'Ex-Gays' Seek a Say in Schools

Los Angeles Times ^ | May 28, 2006 | Stephanie Simon

[DBeers]

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — Over the last decade, gay-rights activists have pushed programs to support gay and lesbian students in public schools. Their success is striking:

More than 3,000 Gay-Straight Alliance clubs meet across the country. Nearly half a million students take a vow of silence one day each spring in an annual event to support gay rights. California may soon require textbooks to feature the contributions of gays and lesbians throughout history.

Critics, mostly on the religious right, view all this as promoting the "homosexual lifestyle." Unable to stop it, they have turned to a new strategy: demanding equal time for their view in public schools and on college campuses.

Conservative Christians and Jews have teamed up with men and women who call themselves "ex-gay" to lobby — and even sue — for the right to tell teenagers that they can "heal" themselves of unwanted same-sex attractions.

They argue that schools have an obligation to balance gay-pride themes with the message that gay and lesbian students can go straight through "reparative therapy." In this view, homosexuality is not a fixed or inborn trait but a symptom of emotional distress — a disorder that can be cured.

Alan Chambers, a leading ex-gay activist, recalls how scared and depressed he felt when a high-school counselor advised him to deal with his attraction to other boys by accepting his homosexuality. He had no choice, she told him: He was gay. "It was very damaging," Chambers said. "I didn't want that. I hadn't chosen it."

His senior year, Chambers found his way to Exodus International, a network of groups that support ex-gays. He is now married to a woman, a father of two — and the president of Exodus.

~SNIP~

[DBeers]

Where's the "delusion" in that?

Delusion is when one that engages in the abnormal believes it to be normal...

[supercat]

Delusion is when one that engages in the abnormal believes it to be normal...

There have, historically, been many people who engaged in homosexual sodomy while being fully aware that it was not considered "normal". Were such people delusional?

[DBeers]

Were such people delusional?

Actually, homosexual activity is abnormal whether one considers it to be or not... REGARDLESS one be fully cognizant or fully deluded...

[supercat]

Actually, homosexual activity is abnormal whether one considers it to be or not... REGARDLESS one be fully cognizant or fully deluded...

Fine. If someone engages in homosexual sodomy, without any pretense that the action is "normal", is that person deluded? And if so, how?

[DBeers]

I suggest you look up the definition for "delusion" and see that "delusion" is premised in a false belief. As such any false belief an individual holds in regard to homosexual activity would be evidence of delusion...

Given the definition I am sure you can assess examples yourself. I gave you one example -if you want more create them yourself...

[mikeyc]

"Stop right there... Two females together or two males together cannot have “sex” with each other. The union has absolutely zero chance of producing progeny."

That's interesting on a religious point. If homosexual 'relations' isn't sex, then they can't physically indulge in sex out of wedlock.
It might be sodomy, and we know the christian teaching on that, but the arguement that it is 'sex outside wedlock' is nulified by your analysis.

Just a point that occured to me.

[Lucky Dog]

I would suggest the APA necessarily must redefine their faulty assessment… Otherwise psychology is but the practice of a humanist religion versus a "scientific" endeavor...

I can not disagree philosophically. However, practically speaking, we must deal must deal with the world as we find it, not as we wish it were, or “should be.” Therefore, my assessment remains:

To remain germane to the current societal discussion, I fear you will have to modify your view or convince others such as the APA to modify theirs.

[expatguy]

bttt

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

That's interesting on a religious point.

There is nothing religious about the reality of mammalian biology...

[mikeyc]

"Part of the article explains why homosexuals should realize it is a choice. It might lead them to happier, healthier and most importantly, holier lives."

Yes, I see your point.
Many boys experience same-sex sexual feelings during puberty and the immediate years after, while the sexual part of their brain is maturing. To tell someone of that age that they have to accept it as what they are, is disgusting.

