LGBT & ? vs Utah: Legal Arguments at 10th Circuit Begin April 10, 2014

[Seawytch]

Yeah, we get it. Y'all bought out and took over the APA and all its "funded and accredited sychophants" in "science". Google "Leona Tyler Principle" and "Cummings" and read up on how "unbiased" the APA and its myriad funded studies elsewhere are when it comes to gay issues.







It's like saying we should trust Dow Chemicals own studies on how benign their plants' effluents are to the nation's waterways and ignore all other studies that show different results.







Sorry. No matter how hard your organizers worked at taking over and infiltrating even science itself, we are not going to throw children to your cult as a great social experiment to see how it works when we already know that to tell a child that "up" is really "down" and "man" is really "woman" or "mother" really "father" is crazy-making and very damaging to a developing psyche. It's not rocket science, but Leona Tyler would approve...







You gonna say now that child development psychologists are all on board with telling kids they don't need a mother or a father [real ones, not ones dressing up like and trying to talk like them or their "partners" who are at the same time allegedly "gay" but also attracted to the opposite gender's trappings..]? That role playing and skewing the truth doesn't affect a developing mind? That crazy-making is OK if it makes the adults feel good about themselves and not have to look deeper than the upper surface of their obvious and glaring mental issues?

No Sil, not just the AMA...ALL major medical and psychological organizations. You've got NARTH and their discredited quacks.

discredited quacks. ???



Hardly , you poor pathetic little creature - you're simply parrotting from the Gay Agenda my dear. I can just see you foaming at the mouth and spitting out pea soup every time someone mentions NARTH

And yet you are the one that comes off as unhinged. I don't need to foment about NARTH. They have no credibility.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Why are small government people against allowing people to have personal freedom?

 

[Silhouette]

I'm a democrat.

The stuff I've quoted is from the Mayo Clinic, the CDC, Clinical Psychiatrists and the University of Montreal, Quebec. Apparently these folks are all quacks according to Seawytch. They all support that artificial sexual orientations are learned.

 

[GreenBean]

No Sil, not just the AMA...ALL major medical and psychological organizations. You've got NARTH and their discredited quacks.

discredited quacks. ???



Hardly , you poor pathetic little creature - you're simply parrotting from the Gay Agenda my dear. I can just see you foaming at the mouth and spitting out pea soup every time someone mentions NARTH

And yet you are the one that comes off as unhinged. I don't need to foment about NARTH. They have no credibility.

Facts please , lets have some facts - come on girl - you cant possibly be as dumb as you sound - lets have some fact

 

[JakeStarkey]

discredited quacks. ??? [/quote]

You have been owned with the comment to SIL which owns you "No Sil, not just the AMA...ALL major medical and psychological organizations. You've got NARTH and their discredited quacks"

 

[Seawytch]

discredited quacks. ???



Hardly , you poor pathetic little creature - you're simply parrotting from the Gay Agenda my dear. I can just see you foaming at the mouth and spitting out pea soup every time someone mentions NARTH

And yet you are the one that comes off as unhinged. I don't need to foment about NARTH. They have no credibility.

Facts please , lets have some facts - come on girl - you cant possibly be as dumb as you sound - lets have some fact

Dr. George Rekers, NARTH "doctor": Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, stated in the decision: "Dr. Cochran (Professor of Epidemiology and Statistics at the University of California in Los Angeles) also testified about errors in scientific methodology and reporting in Dr. Rekers’ study, stating that Dr. Rekers had failed to present an objective review of the evidence on those subjects. Cochran concluded that Dr. Rekers’ work did not meet established standards in the field. Another expert, Dr. Peplau (Professor of Psychology at the University of California in Los Angeles), testified that Dr. Rekers had omitted in his review of the scientific literature “other published, widely cited studies on the stability of actual relationships over time.”[48]

Dr. Paul Cameron, NARTH "doctor": In 1983, the American Psychological Association expelled Cameron for non-cooperation with an ethics investigation. Position statements issued by the American Sociological Association, Canadian Psychological Association and the Nebraska Psychological Association have accused Cameron of misrepresenting social science research.[1]

In these anti gay marriage cases coming to court, lawyers arguing in favor of bigotry are having a harder and harder time finding actual scientists to back up their claims.

The universe of such experts, however, may not be large. In describing Dr. Rekers’s selection in the Florida case, Mr. McCollum told reporters last week, “There were only two willing to step forward and testify, and we searched a long time.”

Scandal Stirs Legal Questions in Anti-Gay Cases

 

[Seawytch]

I'm a democrat.

The stuff I've quoted is from the Mayo Clinic, the CDC, Clinical Psychiatrists and the University of Montreal, Quebec. Apparently these folks are all quacks according to Seawytch. They all support that artificial sexual orientations are learned.

Sil, since we know how you have a tendency to misinterpret things, your statement is suspect. Shall I say it again? EVERY SINGLE major medical and psychological association, Sil...every single one have statements in support of gay parents.

 

[Silhouette]

You have been owned with the comment to SIL which owns you "No Sil, not just the AMA...ALL major medical and psychological organizations. You've got NARTH and their discredited quacks"

The AMA takes it's guidance from the APA. In fact, naturally, when it comes to mental issues pretty much all medical organizations reflexively cite the APA. Who else could they cite? Very few doctors take the time to learn the history of the APA. That it was taken over by gay activists in the 1970s. That nearly immediately after that, its ruling scientific principle was summarily "let go" without even a board meeting to discuss the matter. The APA's decades-long erstwhile ruling "Leona Tyler Principle" meant that any public position the APA took had to be backed up by science. A search on their website lends zero results in even a passing reference to the skeletal structure that used to make up that organization.

Bear in mind, if you needed any further proof, that the APA now approves the amputation of healthy organs of a deluded indivudual who through obvious neurosis and deep delusions has rejected their own gender they perceive in society to such a degree, that amputation of their organs and the resulting incontinence, sexual deadness etc. are "justified" because the politically-driven LGBT owned APA "says so".

Google "Leona Tyler" and "Cummings" together. Read up on what you find. You'll be stunned to find that the APA and all the groups that cite them are not relying on science anymore but instead politically-correct "instant feel good" "cures".

 

[Silhouette]

Why are small government people against allowing people to have personal freedom?

I'm a moderate democrat. Personal freedom has limits in a democratic society that regulates behavior by a majority rule. You may have heard of the civil and penal code system? Are you proposing eradicating majority rule so deviant sexuals can get to the business of adopting kids in "mother/father" role-playing pairs?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

discredited quacks. ???



Hardly , you poor pathetic little creature - you're simply parrotting from the Gay Agenda my dear. I can just see you foaming at the mouth and spitting out pea soup every time someone mentions NARTH

And yet you are the one that comes off as unhinged. I don't need to foment about NARTH. They have no credibility.

Facts please , lets have some facts - come on girl - you cant possibly be as dumb as you sound - lets have some fact

You’ll find the facts here:

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/09cv2292/files/09cv2292-ORDER.pdf

Advocates of Proposition 8 failed to submit any compelling, documented evidence in support of the notion that children living in the home with parents of the same-sex were ‘disadvantaged.’

And others opposed to equal protection rights for same-sex couples have likewise failed in subsequent proceedings.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Why are small government people against allowing people to have personal freedom?

First, because they’ve never been ‘small government people’ to begin with, conservatives have always been advocates of a large, authoritarian government empowered to interfere with the private lives of citizens.

Second, because they’re afraid of change, diversity, and dissent.

Last, they seek to codify subjective religious and social dogma into secular law, further empowering the government at the expense of the civil liberties of women and gay Americans.

 

[GreenBean]

And yet you are the one that comes off as unhinged. I don't need to foment about NARTH. They have no credibility.

Facts please , lets have some facts - come on girl - you cant possibly be as dumb as you sound - lets have some fact

Dr. George Rekers, NARTH "doctor": Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, stated in the decision: "Dr. Cochran (Professor of Epidemiology and Statistics at the University of California in Los Angeles) also testified about errors in scientific methodology and reporting in Dr. Rekers’ study, stating that Dr. Rekers had failed to present an objective review of the evidence on those subjects. Cochran concluded that Dr. Rekers’ work did not meet established standards in the field. Another expert, Dr. Peplau (Professor of Psychology at the University of California in Los Angeles), testified that Dr. Rekers had omitted in his review of the scientific literature “other published, widely cited studies on the stability of actual relationships over time.”[48]

Dr. Paul Cameron, NARTH "doctor": In 1983, the American Psychological Association expelled Cameron for non-cooperation with an ethics investigation. Position statements issued by the American Sociological Association, Canadian Psychological Association and the Nebraska Psychological Association have accused Cameron of misrepresenting social science research.[1]

In these anti gay marriage cases coming to court, lawyers arguing in favor of bigotry are having a harder and harder time finding actual scientists to back up their claims.

