teen 35
- Labour Party report confirms Angela Eagle was targeted by homophobic abuse 31
- Shows must have more on-screen LGBT representation, BBC says 27