SeanRenaud's tags:
SeanRenaud reads (4):

The page you were looking for no longer exists

Could gayness be cured with a pill or vacinated against?  Is there something fundamentally wrong with a homosexual.  My opinion on this has always been no.  I've always thought that it was a decison that the invidual made at some point in their life.  The thing is that more and more I seem to be alone in this belief.  Many of the gays and lesbians that I hear say that there never was a choice.  You don't choose to be gay, you are or you aren't.  Your born that way. 
 
If you are infact born gay rather than become gay (which I suppose makes sense since there has been no evidence to support the idea that homosexuals raise homosexual children) and since homosexuality would obviously be a negative in nature could you then claim that homosexuality is a disease? 


del.icio.us Digg reddit StumbleUpon

Comments

  • missfickle said on Nov 07, 2006....
    Calling homosexuality a mental disease is one way of looking at it! but that is a very judgemental statement in itself! Disease, indicates illness, or disorder, and thereby a belief that homosexuality is not normal.
     
    My father would called homesexuality abnormal, he used to curse like hell calling them things like 'poofs' and stuff.  Once day I had to tell my father that one of his younger brothers (my uncle) was gay, and he had confessed it to me. 
     
    From early childhood my uncle knew he felt differently from most people around him.  This became more evident in secoundary school.  At nineteen my uncle moved to France, unable to confide in any of his family, that was in 1976, it wasn't until 1989 that he managed to tell me, and from then on the secret gradually came out and my father had to deal with his own feelings about homosexuality.
     
    I don't see that we can call it a disease, a chromosonal difference probably, but not a mental disease.
    The only mental disorders that homosexuals suffer are the wounds inflicted by trying to deal with their homosexuality within our narrow minded societies!! The emotional scars they suffer never go away.  Many hate the fact that they will never have children.  It is other peoples views that make homosexuals suffer.
     
    Anyway, my belief is,(bizarre I know)  that mother nature had to find a way of slowing down the reproducing population of our planet.  I can't explain it in intellectual terms (like you would) but I just think that to slow down human reproduction our genes mutated to control human reproduction.  The only problem with this hypothesis is that science then invented IVF!
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • silverwhisper said on Nov 07, 2006....
    sean:

    short answer: no.  is being left-handed a disease?

    long answer: no, b/c a disease implies a status that harms the infected creature.  this isn't the case.

    ed
  • SeanRenaud said on Nov 07, 2006....
    @Silver:  Being left handed doesn't say stop you from accomplishing the basic purpose of life.  Reproduction.  Homosexuality is harmful to the organism, it prevents its genes from making it to the next generation.  I suppose I could argue if I felt like being a complete douchebag that being left handed means you will smear your writing, get lower grades, stay out of college because of said lower grades and then won't make as much money.  Wont' be as sucessful blah blah blah.  Actually I wonder if I could rationalize that to a point where it sounds believable, I'll get back to you on that.  :-)
     
    @Missfickle: Assuming that being gay is something hardwired into the individual rather than a choice they make then your theory makes as much sense as anything else.
     
    I've never been shy about being judgemental though.
  • roundtightass said on Nov 07, 2006....
    Missfickle:  You rock!  Very well put.

    Would I consider homosexuality a disease?  Not at all.  As I've said before, I'm a lesbian, and I think I'm pretty beneficial to society as a whole.  And do people hate me for being a dike?  Probably but I could care less, as long as they're not trying to limit my rights or livelihood.  Overall, I'm a productive, caring, helpful girl in my community and I'm lesbian.  So what?  I am not a disease and the feeling I get from looking at my girlfriend is far from destructive.  In fact (I'll be a little sappy here to make my point), her love "cured" me from being the little dissident I once was...although I'm now more of a political dissident than ever before because my rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness has been limited.
  • missb said on Nov 07, 2006....
    I agree with missfickle and Ed. I dun think homosexuality is a mental disease. I read in a book that some were born with the wrong amount of chromosomes.
     
    But there are some homosexuals who became gay by choice. Somewhere along the way their sexual orientation changed.
     
    Maybe for the 'natural' born gays there could be some kind of a serum to fix it someday, to add the lacking chromosomes, i dunno. I'm no expert in medicine or science :/ It doesn't mean it's a disease, just like a woman being injected by hormones to help her get pregnant.
     
    Cheers :)
  • SeanRenaud said on Nov 07, 2006....

    @Round:  In your current relationship/oreintation you are incapable of passing your genes to the next generation.  That by definition is destructive.  Not that I mind at all, you aren't harming society and thus I care not.  I don't care if your genes make it to the next generation or not.  I would like it if your memes (way of thinking, personality whatnot) did survive so go adopt a kid please and teach him/her.

     

  • fatesblade said on Nov 07, 2006....
    I have to disagree with your line of reasoning. First of all, you ask, "Is homosexuality a mental disease?" Then you go on to reason that because of our evolutionary necessity to pass on our genes it must be. By definition a mental disease is any disease of the mind; the psychological state of someone who has emotional or behavioral problems serious enough to require psychiatric intervention. Now, as far as I know, noone has been admitted to a psychiatric ward for refusing to pass on their genes.
  • fatesblade said on Nov 07, 2006....
    By the way, I'm gay. I don't care if it is a disease. If they come out with some anti-gay vaccine there's no way in HELL I'd take it.
  • moonriver said on Nov 07, 2006....
    seanrenaud: "left-handed" doesn't mean your right hand isn't doing anything useful, in the same way that being a homosexual by choice doesn't mean you can't be intimate with the other sex, even have children by impregnating (or being impregnated by) the other sex at one time or another in your life. been there, done that, man. there's even homosexuality in the plant kingdom. been there, done that too. god you are naive.

    homosexuality isn't "harmful to the organism" -- your words -- it's harmful to the feudal-patriarchal system that imposes rigid gender roles and continues to dominate the minds of many people. i'd rather ask, "is homophobia a mental disease?" i'm on the verge of answering, "yes, in the case of some soulcasters."
  • SeanRenaud said on Nov 07, 2006....
    LoL, funny response moon.  Being homosexual as opposed bi-sexual would by neccessity mean that you wouldn't get intimate with the opposite sex.  If it is something about your DNA rather than a choice it would make it unlikely that you had done so in the past though I suppose you could have.  What the fuck does plants have to do with anything?  Plants can self-impregnate.
     
    If you don't believe that being homo-sexual and thus not passing on your genes to the next generation is harmful from a biological standpoint there is nothing more to say to you because honestly you just don't understand the basics of being alive.
     
    This whole question was about if being homosexual was a choice or not Moon.  I think that it is but many many others keep telling me that it isn't a choice.  You don't chose to be gay your born gay.  That is really the question in its entirety but we got off on a tangent.
  • ALIENated said on Nov 07, 2006....
    Homosexuality is not a disease. It is, however, a perversion and a choice. How else would you explain the people who have overcome and are now happily married with children?

    On the other hand. I do believe there are people born with a weird chemistry. Too many Xs and not enough Ys (or is it the other way around). To them, we probably seem perverted.

    The bottom line is: who cares? I just wish they would drop the affectation, as TheNuttyNakedProfessor says, and act right. But I also wish that of rap-happy blacks. I also wish gays would stop trying to change the definition of marriage. As I have stated so many times here at HomoCast, I think they only want to legalize marriage so they can point to it and say it is legal therefore it is natural. As I have also said countless times: most people will never believe that. We could legalize pediphilia, rape, incest, yada yada yada, but it would still be wrong. As I understand it, increased homosexuality is prevalent in most declining civilizations such as ancient Rome.
  • SeanRenaud said on Nov 08, 2006....
    None of the gays I've ever met were flaming. 
    Don't worry everybody wishes blacks would get over the thug phenomon (well everybody not making money off of it)
  • silverwhisper said on Nov 08, 2006....
    "it is, however, a perversion and a choice.  how else would you explain the people who have overcome and are now happily married with children?"--alienated

    b/c they're lying to themselves.  have you seen the failure rates of the so-called conversion therapy, alienated?  it's poppycock.

    you and i have gone round and round on gay marriage.  you're absolutely dead wrong about everything in your last paragraph.  everything.

    ed
  • moonriver said on Nov 08, 2006....
    seanrenaud, it's very obvious you don't know a lot about the sociology and psychology of homosexuality, not to mention the science of population genetics. we did not go off tangent. your basic premises are wrong. i'll quote from your exact words:

    1. "You don't choose to be gay, you are or you aren't.  Your born that way. "
    Myth. If I can cite just one gay person who wasn't born gay, even raised kids, then later in life became gay, then your premise is proven wrong. I can cite at least a dozen, and they're just among my personal acquaintances. Homosexuality is not a mere biological state. It is a social and psychological state, although conditioned by genetic factors. You differentiate between homosexuality and bisexuality. I see a broad sexual spectrum where red fades into violet.

