Re: Religion, gay artists and homophobia

by Papaumau Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:55 pm

First topic message reminder :

I have found that the stance against homosexuality - and in many other "biblical sins" - in almost all of the religions of the world is based on writings in their holy books.

As the word that is accepted as the word of their Gods is either said to be spoken directly to the humans that report it, ( and in many of these cases these "conduits" from the Gods are found to simply be schizophrenic ), then the word that is written by the fallible human scribes of old into these holy books is at risk of being seen as the flawed interpretation of what these scribes and prophets said they know and found to be true.

The faithful - as in all of the details surrounding faith - believe in their faith because faith requires no proof and when they act on what they find in their holy books, ( although none of the contents of these books has ever been proven to be right or accurate in fact ), their behaviour, as a result, is based on myth rather than even on secular laws. In other words, because their faith dictates that everything that is in these holy books must be true, what they find there that connects to "sin" must also be true.

I have always felt that as far as the laws of the land that I live in should never be based on religious faith, I can only take the stance that if these laws ARE in any way influenced by religion then they are not laws that can apply to everybody or that can be applied to any kind of secular rules or regulations.

Regards.....

Papaumau.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Sat Feb 14, 2015 10:03 pm

polyglide wrote:DR. Sheldon,
You cannot grasp the fact that perversion relates to many things, including homosexuals. Perversion of justice, a criminal offence etc; Anyone indulging in the above are perverts. It is just a name, the emphasis one puts on it is up to them.

Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Who cares about that irrelevant BS, you claimed:

Polyglide wrote:by polyglide on Wed Feb 11, 2015 2:09 pm
Dr. Sheldon,
According to every dictionary I know, homosexuality is a perversion, just as a farmer is a farmer etc.It is purely a definition and you put what relevance you want to it.

Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Now I showed the OED and Webster's dictionaries neither of which mentioned perversion in their definitions of homosexuality. I also asked you to show just one dictionary that backed up your BS claim, and quelle surprise, you can't.

The bottom line here is that you're a bare faced liar Polyglide, and you used the word perversion because it suits your own rebelliously fuelled bigoted homophobia.

by polyglide Mon Feb 16, 2015 2:15 pm

DR. Sheldon.

The definition of homosexuality in the ORT is, Abnormality.

Homosexual. Non conformist.

I do not know about homophobic, how about homofonic.

If anything is abnormal then it is by definition, also perverse.

How I wish you could actually understand the meaning of words, please read through ORT.

We may then be able to knock some sense into you.

by polyglide Mon Feb 16, 2015 3:28 pm

Dr. Sheldon,
As you may be aware the Bible was written a little while ago and even then homosexuality was a problem, as many efforts to deal with it took place.

As for the Bibles information regarding this matte, read:-

Leviticus. 18.22
22.13
Romans. 1. 26.27
Corinthians. 6.9
Timothy 1. 8.11.

I do agree with what it says, however, the Bible also says we must love one another etc;

It is hard to reconcile this without taking the overall picture.

by **Ivan** Mon Feb 16, 2015 4:08 pm

The definition of homosexuality in the ORT is Abnormality......even then homosexuality was a problem

polyglide. You're skating on very thin ice, and not for the first time on this forum. Homosexuality is not a problem to anyone. It doesn't make any difference to you or me, nobody is telling us we must become homosexuals.

The sexual preference of other adults is nobody's business unless it involves children. Paedophilia is certainly a perversion, but that can involve heterosexuals (as in gangs grooming young girls), or homosexuals (as in Tory politicians and celebrities taking boys from children's homes and abusing them). So it doesn't make homosexuality per se any more of "a problem" than heterosexuality.

The rules of this forum specifically ban homophobia. Of course you have the right to subscribe to what it says in Leviticus (though I trust you don't approve of Numbers 31:18, or Judges 11, where Jephthah cooks his daughter), but please don't post comments which could land us in hot water with the site owners.

https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/t18-posting-rules

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Mon Feb 16, 2015 6:47 pm

polyglide wrote: If anything is abnormal then it is by definition, also perverse.

Absurdly idiotic claim. So left handed people are perverse then according to you, and short people, or tall people, or athletes, or professional footballers and snooker players, or anyone who in any way deviates from the norm? This really is the most moronic claim you've made, some achievement in itself.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Mon Feb 16, 2015 6:52 pm

polyglide wrote:How I wish you could actually understand the meaning of words, please read through ORT. We may then be able to knock some sense into you.

