Posted on 12/29/2002 8:59:44 AM PST by scripter
What more does a psychologist/researcher have than his reputation?
Who’s misinterpreting now?
I'm not sure what you mean. A study is everything from data collection to conclusion; fudge one and the whole thing becomes invalid. Freund cited Cameron's collection of data, not his conclusion - Cameron goes on to say that 2% of the population (the homosexually identified) commit 33% of the molestations (the homosexually behaved), which is false, and Freund isn't citing.
Universal truths can only be partially converted. If you say, "all sexual acts that can not lead to conception are the result of mental illnesses" then the correct logical converse is "some of the acts that do lead to conception are not the result of mental illnesses."
Note here that I am not defending John's premise. But your use of logic in the face of his argument is fatally flawed.
Shalom.
Nope. I never said... nor even inferred... any such thing.
You implied that since the document was dated and had been amended that it was therefore obsolete. At least that is what I inferred from your statement.
We're having a scientific discussion here, Eaks... not philosophical politicking.
There is not a scintilla of truth to this statement.
Are you using AOL-8.0... or has AOL always sucked? Presentation is not Protocol.
I don’t pretend to know anything about AOL, but I would not quote AOL or any of their competitors if I was trying to make a case either way.
I guess the Bible being obsolete is a given then?
Ummm... okay... sure. A guide for "spiritual" living during the time of the Roman Empire... all that sex and greed and sex and violence and sex notwithstanding? Okeeeeeey-doke...
(Did I mention "sex?")
Some people find more in the Bible than titillation; a lot more.
The Liberals seem to agree with you.
That would be very VERY important to me... if I were concerned about being popular.
If the homosexuals fell out of vogue with the left it would be a black day for the movement, their agenda and possibly their lives.
So, please... help me understand why it's so important to you...
Because the left is the antithesis of everything good for America and the future of our country. The Liberals support regimes that would have you killed on sight, yet they give lip service to the homosexuals. They are duplicitous and are using the homosexual community as willing idiots. The Liberals are the enemy and must be destroyed. That is the goal of many people here.
Eaker
Exactly, HEREK is a self-serving homosexual and the APA was politically driven to make lame and debunked studies, Kinsey and Hooker, into something that they’re not. i.e. SCIENCE Reputations are everything.
I'm not sure what you mean. Blah, blah, blah…(background music: the Texas two-step)
Sure you do, if Cameron’s study was “invalid” then why would Freund cite ANYTHING form a supposed invalid research study from a supposed invalid researcher.
(the homosexually identified) commit 33% of the molestations (the homosexually behaved), which is false, and Freund isn't citing.
Citing bullshit from a pedophile homosexual “researcher” is as ridiculous as the APA using it to change the DSM. The pathology is same-sex attraction, identified or behavior or whatever, the distinction is irrelevant because one doesn’t preclude the other. And since pedophilia isn’t it’s own gender what we have are TWO pathologies, if the homosexual pedophile practiced bestiality we’d have THREE pathologies, get it? Cameron’s conclusions are as valid as the DATA Freund ignores, 33% of pedophiles are homosexual.
Whatever. Was Cameron censured by the court in Texas, the Nebraska Psycological Association and the American Sociological Association, or was he not?
Sure you do, if Cameron’s study was “invalid” then why would Freund cite ANYTHING form a supposed invalid research study from a supposed invalid researcher.
To save himself the trouble of looking through 17 studies by other people? Cameron isn't accused of falsifying data; he's accused of misrepresenting it. Do you understand the difference?
Cameron’s conclusions are as valid as the DATA Freund ignores, 33% of pedophiles are homosexual.
That wasn't Cameron's conclusion. Cameron's conclusion is that 2% of the population performs 33% of the molestations.
Cameron's conclusion is only valid if, and only if, noone except people who identify themselves as homosexual engage in homosexual behavior.
