Skip to comments.
American Psychological Association supports same-sex ‘marriage’ 157-0
LifeSiteNews ^
| 8/8/11
| Kathleen Gilbert
Posted on 08/08/2011 12:36:02 PM PDT by wagglebee
WASHINGTON, D.C., August 8, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The American Psychological Association (APA) has re-affirmed its support for same-sex “marriage” for the eighth consecutive year, this time with a more strongly-worded statement.
On the eve of this year’s annual convention, the association’s policymaking body supported same-sex “marriage” unanimously in a 157-0 vote.
The APA has backed “marriage” for homosexual couples since 2004, and marriage-like benefits since 1997, and now calls itself “a strong advocate for full equal rights for LGBT people for nearly 35 years.”
This year’s resolution is the first new wording of the association’s position since 2004, and includes stronger support for same-sex “marriage” by both asserting the possibility of long-term gay relationships as well as criticizing the stress that traditional marriage campaigns cause gays.
One APA official indicated that the recent spread of gay “marriage” in America, most notably in New York last month, has made the association’s public support for normalizing same-sex “marriage” more bold.
“Now as the country has really begun to have experience with gay marriage, our position is much clearer and more straightforward that marriage equity is the policy that the country should be moving toward,” says Clinton Anderson, director of APA’s Office on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Concerns.
The position paper now asserts that “many gay men and lesbians, like their heterosexual counterparts, desire to form stable, long-lasting and committed intimate relationships and are successful in doing so,” and that campaigns to uphold traditional marriage are “a significant source of stress” to homosexuals.
Homosexuality was declassified as a mental disorder in 1973 in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the standard criteria for classification of mental illness, after years of lobbying by gay rights groups.
Dr. Robert Spitzer, who was in charge of the DSM change, reversed his position on therapy for homosexuals nearly 30 years later to support sexual reorientation therapy based on his own research.
TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: apa; dsm; homosexualagenda; homosexuallinks; moralabsolutes; samesexmarriage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 last
To: Rudder
Rudder: “BTW, I resigned from the APA back in the 1970’s because of actions discussed in the article.”
That was my immediate reaction to the 157-0 unanimous vote. I assumed the leftists had simply driven off everyone else over the years. A 157-0 vote is proof enough to me that the APA is not a healthy organization itself, otherwise it would permit or have some dissent. The 157-0 vote doesn’t make the APA’s point stronger in my mind. It makes them even more suspect (as if that could be possible).
41
posted on
08/08/2011 4:26:13 PM PDT
by
CitizenUSA
(Bad is easy. Anyone can do bad. Good, OTOH, is work. It takes discipline.)
To: wagglebee
So, the crazy people (psychologists and the psychiatrists) get to determine who is and isn’t crazy people among us?
Their stance on this abhorrent behavior tells me that they are the crazy ones.
The world leaders and the elite have gone mad.
House cleaning time it seems.
42
posted on
08/08/2011 4:28:58 PM PDT
by
Doulos1
(Bitter Clinger Forever!)
To: christianhomeschoolmommaof3; Rudder
Most people get defensive when you bash their profession. I respect Rudder as a fellow FReeper, and I agree with pretty much everything he’s said so far on this thread. It IS wrong to apply generalizations to every member of a group. If he was a member of the APA who supported their immoral agenda, then the other posters might have a point, but he is not.
43
posted on
08/08/2011 4:43:50 PM PDT
by
CitizenUSA
(Bad is easy. Anyone can do bad. Good, OTOH, is work. It takes discipline.)
To: icanhasbailout
Disclaimer: (I ususally hide in a hole when shrink bashing begins on threads...but I know and respect the intellect of many of today's posters, and I just couldn't stand idly by, etc., etc.)
Trained and experienced in both psychology and psychiatry, I can offer some insight regarding the relative efficacy of each and why there are major problems in mental health care. To keep it short, many psychologists' clinical training presumes agreement with outrageous liberal-left dogma---in that regard they are out of step with reality and their patients, but well-received by fellow travelers, and so they continue to practice and generate patients's (and fellow FReepers') disdain.
The profession has, in my experience, as many nuts in it as the general public. The APA has been pushing it's liberal-leftist agenda since about 1967, as far as I can recall. I joined then as a grad student and within 3 years I resigned. I rejoined solely to get malpractice insurance at their group rate (about 1/4 the cost of other policies) in 1985 when I opened private practice.
Psychiatrists who practice in the community, in my experience, do not use "talking therapy"---ever. They also push one therapeutic modality, psychopharm. (Be wary of psychiatrist's Dx of Bipolar Disorder and the Rx given.) This sole reliance on one therapy is due to what I call, "medical economics." A medication check and Rx can take 10 minutes or less...a psychiatrist can (and does) bill for 30-50 said procedures an hour. (math error?)
For far too many practitioners, psychiatrists' professional identity crisis (i.e., Do we follow the medical model or the social-learning model?) was resolved as psychopharmacology improved. It was Faustian bargain, since now all they do is push pills and often polypharmacy results.
All of the medical professions are run by the government, one way or another...
Regards, R.
44
posted on
08/08/2011 5:08:54 PM PDT
by
Rudder
(The Main Stream Media is Our Enemy---get used to it.)
