Posted on 02/07/2006 8:28:20 AM PST by Mr. Silverback
It was bound to happen. In the span of a single generation, we have seen the practice of sodomy evolve from a bizarre sexual behavior to a normative alternative lifestyle; from illegality to a constitutional right; from the closet to the boardroom; from tolerance to promotion; and lastly, from the bathhouse to the marriage altar. The next step, which is already in process, is reminiscent of a Soviet-style “reeducation” program.
According to a December 10, 2005, Washington Post article, “Psychiatry Ponders Whether Extreme Bias Can Be an Illness,” it seems there is a serious move afoot to formally designate those who are repulsed by homosexual practice as suffering from a pathological neurosis—“homophobia.” In other words, a person who views the legitimization of homosexuality as sinful, immoral, or destructive to society may have a mental disorder!
That analysis was offered by a number of mental health professionals, including UCLA psychology professor Edward Dunbar, who equates so-called homophobia with racial bias and suggests the “disorder” should be included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).
According to Professor Dunbar, “When I see someone who won’t see a physician because they’re Jewish, or who can’t sit in a restaurant because there are Asians, or feels threatened by homosexuals in the workplace, the party line in mental health says, ‘This is not our problem.’ If it’s not our problem, whose problem is it?”
Gary Belkin, deputy chief of psychiatry at New York’s Bellevue Hospital, said “Psychiatrists who are uneasy with including something like this in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual need to get used to the fact that the whole manual reflects social context. That is true of depression on down. Pathological bias is no more or less scientific than major depression.” Dr. Belkin plans to conduct a study on pathological bias among patients at his hospital.
Other psychiatrists have gone a step further and suggested that persons who exhibit “homophobia” may need to be treated with anti-psychotic medications, with a program already implemented within the California Department of Corrections.
Shama Chaiken, divisional chief psychologist for the department, said, “We treat racism and homophobia as delusional disorders. Treatment with anti-psychotics does work to reduce these prejudices.”
Alvin F. Poussaint, a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, says that persons with such pathological biases are “delusional” and believes their problems should be treated with psychiatry. “They imagine people are going to do all kinds of bad things and hurt them, and feel they have to do something to protect themselves. When they reach that stage, they are very impaired. . . . They can’t work and function; they can’t hold a job. They would benefit from treatment of some type, particularly medication.” (Emphasis added)
A voice of “dissent” was heard from psychiatrist and author Sally Satel, who opined that hate-crime perpetrators could evade responsibility by claiming they suffered from a mental illness: “I think it’s absurd. You could use it as a defense [in court].”
Brokeback Mountain, the homosexual “love story” between two cowboys has served as a catalyst to bring the issue of “homophobia” as a neurosis before the public. Irrespective of the fact that Hollywood and liberal elites are thrilled by the film and have honored it with a number of awards, moviegoers have generally been turned off by the portrayal of the noble American cowboy as gay. Many theaters are refusing to show the film, prompting co-star Heath Ledger to claim the cancellations are “akin to racism.” He added:
"I heard a while ago that West Virginia was going to ban it. But that’s a state that was lynching people only 25 years ago, so that’s to be expected. . . . Personally, I don’t think the movie is [controversial] but I think maybe the Mormons in Utah do. I think it’s hilarious and very immature of a society—if two people are loving. I think we should be more concerned if two people express anger in love, than love."
The premise that deep opposition to homosexual practice is a mental disorder appears prominently in columnist Dru Sefton’s examination of the negative reaction to the film in her January 6 column. The article features the “expert” opinions of several researchers who see aversion to the film as “homophobia” and offers a good example of the homosexual propaganda machine at work.
Dr. Dean Hamer, a National Institutes of Health (NIH) researcher said to be investigating homophobia, was described as “a scientist who discovered genetic links to sexuality.” He commented, “It does seem to be almost culturally universal that heterosexual men can have a deep repulsion to overt homosexuality, but there is no study I know of to ascertain whether this is a biologically based trait.”
Actually, Dr. Hamer is a homosexual activist who has been searching unsuccessfully for a genetic link to homosexuality for many years. In 1993 he published some study results on gene position Xq28 that he alleged showed a genetic link to homosexuality. The study was widely reported in the press and touted as discovery of a “gay gene.”
