Skip to comments.Remember: Politics not science decided that homosexuals are 'normal'
Posted on 11/23/2008 7:06:32 AM PST by JosephSmithNAW
Let us, for a moment, rewind to the year1970. In this year, same-gender sex activists began a program of intimidation aimed at the American Psychiatric Association (APA). Activist Frank Kameny states the movements objective clearly, I feel that the entire homophile movement is going to stand or fall upon the question of whether or not homosexuality is a sickness, and upon our taking a firm stand on it (The Gay Crusaders, by Kay Tobin and Randy Wicker, p. 98)
In 1970, psychiatrists generally considered sexual desires toward members of ones own gender to be disordered. Karoly Maria Kertbenys term, homosexual was the official descriptor for those inflicted by this mental-physical disassociative disorder. Psychiatrys authoritative voice influenced public opinion, which at the time was negative toward same-gender sex. Of course, public sexual activity in parks and public restrooms contributed to societies negative views about the types of people that did such things, but scientific opinion was crucial in the public attitude.
Led by radicals like Frank Kameny, same-gender sex activists attacked many psychiatrists publicly, as Newsweek describes, But even more than the government, it is the psychiatrists who have experienced the full rage of the homosexual activists. Over the past two years, gay-lib organizations have repeatedly disrupted medical meetings, and three months agoin the movements most aggressive demonstration so fara group of 30 militants broke into a meeting of the American Psychiatric Association in Washington, where they turned the staid proceedings into near chaos for twenty minutes. We are here to denounce your authority to call us sick or mentally disordered, shouted the groups leader, Dr. Franklin Kameny, while the 2,000 shocked psychiatrists looked on in disbelief. For us, as homosexuals, your profession is the enemy incarnate. We demand that psychiatrists treat us as human beings, not as patients to be cured! (Newsweek, 8-23-71, p.47)
Ironically, at the very moment Franklin Kameny was claiming that same-gender sex was healthy, safe, and natural, a deadly virus was silently passing through communities of men all over the nation as a result of the promiscuous, unhealthy nature of the sex they were having. Only a decade later, thousands of men would be dead or dying, of AIDS.
On June 7, of the following year, 1971, Franklin Kameny wrote a letter to the Psychiatric News threatening the APA with not only more, but worse, disruptions. In this letter he states, Our presence there was only the beginning of an increasingly intensive campaign by homosexuals to change the approach of psychiatry toward homosexuality or, failing that, to discredit psychiatry. (The Gay Crusaders p. 130-131)
Same-gender sex activists continued to pressure the APA through 1973. A same-gender sex magazine, The Advocate, talks of what happened in 1973 referring to the widespread protests by the gay and lesbian community that led to the APAs dropping homosexuality from the DSM. (The Advocate, 12-28-93, p.40) As a result of the pressure, in the words of the prominent journalist and same-gender sex activists, Andrew Sullivan, in December of 1973 the APA, under intense political pressure removed homosexuality from its official list of psychiatric disorders (Love Undetectable, book by Andrew Sullivan, 1998, p. 107) Under this intense political pressure the APAs board of trustees finally caved in to the demands of same-gender sex activists. Another same-gender sex activist Mark Thompson writes, Just before the first of the year, the American Psychiatric Associations board of trustees declared we were no longer sick. (The Long Road to Freedom, ed. by Mark Thompsan1994, p. 97)
(There is more in the link)
The homosexual propaganda continued with "I was born this way", the "gay gene", and so on. The whole story - that, whatever disposition may exist "genetically", it is by no means conclusive; that what happens during childhood or adulthood is of no consequence, rather of major consequence.
The rise of open homosexuality as a lifestyle was due to the breakdown of the moral consensus which existed prior to the rise of gay agitators. The gays pushed it along faster than it might have otherwise gone.
“WHY IT IS TRUE THAT SODOMITES ARE NOT A CLASS OF PEOPLE BUT A TYPE OF SINNER?”
The statement, “Some people are born homosexuals” is not true. It is true that ever person is born with a sin nature. That sin nature is capable of all kinds of vile affections. In order to practice them, however, a person must reject the moral laws of God which are written in his heart (See Romans 2:15) and then surrender himself to sensuality. (See Romans 1:24).
The false notion that sodomites are “born that way” leads to the political chaos described in the following quotes:
“It is no longer a matter of whether homosexuals will achieve political power, so much as what they will do with it. Will they demand absolute sexual freedom as in San Francisco? Will this challenge to traditional values stir still more hostility and controversy? (Commentator Harry Reasoner after research on San Francisco).