Ah, another ad hominem, the problem with your little homophobic tantrum is I supplied both the Oxford English dictionary's, and Webster's definition of the word homosexual. It's you who is denying these definitions based on your homophobic religious beliefs, not me. I doubt there are enough dictionaries anywhere to knock any sense into you though, but one last try, just because something is not the norm doesn't mean it's perverse.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Mon Feb 16, 2015 7:08 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr. Sheldon,
As you may be aware the Bible was written a little while ago and even then homosexuality was a problem,
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Well since it was written by bigoted misogynistic men in a male dominated society it's not a surprise to anyone that they wrote such vile nonsense, only a moron would think that the prejudice people like that exhibit towards gay people is actually the fault of gay people for being gay.

as many efforts to deal with it took place.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:What your vile beliefs don't seem able to grasp is that these are people, they don't need dealing with, consenting adults have the right to do what they want with each other, as long as no one is being forced or hurt. Your bronze age bigotry doesn't entitle you to comment on who gay people sleep with or marry. This is another one of those asinine doctrines the church will have to be cajoled and then forced to abandon, but forced they will be, as no decent moral society will suffer homophobic prejudice in the 21st century.

As for the Bibles information regarding this matte, read:-

Leviticus. 18.22
22.13
Romans. 1. 26.27
Corinthians. 6.9
Timothy 1. 8.11.

Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Already read them, that kind of vile ignorant bigotry is one of the many reasons it's impossible for me to believe the bible originated from an omniscient deity, as it clearly shows it's entirely ignorant human origins in the bronze age bigotry it espouses.

I do agree with what it says, however, the Bible also says we must love one another etc; It is hard to reconcile this without taking the overall picture.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Not for me, the bible is from multiple sources all of them human, and therefore deeply flawed in places, and profound in others. It's not a panacea for all ills, in fact quite the opposite. Only people foolish enough to believe it's some kind of divine message swallow the bigoted nonsense that is to be found throughout it's pages.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Feb 17, 2015 7:35 am

So just to recap.

1. Homosexuality is perfectly natural as it occurs throughout nature, and this has been proven with proper scientific research.
2. Only a moron thinks something is perverse because it deviates from the norm.
3. Polyglide can't produce even ONE of "all the dictionaries he's read" to validate his claim that they define homosexuality as a perversion. I shan't even feign surprise here.
4. Despite their indignant protestations not to care particularly, some theists do harbour quite deep seated prejudice and bigotry towards gay people.

Thankfully in this country as in other civilised societies gay people are having equal rights protected by law. Long overdue it is as well.

by polyglide Tue Feb 17, 2015 10:42 am

DR. Sheldon,
No dictionary rates homosexuality as normal.

I have given you the dictionary references, several times.

There are several scientists who have exlpained that homosexuality is not due to any natural gene or anything else and have given their reasons.

If you are to consider one then you have to consider the other.

Your inability to give due consideration to all shows a complete lack of intelligence and leaves me with a feeling of hemiplegia.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Feb 17, 2015 3:51 pm

polyglide wrote:DR. Sheldon,
No dictionary rates homosexuality as normal.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:I have rightly been chastised for allowing these exchanges to descend into name calling. So first I'll apologise for that.

Now to be fair you've made this point relentlessly and each time I have conceded that homosexuality is not the norm. So I'm not sure why you keep repeating it.

As I've said many things are not normal, and most of them are, like being gay, perfectly harmless. So it's a completely moot point in my opinion.

I have given you the dictionary references, several times.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Well then I've missed these. So perhaps you'd be good enough to post a dictionary definition of homosexuality that describes it as a perversion, as that's what you claimed for all the dictionaries you'd read, your words verbatim. I already posted both the OED and Webster'a and neither definition validated this claim.

There are several scientists who have exlpained that homosexuality is not due to any natural gene or anything else and have given their reasons.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Again I made no claim that homosexuality was genetic, and again unless heterosexuality is genetic I fail to see what point you're trying to make.

Again if you're going to cite scientific opinion then without citing the research or the scientists it is impossible to judge the validity of the claim. An individual scientist can claim anything, this does not make the claim scientific. Was this research published and more importantly was it peer reviewed?