The pathology is same-sex attraction, identified or behavior or whatever, the distinction is irrelevant because one doesn’t preclude the other. And since pedophilia isn’t it’s own gender what we have are TWO pathologies, if the homosexual pedophile practiced bestiality we’d have THREE pathologies ...Assuming you are using the word pathology to describe a disordered sexual attraction in the sense of "mental disease," is there any evidence that such a disorder responds to medication? If so, are there different medications for the various disorders?
Asked and answered yes, but it’s irrelevant since the actions of those associations and court are based on FAULTY premise made by the APA in 1973. It’s called piling on! If the APA hadn’t made its VOTE to change science to politics in 1973, NONE of these “censures” would have taken place, would they? Why should Cameron address actions motivated by insignificant APA lemmings?
To save himself the trouble of looking through 17 studies by other people? Cameron isn't accused of falsifying data; he's accused of misrepresenting it. Do you understand the difference?
Yes, it’s not the point other than one created for your back peddling and sophistry. The difference is, you now Agree that Freund used data from an “invalid” study from an “invalid” researcher, which lends “validity” to his study. Thank you for making my point.
Cameron's conclusion is only valid if, and only if, no one except people who identify themselves as homosexual engage in homosexual behavior.
The distinction of “identification” and “behavior” is erroneous not to mention ridiculous, it’s a straw man not worthy of definition, conjured by the homosexual pedophile Kinsey. The pathology of homosexuality remains same-sex attraction regardless of other sexual behaviors, bisexuals ARE homosexuals. There may be more than one pathology involved.
Like so-called ADHD I don’t think there’s any legitimate medication for behavioral disorders. Therapy seems to be the best answer.
Freund and Cameron used valid data in their studies; Cameron used the work of 17 others and Freund used Cameron's. The fact that Freund pulled a diamond from a pile of dung doesn't make the dung itself any more valuable.
The distinction of “identification” and “behavior” is erroneous not to mention ridiculous
The distinction is extremely important when the numbers represent one or the other.
The trouble with that theory is that lesbians also tend to have far more lifetime sexual partners that heterosexual women. The difference isn't as extreme as the difference between gay men and straight men. But the difference is still significant.
Bell & Weinberg (1978) found that 43% of gay men had 500 or more different "lifetime" partners, while 28% had over 1000 partners. In addition, 79% of gay men in this study said more than half their partners were total strangers. 50% of gay men over the age of 30, and 75% of gay men over the age of 40, experienced no relationships that lasted more than one year.
Bell & Weinberg (1978) also found that the most common reported cause for a suicide attempt among gays (47%) was a dispute with a lover.
Bell & Weinberg found that 84% of homosexuals shifted their sexual orientation at least once in their life, and 32% of homosexuals reported a second shift in orientation. A significant 13% of homosexuals claimed at least five orientation changes in their lifetime (Bell & Weinberg, 1978). "A. P. Bell and M. S. Weinberg, in their classic study of male and female homosexuality, found that 43 percent of white male homosexuals had sex with five hundred or more partners, with 28 percent having 1,000 or more sex partners. "50% of homosexual men over the age of 30, and 75% of homosexual men over the age of forty, experienced no relationships that lasted more than one year. Source: M. T. Saghir and E. Robins, Male and Female Homosexuality: A Comprehensive Investigation (Baltimore: Williams Wilkins, 1973), pp. 56-57.
LOL!
Ummmm....
Oh nevermind...You're obviously too simple...
I did. And that doesn't change the fact that they're monumental idiots!
"Sick beyond words" for WHAT? Stating these guys are well over the line in their treatment of this Freeper?
Get some perspective and don't try to be such a breathless harpie.
I don't mean to single you out john838, but why is it that by the time I decide to join these discussions, they have wandered off the topic and degenerated in name-calling, personal attacks and disgusting inflamatory rhetoric?
By the way, anal sex is by no means limited to homosexuals. There are numerous heterosexual websites that specialize in and exploit this sort of sexual behavior.
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.