The universe of such experts, however, may not be large. In describing Dr. Rekers’s selection in the Florida case, Mr. McCollum told reporters last week, “There were only two willing to step forward and testify, and we searched a long time.”

Scandal Stirs Legal Questions in Anti-Gay Cases

Greetings Seahag, my apologies for the delay in replying to your post, I know you must have been absolutley devastated with anticipation, but alas I was involved in the real world.


Link # 1 - Re: an American psychologist and ordained Southern Baptist minister, a holy roller with a sheepsking, George Rekers lmao - you simply have to be kidding sweetheart. George is as much a scientist as any of the clowns you like to cite - which translated means - he's not much of a scientists at all . [I Thought at least you would take a shot at Jeffrey Santinover.] He as well as his polar opposites at the APA have abandoned Scientific Objectivity in favor of a political aagenda - In georges case it's a religous one . A very poor example and hardly represenaive of NARTH as a whole, or the very sound theory of Ex-Gay therapy. On this segment of your assignment, taking into consideration your limited mental capacities - I give you an A for effort - but a d minus for subtance.

Link # 2 - Re: Paul Cameron, Cameron has done politically incorrect work associating homosexuality with sexual abuse and has pointed out the reduced life expectancy within the Gay community. THis is TAboo and sacrelig as per the Fagmasters controlling the APA , he went against the mandates of Big Brother and invoked the wrath of its totalitarian dictators - for this he was expelled from the APA - Camerons work is bordering on brilliant , although not withoout minor flaws [Is anything done by human beings perfect _ I say Nay] Nobody has been able to debunk it. Cameron is a courageous and brilliant man , and history will prove him to be so . He is martyr and enemy of the Socio-Fascist Liberal Agenda. On this segment of your assignment I give an F [F for Fucked Up]

Link # 3 is simply a rehashing of the George Reker scenario and not worth commenting on a second time - Bu I'll be generous and give you a C for that segment.

The balance of your homework

In these anti gay marriage cases coming to court, lawyers arguing in favor of bigotry are having a harder and harder time finding actual scientists to back up their claims.

The universe of such experts, however, may not be large. In describing Dr. Rekers’s selection in the Florida case, Mr. McCollum told reporters last week, “There were only two willing to step forward and testify, and we searched a long time.”

...A long sentence that doesn't say much - of course they're having a hard time dumbass - what scientist wants his career ruined and life destroyed for speaking out against the Gay Lords and Socio-Fascists - look what they did to Paul Cameron ! The statement says that there were only two WILLING to come forward, the rest cowered.

Sorry SeaWytch - as stated , I do realize that you are working with very limited mental capacities but I have to give you an F on this homework assignment - better luck next time - do keep trying .....

 

[GreenBean]

And yet you are the one that comes off as unhinged. I don't need to foment about NARTH. They have no credibility.

Facts please , lets have some facts - come on girl - you cant possibly be as dumb as you sound - lets have some fact

You’ll find the facts here:

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/09cv2292/files/09cv2292-ORDER.pdf

Advocates of Proposition 8 failed to submit any compelling, documented evidence in support of the notion that children living in the home with parents of the same-sex were ‘disadvantaged.’

And others opposed to equal protection rights for same-sex couples have likewise failed in subsequent proceedings.

Sorry Clayton - irrelevant and over ruled
Not much legally acceptable evidence available , but let the Fags have some orphans [And I don't mean Lebos, but male fags] and it won't be long b4 there's plenty of evidence. What the hell - lets throw a few kids to the Lions and let them get ripped up- at least you'll be politically correct - Case Disnissed

 

[GreenBean]

Why are small government people against allowing people to have personal freedom?

I'm a moderate democrat. Personal freedom has limits in a democratic society that regulates behavior by a majority rule. You may have heard of the civil and penal code system? Are you proposing eradicating majority rule so deviant sexuals can get to the business of adopting kids in "mother/father" role-playing pairs?