If you are to consider one then you have to consider the other. Your inability to give due consideration to all shows a complete lack of intelligence and leaves me with a feeling of hemiplegia.

Since I have already addressed the name calling I'll ignore your last. Especially as it's unclear what you're claiming I've ignored, as all you've presented is a bare unevidenced claim with a vague suggestion it's scientific opinion.

by polyglide Wed Feb 18, 2015 11:49 am

DR. Sheldon,
Lets forget the insults it is beneath us both.

I do not realy think of homosexuality as being a problem to either those concerned or life in general, there are far more problematic matters.

But just to answer your question regarding this matter.

Dictionary definitions:-

Homosexual-person attracted to members of same sex.

Homosexuality-sexual attraction or sexual relations with members of same sex.

Perversion-Any abnormal means of obtaining sexual satifaction.

There are far more important matters than the above so far as I am concerned, however, there are far too may people in the world who do not feel the same, only in ther last year one country made it law to stone homosexuals to death.

Cristianity would in no way condone such barbaric
practices.

We on the other hand have our own problems;-

Children being accused of rape, aged under eight.

Rampant abuse in childrens homes and hospitals.

Rapes reported daily.

Mothers killing their children.

Wives being abused.

Children starving etc;etc;

I think we have far more to worry about and discuss than someone being Gay.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Wed Feb 18, 2015 12:13 pm

polyglide wrote: I do not realy think of homosexuality as being a problem to either those concerned or life in general, there are far more problematic matters. But just to answer your question regarding this matter.
Dictionary definitions:-
Homosexual-person attracted to members of same sex.
Homosexuality-sexual attraction or sexual relations with members of same sex.
Perversion-Any abnormal means of obtaining sexual satifaction.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:The dictionary definition in the Oxford English dictionary defines homosexuality as follows:
ADJECTIVE
1 Sexually attracted to people of one’s own sex.
1.1 Involving or characterized by sexual attraction between people of the same sex:
Many posters have pointed out that heterosexual practices that deviate from the norm would fall into this category, you're subjectively misrepresenting the definition of homosexuality, and whatever you say it is both prejudiced and offensive.

polyglide wrote:There are far more important matters than the above so far as I am concerned, however, there are far too may people in the world who do not feel the same, only in ther last year one country made it law to stone homosexuals to death.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Those topics are not part of this thread OP, and I don't categorise crimes, and human rights abuses in order of importance, though I'd have though it was axiomatic that a country criminalising people for who they are and stoning them to death is about as important a topic as we can discuss, perhaps if these were Christians being stoned to death for their beliefs you might better grasp how wrong your characterisations were?

That aside:

Psychology was one of the first disciplines to study homosexuality as a discrete phenomenon. Prior to and throughout most of the 20th century, common standard psychology viewed homosexuality in terms of pathological models as a mental illness. That classification began to be subjected to critical scrutiny in the research, which consistently failed to produce any empirical or scientific basis regarding homosexuality as a disorder or abnormality.

Note the last sentence, and all major world health, medical, and mental health bodies disagreeing with your categorisation of homosexuality as an abnormality.

Link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_psychology

Also note: Since the 1970s, the consensus of the behavioural and social sciences and the health and mental health professions globally is that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexual orientation,

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Wed Feb 18, 2015 12:15 pm

Polyglide wrote:Cristianity would in no way condone such barbaric
practices.

Well that's axiomatically false as well I'm afraid, as we have ample evidence of Christians persecuting gay men and women, both historically and in contemporary Christian societies. Some posters have posted links to conservative Christians in America espousing the worst kind of prejudices and homophobia.

by polyglide Wed Feb 18, 2015 12:25 pm

DR. Sheldon,
Christians have been thrown to the lions, or do you not know.

Of course there have been and still are, Christians who do not adhere to Christs teachings and you tend to forget, present day Christians have nothing to do with the Old Testaments contents, their sole concern is to follow the teaching of Jesus.

Now show me any time that Jesus condoned any bad practise.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Wed Feb 18, 2015 12:34 pm

polyglide wrote:Christians have been thrown to the lions, or do you not know.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:I'm aware this is an historical claim, though I'm not sure how accurate it is or what actually evidence there is for the claim, but I fail to see the relevance to the thread OP to be honest?

polyglide wrote:Of course there have been and still are, Christians who do not adhere to Christs teachings and you tend to forget, present day Christians have nothing to do with the Old Testaments contents, their sole concern is to follow the teaching of Jesus.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:This strikes me as another logical fallacy called The No True Scotsman fallacy. There's a very good concise explanation of it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman.