    2. "Homosexuality is harmful to the organism, it prevents its genes from making it to the next generation."
    Layman's fallacy. Your understanding of how a gene pool is kept healthy, of how the Brownian motion of individual sexual behavior fits into a normal bell curve, seems to be very poor. Much animal behavior prevents genes of many individial organisms from making it to the next generation, yet such behavior (and the genes that generate them) continue to be passed from one generation to the next.

    3. "Plants can self-impregnate."
    Somatic reproduction, self-pollination, aposphory, apogamy, parthenogenesis, and so on. Proves my point exactly. Even plants have states analogous to homosexuality, wherein strictly male and strictly female individuals are the exception rather than the rule. Sexuality straddles a wide spectrum.

  • ALIENated said on Nov 08, 2006....
    Wrong?! That would be a first.
  • silverwhisper said on Nov 08, 2006....
    ah alien, did i just bust your wrongness cherry?  :D

    ed
  • the_infernal_optimist said on Nov 08, 2006....
    There's nothing fundamentally wrong with a homosexual, and I don't think that we exist solely - or even primarily - to reproduce. If not reproducing made you flawed in some way, then what would you say about the many couples who struggle with infertility? I don't think every person was necessarily meant to have offspring anyway.

    I wonder if I ever would have even really noticed beyond a peripheral awareness that homosexuals and heterosexuals differ, if it wasn't for society and what's "natural" vs. not. I certainly never would have thought to condemn someone for it, and I won't. I can't control who I fall in love with or find attractive (this from a heterosexual); why should I think that anyone else could control it based on gender or anything else?

    I suppose you could argue that we DO control whether or not we act on our feelings, but as I see nothing wrong with someone making love to someone else they care about, I'm not going to say something as stupid as "Well, even if they can't control being gay, they shouldn't act on it," which I've heard argued before. :-p

    I don't think homosexuals hurt our society. People peddling drugs, sometimes to kids, hurt our society. Politicians who ignore the needs of their constituents hurt our society. Economic crises hurt our society. I could go on with a lot that's wrong these days, but homosexuality wouldn't be on my list. I have no reason to be biased one way or the other; I just see no reason to find fault here.

    At least your bigotry is on public display, instead of hidden beneath politeness and the pretense of open-mindedness. That's not an insult; I respect you for that much, even though I think you're wrong.
  • hstock28 said on Nov 08, 2006....
    I do not believe that homosexuality is a mental disease, nor do I believe that most homosexuals choose to be homosexual. I for one believe in reincarnation. I believe that all of us live lives as the opposite sex though generally we feel more comfortable as one sex or the other. I believe that most homosexuals are basically trapped in the body they feel least comfortable with. Take for example a homosexual male. I believe that this male has spent many lives as a female which would explain why he would be attracted to another male and feel more akin with females than males. Therefore, homosexuality is not a mental disease in the least nor is it a choice; in fact, it is quite a natural response given the person's prior experiences in previous lifetimes.
  • SeanRenaud said on Nov 08, 2006....
    You differentiate between homosexuality and bisexuality. I see a broad sexual spectrum where red fades into violet. 
     
    I don't disagree with this point at all.  Just because there is black, white, and grey doesn't mean that I don't acknowledge the shades in between.  I just have clearly delinated markers for ease of conversation. 
     
    If I can cite just one gay person who wasn't born gay, even raised kids, then later in life became gay, then your premise is proven wrong.
     
    Bullshit that's not how science or common sense works.  You would have to prove that it happens at the leas tmore often than not.  I've personally never looked into the data on how often it happens but I keep reading that its not likely.  Would you let me use the same excuse on say child predators?  That if one of them changes that it erases the fact that 90% of the time it doesn't work?  For the record I'm not equating being gay to being a pedo.  Its just those are numbers on a behavior that are easily citable.  I would have used people who watch too much tv or enjoy contact sports if they were easily citable.
     
    Once again citing plants doesn't matter.  We aren't plants and the rules that govern their behavior is fundamentally different from our own.  I don't see why we are discussing this.
     
    Explain to me where the fallacy was in my statement that homosexuality is harmful via prevention of gene passage?  You could probably site things like lions where many males will never have their own pride.  That is because they are inferior  Being inferior keeps your genes from passing on. 
     
