If they are having relations with their wives then I'd say they have some physical attraction there. Kind of hard to get it ready for action with someone who repulses you.
These ex-SADs are obviously living happy fulfilling lives. Why do you insist on trying to hold them in the SAD lifestyle when they've found a way out.
Are you afraid that if they can get out and lead good lives then you will be expected to also?
Reparative therapy doesn’t work. The technique doesn’t create a heterosexual attraction. It seems only effective in creating psychological eunuchs. The need to force others to destroy their sexuality to be acceptable strikes me as amazingly selfish on your part. I feel sad for those who take your advice.
Seems to work pretty good for the people we just discussed. If they are having fulfilling sex with their wives (and in your own description of it they are) then they seem to be happy and cured. How? by reparative therapy. Seems that, according to your description of their lives, reparative therapy works well.
Sexual orientation, as a function of sexual attraction objectively exists. If it didn’t there wouldn’t be any heterosexuals either. Even your friends at NARTH concur. People make choices to follow or resist their sex drives.
The question is, why are they 'oriented in this abnormal way'. Studies have shown that it is (in at least some cases) the result of mental trauma (molestation, abuse or a poor relationship with their father). So SAD can be compared to psychological scar tissue. Which thankfully can be healed by excising the scar tissue through reparative therapy. SAD is curable
Demanding others, or even worse, forcing others to abandon their sexuality to please you is both selfish and cruel.
Healing the sick is neither selfish nor cruel.
Co-opting psychology to advance a political or social agenda is deceptive and unethical. Even your terminology (SAD) is insulting to the ones you claim to wish to help.
For the vast majority of human history SAD was acknowledged to be a mental disease. It was only when the SADs co-opted the American Psychiatric Association (I think I have the right org here) that it was removed from disease/disorder status for political reasons. If that wasn't deceptive and unethical then why is it deceptive and unethical now to use the same methods to eliminate the politics and restore the disease as a listed treatable illness?
Personally I feel people shouldn’t destroy their lives so that selfish bigots can maintain power, dominance, and control.
Of course if these people are living fulfilled lives (as your description of them indicates and their own testimony supports) then have they destroyed their lives or only destroyed your excuses?
If you want to commit perversion, then commit perversion. Just don't come crying to us and trying to justify your actions by saying that that's just the way you are naturally. You can choose to be healed, you just don't want to be yet. We know that you behave as you choose to behave (as we all do). No non-beneficial behavior (and SAD behavior is non-beneficial) is worthy of any special protection. Don't bother asking for any. Just keep your perversion out of normal society's sight and we'll all get along better. (Of course if you should choose to molest one of our sons, don't complain if we hunt you down and execute you like the animal you behaved like (and hetersexual child molesters should be executed also)).
God Save America (Please)
I disagree. Ex-gays almost universally report no increase in heterosexual desire. Read the NARTH testimonials. That in and of itself is clear evidence that reparative therapy doesn’t work.
Kind of hard to get it ready for action with someone who repulses you.
Non attraction doesn’t equal repulsion. Normal heterosexuals are capable of homosexual sex. This doesn’t make them homosexual. The term I’ve seen here that best expresses, to me, an ex-gays relationship to his wife would be “mutual masturbation”.
These ex-SADs are obviously living happy fulfilling lives. Why do you insist on trying to hold them in the SAD lifestyle when they've found a way out.
I do not object to their decision. If they are happier without their sexuality, then it’s a good trade off. Only they can determine if they are leading a “fulfilled life”. I do object to the demand that all homosexuals follow suit. I also object to the unsubstantiated claims by some that reparative therapy magically transforms homosexual into heterosexual desire.
Are you afraid that if they can get out and lead good lives then you will be expected to also?
Who’s definition of a “good life”? Yours? Part of the beauty of our system is right to determine for oneself what constitutes a “good” life. People’s lifestyle decisions are not subject to yours or anyone else’s expectations.
Seems that, according to your description of their lives, reparative therapy works well.
I’ve limited myself to using the NARTH terminology. If you like, you can hop over to one of the ex-ex-gay sites and read for your self the testimonials of former ex-gays.
Studies have shown that it is (in at least some cases) the result of mental trauma (molestation, abuse or a poor relationship with their father). So SAD can be compared to psychological scar tissue. Which thankfully can be healed by excising the scar tissue through reparative therapy. SAD is curable.
No one knows what causes homosexuality. Personally, I believe that you’re on the right path. However, it is my opinion that reparative therapy is insufficient. It doesn’t create a functioning heterosexual. My opinion is that reparative therapy is a sincere but misguided effort to apply the tenants of a belief system to modern medicine. The results have been less than successful.
Healing the sick is neither selfish nor cruel.
But using the needy to advance a political agenda is selfish and cruel. Effectively you are saying that since we have a magic cure for homosexuality, gay people have no excuse to engage in homosexual behavior. Therefore, it’s all right to have laws prohibiting such behaviors. But you don’t have a magic cure, and even if you did, that wouldn’t give you the right to dictate how others lead their lives.
For the vast majority of human history SAD was acknowledged to be a mental disease.
That’s not true. For most of human history homosexuals were considered moral deviants and were persecuted or executed by various civil powers. Only recently has homosexuality been acknowledged as a condition.
It was only when the SADs co-opted the American Psychiatric Association (I think I have the right org here) that it was removed from disease/disorder status for political reasons.
It was mostly the work of Evelyn Hooker and other psychologists that convinced the APA to remove homosexuality from the list. Members were convinced through peer-reviewed research, not politics. You can read the research yourself if you like.
If that wasn't deceptive and unethical then why is it deceptive and unethical now to use the same methods to eliminate the politics and restore the disease as a listed treatable illness?
I’m not going to say that politics doesn’t influence the decisions of scientific organizations. I do believe that most scientists (and that’s what psychologists are) remain objective and I believe theirs was an objective decision.
Of course if these people are living fulfilled lives (as your description of them indicates and their own testimony supports) then have they destroyed their lives or only destroyed your excuses?
They (and you) have failed to make a convincing case.
If you want to commit perversion, then commit perversion. Just don't come crying to us and trying to justify your actions by saying that that's just the way you are naturally.
No one needs your permission. You have no authority in this matter.
You can choose to be healed, you just don't want to be yet.
You don’t offer healing, only slavery. If some accept the offer of bondage, that’s their business. I feel sad for those who debase themselves so you can maintain your illusions.
We know that you behave as you choose to behave (as we all do). No non-beneficial behavior (and SAD behavior is non-beneficial) is worthy of any special protection. Don't bother asking for any. Just keep your perversion out of normal society's sight and we'll all get along better..
And who gets to define beneficial? You again? Once again you haven’t the authority, or the power. All people like you have managed to do is cause a great deal of pain to a great many people – all because of selfishness. What a horrible legacy for a group that claims to want to help.