If your deity is perfect then it behoves people to explain why it's behaviour was so abhorrent in the OT. Obviously the simplest explanation, Occam's Razor applies here, is that there is no deity and the appalling narrative reflects the human attitudes of that period.

polyglide wrote:Now show me any time that Jesus condoned any bad practise.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Again this is not really relevant to the thread OP, so perhaps if you want to discuss this you should start another thread on that topic, as I have promised Boatlady that I'll make more of an effort to stay on topic and not be drawn into other debates.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:09 am

polyglide wrote:. Now show me any time that Jesus condoned any bad practise.

If this is relevant to the homophobic narrative in the OT as you've claimed, and that Christians live by Jusus's teachings and disregard the OT where it conflicts, then you need to explain why you have posted OT narratives that make bigoted homophobic claims and cited them as relevant to this debate? You'd also have to explain why your own posts contain remarks that many on here have pointed out are homophobic and prejudiced?

by Norm Deplume Thu Feb 19, 2015 9:50 am

polyglide wrote:
Now show me any time that Jesus condoned any bad practise.

Slavery.

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5)

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Thu Feb 19, 2015 9:57 am

Norm Deplume wrote:
polyglide wrote:
Now show me any time that Jesus condoned any bad practise.

Slavery.

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5)

Ah, but you're failing to subjectively interpreting it so it loses its appalling meaning as written.

Naughty naughty. The only fit punishment is of course that you be tortured by immolation FOR EVER.

by Norm Deplume Thu Feb 19, 2015 10:19 am

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:
Norm Deplume wrote:

Slavery.

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5)

Ah, but you're failing to subjectively interpreting it so it loses its appalling meaning as written.

Naughty naughty. The only fit punishment is of course that you be tortured by immolation FOR EVER.

I keep forgetting that!

And that if it is condoned in the NT it must be a Good Thing. I must try to remember that just because I consider slavery a Bad Thing, True Christians™ might not agree with me.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Thu Feb 19, 2015 2:20 pm

Norm Deplume wrote:I keep forgetting that!

And that if it is condoned in the NT it must be a Good Thing. I must try to remember that just because I consider slavery a Bad Thing, True Christians™ might not agree with me.

Although we're being slightly facetious it's worth pointing out that the parts of scripture that condone slavery allowed ordinary Christians to participate in this vile trade of hundreds of years. This is the problem with basing your morals unequivocally on a religious tome that itself largely originated 2-4 thousand years ago. Though again it begs the salient question as to why if a deity that is purportedly omniscient and omnipotent exists it permitted a message of this sort to be communicated as it's own?

Using Occam's razor we can quite easily arrive at a very simple answer that fits all the evidence and also explains the other egregious narratives including homophobia in the bible and other religious tomes for contemporary monotheistic religions. They simply are all man made..

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Thu Feb 19, 2015 2:23 pm

polyglide wrote:DR. Sheldon,
Christians have been thrown to the lions, or do you not know.

Of course there have been and still are, Christians who do not adhere to Christs teachings and you tend to forget, present day Christians have nothing to do with the Old Testaments contents, their sole concern is to follow the teaching of Jesus.

Now show me any time that Jesus condoned any bad practise.

You never actually responded to the post before that one that showed your categorisation of homosexuality as abnormal to be directly refuted by all the worlds major health, medical, and mental health bodies? Here:

Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Psychology was one of the first disciplines to study homosexuality as a discrete phenomenon. Prior to and throughout most of the 20th century, common standard psychology viewed homosexuality in terms of pathological models as a mental illness. That classification began to be subjected to critical scrutiny in the research, which consistently failed to produce any empirical or scientific basis regarding homosexuality as a disorder or abnormality.

Note the last sentence, and all major world health, medical, and mental health bodies disagreeing with your categorisation of homosexuality as an abnormality.

Link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_psychology

Also note: Since the 1970s, the consensus of the behavioural and social sciences and the health and mental health professions globally is that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexual orientation.

by polyglide Fri Feb 20, 2015 5:09 pm

Dr. Sheldon,
Homosexuality has been around since recorded history.