“Our message to city hall politicians everywhere is that they think it’s difficult to deal with homosexual influences now, they’ll be dealing with a total political monster if they pass they pass these bills. They’ll face pressures and agonies they never before dreamed of” (Dr, David Innes, minister in downtown San Francisco).
Copied from: SPECIAL REPORT FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS
By: IBLP Ministries (1986)
What difference does it make whether or not it’s “abnormal”? Obviously something that is relatively rare is “abnormal.”
But so is being a genius.
“Normal” has no intrinsic value, and “abnormal” is not intrinsically bad.
Pedophiles are attempting to do the same thing. They want their perversion to be viewed as just another healthy sexual expression. If we think it cant happen, I fear that we are deceiving ourselves.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment
And so is being retarded.
We DO make such distinctions. There IS intrinsic “good” and “bad”.
WHY ARE LAWS AGAINST SODOMY VITAL AND BENFEFICIAL FOT ALL CITIZENS, INCLUDING SODOMITES?
The first purpose of a law is to give instruction to those who violate universal standards of conduct which bring destruction to themselves and to those around them.
“Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers. For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine” (1 Timothy 1:9-10).
Sodomy is a self-consuming passion which will not satisfy those who engage in it. Instead it will produce enslavement to ever-increasing cravings for fulfillment. If no law exists to probihit sodomy or, worse yet, if laws are made to protect it, thousands of unsuspecting citizens will be drawn into it without knowing of its dangers.
Copied from:”SPECIAL REPORT FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS”
By; IBLP Institute (1986)
“........Normal has no intrinsic value, and abnormal is not intrinsically bad........”
....abnormal is not intrinsically bad...really?
That is the sort of ‘thinking’ that emptied mental hospitals in the 70s. Look at the results.
Normal sexual desire and drive ensures procreation.
What does homosexual desire and drive ensure?
>Remember: Politics not science decided that homosexuals are ‘normal’<
Remember: Politics not science decided that there is irrefutable proof of global warming and its destructive effect to the way of life in a Western culture.
But being "retarded" isn't bad because it's abnormal, per se.
We DO make such distinctions. There IS intrinsic good and bad.
Assuming that's true, it misses the point. It's illogical, even nonsensical, to make such distinctions merely (or even at all) on the basis that something is "abnormal," as the examples show. If you want to argue that homosexuality is bad, you have to find a more rational basis for such an argument than the mere fact that it is "abnormal," at least if you want to convince rational people of your position.
“..I do not believe they should be discriminated against in any area of society except adoption and marriage.”
Totally sensible and acceptible opinion.
Intimidation, whining, violence seems to work in the USA. Which victim groups have NOT tried it to get special undeserved privileges from normal people?
Yes, really. Being a genius is abnormal. Having flaming red hair is abnormal. Being 6'5" is abnormal. Being capable of running a four-minute mile is abnormal. All of these things are abnormal, and none of them are intrinsically bad.
That is the sort of thinking that emptied mental hospitals in the 70s.
What does homosexual desire and drive ensure?
What difference does it make? I'm not arguing that homosexuality is good. I'm just pointing out that to call it so simply on the basis that it isn't normal makes no sense. There is no intrinsic value to normality.
Obviously, I meant "...to call it bad simply on the basis...
Two words are being confused here. ‘rare’ and ‘abnormal’. These are two different words with two different meanings.
Being a genius is rare but it certainly is not considered abnormal.
When i use the word ‘normal’, i use it in this sense
Normal : free from mental disorder
I suppose it is abnormal in the statistical sense of the term, but as you say not in the sense of what is considered unhealthy.
I had hoped the sense in which the word ‘normal’ was being used would be clear from the context of the article I cited. I posted the clarification from the dictionary just to clear things up
If they aren’t sick, and it’s a predisposed condition, why do they have to recruit others? I saw this done at a local high school. It was the final straw right before I pulled my son out of there.
I don't understand the question. If by "recruiting others" you mean coming on to them, they do it for the same reason that I (a heterosexual male) used to "recruit" girls in high school--because I found them sexually attractive.
All I know is that when someone tells me homosexuality is bad because it’s not “normal,” or not “natural” (rape is natural), I just shrug.
Give me a real argument.
“...What difference does it make? I’m not arguing that homosexuality is good. I’m just pointing out that to call it so simply on the basis that it isn’t normal makes no sense. There is no intrinsic value to normality...”