However, his discovery did not hold up to scientific scrutiny. A much larger study by researchers George Rice and others concluded, “Our data do not support the presence of a gene of large effect influencing sexual orientation at position Xq28.” Reportedly, Dr. Hamer was later investigated by the NIH on charges of scientific fraud.
Dr. Simon LeVay, also said to be investigating homophobia, agreed with Dr. Hamer. “From a neurobiological basis, I just don’t think this response has been researched at that level, although it’s something that should be.”
Dr. LeVay is the author of the 1991 study, “A Difference in the Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men.” The study, which was reported to have identified a physiological difference between gay and straight men, was later proved to be bogus. Dr. LeVay himself admitted, “I did not prove that homosexuality was genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn’t show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work.”
Dr. George Weinberg, a New York City psychologist and researcher, commented that the aversion to Brokeback Mountain is “definitely homophobia.” He said the film is “the idea of one man’s adoration for another. A love affair more deep and lasting and romantic than with their wives.” He advised that those who are uneasy about the film “first understand you have this problem. At least by acknowledging it, that’s a start. It’s like saying, ‘I have a fear of heights.’”
In reality it is not unusual, nor is it immoral, for a man to have a deep and affectionate bond with another man, but not the erotic relationship described by Dr. Weinberg. As a case in point, men often experience a sacrificial, moral love among comrades in arms, which is called agape love. The greatest example of such love was the sacrificial death of Jesus on the cross: “For God so agapao the world, He gave His only begotten Son . . .”
Plainly, it is part of the gay rights strategy to portray homosexuality as “normal” and to marginalize—and even criminalize—the views of those who might expressly disagree. Brokeback Mountain has provided an opportunity for activists to take the debate over homosexuality to a new level and suggest that aversion to the practice may be a neurosis.
Thus, in one generation homosexuality has been removed from the DSM as a sexual disorder, and persons who find it abnormal and repulsive have been offered up in its place.
Notwithstanding, it is well established that the practice is repulsive, self-destructive, and corrosive to society, as both sacred and secular sources have emphatically stated for the last several thousand years. The fact that it is repulsive is both a bane and advantage to the homosexual rights movement. Because the topic is so unseemly, there is scant open discussion of homosexuality, and the public is understandably reluctant to seek out information on the subject. (For a peek through the window of reality of the homosexual lifestyle, visit gayhealth.com.)
It is an arrogant ploy on the part of gay activists to insinuate that people who find homosexual acts to be repulsive may be mentally disturbed. However, the good news is that such persons would not have to worry about being arrested under “hate crimes” statutes for voicing negative opinions about the lifestyle—they’re simply crazy.
Allan Dobras is a freelance writer on religious and cultural issues and an electronics engineer. He lives in Springfield, Virginia.
Right on target -bullseye!
;-)
I got the impression that she was agreeing with specificity as to the author's general conclusion...
Or he may have studied history.
These people should learn about the ancient Greeks and Romans.
"these people" really could care less! Try DU if you wish to continue your liberal debate...
To go into more detail, by "these people", I mean those people who willing choose to remain ignorant about history.
I hope you don't include yourself in that group.
I include myself in the group opposed to the liberal talking points you consistently post in support of the homosexualization of society...
Any relation to the founder of the Church of Satan?
If you blindly oppose anything that you don't like you will become no better than those anti-Bush lunatics at the DNC.
Chuck Colson's editorial on the Washington Post's article; “Psychiatry Ponders Whether Extreme Bias Can Be an Illness,”
We have learnd bout them Paul.They no longer exsit. They fell into oblivion because of their amoral/immoral scocial practices. Just like Sodom and Gammora.
We have learnd bout them Paul.They no longer exsit.
On the contary, the city of Rome still stands as a center of power, but instead political power of yesterday, it is a center of religious power.
They fell into oblivion because of their amoral/immoral scocial practices. Just like Sodom and Gammora.
Sodom and Gammora were just two cities. the Roman Empire stretched from what is now England to just east of India. From south Germany to the Sahara desert of Africa.
