I am pretty much convinced that neither of the two sides of the argument being discussed have been proven correct(sickness/inborn). Additionally, it does not matter to me which side "turns out" to be correct, if either do. This is as close to objectivity as I can get, without going into double-blind scenarios, etc.
From your post, John, I am fairly sure you advocate the "sickness" argument, for a number of reasons, only a few of which claim to be research based. I imagine you find homosexual conduct repugnant and sinful, but I may be wrong. Regardless of your reasons for backing the sickness theory, you still are centered on only that side of the argument, and thus seek to further that argument over the "inborn" theory. The outcome of the argument, proving that homosexuality is a curable disease, is your ultimate goal. This is inherently subjective, and any opinion presented by you with this mindset is therefore subjective. This has nothing to do with how "right" or "wrong" you believe you are.
Additionally, you brought up some behavior issues with homosexuals; specifically, defending what they do. I must assume you mean what they do to each other? The consensual stuff? If that is the case, why would any adults need to defend consensual activites in private? I personally find that behavior gross, but I sure as heck don't think it's any of my business. Is that what you meant? Or am I misinterpreting?
The point in this issue as started in post 61 is whether or not SAD is curable. mille99 believes it is not. "you're either gay or you're not". My point is that it is curable
The average SAD cannot accept the possibility that SAD is curable because that would destroy their image of the world (the old God made me this way I can't change so I'm not accountable for my choices shtick). This totally prevents any objectivity on their part in the discussion. I (the Christian) can look open eyed at the 'curability' of SAD since I have no world image to protect that would be damaged by it. Therefore I can look at the tons of ex-SADs and know that the condition is not permanent no matter what anyone says, and remain objective to a far greater degree than the SAD can. 2. homosexuals defense of homosexuality: I didn't address what they do. If they did it in private and stopped rubbing the world's face in it, it wouldn't be a problem (it would stay between them and God so to speak)
What I addressed was the SADs defense of the SAD world image. (SAD is incurable, I was made this way, the Bible was corrupted and really doesn't condemn homosexual behavior etc). They cannot let these myths be corrected else they become accountable for their choices again, therefore they defend them with radical eyes-held-tightly-shut fanaticism.
GSA(P)