I am simply stating a fact. I not moralizing the subject. There are physical differences in the brains of homosexuals. That is the point of my statement.
Red hair is ‘abnormal’? Pray tell what is ‘normal’ hair color?
You are mixing apples and oranges. There is intrinsic value to normative ranges of biologic function. Ask any diabetic or better yet, hold your breath for 5 minutes. You will quickly learn the intrinsic value of normal levels of carboxyhemoglobin.
Homosexuality is a deviation from normal sexual stimulation. Regardless of any PhD opinion, that is simply common sense. A specie cannot continue to reproduce and exist if all its members practice homosexuality. Other factors may contribute, but the driving force is abnormal brain function.
That does not make these people any less valuable to society nor do they deserve scorn. One of my dearest friends and former supervisor is a retired Marine Officer with 3 combat tours in Nam. He’s also gay; been with the same partner for 20 years. His partner is a scientist with NASA. They are valuable, productive citizens.
If the abnormal act itself is not enough to make it wrong, than what is?
I didn't claim to personally think it was wrong, though as a heterosexual, I do find it disgusting. Of course, as homosexuals, they presumably feel the same way about heterosex.
I'm just pointing out that if people want to convince me that it is, they'll have to come up with better arguments than "it's not normal" or "it's not natural."
Freud said it is part of sexual maturation to be first pre-occupied with auto-eroticism, then perhaps a fleeting interest in and identification with others of the same gender, and finally sexual maturity that enables one to have a fulfilling relationship with the opposite sex.
"Recruiters" seek to suspend teens in the phase where they are curious about their own bodies and others like them. They seek to have teens quickly identify as homosexual if they have even a scintilla of attraction to anyone of the same sex for any reason and never move on to heterosexual relationships.
I don't understand how they could be so angry about people not accepting their behaviors when they are protesting while they are naked, or wearing leather bondage gear, or busting into churches during their masses or services by throwing condoms in parishioners faces while two women French kiss each other on the church's altar. I don't see anybody in the homosexual community condemning these behaviors either. If you aren't condemning it, than you are condoning it.
Being naked in public, in front of small children while doing disgusting things to each other is WRONG!
When the protests were happening in the civil rights movement, the black protesters were fully clothed and not doing their best Caligula impression while trying to get their point across.
That is why I cannot help but to feel like the homosexual lifestyle is wrong and not about equal rights. It is more about people looking for a free pass on morally indefensible behavior. Behavior like public sex, nudity, promiscuity and violence towards anyone with a conflicting view point.
If a person feels like what they are doing is normal, than that should be good enough for them. Why do they have to go around convincing everybody that they are normal. they should just live their lives and be done with it. Why act like obnoxious disgusting asses to prove their point. They hurt their own movement when they do these things.
Welcome to FreeRepublic.
Yes, Freud said a lot of nonsensical things that have since been discredited. Few modern psychologists take Freud seriously.
I never had any sexual interest in or identification with others of the same gender, even fleetingly. I was born an extreme heterosexual. Your "recruitment" theory only works with bisexuals. Sorry, it still amounts to coming on to them for the purposes of having sex (just as I did with girls), not some kind of international gay conspiracy to expand their ranks.
I have to beg off here. I dont subscribe to the notion that what is natural is good and what is not natural is bad. Been this way since I was old enough to recognize the value of synthetic antibiotics.
I think "normal" is a useful concept when talking about health. In the context of what is bad or good, I see it as opinion. That may be worth something or even a great deal to the discussion, but it's hard to call it fact.
I agree. I certainly wouldn't defend their public behavior. I just don't think that "normality" is relevant to the discussion.
Just remember, back up your arguments with facts (or say up front it’s an opinion), and don’t take anything too personally.
We are conservatives, first and foremost. Well, most of us are! ;^)
If you don't think there is an agenda or conspiracy, read "After the Ball" and "The Band Played On."
When I go to the West Coast Walk for Life, there are individuals and hand-holding same-sex couples milling through the pro-life crowd wearing pink or rainbow triangle pins emblazoned RECRUITER. Don't tell them there's no such thing.
p.s. Most modern psychologists think homosexuality is not a mental illness, nut that so-called homophobia is.
Yes. But I never wanted to have sex with them. The thought would have disgusted me.
"Proof" to some of inclinations, even though you or I might not agree.
It's not proof of anything regarding your (or Freud's) "theory."