    There is no inteligent argument that can be made against homosexuality being harmful on the genetic level to a given individual.  However that is a bit of an oversimplification.  It comes down to two things, one is it any of my bussiness if you are harmful to your gene pool?  No more than when you smoke, drink or in my opinion do any amount of illegal drugs that don't cause you to go berzerk and kill people.  Your body, your genes your bussiness bottom line. 
     
    The second point is how important is your genetic code?  Today what is most responsible for your survival isn't your genes rather it is your knowledge.  Stephen Hawkings is a great example.  His genes fucking suck, he'll never (I imagine correct me if I'm already wrong) have a child.  His knowledge however has and will continue to be passed on to thousands if not millions of people.  He will live on.
     
    For the record my basic stance was and still is that gay is a choice.  However people keep telling me that I'm wrong on that so lets try to focus here just for a second and answer the following questions with the minimal amount of qualifying bullshit around them they are pretty much yes or no questions.
     
    1.  Are you born gay?
    2.  If it is a fact that gays are born not made could it be considered a defect, miscalculation how
  • jbechtel said on Nov 10, 2006....
    All very interesting points...but what was screaming out at me was the conversation that no one was talking about, but everyone was speaking volumes about. That conversation is, "Is being homesexual right or wrong?" But yet no one wanted to come out and say this. Why is that? :) In our entire lives, in all areas, we fight about everything being right or wrong--the main issue in hate crimes comes from homosexuality being "wrong". And people are threatened by their own internal issues so much that they want to hurt others who are bringing those issues to light in them.When you (In general--no specific person) see things in a "right" or "wrong" point of view, then everyone else is wrong and you are right. But, when you get over yourself and your inflated point of view, then you can begin to look at all points of view and then actually communicate. So, do I think homosexuality is wrong? I don't see it as right or wrong, but what is so. (But I do think those who are fighting so much against homosexuality are the ones who are the most afraid of coming out as gay.)

    Now, whether or not homosexuality is nature vs. nurture has been a very long standing debate for decades now, and I don't think that anyone has really come any closer to solving that puzzle. When you figure it out, let me know, ok? :) And for the record, I am a pansexual (look it up) transgendered man, who is married to a very awesome man. And I used to fight against homosexuality myself, because I was denying what was inside myself.
  • bullblogg said on Nov 11, 2006....
    i believe you are gay or you are not-same as you are straight or not, did we decide to be straight? -no, we just are- the same for gay people-did they decide to be gay-no they just are! now,bi-sexual, thats just being greedy!!!!!! lol.......
  • silverwhisper said on Nov 12, 2006....
    sean, there is no conclusive evidence anywhere to support the stance that homosexuality is nature/nuture.  anyone who says differently has been blinded by ideology.

    if someone knows of good evidence to the contrary, i'd like to see a link to it.

    ed
  • anonymous said on Nov 12, 2006....
    I haven't seen it either.  That was quite simply why I asked the question.  Contrary to what I claim when debating against someone I don't know everything.
  • missfickle said on Nov 14, 2006....
    I found this and thought it was appropriate-

    In the age of Primal Health Research, we are learning that most personality traits and states of health are to a great extent determined during fetal life. It is time to cease contrasting genetic and environmental factors. We now understand that the expression of our genes is influenced by early – particularly prenatal and perinatal - environmental factors. Our study of the genesis of sexual orientation provides an exemplary opportunity to realize that we are entering a new phase in our understanding of human development. On one hand, the role of genetic factors in sexual orientation is well researched. On the other hand there is accumulating of data confirming that the sexualisation of the brain is to a great extent determined during fetal life. (Odent 2006) 

    This link gives a good insight to all that has been discussed here, and there is so much more.

    Love and Peace MF xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

     

  • thinker55 said on Aug 19, 2007....
    I see this is quite old and maybe there are later postings but I read this thread and felt the need to add my 2 cents. First off, I want to mention that anything I say I would hope no one takes as disrespectful at the same time I also want to mention  I am no genius when it comes to the subject matter. However I feel common sense plays a major role and since everyone should have it maybe my thought process makes sense to others. Additionally. one of the concepts that affects all of us is natural selection. Despite scientific improvements many would say homosexuals have had a very rough history, maybe its nature's way of saying, not normal and not suggested.

    The question of whether homosexuality is a mental disease is not necessarily the correct question. I think it leads to another in this situation and that is 'Does something need to be done about the increasing homosexual population in the entire world.' Additionally, you must also address whether any sort of rights granted or so on will cause any sort of downfall on society.