I am aware of the present interest in finding out the origin etc;.

This will obviously also be applicable to other abnomal human behaviour.

You cannot just attempt to justify one human departure from what all the facts determine as unusual and not others.

Do not come back with the, homosexuality hurts no one, etc; this does not wash.

If all human behaviour is decided at birth then all should be treated equaly.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Fri Feb 20, 2015 5:29 pm

polyglide wrote:This will obviously also be applicable to other abnomal human behaviour.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Homosexuality is not abnormal, as I showed above, why do you think you can simply ignore my post and repeat your homophobic claims? I've reposted it at the end of this post anyway.

polyglide wrote:You cannot just attempt to justify one human departure from what all the facts determine as unusual and not others.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:I've not done this as homosexuality does not require any justification any more than heterosexuality, and so your claim is moot. I merely pointed out that there is plenty of research into this, and that it all refutes your prejudiced claims. As I said I've reposted the evidence and the link at the end of this post. It's also been pointed out to you that the differences between homosexuality and the other behaviours you described was that they were harmful and abusive, whereas being gay is not, which as well as being backed by all world's major health organisations and mental health bodies and organisations, is now reflected by laws in most civilised societies that are striving for equality and equal rights for gay men and women.

Do not come back with the, homosexuality hurts no one, etc; this does not wash.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:You don't get to tell others what they can and cannot post in a public forum, especially since unlike you I have evidenced my claims, and provided links. Your personal opinion is irrelevant as it's unevidenced, Hitchen's razor etc.

If all human behaviour is decided at birth then all should be treated equaly.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:There's two l's in equally. Your claim doesn't really make much sense to be honest. but again, since it is a bare claim plucked out of thin air with no attempt to evidence it I'm rejecting it on that basis using Hitchen's razor. I have explained this enough times now and provided links so I'll not repeat it any more.

I'll repost this as you seem to have largely ignored it and simply repeated your prejudiced claims:

"Psychology was one of the first disciplines to study homosexuality as a discrete phenomenon. Prior to and throughout most of the 20th century, common standard psychology viewed homosexuality in terms of pathological models as a mental illness. That classification began to be subjected to critical scrutiny in the research, which consistently failed to produce any empirical or scientific basis regarding homosexuality as a disorder or abnormality."

It's not an abnormality, and all the scientific research shows this. The article goes on....

"Since the 1970s, the consensus of the behavioural and social sciences and the health and mental health professions globally is that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexual orientation, "

So it's a fact that all the scientific research shows that being gay is neither abnormal nor unnatural as you keep trying to claim, without any actual evidence of course.

by polyglide Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:37 am

DR. Sheldon,
I accept, as all rational people, I feel do, the definitions of a word as given in the dictionary.

When the definition of homosexuality says it is normal, then, just as long as they say, rape is normal, then I will believe it.

Do not, please, get on your high horse and say rape hurts, of course it does and is a henious crime,however, what if the desire to do so is on the same level as homosexuality, involved in ones genes etc;

Do we then look for a cure?.

by snowyflake Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:56 am

polyglide wrote:When the definition of homosexuality says it is normal, then, just as long as they say, rape is normal, then I will believe it.

Does the definition of heterosexuality say it's normal?

BTW with rape there are victims and the issue of consent. Rape is not consensual. There are no victims between mutually consenting adults in a homosexual relationship.

by polyglide Sat Feb 21, 2015 12:04 pm

snowyflake,
Come on flower, no word has to be confirmed as normal, you accept that the definition is that in the terms and meaning it is used.

I do not want to debate homosexuality, as such, I have homosexual friends who I hold dear, I also have friends who drink more than they should, who I hold dear, others that swear every other word etc; etc; I am in no position to judge any, although I would indulge in none.

by snowyflake Sat Feb 21, 2015 12:10 pm

polyglide wrote:snowyflake,
Come on flower, no word has to be confirmed as normal, you accept that the definition is that in the terms and meaning it is used.

I do not want to debate homosexuality, as such, I have homosexual friends who I hold dear, I also have friends who drink more than they should, who I hold dear, others that swear every other word etc; etc; I am in no position to judge any, although I would indulge in none.

Come on, petal, let's not be condescending to one another. You were the one who said that the definition of homosexuality did not state it was normal and therefore in your mind it is not normal. So by your own criteria, heterosexuality is not normal either. If you are going to argue, please argue sensibly and consistently or they will be ripped to shreds and rightly so.