There are probably hundreds of children who have had similar deliberate misinformation. It's those who are reasured and convinced that these feelings are normal who enter the homosexualisation sausage machine.

[mikeyc]

"There is nothing religious about the reality of mammalian biology..."

Nothing at all. I quite agree. It was just a point of interest for christians.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Many people engage in behaviors involving their genitalia for purposes other than the production of progeny.

Many other anatomical functions ivolving things besides genetalia do as well.

1. Stuffing a lit cigar in your face and puffing smoke gives some people pleasure. It has nothing to do with absorbing nutrition.

2. Stuffing an unlit cigar in a woman's bodily orifice at the workplace is also pleasurable to a former president. It has nothing to do with absorbing nutrition, conception, voiding bodily waste, or administering the executive branch of government.

Neither of which are anatomical functions... or are permitted at most workplaces by law.

__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--__--

Where's the "delusion" in that?

In your head...

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

...it was used as an illustrative rhetorical device... An acceptable departure from pure logic in a debate forum.

“...often applied logically for those whom logic fails.”

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

It was just a point of interest for christians.

I am an atheist...

[Lucky Dog]

“...often applied logically for those whom logic fails.”

In deed...

[mikeyc]

"I am an atheist..."

Yes, I know. I wasn't making a point directly at anyone in particular. Just an observation.

[mikeyc]

I understand from the logic used by Sir Francis Dashwood that only sex for procreation is proper sexual intercourse. I see how it can therefore be said that any sexual activity between two members of the same gender isn't sex...

It's quite a nice thought that I've never had sex, although the 'world' view might be quite different. However, I do accept that the majority of people don't tend to see everything logically.


I'm still not convinced that if someone indulges in sexual activity with another of the same sex, knowing and accepting that it isn't normal, they are delusional.

I'm not under any delusion that any sexual activity I have enjoyed with any other male is in any way normal, or normal sex. In fact, some might find excitement in the fact that it isn't normal, and that their sexual preferences are not normal or 'acceptable'.

I would put the point that the vast majority of homosexuals begin their adult life by believing that sodomy is abnormal and against nature. After all, that is what is taught. If, however, their opinion is altered through argument, and because the homosexualists convince them, then such delusion surely isn't psychotic. It's just accepting an alternative opinion (for whatever reason they do), isn't it?


If we go with the idea that false belief is delusional, then those who regularly drink Coca Cola because advertising has convinced them that it's good for them, are also dilusional. If they develop a compulsion (or habit) to regularly drink Coca Cola, then I guess they have a psychosis?

Could the same argument not also be applied to religious belief of any sort, where simple faith in any scripture is required over evidence? Using logic, all those people who lead their lives around a belief that can't be proved, simply because they are told that what they read is true, are dilusional. ...and maybe even possibly psychotic?

(Please note that I'm not attacking religion here... It is a sensitive subject... but just trying to get an understanding of the homosexual condition.)

Maybe I'm missing a miriad of points here, and I hope to be put right, but I'm seeing the homosexual delusion along with the Coca Cola and religious faith comparisons.

Maybe I'm way off track here, but I'm coming from a very liberal background where logic hasn't been foremost in my mind, so please bear with me... that's my excuse :)

[DBeers]

I can not disagree philosophically. However, practically speaking, we must deal must deal with the world as we find it, not as we wish it were, or “should be.” Therefore, my assessment remains:

Logical argument may be used to deal with and accept the world as one finds it or may be used to assess and point out errors to correct such that the world might be what it should be...

To remain germane to opposing the homosexual agenda one must step outside the box homosexual activists or those supporting such define...

[DBeers]

Could the same argument not also be applied to religious belief of any sort, where simple faith in any scripture is required over evidence?

IF such believe was proved or could be proved false...

Regardless, faith alone without proof supporting it is not delusion...