    Personally I don't know exactly what a disease is scientifically but if that's what we want to refer to it as.. I believe it is a perversion of sorts and/or an addiction. Saying what I say implies that it is a choice which people claim it's not, however I'd like to make clear its not necessarily a conscious choice, but rather a subconscious one in most situations. (I say most because there are some people that "experiment" with both sexes and feel attractions towards both males and females and prefer one over another. This also applies to bi-sexuals, essentially.)

    This subconscious choice could possibly be due to the fact that there is some sort of inclination from chromosomal differences or genetic makeup, but from my understanding there is no specific homosexual gene, chromosomal makeup that guarantees homosexuality but maybe there is some sort of correlation amongst them. However every homosexual is not genetically made up exactly the same and there is no specific combination that could produce a homosexual child. (Gay couples cannot mate with lesbian ones and produce homosexual offspring) I believe that would need to be the formula if infact it was a recessive gene. Unless we had carriers, but like i said yet to be proven from my knowledge. If carriers came in play, we would have to have a lot higher percentage of homosexuals than  what we currently have in society or have had at any given time. Statistics would prove that if you have certain possible outcomes it should over time equal its probability or close to it. If carrier genes played in a role then roughly 25% of the population would need to be gay, and roughly 50 percent would need to be carriers.

    Additionally I think it is an addiction and/or perversion. Let's say we do call it a disease. Disease in and of itself implies something horrific. Let's look at it from a non-emotional standpoint and look at different other diseases as a comparison. Alcoholics can be considered to have a mental disease. (No one chooses to be an alcoholic. It happens over time. No one wakes up one day and decides to be gay/lesbian either unless they're on springbreak and get extremely drunk.) Kidding aside gamblers can be considered to have a disease as well. Pedophiliacs are considered diseased. One would raise the argument of even saying incestual individuals are mentally diseased or perverted. Now we don't look down on our fellow friends if they had one of these diseases because they have a disease. We attempt to cure them or place some sort of intervention to end their perversion or addiction. The problem with certain diseases is after it becomes so inherent in a person and the mental pathways have been made to adjust to those 'subconscious choices' there's not really much that can be done to bring them out of their mental state and additionally the only one that can decide to make that "choice" of not being mentally state is that specific individual. Implying choice. All major help groups such as AA use the methodology of having the person admit to their disease because if you don't believe yourself to be flawed or containing a disease you will not take appropriate steps to correct your actions. If you think you're fine, why would you go to the doctor or seek medicine or treatment. Also another reason why many interventions don't work... the person isn't satisfied with changing. They like their addictions, perversions, diseases because they've gotten used to it isn't really causing them enough of a problem to not continue to exist the way they are. People change after they hit rock bottom! Being homosexual in society cannot be compared to being at rock bottom. Most homosexuals are quite wealthy, some have HIV but if they do not care to pro-create their worry only exist for their own life and selfish motives; no concern for a propogating society/world. Once you get HIV you can't really be cured anyways so no reason to stop being homosexual. Interesting that homosexuals have a higher rate of HIV. Maybe a message from mother nature.

    So now you're thinking that i'm saying being gay is flawed. Well it's a vice just like excessive gambling, drinking, usage of drugs are all considered flawed. From a biological viewpoint it is unnatural purely due to the fact that you cannot pro-create. That is the ultimate downfall on any society. If all individuals were infertile we'd disappear in a single generation. Agreed? Just like that incestual individuals would argue well at least they can reproduce. They should receive the same rights and society should not look down upon them, despite knowing that reproducing for them causes a considerable amount of birth defects. In the end it comes down to the fact that it is their prefered way of receive sexual gratification. Its a fetish. Act on it at your own risk basically.

    In a bell curve situation though I believe less than .1 percent is considered an outlier. *2/3 standard deviations from the mean. If that was the case for sexuality that would be a great society to live in because it would constantly grow. If the gay population was like 14-20 percent of the population society would deteriorate at an exponential rate. The danger of increasing homosexual population.

    So why would someone subsciously choose to be gay. Well in essence, saying its subconscious means they're not really choosing by their own choice! Environment and nurture plays a much larger role. They aquire an affinity to the same sex naturally through different stages of their growth. Example, a gay boy may think girls have cooties and take it seriously through his development and during that same time period develops his sexual orientation. Maybe experiments at band camp and has a one time at band camp story.. jk..American pie's hilarious!