Do you tell your dear homosexual friends they are not normal?

I would question your friendship if I were them.

by polyglide Sat Feb 21, 2015 12:21 pm

snowyflake,
I think most homosexuals are aware they are not normal.

Just as a person with only one leg is not normal.

They are normal amongst themselves but not in society as a whole.

You must be unable to grasp the meaning of normal.

I have gone over this a few times, normal so far as things are concerned, means using them for the reason they were created, to use them for other purposes is abnormal.

If you refute this, on what acceptable grounds based on what the vast majority of people understand.

by snowyflake Sat Feb 21, 2015 12:28 pm

You are suggesting that because a majority of people are a certain way that is what you consider normal? The implication being that anyone who is not that way is abnormal. The majority of people are dark haired. Does that mean that blonde and ginger people are abnormal? No it doesn't. It's a variation of hair colour that appears at reduced levels in the population compared to dark haired people.

Homosexuality is a variation of human sexuality that appears at low levels in the population. It is not majority but that does not make them abnormal or not 'normal'.

I would suggest it is you who doesn't understand that using terms like 'normal' is offensive.

by Norm Deplume Sat Feb 21, 2015 5:03 pm

polyglide wrote:snowyflake,
I think most homosexuals are aware they are not normal.

Just as a person with only one leg is not normal.

They are normal amongst themselves but not in society as a whole.

You must be unable to grasp the meaning of normal.

I have gone over this a few times, normal so far as things are concerned, means using them for the reason they were created, to use them for other purposes is abnormal.

If you refute this, on what acceptable grounds based on what the vast majority of people understand.

By your reasoning, no one is "normal". For instance, there are more women than men in the world, so being male is "not normal". No one over the age of 50 is "normal". No one with an annual income in excess of £6000 is "normal". No one who believes Jesus Christ is God is "normal".

I get the distinct feeling that you are suggesting that homosexuals and monopeds should keep their own company rather than being treated as members of the human race.

=====================
I can assure you that there is no special group of people with one leg. I know a few from when I was in physiotherapy and from visits to my prosthetist but then I also know many other people from other places.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Sun Feb 22, 2015 9:07 am

polyglide wrote:DR. Sheldon,
I accept, as all rational people, I feel do, the definitions of a word as given in the dictionary.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:That's axiomatically false, and I simply ask anyone to read the discourse for your claim that...

Every dictionary you've read defines Homosexuality as a perversion and homosexuals as perverts"

I politely asked you to cite even one dictionary definition that did this, I cited and quoted both Webster's and the OED, you ignored my request, and simply used dishonest semantics after that.

polyglideWhen the definition of homosexuality says it is normal, then, just as long as they say, rape is normal, then I will believe it.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Your bigoted homophobic attempts to suggest a synonymous connection between gay people who do no one any harm and the worst kind of sexual crimes have already been dealt with by Ivan, tread carefully. Or better still keep your religious bigotry to yourself.

polyglideDo not, please, get on your high horse and say rape hurts, of course it does and is a heinous crime,however, what if the desire to do so is on the same level as homosexuality, involved in ones genes etc;
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:What if the desire to commit rape is on the same level as heterosexuality? What a truly asinine thing to say. "Get on our high horse", another truly asinine thing to say, anyone who considers condemnation of rape in this fashion should really seek help.

polyglideDo we then look for a cure?.

There is no more a cure for being gay than there is for being straight, as the entire medical and scientific world has evidenced that being gay is a "NORMAL" variation of adult heterosexual desire.

"Psychology was one of the first disciplines to study homosexuality as a discrete phenomenon. Prior to and throughout most of the 20th century, common standard psychology viewed homosexuality in terms of pathological models as a mental illness. That classification began to be subjected to critical scrutiny in the research, which consistently failed to produce any empirical or scientific basis regarding homosexuality as a disorder or abnormality. As a result of such accumulated research, professionals in medicine, mental health, and the behavioral and social sciences, opposing the classification of homosexuality as a mental disorder, claimed the conclusion that it was inaccurate, and that the DSM classification reflected untested assumptions that were based on once-prevalent social norms and clinical impressions from unrepresentative samples which consisted of patients seeking therapy and individuals whose conduct brought them into the criminal justice system."