Some of the roads built by the Romans are still used even today.
Large parts of Western civilization has it's roots in ancient Roman and earlier Greek culture.
Their art, their math, their science, their philosophy have been used to shape the world is to this day.
And up until around 300 to 400 AD the Romans were not against homosexuality.
I know this is hard for you to accept, these are the facts.
And all that's left of them is the ruins like the Roman coliseum and bath houses where they fed people to lions while their boy sex slaves fed them grapes while they lusted after blood, violence and homosexual perversion.
Same thing for ancient Greeks.
Those are the facts.
The city of Rome still stands.
Their art is still admired.
Their science and math is used today in a more updated form.
Their philosophy is still talked about.
As I see it, the works of the ancient Romans and Greeks still exist, and you just want to pretend they do not.
Note this:
"Other psychiatrists have gone a step further and suggested that persons who exhibit “homophobia” may need to be treated with anti-psychotic medications, with a program already implemented within the California Department of Corrections.
Shama Chaiken, divisional chief psychologist for the department, said, “We treat racism and homophobia as delusional disorders. Treatment with anti-psychotics does work to reduce these prejudices.”"
Anyone who doesn't see what these people want for us is either in agreement with them, or is in total denial. I think people should read (or re-read) "Brave New World" and "1984" and get a clue.
They want total domination with us, the normal people, as squirming little worms under their boots.
The great mathematics of the Greeks they learned from brahmins in India, for one thing. For another, even the normal Greeks and Romans were disgusted at the pederasty and sodomy of the perverts, and had laws to protect boys (and young girls) from deviants. They had to send boys to schools with guards to keep them safe.
If someone wants to support homosexual behavior by citing other "cultures", how about New Guinea? If they haven't changed their ways, they have young boys living in the men's longhouse being sodomized while the women do all - and I mean ALL - the work of food growing, while the men sit around - well, doing what I just said, hunting pigs occasionally, and I think they smoke stuff or ferment spit and drink it. Also, they have the charming custom of cutting off a woman's finger every time a relative dies, so most old women (should they live that long) have very few fingers, while they hoe the sweet potatoes.
They also never, ever bathe - not even once in their whole lives.
Of course, times may have changed with the advance of civilization. I've heard many of them are now alcoholics and drug addicts.
I guess their mode of life is just as good as any, right?
So if you make any values or morals based judgements you aren't sane? It is more sane to take another mans' genitals into your @$$ than to find that practice disgusting?
Yes, you're right, Our founding fathers talked about them to...
Benjamin Franklin: Constitutional Convention Address on Prayer
delivered Thursday, June 28, 1787, Philadelphia, PA
Mr. President:
The small progress we have made after 4 or five weeks close attendance & continual reasonings with each other -- our different sentiments on almost every question, several of the last producing as many noes as ays, is methinks a melancholy proof of the imperfection of the Human Understanding. We indeed seem to feel our own wont of political wisdom, since we have been running about in search of it. We have gone back to ancient history for models of government, and examined the different forms of those Republics which having been formed with the seeds of their own dissolution now no longer exist. And we have viewed Modern States all round Europe, but find none of their Constitutions suitable to our circumstances.
In this situation of this Assembly groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when to us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our understandings?
In the beginning of the contest with G. Britain, when we were sensible of danger we had daily prayer in this room for the Divine Protection. -- Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a Superintending providence in our favor. To that kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? or do we imagine that we no longer need His assistance?
I have lived, Sir, a long time and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth -- that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a *sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings that * "except the Lord build they labor in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall be become a reproach and a bye word down to future age. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing Governments by Human Wisdom, and leave it to chance, war, and conquest.
I therefore beg leave to move -- that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the Clergy of this City be requested to officiate in that service.
*Franklin Quoted Jesus there. And there as well.
That is only one small example of how our founders warned us against turning away from God and embracing immorality.
I just hope Jesup and the other perversion advocates learn the truth..;-)
The Founding Fathers had a lot of discussion about Democracies and Republics, they expected the U.S. to last around 200 years, yet you cannot get your head out of the sand.
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.