    My thinking is... a lot of times people in general mistaken "friendship for love" or feel the need for something more. We are very conservative when it comes to communicating how we feel and sex is considered a taboo is our society. This repressed thoughts/feelings we have cause us to have creative dreams and experimental desires since they become so subdued. Additionally they grow stronger with longer repression. (A hose if blocked builds up and when let go shoots further and goes all out but should eventually come back to a steady stream. Meaning well you may have gay/lesbian tendencies or thoughts but if you act on them don't equate that to be normal, view it as abnormal and make you're normal heterosexual behavior. A responsibly gambler comes home after a splurge, where as an addict has no self control and goes on and mistakens the need for satisfaction to only be gotten from gambling)  We all crave and desire more, its human nature. We never are really satisfied. That's why we evolve. Romans used gay sex as a form of experimental pleasure. They also used to have young boys and girls as prostitutes that would please much older men. (Pedophilia existed and wasn't looked at much different from homosexuality) In any 'open-minded' society which was spoken about earlier there is no place to draw the line. One would question why not allow ourselves to be like cavemen and freely rape who we innately feel we are attracted to or kill as we see fit. The answer is well we're civilized. The point is to learn from our history. Civilization means that we should evolve to a better more advanced thought process than what we used to be. We realized that raping people was bad even though that would still pro-create biologically but a lot of studies have gone to show it is a mental defect that causes people to be rapist. People have predicted that certain individuals due to their brain imagery or whatnot would at one point rape someone and within a couple years or so had committed multiple rapes.

    I think a lot of the reason why we don't know much about homosexuality is because we're looking in the wrong place. Society is afraid to consider it a mental disease so we rightaway assume it's a genetic or chromosomal issue. The need to be politically correct and the fear of backlash or persecution of speaking about homosexuality as a disease or mental defect is what forces people to allow it to take place and without reason believe its genetic or chromosomal and people are born that way. Well we've mapped the entire human genome and have yet to determine any specific gene that = homosexuality. Same with any specific chromosomal makeup.

    It would be interesting to study a pair of twins that grew up in two different surroundings and see if one was homosexual and if one wasn't. But then again if they are twins chances are they are inclined to make the same decisions in life, yet it'd still be interesting.

    What it does come down to is if we decided to consider it a disease and research the mental imagery and psychological makeup of homosexual individuals we would be able to find more answers.  However, homosexuals have no reason to not be homosexuals in our current society. In fact, I'd dare to say its become a fad to be gay. Especially in big cities such as New york. They have gay parties, pride parades, marches for rights, a Chelsea area where people live can be a community, etc. Nowadays we even make it acceptable to children to be open to experiment in college. In many cases, the media makes it as if you're a minority to not have tried it. Not to mention how many shows incorporate gay individuals and so on. Despite being a small minority when it comes to the population they've made a large impact on everyday life. They should have more shows targeted to the demographic of its constiuents.

    So this is what I think leads to the real question. If homosexuals feel no need to change and continues to grow, does something need to be done about it. My answer, in our current state there are much larger issues that need to be addressed and if you could address them all I'd say yes but priority wise its much lower on the ladder. Additionally, homosexuals are very productive and contributing members of society. They don't beat their wives like alcoholics do, they do not fall in financial crisis as many gamblers do, which affects others around them. In fact, they have above average income are generally fashionable, outgoing personalities for the most part, good-hearted and loving people. So why feel the need to fix something that doesn't appear to be wrong.

    Well it doesn't appear to be wrong because we're looking at it from the wrong perspective. I'm not homophobic because i've never felt that a homosexual threatens my sexuality. However I'd be very concered for my child to live in our current society with such a significant amount of media these days concentrating on homosexual lifestyle. Every magazine has a dedicated homosexuality section issue or raises the topic of it. So in essense, what possibly in the past would not have even been a choice or a subconscious choice, now becomes an easier choice because it is easier to be homosexual and live comfortably. People don't do something if they're persecuted. But if you make it an available option chances are at certain points may exercise you're right to choose, whereas if its not even an available choice.
    You're rate of homosexual children will gradually get higher. Natural selection says that will kill off our society eventually. Because if it's a choice its a 50/50 choice. Within one generation 50 percent of the population could essentially choose to not pro-create.