"Since the 1970s, the consensus of the behavioral and social sciences and the health and mental health professions globally is that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexual orientation, while there remain those who maintain that it is a disorder. In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder. The American Psychological Association Council of Representatives followed in 1975. Thereafter other major mental health organizations followed and it was finally declassified by the World Health Organization in 1990. Consequently, while some still believe homosexuality is a mental disorder, the current research and clinical literature demonstrate that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality, reflecting the official positions of the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association."

Jeep posting these bigoted homophobic lies, and I'll keep posting the evidence that refutes it.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Sun Feb 22, 2015 9:12 am

polyglide wrote:snowyflake,
Come on flower, no word has to be confirmed as normal, you accept that the definition is that in the terms and meaning it is used.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:So you lied when you claim it actually in every dictionary definition you'd ever read?

I do not want to debate homosexuality, as such, I have homosexual friends who I hold dear, I also have friends who drink more than they should, who I hold dear, others that swear every other word etc; etc; I am in no position to judge any, although I would indulge in none.

This thread is about homosexuality, so if you have no more interest in posting your homophobic prejudices then stop. I seriously doubt you have any gay friends, as if you pretend to then you must keep your true feelings about them dishonestly hidden. Try telling them what you've told us on here, or show them these posts, and you have judged gay people, repeatedly as anyone can read.

Addressing Snowyflake as flower is another attempt at derisory ad hominem, cut it out.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Sun Feb 22, 2015 9:22 am

polyglide wrote:snowyflake,
I think most homosexuals are aware they are not normal.Just as a person with only one leg is not normal. They are normal amongst themselves but not in society as a whole.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:You claimed they were perverts because of this false claim which every major health and psychological organisation in the world refutes, are you now claiming people with one leg are perverts?

polyglide wrote:You must be unable to grasp the meaning of normal.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Do you think these scientific bodies know what normal means?
"Since the 1970s, the consensus of the behavioral and social sciences and the health and mental health professions globally is that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexual orientation,"

You see the word normal in there right? Perhaps they don't know what it means either?

polyglide wrote:I have gone over this a few times, normal so far as things are concerned, means using them for the reason they were created, to use them for other purposes is abnormal.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:No that's just your attempt to subjectively interpret it to suit your own prejudices, and I've been over that a few times.

polyglide wrote:If you refute this, on what acceptable grounds based on what the vast majority of people understand.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Well done you've invoked argumentum ad populum again, unless you'd care to evidence this claim for widespread support of your opinion, an opinion refuted by the entire medical scientific world. As I have shown above, evidenced my claim in other words.

by polyglide Mon Feb 23, 2015 2:05 pm

Dr. Sheldon,
Every dictionary I know is clear in the fact that, if you follow all the relative words, homosexuality is abnormal.

This does not mean anything other than what is involved is not being used in the manner intended.

Only some brainless idiot would not agree that this includes homosexuality.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Mon Feb 23, 2015 3:03 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr. Sheldon,
Every dictionary I know is clear in the fact that, if you follow all the relative words, homosexuality is abnormal.

This does not mean anything other than what is involved is not being used in the manner intended.

Only some brainless idiot would not agree that this includes homosexuality.

Yet you cannot quote one dictionary that describes homosexuality as abnormal. What's more I have quotes with links research that shows every major scientific health and mental health organisation in the world utterly refutes your claim, so you're claiming the world of medical science and psychological are all " brainless idiots" now because they don't share your homophobic prejudices.

You've been repeatedly warned about your use of ad hominem, yet here again we see you resort to this. If you can't discuss this without resorting to childish name calling then please don't bother.

by boatlady Mon Feb 23, 2015 4:53 pm

Only some brainless idiot would not agree that this includes homosexuality.

Please try to refrain from this kind of name calling - it adds nothing to the discussion and succeeds only in deterring other forum members from joining in - may even dissuade possible new members for all I know

by **Ivan** Mon Feb 23, 2015 6:29 pm

What is ‘normal’? If you mean “conforming to the behaviour of the majority”, then yes, heterosexuals are normal. It’s also claimed by homophobes, and by Catholics in particular, that heterosexuality is ‘normal’ because it’s a required activity in order to reproduce the species. A fallacious argument if ever there was, because on most occasions that heterosexuals have sex they aren’t trying to make babies. In fact, it most instances they are careful enough to ensure that that’s not the outcome. I know plenty of heterosexuals who have never had children but have had sex. Heterosexuals have sex for pleasure, as do homosexuals. Having sex for pleasure is a majority pursuit and is therefore ‘normal’, regardless of your personal preferences, and as long as you only do it with consenting adults.

