Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Remember: Politics not science decided that homosexuals are 'normal'
conservativecolloquium ^

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 movement’s 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 one’s own gender to be disordered. Karoly Maria Kertbeny’s term, “homosexual” was the official descriptor for those inflicted by this mental-physical disassociative disorder. Psychiatry’s 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 ago—in the movements most aggressive demonstration so far—a 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 group’s 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 APA’s 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 APA’s 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 Association’s 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)


TOPICS: Moral Issues
KEYWORDS: disorders; homosexualagenda; psychology
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-54 next last

1 posted on 11/23/2008 7:06:32 AM PST by JosephSmithNAW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JosephSmithNAW
"...In 1970, psychiatrists generally considered sexual desires toward members of one’s own gender to be disordered..."

In 2008, most sensible people still understand homosexuality is abnormal. Science has proved it is.

The politics of homosexuality is composed of groups of miserable people who are demanding that society declare them 'normal'. IMO

Having said that, and having known many homosexuals through the years, I do not believe they should be discriminated against in any area of society except adoption and marriage.
2 posted on 11/23/2008 7:19:03 AM PST by Islander7 (This Atlas is shrugging! ~ I am Joe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JosephSmithNAW
I think their response would be that it was political to make it a sickness in the first place. In the Christian world view, it is/was a sin. Since the religious underpinning of the society gave way during the 20th century, any kind of law which took it's inspiration from a religious moral code was immediately attacked as being a kind of "oppression". If it could not be justified outside of the "old morality", it was free to be disposed of.

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.

3 posted on 11/23/2008 7:25:19 AM PST by HondaCRF450
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Islander7
“Having said that, and having known many homosexuals through the years, I do not believe they should be discriminated against in any area of society except adoption and marriage.”
Discrimination is one thing that should be promoted in one aspect instead of protected against. The homosexual activist's agenda is dependent on promoting the false idea that all points of view are morally equivalent. The incremental nature of their attacks is to ensure that eventually every imaginable act of depraved behavior is no longer deemed unacceptable.
By indoctrinating the school kids with their pro homosexual tripe they are destroying the fabric of society.
4 posted on 11/23/2008 7:37:40 AM PST by bitterohiogunclinger (America held hostage - day 19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HondaCRF450

“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)


5 posted on 11/23/2008 7:52:41 AM PST by LetMarch (If a man knows the right way to live, and does not live it, there is no greater coward--Anonymous))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Islander7

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.


6 posted on 11/23/2008 7:54:31 AM PST by NonZeroSum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bitterohiogunclinger

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.


7 posted on 11/23/2008 8:01:16 AM PST by christianhomeschoolmommaof3 (I homeschool because I have seen the village and I don't want it raising my kids.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JosephSmithNAW; informavoracious; larose; RJR_fan; Prospero; Conservative Vermont Vet; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment

Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

8 posted on 11/23/2008 8:02:06 AM PST by narses (http://www.theobamadisaster.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NonZeroSum

And so is being retarded.

We DO make such distinctions. There IS intrinsic “good” and “bad”.


9 posted on 11/23/2008 8:03:55 AM PST by Adder (typical basicly decent bitter white person)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bitterohiogunclinger

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)


10 posted on 11/23/2008 8:12:51 AM PST by LetMarch (If a man knows the right way to live, and does not live it, there is no greater coward--Anonymous))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NonZeroSum

“........“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?


11 posted on 11/23/2008 8:19:41 AM PST by Islander7 (This Atlas is shrugging! ~ I am Joe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JosephSmithNAW

>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.


12 posted on 11/23/2008 8:22:42 AM PST by 353FMG (The sky is not falling, yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Adder
And so is being retarded.

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.

13 posted on 11/23/2008 8:23:22 AM PST by NonZeroSum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Islander7

“..I do not believe they should be discriminated against in any area of society except adoption and marriage.”

Totally sensible and acceptible opinion.


14 posted on 11/23/2008 8:25:33 AM PST by 353FMG (The sky is not falling, yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JosephSmithNAW

Intimidation, whining, violence seems to work in the USA. Which victim groups have NOT tried it to get special undeserved privileges from normal people?


15 posted on 11/23/2008 8:27:22 AM PST by Leftism is Mentally Deranged (liberalism = serious mental deficiency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Islander7
....“abnormal” is not intrinsically bad...really?

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.

Huh?

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.

16 posted on 11/23/2008 8:28:16 AM PST by NonZeroSum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NonZeroSum
I wrote: 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...

17 posted on 11/23/2008 8:32:42 AM PST by NonZeroSum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: NonZeroSum

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.


18 posted on 11/23/2008 8:34:17 AM PST by JosephSmithNAW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: NonZeroSum

When i use the word ‘normal’, i use it in this sense

Normal : free from mental disorder
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Normal


19 posted on 11/23/2008 8:41:04 AM PST by JosephSmithNAW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: JosephSmithNAW; NonZeroSum
Being a genius is rare but it certainly is not considered abnormal.

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.

20 posted on 11/23/2008 9:12:04 AM PST by freespirited (Honk to indict the MSM for treason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-54 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson