Study on gay marriage views retracted after allegations of fake data

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(05-24-2015, 09:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As I said; it is most likely because there has been no motivation to "prove" it; as there has been to find the gay gene over the last few decades. Here's one man's opinion on the matter:

http://www.behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2011/10/08/homosexuality-the-mental-illness-that-went-away/

Are you trying to imply that no scientific or medical research about the cause of homosexuality has done because it would be politically incorrect?

Because that is what your blogger is suggesting.

[BmorePat87]

(05-24-2015, 09:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Nope. Throughout the thread I gave many credit for being on the right track. Except for the failed mind-reader; that dude didn't have a clue.

Clearly, no one can understand your irrational line of reasoning.


Btw, nice blog post. Glad to see you're only using the most academic of sources.

[BmorePat87]

(05-24-2015, 10:15 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: Are you trying to imply that no scientific or medical research about the cause of homosexuality has done because it would be politically incorrect?

Because that is what your blogger is suggesting.

As soon as you point out how crazy his non academic links are, he begins to run away from what they say.

[*bfine32*]

(05-24-2015, 10:15 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: Are you trying to imply that no scientific or medical research about the cause of homosexuality has done because it would be politically incorrect?

Because that is what your blogger is suggesting.

He is not simply a blogger; you may want to research him.

As I said, It (mental disorder) has not been done because there has been no motivation to do so. There has been plenty of research looking for the gay gene; because there is a motivation to do so.

On the mothership one really lost poster in that PR forum stated that he would be glad when it was legal, so no one would complain that it should be illegal (I know, right?). IMO, once it is legitimized, there will be motivation to proof it is a mental disorder.

[*bfine32*]

(05-24-2015, 10:22 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: As soon as you point out how crazy his non academic links are, he begins to run away from what they say.

It is of no use. Unlike many on here Richmond tries to keep it focused on the post instead of the poster.

He may be just a little more mature.

[BmorePat87]

(05-24-2015, 10:23 PM)bfine32 Wrote: He is not a blogger; you may want to research him.

As I said, It (mental disorder) has not been done because there has been no motivation to do so. There has been plenty of research looking for the gay gene; because there is a motivation to do so.

On the mothership one really lost poster in that PR forum stated that he would be glad when it was legal, so no one would complain that it should be illegal (I know, right?). IMO, once it is legitimized, there will be motivation to proof it is a mental disorder.

Just because he has a PhD doesn't mean he isn't a blogger. That website is a blog. What sets this apart from a more academic or legitimate source is the fact that he engages in conversations with anonymous posters in the comments section and feeds on their ridiculous view points, even starting whole new blog posts to talk about their views (that he tends to agree with).

It's almost like that time you tried to pass a guy with a PhD who was an expert one earthquakes off as an expert on gay conversion therapy. That was hilarious.

Which is almost as funny as this idea that you have that legalizing gay marriage will lead to some break through in which everyone realizes being gay is a mental illness.

[BmorePat87]

(05-24-2015, 10:32 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It is of no use. Unlike many on here Richmond tries to keep it focused on the post instead of the poster.

He may be just a little more mature.

Be sure to keep that in mind next time you resort to trying to mock GMDino and myself when you become incapable of defending your posts.

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(05-24-2015, 10:23 PM)bfine32 Wrote: He is not a blogger; you may want to research him.

Maybe some other time when I have more time, for now I'm responding to the blog you linked me to.

Quote:As I said, It (mental disorder) has not been done because there has been no motivation to do so. There has been plenty of research looking for the gay gene; because there is a motivation to do so.

This makes no sense. Either research hasn't been done "because there has been no motivation to do so." or "There has been plenty of research looking for the gay gene; because there is a motivation to do so." Well which is it?

Quote:On the mothership one really lost poster in that PR forum stated that he would be glad when it was legal, so no one would complain that it should be illegal (I know, right?). IMO, once it is legitimized, there will be motivation to proof it is a mental disorder.

The only thing I do agree with here is that if gay marriage is legalized throughout the nation (or legitimized in your words) there could be a push or "motivation" to prove that it is a mental disorder. But we've seen that happen before in our history when a particular minority is seeking equal rights.

[*bfine32*]

(05-24-2015, 10:46 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: Maybe some other time when I have more time, for now I'm responding to the blog you linked me to.

It really doesn't take that long and he is likely more qualified that any message board member.

(05-24-2015, 10:46 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: This makes no sense.  Either research hasn't been done "because there has been no motivation to do so." or "There has been plenty of research looking for the gay gene; because there is a motivation to do so." Well which is it?

The research has been focused on looking for a gene that most likely doesn't exist. Freud researched it and determined it was a mental disorder (didn't have blogs back then). If it is legitimized the focus will most likely change.

(05-24-2015, 10:46 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: The only thing I do agree with here is that if gay marriage is legalized throughout the nation (or legitimized in your words) there could be a push or "motivation" to prove that it is a mental disorder.   But we've seen that happen before in our history when a particular minority is seeking equal rights.

So you did understand what I meant above.

[*bfine32*]

(05-24-2015, 10:46 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Be sure to keep that in mind next time you resort to trying to mock GMDino and myself when you become incapable of defending your posts.

Didn't mean to hit a nerve. I'm sure Dino feels the same.

[BmorePat87]

(05-24-2015, 11:03 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Didn't mean to hit a nerve. I'm sure Dino feels the same.

and it looks like another thread comes to a close with bfine being incapable of responding to the topic at hand and just resorting to desperate attacks.


It's been fun playing.

[*bfine32*]

(05-24-2015, 11:08 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: and it looks like another thread comes to a close with bfine being incapable of responding to the topic at hand and just resorting to desperate attacks.


It's been fun playing.

Might want to do 2 things:

1. Get a mirror

2. Look at the post I was responding to.

Either way: "Bye"

[Belsnickel]

Homosexuality was considered a mental disorder as it was deviant behavior. In other words, it was contrary to societal norms. The definition of a mental disorder no longer includes deviant behavior in general. Because these behaviors do not fall within the same guidelines as other mental disorders they were removed as they do not actually fit the definition. It wasn't just an arbitrary removal based on lobbying from the gay community. There was actually a logical, legitimate reason to remove homosexuality from the list of disorders.

[Johnny Cupcakes]

(05-24-2015, 09:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No we should not deny them rights enjoyed by all. But IMO, we should not legitimize it.  

Should we allow every personality of someone suffering from multiple personality disorder to vote?

Of course not. But as long as the person understands the consequences and importance of voting, they are allowed to cast a single vote. You have to be an actual person to vote....not an imaginary being created from a mental illness. So the votes would stop at 1 there.

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(05-24-2015, 10:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It really doesn't take that long and he is likely more qualified that any message board member.

Meh long enough, look how long it's already taken me to respond to you

Quote:The research has been focused on looking for a gene that most likely doesn't exist. Freud researched it and determined it was a mental disorder (didn't have blogs back then). If it is legitimized the focus will most likely change.


So you did understand what I meant above.

So your point is that if it is legitimized, there will be more of a push for research to determine if it is a mental disorder. If it is not legitimized then it is less likely to be researched as to whether or not it is a mental disorder. Is that correct?

[GMDino]

(05-24-2015, 11:08 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: and it looks like another thread comes to a close with bfine being incapable of responding to the topic at hand and just resorting to desperate attacks.


It's been fun playing.

Still hasn't my question either. And I refuse to explain why that is important to my point until he does.

[*bfine32*]

(05-24-2015, 11:26 PM)GMDino Wrote: Still hasn't my question either.  And I refuse to explain why that is important to my point until he does.  

Ask you question and I will provide a straight answer.

Is it is why do I prefer boobs over man-meat? If that is the question then I believe I answered it when I said:

(05-24-2015, 07:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Who knows early in our awareness we may have been attracted to males and females equally (just because you don’t remember it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen); however, as we learned our minds were able to shut down the same sex urge (voice). Just as you have ‘learned” to shutdown other urges considered inappropriate (negative repercussions). There are those that cannot even suppress these urges and you have stated you can only suppress them long enough until you can be alone. Other suppress them permanently. “young bfine meet your new sister”, from that point forward sexual urge is shutdown.

If that was not the question or the answer you were looking for let me know

[*bfine32*]

(05-24-2015, 11:24 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: So your point is that if it is legitimized, there will be more of a push for research to determine if it is a mental disorder.  If it is not legitimized then it is less likely to be researched as to whether or not it is a mental disorder.  Is that correct?

Yes. Why do you think the push over the last couple decades has been to find a "gay gene"?

[GMDino]

(05-24-2015, 11:32 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Ask you question and I will provide a straight answer.

Is it is why do I prefer boobs over man-meat? If that is the question then I believe I answered it when I said:


If that was not the question or the answer you were looking for let me know

I posted my question twice. It was not the question you just answered.

So are you avoiding me? Or avoiding the question?

My point will be clear once you answer...

[*bfine32*]

(05-24-2015, 11:16 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Homosexuality was considered a mental disorder as it was deviant behavior. In other words, it was contrary to societal norms. The definition of a mental disorder no longer includes deviant behavior in general. Because these behaviors do not fall within the same guidelines as other mental disorders they were removed as they do not actually fit the definition. It wasn't just an arbitrary removal based on lobbying from the gay community. There was actually a logical, legitimate reason to remove homosexuality from the list of disorders.

I agree. It is no longer classified as a mental disorder because the definition was changed.

Have I said something to the contrary?