A.P.A. Debates Pedophilia, Gender-Identity Disorder, Sexual Sadism

NARTH ^ | 28 May 2003 | Linda Ames Nicolosi

[scripter]

Thanks for the ping. This is one I'll be passing along to folks who said this would never happen.

Homosexual Agenda Index

Homosexual Agenda Keyword Search

All FreeRepublic Bump Lists

[Houmatt]

Oh. My. God.

I honestly don't know what to say.

[sharktrager]

Just because one did not mention God does not indicate a lack of belief.

Biology is a part of God's creation, and provides a sound basis for analysis of this issue.

You need to stop assuming that you know things you do not.

[Remedy]

• To state that it is impossible to define what is and is not a normal sexual practice is an absurd argument. The purpose of sex being reproduction, normal is clearly defined.
• Both of the APA's have a significant issue to address. First, they have developed a belief that judgment is wrong. As such, there is a strong movement to avoid classifying any activity or individuals as unhealthy
• As a result, I will base my personal beliefs first on biology and what is known over that which is based solely on theory

You will find these points, in the links @ post #18, made against homosexuality. Anyone consulting common sense will find same.

[kstewskis]

Disagreeing, Psychiatrist Charles Moser of San Francisco's Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality and co-author Peggy Kleinplatz of the University of Ottawa presented a paper entitled, "DSM-IV-TR and the Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal." They argued that people whose sexual interests are atypical, culturally forbidden, or religiously proscribed should not, for those reasons, be labeled mentally ill.

...no, no no! When are these demented, possessed wacko's going to give up "trying" to convince society that is has nothing to do with being "atypical, culturally forbidden, or religiously proscribed?"

It's NATURE! Sorry Satan, you're not going to win this one with your perverted ways.

/rant off

[sharktrager]

I never disputed that there was some decent content in the links.

[Clint N. Suhks]

many beloved authors and public figures throughout history have been high-functioning individuals who could actually be classified as pedophiles.

That’s the APA we all know and love…if you have no anxiety, good psychosocial functioning and a positive well-being then you’re not sick. It must be good for the pedophiles, bestials and incestuals because it worked for the homosexuals.

[Clint N. Suhks]

It's been shown time and again that Kinsey's research was terribly flawed because of the samples used.

Yeah but the APA cites Kinsey as one of the studies that proves homoseuality not a disorder. I guess it's not so useless to to the "doctors" that make decisions for our society's social mores.

Go Figure?

[Clint N. Suhks]

The purpose of sexuality is enjoyment and socialization.

Hehehe...that's why you have a chance of getting pregnant each and every time you have sex? I'm guessing your 16 year-old gets pregnant out of wedlock with a parent like you.

BTW sodomy is NOT sex so you can save your interpretations as a comparison, Ok Mr. Flint?

[Clint N. Suhks]

The idea of cross-dressing is bizarre, but not, in and of itself, unhealthy.

Dressing up as a fireman or a doctor is not physically unhealthy but a sign of mental instability. Dressing as the opposite sex has the same conations however objectively dressing as the opposite sex is to attract the opposite sex and part of the homosexual pathology.

[ffusco]

I never mentioned sodomy, I have no children.

I simply distinguished between sex and sexuality. Sex is for procreation. Everytime I lay with my wife it is sexuality or I'd have a schoolbus ful of kids. DUH.

I wasn't even talking to you was I?
You nasty, holier than thou creep.

[First Amendment]

Biology is a part of God's creation, and provides a sound basis for analysis of this issue.

It provides ground for much information, but not the entire argument. Biology doesn't address morality, consciousness, happiness, guilt, ruined lives, future existence, normal or destroyed familes and children etc. All these and more must be taken in to consideration when figuring out which sexual behaviors and normal and healthy.

Why do you say I assume things that I don't know? What mistaken assumption was I assuming?

[sharktrager]

You assumed, and stated, that I did not accept God's teachings which relate to sexuality, which is not true at all.

I simply believe that you will be more persuasive in an argument on the issue using scientific analysis over simply trying to state that something is wrong because it's wrong.

[kegler4]

"...objectively dressing as the opposite sex is to attract the opposite sex and part of the homosexual pathology."

Oh really? And where did you pick up this tidbit? The males other males are trying to attract are not interested in women. Every male homosexual I've ever known dressed up as a man to attract other men.

I once dressed as a woman for a Halloween party but I still went home with my wife.

[Clint N. Suhks]

I never mentioned sodomy, I have no children. I simply distinguished between sex and sexuality. Sex is for procreation. Everytime I lay with my wife it is sexuality or I'd have a schoolbus ful of kids. DUH.

Sexuality means being sexual, the distiction has nothing to do with laying in bed with your wife.

I wasn't even talking to you was I? You nasty, holier than thou creep.

If you’re going to post in this forum prepare to be challenged and don’t cry about it.

[ffusco]

G.F.Y.

Now is that sex or sexuality?

[Clint N. Suhks]

Oh really? And where did you pick up this tidbit? The males other males are trying to attract are not interested in women.

That would be dressing as a woman to attract a man.

Every male homosexual I've ever known dressed up as a man to attract other men.

You’ve never been in a “gay” bar have you?

I once dressed as a woman for a Halloween party but I still went home with my wife.

Not quite the same thing is it? Do you dress as a woman when you’re not at a costume party?

[Clint N. Suhks]

Stupidity

[Clint N. Suhks]

Sorry

Juvenile Stupidity

[Travis McGee]

What's wrong with being homophagic (sic, I think.)

That is, a cannibal?

If your dearly departed lover desires you to consume him upon death who are we to judge their unique expression of tender love?