[Lucky Dog]

I understand from the logic used by Sir Francis Dashwood that only sex for procreation is proper sexual intercourse… I'm still not convinced that if someone indulges in sexual activity with another of the same sex, knowing and accepting that it isn't normal, they are delusional.

The term delusional should not be confused with the term “cognitive dissonance.”

cognitive dissonance -- Motivational state produced by inconsistencies between simultaneously held cognitions or between a cognition and behaviour; e.g., smoking enjoyment and believing smoking is harmful are dissonant.

--The On-line Medical Dictionary

dysfunctional --- Working improperly or abnormally.

--The On-line Medical Dictionary

Irrationality is an element associated with abnormal or dysfunctional behavior. The question at the center of this concept is whether or not the person exhibiting the abnormal or dysfunctional behavior can consciously control their behavior.

If one accepts that the natural, normal function of sexual activity is between two members of the opposite sex and the ultimate, natural, normal purpose of sex activity is procreation, then sexual activity which intentionally violates these tenants is, by definition, abnormal and therefore, dysfunctional.

Directly to the point, if the homosexual practitioner knows his or her behavior is abnormal or dysfunctional and consciously chooses to engage in such with the complete ability to permanently abstain from the activity at will, then he or she is merely cognitively dissonant. If the homosexual practitioner engages in abnormal or dysfunctional behavior under compulsion and rationalizes his or her indulgence as being anything other than dysfunctional and abnormal to avoid admitting the truth, then he or she is delusional.

I'm not under any delusion that any sexual activity I have enjoyed with any other male is in any way normal, or normal sex. In fact, some might find excitement in the fact that it isn't normal, and that their sexual preferences are not normal or 'acceptable'.

Given that you maintain that you are not delusional, the key question is then can you quit permanently at any time you choose? If you can quit without compulsive impetus to re-engage, then you are merely cognitively dissonant. Cognitive dissonance is a condition correctly cured with the application of logic and will power.

It's [engaging in homosexual activity] just accepting an alternative opinion (for whatever reason they do), isn't it?

As noted above, homosexual activity is a dysfunctional behavior. Therefore, it must be concluded that do so is either cognitively dissonant or delusional. Consequently, such activity can not be logically viewed as just accepting an alternative opinion.

If we go with the idea that false belief is delusional, then those who regularly drink Coca Cola because advertising has convinced them that it's good for them, are also dilusional.

Technically, the situation would probably be classed as an induced misperception rather than a delusion. It could be delusional if the holders of your postulated conviction, when confronted with reality, consistently and intentionally denied it or consistently attempted to rationalize it into something it wasn’t, to maintain their conviction.

If they develop a compulsion (or habit) to regularly drink Coca Cola, then I guess they have a psychosis?

As noted above, if your postulated Coke drinkers, consistently denied reality, to maintain their conviction and also developed a compulsion to drink Coke beyond the control of their conscious will, they would technically be suffering from a psychosis. However, in this case, barring excessive consumption, beyond potential obesity and tooth decay, the detrimental impacts of the psychosis would be minimal on the individual and negligible on society.

Using logic, all those people who lead their lives around a belief that can't be proved, simply because they are told that what they read is true, are dilusional. ...and maybe even possibly psychotic?

You are incorrect. The first issue to confront, as you should recall from the definition of psychosis, is that it involves a mental disorder related to a consistent skewing of the perception of reality. A belief, in, and of, itself, does necessarily skew perception of reality and, thus, in the absence of such, is not indicative of a mental disorder. On this point alone, your postulation fails. Secondly, a belief does not necessarily lead to actual, or even, the compulsive desire toward, dysfunctional or abnormal behavior. A psychosis does lead to an actual, or a compulsive desire toward, dysfunctional or abnormal behavior.

Maybe I'm missing a miriad of points here, and I hope to be put right, but I'm seeing the homosexual delusion along with the Coca Cola and religious faith comparisons.

I trust the above explanation have clarified the issues for you. If not, please rephrase your questions and I will try an alternative explanation.