    But see this is such a sensative issue. That's why I believe more investigation needs to be done not just by me but all of us to figure out what it is and why it happens and additionally what would be the proper methodology of going about making it less prevalent. I don't think it would ever go away. Anyway there's always going to be a certain percentage of people that will exercise their sexual fetishes, perversions and creativity. Sex is pleasureful, however you go about it.. One of the reasons why people have pre-marital sex. However that's definetely something looked down upon because sex is meant for reproduction, it was made pleasureful so that you propogate society and have it grow. If you decide in your mind i like certain sexual behavior/acts it's pretty much set in stone.. The only way to change it is if all of society told you it was wrong and that it shouldn't be done. (As we do to pedophiliacs and incestual people) The reason it's wrong is because it doesn't lead to a better society. It causes more std issues and prevents reproduction from taking place, which in fact would still be possible for pedophiliacs or incestry.

    Once again, I just want to mention I know a lot of people disagree with what my thinking is but I really think a lot of this is common sense based. By know means do I have any sort of hatred or distaste for homosexuals. I do believe the behavior is in my opinion an act of mistaken love and purely selfish in the sense that it's not done to benefit society. I also believe we should properly organize a way to prevent children from pursuing that path early on if they someone were inclined on it. I also do believe if someone wants to overcome it and caught in its early phases they would be able to with enough mental strength and only after admitting to themselves that it is wrong and its something they want to rid themself of however it would be difficult as any other addiction is to rid of. But plausable!

    Sexual pleasure is associated with what you make it to be. People have various fetishes and have always had various perversions. We are creative and individually experiment in our own confines. One of the wierd things about sex is that it's limited. It's limited in the sense that you can only have it with someone that is willing to have it with you." If you couldn't find it one person or methodolgy you'd seek another. However its also a necessity so there in lies the pressure to have sexual gratifcation one way or another. Because otherwise why wouldn't we feel the need to be asexual? Why don't we have a large population of society or people that dislike sex altogether if there was some sort of corruption of chromosomes or genes. If something could go wrong it would at one point or another.. Murphy's law.

    If anyone agrees please let me know.

  • silverwhisper said on Aug 19, 2007....
    i do not agree.

    ed
  • ALIENated said on Aug 20, 2007....
    Homosexuality is not a mental disease. It is a mental disorder. 
    
    
    http://www.soulcast.com/post/show/84236/Homosexuality-Is-A-Mental-Disorder#
  • Za_Warudo said on Mar 09, 2008....
    @ALIEN- That post of yours that you linked to was disgusting. I merely skimmed over it so that I wouldn't be yelling at you without even a bit of foundation to what I was saying but the line
    "Anyway, do what you want, but do not try to recruit me or my children to join in your perverted lifestyle. Do not try to redefine marriage to fit your perverted view of the world. What ever happened to not asking and not telling?"
    was simply disgusting. I think you freaking negative, homophobic assholes are just the pisspots of everything wrong in the world, with your self-serving, spoon-fed Christian values, only blinding the rest of society to other paths of life. Which is basically it. You were saying that you don't want homosexuals (or any other alternative lifestyles) beign with your kids as to pervert them? That's like outcasting a few hideous people from a remote village to live out on there own to spare the rest of the townspeople. Except that's exactly wrong. Because gay people aren't freaks, they have no defects in the mind or genes or any other biological parts. And I say mind is biological, because the brain and mind are synonymous. Sure, you may say psychological states are unrelated to the biological functions of a human's brain, and that's true, but if thoughts come from the little pops and snaps going on in our heads, then wouldn't you be saying hmosexuality is a cerebral disease? Brain decay? Well, that's completely wrong. They are fine in every way and choose to live the way they feel most comfortable with. And if that involves loving and living with people of the same sex, then you have no honor or logic at all in your misguided little ponderings, those little buzzes you call coherent thoughts and ideals coming from that polluted bunghole you call a brain.
    So, short and sweet, you're kind of a blind fool, try again once you can speak with clarity.
  • upyoars said on Jul 19, 2008....
    Homosexuality Was listed in the medical dictionaries for years as a mental disease. Rightfully so. It is. It always has been. When enough fags started whining about being mentally handicapped they tried to get the medical people to change it in their dictionary to make them feel better. They wouldnt do it. After even more pressure from the fags it was removed from the dictionary altogether. They were not going to lie about it so they took it out. It just goes to show you that even a bunch of fucked up fags with a mental disease can have a say in this country if they coordinate. However in some countries they would still be shot down in the streets. I would rather my kids walk down those streets than to keep explaining to my kids that we let mentally sick people walk around with normal people.
  • SeanRenaud said on Jul 19, 2008....
    Wow a genuine bigot.  I hope you taught your daughter her place in life and that she should never ever talk back to a man
  • silverwhisper said on Jul 21, 2008....
    congratulations on finding an actual, honest-to-goodness bigot, sean! i thought they were largely extinct!