To: wagglebee
Two liberals in the APA wrote a book and this thread is a perfect fit to mention the book again:
Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The Well Intentioned Path to HarmEditorial Reviews
Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The Well-Intentioned Path to Harm documents and critiques the ascent of social activism over open-minded scintific inquiry and quality care in the current menatl health establishment. This book is a must-read for anyone who cares about menatl health care in this country. The book casts a eye on much of the psychological and psychiatric professional associations' social activism over the last 30 years. Drs. Wright and Cummings cannot be dismissed as disgruntled conservatives. Their deeds validate their claim to be lifelong liberal activists..
Washington Times, The (DC), Warren Throckmorton, associate professor of psychology and fellow foe psychology anf public policy., 01/03/2006
This book may be the read of the year for mental health practitioners. It is the most sweeping critique (and often indictment) of the mental health professions in recent memory. It is occasionally freewheeling, unfettered, and polemical on the one hand, and precise and surgical on the other. Readers are going to either love it or hate it. This is a wide-ranging provocative book that offers a sweeping critique of several areas of science, practice, and the profession that may be valuable in stimulating discussion as we look ahead. It provides an important voice in a growing chorus demanding reform.
.
Frank Farley and V.K. Kumar, Reviewers, Contemporary Psychology, 06/07/2005
According to Cummings, self- interested destructive trends have permeated the mental health professions, threatening harm to the patients who seek their help and betraying the society they are sworn to serve. This book echoes many of the charges that up to now have come from outisde the therapy profession. This isn't a book that can be dismissed as just another ideologically inspired, partisan attack..
Psychotherapy Networker, Richard Handler, Radio Producer, Jan/Feb 2006
Are you open - minded? If so, this book will captivate, fascinate, and disturb you. If you are unquestioningly married to political correct ideology, you will brand this book conservative dogma and look for reasons to discredit the authors, but ironically, the editors and principal authors are life-long liberal activists. The book leaves few sacred cows un-gored. Nick Cummings wryly gives step by step process for fabricating a new syndrome that would be widely accepted. He posits that by truly integrating psychology with healthcare and casting psychologists as behavioral primary care providers, the number of psychology patients could increase 900%. This book is exciting, profound, and the most thought provoking book ever to be read in at least a decade..
Independent Practitioner, Michael Brickey, Summer 2005
This book is about the taboos surrounding many controversial subjects. It is such a challenge, the editors, mature and experienced professionals, and book contributors dissect many aspects within the field of mental health. These are as pertinent to the practice of social work as they are to psychology.This book is not to be overlooked. It has a plethora of references, primarily from psychology even though many of the subjects have been presented in the recent social work as well as the psychiatric and psychoanalytic literature. It is well written and parts of it are fun to read. Like the child who pointed out the emperor's nakedness, this book will promote reconsideration of many problems in the area of mental health and in the profession of social work. Social workers who like to think and who respect challenges will find this book a must read..
Florence Lieberman PhD/DSW, Professor Emerata, Hunter College School of Social Work
Product Description
This book takes as its inspiration the assumption that the atmosphere of intellectual openness, scientific inquiry, aspiration towards diversity, and freedom from political pressure that once flourished in the American Psychological Association has been eclipsed by an "ultra-liberal agenda," in which voices of dissent, controversial points of view, and minority groups are intimidated, ridiculed and censored.
Chapters written by established and revered practitioners explore these important issues within the contexts of social change, the ways in which mental health services providers view themselves and their products, and various economic factors that have affected healthcare cost structure and delivery.
In short, this book is intended to help consumers, practitioners, and policy makers to become better educated about a variety of recent issues and trends that have significantly changed the mental health fields.
About the Author
Rogers H. Wright, Ph.D., is currently retired from professional service after a long and distinguished career. Dr Wright was a Co-founder and Partner of Fiske, Levy & Wright Psychological Consultants to Management for almost 40 years, before serving as CEO of the Association for the Advancement of Psychology. During his illustrious career, Dr. Wright was elected as President of Division 31 of the APA, once in 1969 - the year he founded the division - and again in 1986, the California State Psychological Association (2 terms), and the APA's Division of Clinical Psychology. Dr. Wright has served as the Chair of a number of organizations and has been the recipient of an astounding array of professional honors and awards.
Nicholas A. Cummings, Ph.D., Sc.D., is Distinguished Professor Emeritus, Clinical Psychology, and President, Foundation for Behavioral Health at the University of Nevada at Reno. Dr. Cummings is a Past-President of the American Psychological Association and founder of American Biodyne, the first behavioral healthcare HMO
45
posted on
08/08/2011 5:42:53 PM PDT
by
scripter
("You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body." - C.S. Lewis)
To: Rudder
I think we discussed the book mentioned in post 45 before, but just in case I’m pinging you to post 45.
46
posted on
08/08/2011 5:47:06 PM PDT
by
scripter
("You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body." - C.S. Lewis)
To: scripter
Many thanks for the resource.
47
posted on
08/08/2011 5:53:46 PM PDT
by
Rudder
(The Main Stream Media is Our Enemy---get used to it.)
To: wagglebee
They ceased being a legitimate, rational body over 30 years ago.
48
posted on
08/08/2011 6:52:08 PM PDT
by
fwdude
To: wagglebee
These people “counsel” and possibly manipulate patients who are in very fragile states of mind.
Scary.
To: wagglebee
Of course they do. If anyone dissents, they won’t be members of APA for long...
50
posted on
08/09/2011 8:49:11 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Nothing that offends God can possibly be a legitimate right.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson