Is Homosexuality a Disorder?

[Nameless.In.Grace]

No no, I should be the one apologizing, I misunderstood you. Thats my fault. I know you're one of the few nice people here. Don't give it a second thought.

Thank God!!!! Peace brother.

Thankful for your forgiveness!

Respect! Sincere respect!


Sent from my iPad using TOL ~Jesus is the Theology and the Counselor is the Commentary

 

[Nameless.In.Grace]

Right. Most girls like their bodies, but when boys go through puberty, the girl go boy crazy, you know. Then some boys go boy crazy and they come to dislike their bodies, but as they mature they come to like their bodies and even though they like being male, they are still boy crazy. The very few who never like their bodies are very messed up.

Now, this is NOT the same as boys who grow up naturally lifelong girls, and are girl crazy,. yet have never developed inner trust, so they cannot totally love a girl and then obsesses on becoming a girl

This is volumes of psychological and psychoanalytic theory made simple.

One cannot know all this, then hate people for the developmental problems, just because the problems are primary and sexual.

If any censorship is based outside religion, then one is bigoted and a bit disturbed, like some we know

Right. Most girls like their bodies, but when boys go through puberty, the girl go boy crazy, you know. Then some boys go boy crazy and they come to dislike their bodies, but as they mature they come to like their bodies and even though they like being male, they are still boy crazy. The very few who never like their bodies are very messed up.

Now, this is NOT the same as boys who grow up naturally lifelong girls, and are girl crazy,. yet have never developed inner trust, so they cannot totally love a girl and then obsesses on becoming a girl

This is volumes of psychological and psychoanalytic theory made simple.

One cannot know all this, then hate people for the developmental problems, just because the problems are primary and sexual.

If any censorship is based outside religion, then one is bigoted and a bit disturbed, like some we know

On that note,

If you were simply political, I would see you as so.

But do you not represent Christ, by your personal profession?

I censor no one.

But I do hold people to their claims of faith.

I only reported you, because you threatened to have me banned.

I also respect your opinion, but calling expression of Christ's stance of forgiveness obscene is not wise.

What is more important, the political views you express, or the King who redeems your soul?

You are aware that your words, represent His words, because you profess Christianity, are you not?


Sent from my iPad using TOL ~Jesus is the Theology and the Counselor is the Commentary

 

[Eeset]

When did I choose to be straight? I suppose it was in the back seat of a convertible when Billy ...

 

[Nameless.In.Grace]

It is nonsense. It's simply the fact that puritans need to insist on it being a "choice" unfortunately, despite the fact that if you're straight it's not one you could make. Bonkers...

Witches that were mere people, falsely accused of which-craft were burned by such a pack mentality. [emoji848]

And again, those occurrences were contrary to the teachings of Jesus. [emoji20]


Sent from my iPad using TOL ~Jesus is the Theology and the Counselor is the Commentary

 

[Nameless.In.Grace]

When did I choose to be straight? I suppose it was in the back seat of a convertible when Billy ...

Rotfl.....


Sent from my iPad using TOL ~Jesus is the Theology and the Counselor is the Commentary

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Sorry to go off topic but you guys have GOT to see the tweet replies to this tweet by Jeanine Pirro, heeelarious: https://twitter.com/JudgeJeanine/status/757021472938262529

 

[Ktoyou]

I only reported you, because you threatened to have me banned.

That does not make any sense.

You posted an obscene thread and many have reported it. Obviously you do not understand the rules on TOL. I suggest you read them. Maybe you are able to see the flaw in posting potty language thread titles and obscene pictures. This why I think you are not proper for TOL, not being gay, or your theology.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

When did I choose to be straight? I suppose it was in the back seat of a convertible when Billy ...

Don't stop now!

 

[Catholic Crusader]

 

[Nameless.In.Grace]

That does not make any sense.

You posted an obscene thread and many have reported it. Obviously you do not understand the rules on TOL. I suggest you read them. Maybe you are able to see the flaw in posting potty language thread titles and obscene pictures. This why I think you are not proper for TOL, not being gay, or your theology.

Are you referring to the church of the "Whited Tomb"? Which has the name, the Church of the Chocolate covered Turd?

It would only offend self righteous people...... OIC....

Awkward Moment.

Sent from my HTC One M9 using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[Eeset]

Don't stop now!

If I say much more then some uptight holier than thou pretender will report me.

 

[MrDante]

Do heterosexuals engage in sexual behavior which won't lead to procreation?

(That's a rhetorical question, btw.)

Are heterosexuals inherently disordered for performing those acts?

(That question is for you.)

I suspect the response will be that such acts when performed by heterosexuals is somehow "different" and therefore OK.

 

[MrDante]

Moved from ACW's thread.

Are homosexual desires and behaviors inherently disordered (ie, divorced from the biological function(s) of sex)?

Since a disorder is characterized by clinically significant disturbance in an individual's cognitive, emotion regulation, or behavior that interferes with the performance of daily routines and life demands then it is obvious that homosexuality is not a disorder.