And I don't think that either homosexuality or "homophobia" are mental illnesses.
Just thought I would add this interesting note.
Btw Transsexualism is still recognized as a mental disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th Edition (DSM-IV) codes
(Normally wouldn’t quote wikipedia but making an exception in this case.)
Whats interesting to note is that there is a similar movement of transsexuals to get Transsexualism removed from the list of mental disorders. Heres what some of them have to say
“Many transgender people do not regard their cross-gender feelings and behaviors as a disorder. People within the transgender community often question what a “normal” gender identity or “normal” gender role is supposed to be. One argument is that gender characteristics are socially constructed and therefore naturally unrelated to biological sex.”
Whatever be the case this looks to me like a patient telling the doctor what is normal or isn’t and this makes me wonder.
Yep, they protested the heck out of them until they got heads on a board, then they reversed it.
they may be productive citizens in spite of being homo if in fact they stay in the closet. Scandal ensues if they try to pass off their problem as “normal” in front of impressionable people
your argument: will you apply it for drunkeness, racketeering, organized crime, polygamy, fornicators, and many other social evils. Many of these people have nice productive careers too (besides organized crime)
Hey I know lots of drunks who had nice careers. My wife worked with many lesbos, and they were very unhappy people outwardly, but I guess rare exceptions as with your friends mean we should change on a whim 2000+ years of experience.
I’d say 25 years of AIDS, millions of dead young men, absolutely filthy unnatural behavior, billions of dollars of spent to cure/treat a disease easily prevented show the “Fruit” of unleashed homo behavior. Hard to believe as a society that after all this, we are now going to remove any last vestige of stigma.
“...will you apply it for drunkeness, racketeering, organized crime, polygamy, fornicators, and many other social evils...”
There is no comparison. These are behavior issues not necessarily related to any biological factors.
My original statement on this thread was related to how homosexuals view themselves. Through the years, I have met and worked with hundreds of male and female homosexuals. (The medical field is an attractive profession for them.) My experience has been that they are unhappy people. Not all, but most I have known are.
The politics of militant homosexuality is an attempt for them to achieve a level of ‘normalcy’ within society. This is my opinion, nothing more.
Deep down, they realize they are very different. Thus the high rate of teen suicide among gays and lesbians. In the past 20 years, society and science have gained a greater understanding and tolerance of homosexuality. This is a good thing. They can’t help who they are. However, that does not mean social norms; i.e. marriage; should be opened to them; especially the flaming in-your-face perverts.
Adoption is a pet peeve with me. My ex and I spent thousands and jumped through hoops for years to adopt only to be refused because I reached 40. The adoption industry, and that is what it is, in this nation is a disgrace! Then Rosie O’Donnell adopts a baby!!
IMO, your opinion is right on target. I've known a number of gays over the years, and NONE of them were mentally normal (and not just the "gayness" issue, they were unbalance in other ways, too). Some were VERY bright--but still nutso.
Degradation, disease, and death---usually in that order.
Gee---how about the fact that homosexual behavior is responsible for rampant disease among it's practitioners, and a severe shortening of their average lifespan?? Isn't that enough???
“I don’t understand the question. If by “recruiting others” you mean coming on to them, they do it for the same reason that I (a heterosexual male) used to “recruit” girls in high school—because I found them sexually attractive.”
Actually, I meant trying to convince young, impressionable pubescent boys that liking other boys is perfectly normal, and then encouraging them to the exclusion of members of the opposite sex. It was a major issue at my son’s H.S.. He was trying to find friends when he started high school and latched onto the first familiar face. Unfortunately the first familiar face happened to be a self proclaimed lesbian and she introduced him to her friends who all happened to belong to GSA. I tried to not make it an issue til it started to affect him, which affected me. First week in high school and he came home and told me he was gay, I reacted in a very unchristian manner. I could not believe the look on his face when he told me this, his whole countenance changed and I could see the evil on his face. I was completely overwhelmed. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t hate homosexuals, but I don’t condone their behavior either. Three weeks into the school year and I pulled him out as things were deteriorating very fast. Now three years later my son has told me he’s glad I did it. Thank God.
“Sorry, it still amounts to coming on to them for the purposes of having sex (just as I did with girls), not some kind of international gay conspiracy to expand their ranks.”
You could not be more wrong. I know they have an agenda. They already said they were coming after our kids. Go to the website Exodus.org (I think that’s what it is) and read about the gay agenda. It’s an eye-opener. You’re naive to think there’s nothing there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.