Skip to comments.Dr. Robert Spitzer Renounces Infamous 'Ex-Gay' Study Claiming Some Gays Could...retread troll zot
Posted on 04/19/2012 7:21:51 PM PDT by Only Sane ManEdited on 04/19/2012 7:45:07 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
In a move that serves as a significant blow to "ex-gay" programs and anti-gay organizations, Dr. Robert Spitzer repudiated his much-criticized 2001 study that claimed some "highly motivated" homosexuals could go from gay to straight. His retraction occurred in an American Prospect magazine article that hit newsstands today. Spitzer's rejection of his own research, which was originally published in the prestigious Archives of Sexual Behavior, is a devastating blow to "ex-gay" organizations because it decisively eliminates their most potent claim that homosexuality can be reversed through therapy and prayer.
His reason for retraction had nothing to do with the veracity of the study. Further the only thing he stated regarding the study was "the critiques [of my study] are largely correct" and "The findings can be considered evidence for what those who have undergone ex-gay therapy say about it, but nothing more."
I suspect he was simply sick and tired of getting harassed, (RE: retraction: "So I don't have to worry about it anymore"), by the butt rangers and their useful idiots.
-from the article
"In retrospect, I have to admit I think the critiques [of my study] are largely correct," Dr. Spitzer told the American Prospect in an article by Gabriel Arana titled, My So Called Ex-Gay Life. "The findings can be considered evidence for what those who have undergone ex-gay therapy say about it, but nothing more." Spitzer asked for a retraction of his 2001 study, "So I don't have to worry about it anymore?"
In summary The arguments remain -homosexuality is an intrinsic disorder and homosexual sex is self destructive, of no benefit to society, and noting to be promoted -I am not drinking the leftist koolaid you are serving up.
I believe one can hate the sin but not the sinner.
Most conservatives could care less what consenting adults do in the privacy of their home.
What many of us have a problem with is the concept of putting a homosexual relationship on a culturally equal footing, both societally and politically, with heterosexual relationships.
I don’t have children, but I fully recognize that the benefits that a government may render for the purpose of supporting a family-based society are ostensibly there to promote that structure, and should not be extended to homosexual relationships.
Liberals, of course, have different ideas about the family unit. It is not a surprise that the vast majority of homosexuals are liberals.
I hardly think this tripe is “scientific advance”. Methinks that Spitzer succombed to the gaystapo.
My research in this area has led to some interesting observations.
1. Why more boys are autistic and have Asperger’s Syndrome than girls.
2. Why women or dominate feminine men are more likely to develop MS. It appears to be an emotional influence on allosteric enzymes production in the liver necessary for the schwann cells to produce the myelin sheath around the axons.
This is a fascinating area for research.
That was exactly what I got from that.
I don’t know or care about his original study, but it doesn’t sound like he went back to the drawing board with his quiver of scientific method tools and came to a different conclusion.
It sounds more like he wants to wash his hands of it. Can’t say I blame him.
Maybe people can't change, but they can be changed.
Prayers for your son. We are all sinners, saved only by Grace. May the Good Lord work His miraculous work.
2 Corinthians 5:17
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
The rectum is certainly uncomplicated ... as a part of the digestive system, it was designed the Creator to solely be a 'one-way street'.
Religion is "a choice"; race is "an innate characteristic"; discrimination on either basis is equally unacceptable in civilized society.
Actually, there are countless former homosexuals.
So, you are wrong.
Exactly. I do not think the results of his study point to a finding that ALL homosexuals can change and be cured of the disorder. At best, the critiques, which involve the population sampled point to a conclusion that not as many may be successfully treated as the study implies.
HOWEVER, the homosexual sex promoters want to use this 'monumental earth shattering scientific retraction' as another springboard to use to continue promoting the fallacy that NO ONE CAN BE TREATED successfully, and as such, there is no reason to resist the self destructive activity, and further, since the disordered activity can not be resisted (automatons born that way) we must all embrace and promote it as good and wholesome -after all, penguins do it!
I say, balderdash!
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.
Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.
Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.
Well well well, Spitzer went flip-flop-flip, back to being a lickspittle of the homo-nazis. I wonder what kind of of pressure was applied.
If you"re talking about behavior, I believe you. Under that standard there are countless former heterosexuals too...ask about 1/2 the married men you know. They are certainly "former" in the sense they don't get any sex.
The question is, what kind of sex would they choose if they could have any they wanted?
That's my definition of homo and hetero.
A great thread with lots of information about the real causes of homosexuality. Tons of links.
Not born this way: The facts, plus help available
Save California ^ | Various authors
Posted on Sunday, June 05, 2011 7:48:09 AM by scripter
Without any reputable evidence, the entertainment culture, uneducated media, and sexual activists have seduced today’s teenagers, in particular, to believe that people are born homosexual.
However, science has found no biological basis for homosexuality, bisexuality, or transsexuality.
Study after study has found the LGBT lifestyle to be unhealthy, with the highest rate of sexually-transmitted diseases, and higher cancer rates and earlier deaths.
While all people are worthy and valuable, the fact is people are not “born this way,” as a popular song insists.
On this page you will find:
1. The facts on homosexuality
2. Resources to overcome homosexual behavior and gender identity disorder
3. An important video message titled “Does God Love Gay People?”
4. Some personal stories from people who used to live a homosexual lifestyle
Bingo! After all, a majority of the APA caved after a very long period of homo-activism, threats, and just downright nastiness.
Nature discriminates unapologetically. I can't have a baby though I can Father one. And two men can not have a baby no matter who pitches and catches. Natural law is a harsh mistress.
Homosexuality is a mental illness, a gross sexual perversion, a grave moral failing and so on.
Whether it’s a concious choice or not has little to do with the question. For some it is, for many it is not - at least as far as same sex attraction disorder. But every sex act by anyone is a choice. One can choose to act or not to. That’s one of the differences between being an animal and being a human being.
Discrimination because of race or religion in public or by the state is wrong, of course individuals can discriminate all they want to. But homosexuality has nothing to do with race or religion since it is a mental illness and moral flaw and such people are not only dangerous to themselves, but to others, and the sickness is also accompanied by other character flaws, such as higher rates of drug and alcohol abuse, domestic violence, crime including sex crimes, pedophilia and more.
Actually a person would be crazy not to discriminate against homosexuals.
Thanks, WestwardHo. Your previous stories about your son were heart-wrenching, and your anguish has been felt by many here who are familiar with you and your excellent posts. I’d say that your admonition is worth more than all the others posting here combined.
Why don’t you at least familiarize yourself at least with one such man and his story. Start by looking up Sy Rogers. If he can change, anyone can.
You don’t believe that there might be rational reasons to discriminate on the basis of a choice? Even a religion that is a “choice”.
If there were a religion that mandated that all people of another religion should be killed or oppressed, wouldn’t that be an appropriate reason to discriminate against someone who embraces that religion?
One of the major problems we face is that being judgmental is somehow perceived to be “bad”. We should damn well be judgmental, else we go down the slippery slope of moral relativism.
Oh. We are already doing that.