 

[MrDante]

Right. Most girls like their bodies, but when boys go through puberty, the girl go boy crazy, you know. Then some boys go boy crazy and they come to dislike their bodies, but as they mature they come to like their bodies and even though they like being male, they are still boy crazy. The very few who never like their bodies are very messed up.

Now, this is NOT the same as boys who grow up naturally liking girls, and are girl crazy,. yet have never developed inner trust, so they cannot totally love a girl and then obsesses on becoming a girl

This is volumes of psychological and psychoanalytic theory made simple.

No, if it were a theory then it would be supported by evidence and research.

 

[Selaphiel]

Of course it is.

Particularly, if you get crushes on, and fall in love with, members of your own sex, instead of with members of the opposite sex, that's disordered, plainly and clearly. Your desire is for a spouse, which is right and good, and you're only interested in others of your own sex, which is beyond your control. It's disordered.

When you say that "X clearly is Y", I expect to find an argument backing it up. If it clearly is the case, it should be easy to appeal to clear evidence or an unambigious argument demonstrating your claim.

You have not provided such an argument. Why is it disordered? Why is it inherently disordered to be longing for a loving partnership with someone of the same sex? You have just silently assumed that longing for someone of the opposite sex is the only ordered option. Justify that assumption please.

If homosexual relationships are so inherently disordered, why are they so prevalent in nature? If it was only in human beings, then you might have a case for arguing that it was some peculiar human disorder. But it is prevalent across many species in the animal kingdom, especially in social animals. Why would such a disorder (according to you) be preserved through natural selection? Especially a feature that does not produce offspring directly. This seems to suggest that they actually do have a social function in these species and thus a certain rate of same sex activities and partnerships are preserved in the populations.

 

[musterion]

Do you ever whistle?

The mouth evolved to whistle? That is some stupid reaching right there. You got nothing, just say so.

 

[musterion]

Mouth is for eating, speech and, in Selaphie's case, breathing. Anus is for defecation. Neither of these structures is designed for penile penetration.

The vagina, alone, is. It not only self prepares for penetration, it leads to the womb which is designed to make us of the sperm discharged from penetration. This is a fact plainly seen in mammals. We are no exception to it. The same Designer used a common design that works fine.

So the question "Is homosexuality a disorder" answers itself. Of course it is. It can't not be.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Whatever unnatural acts heterosexuals decide to engage is totally besides the point. People fly, people scuba dive, people race at 200mph, all unnatural acts as well, but people who do them are not mentally disordered.

This thread is about "Is Homosexuality a Disorder?". A disorder is a thing of the MIND, and same-sex ATTRACTION is a thing of the mind. Yes, it is a disorder.

This is really simple: The most base instinct in ANY species is to procreate and perpetuate the species. Therefore, if you have an aversion to intercourse with the opposite sex, then the normal main instinct that you should have is skewed and disordered. If someone actually has an aversion to intercourse with the opposite sex, that is disordered: it is diametrically opposed to the most core instinct we have.

 

[Selaphiel]

Mouth is for eating, speech and, in Selaphie's case, breathing. Anus is for defecation. Neither of these structures is designed for penile penetration.

The vagina, alone, is. It not only self prepares for penetration, it leads to the womb which is designed to make us of the sperm discharged from penetration. This is a fact plainly seen in mammals. We are no exception to it. The same Designer used a common design that works fine.

So the question "Is homosexuality a disorder" answers itself. Of course it is. It can't not be.

Of course, you operate out of a ridiculous design paradigm. Scientifically literate people operate out of a paradigm of natural selection and adaptation. I have little interest in arguing about biological function with someone who fails to grasp middle school biology.
It is highly unlikely that homosexuality is a disorder if it is prevalent across so many species. It suggests that it serves some societal function in social species.If it does, then it serves a function in the perpetuation of species.

This is really simple: The most base instinct in ANY species is to procreate and perpetuate the species. Therefore, if you have an aversion to intercourse with the opposite sex, then the normal main instinct that you should have is skewed and disordered. If someone actually has an aversion to intercourse with the opposite sex, that is disordered: it is diametrically opposed to the most core instinct we have.

Which is an overly simplistic understanding of how perpetuation of species actually occurs, to the point of being a falsehood. You assume that it is all about individuals procreating. If it was, homosexuality wouldn't have existed, it would have been extinct since whatever mechanism that causes it would have been eliminated by natural selection. But evolutionary biology is about the perpetuation of populations, not individuals. In social animals, that means that some individuals serve other needs than those that are directly related to the reproductive act. Homosexuality may serve such a role, which would explain why it mainly exists in social animals. Then you entire "it is a disorder because it has no function" argument collapses.

 

[musterion]

Of course, you operate out of a ridiculous design paradigm.

Mouth --> eating, drinking. Additionally for humans, speech.

Anus --> defecation and expulsion of gaseous byproducts of gut bacteria.

Vagina --> accommodates penis, receives semen, enables reproduction, births young.

Only an insane, perverted, psychologically retarded sodomite would find any of that ridiculous.