If you want to pursue the idea that normal is “conforming to the behaviour of the majority”, then going to church these days is somewhat abnormal. Only about a million people in the UK, roughly 1.5% of the population, attend Church of England services regularly. Yes, there are people who attend other churches, chapels, mosques and temples, but the vast majority of people in all developed countries, apart from the USA, are not active worshippers. So should we attack all those who practise their faith for being 'abnormal' because they’re doing what sociologists would call “deviating from the norm”?

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Mon Feb 23, 2015 6:37 pm

Ivan wrote:Having sex for pleasure is a majority pursuit and is therefore ‘normal’, regardless of your personal preferences, and as long as you only do it with consenting adults. If you want to pursue the idea that normal is “conforming to the behaviour of the majority”, then going to church these days is somewhat abnormal.

A valid point, and of course if we prohibit actions based on whether they might harm others, then consensual sex whether gay or straight would fare considerably better than religion. What consenting adults do to each other harms no one and is no one else's business.

by polyglide Tue Feb 24, 2015 12:02 pm

Dr. Sheldon,
We keep going over old ground.

Otiose, being the word.

We are not talking about consent, the problem is wether homosexuality is normal, not acceptable, between adults, but normal.

The dictionary says it is abnormal, the vast majority of people accept it as abnormal and what occurs even between consenting adults can be abnormal, including hetrosexuals.

Normal, relating to anything is accepted as meaning,
behaving in a manner accepted as normal, using anything in the intended manner, acting in an acceptable manner etc;

I am not bothered about what consenting humans do, that is entirely up to them, but what some do is not normal, it may be acceptable but that does not make it normal,

If it was normal then it would be the practise of most and it is not.

What the problem is, homosexuals think they are looked down on and not accepted in society, which I disagree with, they want to feel normal and equal, which they are as humans, they are normal amongst themselves but in the wide world they are a section who have different and abnormal preference and I cannot see how anyone can dispute the fact.

by boatlady Tue Feb 24, 2015 12:46 pm

We keep going over old ground.

And that, right there, may be the problem.

A more fruitful direction might be the consideration of whether or not the category 'normal' has any relevance to what i believe began as a discussion of whether or not secular law should be based on religious belief.

The original post concluded that
I have always felt that as far as the laws of the land that I live in should never be based on religious faith, I can only take the stance that if these laws ARE in any way influenced by religion then they are not laws that can apply to everybody or that can be applied to any kind of secular rules or regulations.

Maybe take that as your starting point rather than going round and round debating the meaning of 'normal' - which i don't think has very much bearing on the discussion?

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Feb 24, 2015 1:08 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr. Sheldon,
We keep going over old ground.

Otiose, being the word.

We are not talking about consent, the problem is wether homosexuality is normal, not acceptable, between adults, but normal.

The dictionary says it is abnormal, the vast majority of people accept it as abnormal and what occurs even between consenting adults can be abnormal, including hetrosexuals.

Normal, relating to anything is accepted as meaning,
behaving in a manner accepted as normal, using anything in the intended manner, acting in an acceptable manner etc;

I am not bothered about what consenting humans do, that is entirely up to them, but what some do is not normal, it may be acceptable but that does not make it normal,

If it was normal then it would be the practise of most and it is not.

What the problem is, homosexuals think they are looked down on and not accepted in society, which I disagree with, they want to feel normal and equal, which they are as humans, they are normal amongst themselves but in the wide world they are a section who have different and abnormal preference and I cannot see how anyone can dispute the fact.

So a discussion that doesn't go your way serves no purpose? I tend to disagree.

Homosexuality is a normal variation of adult heterosexual desires. All the evidence shows this, and every single scientific and medical body in the world supports this view. Ranting about dictionary definitions you've failed to produce even once is rather silly, and won't help your cause. Neither will subjective semantics to try and dishonestly avoid the fact that your claim was a lie.

Religious homophobic bigotry is vile, and anyone who indulges it should be ashamed. They are also treading a fine line as there are now laws enacted to stop precisely such hate crimes.

by Sponsored content