    ed
  • upyoars said on Jul 22, 2008....
    Bigotry is based on opinions.  Look it up. I state facts.
    Which of my comments do you think are an opinion?
    The fact that Homosexuality used to be listed in the medical dictionaries as a mental disease?
    Or maybe the fact that homosexuality was removed from the medical dictionaries?
    Or maybe you dont beleve that fags are shot down in some Countries?
    Look it up for yourself.

    Like ALL mental dieseases denial is always a main factor. Thats why its called a mental disease. Otherwise you would correct yourselfs.

    Your attempts to call my comments an "opinion" is nothing more than denial, a symptom of your fag disease.

    The fact that you have a hard time seeing it is because we allow you to walk down our streets and shop at our stores.
    If you were a child molestor (another mental illness) you would not be allowed to mingle with normal people and you would be locked up and put in therapy right away.
    Let that be a clue.

  • upyoars said on Jul 22, 2008....
    Hey Einstein,
    Not procreating is the most harm you can do for a species.
    Here is a better definition of disease from http://www.lexicon-biology.com

    Disease: In human beings,"disease" is often used more broadly to refer to any condition that causes extreme pain, DYSFUNCTION, distress, SOCIAL PROBLEMS. includes injuries, disabilities, DISORDERS, syndromes, infections, isolated symptoms, DEVIANT BEHAVIORS, and ATYPICAL VARIATIONS OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION, etc
    Pretty much describes a homo doesn't it?
    >short answer: no. is being left-handed a disease?
    >long answer: no, b/c a disease implies a status that harms the >infected creature. this isn't the case.
  • SeanRenaud said on Jul 22, 2008....
    Depends on how far we are going to go in order to define harm.  I could make a strong case that up until relatively recently being black was a disease, at least in the United Stats.  It caused you to be bought and sold for centuries, after that it prevented the right to vote, recieve equal pay, use the same water fountains and sit where you wanted on the bus.
     
    What's more is that if you believe it is a disease then you understand that it's not a choice and you should pity them and be searching for a cure, or treating the same way we do any other incurable disease, we ignore it when we can and help where we can.  You're just a bigotted fool.
     
    It was listed as a mental disease, it was removed when that information was found false by the majority of doctors.  Yes fags are shot in some countries.  So are Christians.  So are cartoonists (well actually they only got death threats they were smart enough not to be found) is your belief thta because an act takes place some place on earth that it is right?
     
    Just because something is based on facts doesn't make it less of an opinion and more of a fact, the facts need to prove a causation not a correlation.  Did you know that as piracy in the Atlantic Ocean decreased throughout the the eighteen hundreds that the temprature of the earth has risen?!  Oh no a lack of pirates causes fucking global goddamn warming!
     
    It's ok that your a bigot though you'll get along fine here with the other Christians like LENNY and ALIENated and probably Curmudgeon but he's become oddly sane as of late.  I think he was abducted by liberals and given a human booster shot.
  • silverwhisper said on Jul 23, 2008....
    upyoars is obviously the world's greatest and most original thinker.

    [sarcasm]

    ed
  • SeanRenaud said on Jul 23, 2008....
    I should really bow down now that a truly superior thinker has arrived on SC.  
  • fynallegend said on Nov 25, 2008....
    I will answer the question with factual information. I am a successful neurologist. I have been in practice for over 17 years and i know for a fact that in all my research, that homosexuality is and environmental adaptation. The attraction to the opposite sex is the same as the attraction to the same sex. this attraction is triggered by outside influinces upon an individual. this attraction is a result of environmental influinces and is not a matter of choice. So you see it isn't a disease persay, but at the same time it is also not a choice either.

Comment on "Is homosexuality a mental disease?"


(Separate tags using commas, for example: New York, dating, vegetarian)

I wanted to ask....
Homosexuality in the community has brought in some confusion and forced some people in business to act in a way they would not have otherwise acted....
News of a visit....
Boy will be the superstar of 2009, and he plans to lose 200 pounds just to do it....