Silhouette, I just lost a great deal of the admiration and respect I had for you, although I still have respect- A Democrat ! oy vay !!!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Why are small government people against allowing people to have personal freedom?

I'm a moderate democrat. Personal freedom has limits in a democratic society that regulates behavior by a majority rule. You may have heard of the civil and penal code system? Are you proposing eradicating majority rule so deviant sexuals can get to the business of adopting kids in "mother/father" role-playing pairs?

Nonsense.

The United States is a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy, whose citizens are subject only to the rule of law, not men – as men are incapable of ruling justly; Proposition 8 and Amendment 3 are proof of that.

The people lack the authority to determine who will or will not have his civil rights, citizens’ civil liberties are not subject to ‘majority rule,’ and one does not forfeit his civil liberties solely as a consequence of his state of residence.

Consequently, the people of Utah lack the authority to seek to deny same-sex couples their right to access marriage law that gay Americans are eligible to participate in, regardless what the majority might ‘rule.’

 

[Silhouette]

Why are small government people against allowing people to have personal freedom?

I'm a moderate democrat. Personal freedom has limits in a democratic society that regulates behavior by a majority rule. You may have heard of the civil and penal code system? Are you proposing eradicating majority rule so deviant sexuals can get to the business of adopting kids in "mother/father" role-playing pairs?

Silhouette, I just lost a great deal of the admiration and respect I had for you, although I still have respect- A Democrat ! oy vay !!!

I just don't cop to extremes. But the more and more the dems embrace this cult movement, the further and further I slide to the right. But fracking? No, never. I went to college with a science emphasis. So the far right is as nutty to me as the far left.

 

[Seawytch]

Facts please , lets have some facts - come on girl - you cant possibly be as dumb as you sound - lets have some fact

You’ll find the facts here:

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/09cv2292/files/09cv2292-ORDER.pdf

Advocates of Proposition 8 failed to submit any compelling, documented evidence in support of the notion that children living in the home with parents of the same-sex were ‘disadvantaged.’

And others opposed to equal protection rights for same-sex couples have likewise failed in subsequent proceedings.

Sorry Clayton - irrelevant and over ruled
Not much legally acceptable evidence available , but let the Fags have some orphans [And I don't mean Lebos, but male fags] and it won't be long b4 there's plenty of evidence. What the hell - lets throw a few kids to the Lions and let them get ripped up- at least you'll be politically correct - Case Disnissed

Gays and lesbians have been adopting children for many, many years now. There is plenty of evidence that our children are at no disadvantage to the children of straights. The lack of evidence is on the side of the anti-gay folks. This is why the anti gay side keeps losing...they trot out discredited quacks to testify for them.

 

[Silhouette]

Gays and lesbians have been adopting children for many, many years now. There is plenty of evidence that our children are at no disadvantage to the children of straights. The lack of evidence is on the side of the anti-gay folks. This is why the anti gay side keeps losing...they trot out discredited quacks to testify for them.

But Seawytch, you, a lesbian with another lesbian acting as "mom and dad" to your kids, farmed out several of your babies under contract to gay men. And I understand this is a common occurance in the cult of LGBT to provide each other with children you cannot naturally have with each other. You know, because your type of sex isn't reproductive.

My question is did you take any compensation for those babies? And also, were the men screened by legitimate adoption agencies for parental fitness or did you just do a couple gay guys you know a solid?

Only asking because if this is to be the new normal, I'm wondering how all this is going to wind up being good for Utah's kids? I know you're from the Bay Area California and you all out there have been working at this new system much longer than the rest of the country. To you, this type of thing has morphed into normal family setups. And in that respect we can use the Bay Area as a litmus test for what this will morph into as it spreads around the country. So for you, my questions are silly. Of course you just farmed a couple of babies out to some gay guys you knew. But for the rest of us, the idea of shuttling babies around like commerce to supply the LGBT community with kids they refuse to naturally provide with opposite gender parents is a little new and weird. I can't imagine what would go wrong for children in this scenario?

 

[GreenBean]

You’ll find the facts here:

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/09cv2292/files/09cv2292-ORDER.pdf

Advocates of Proposition 8 failed to submit any compelling, documented evidence in support of the notion that children living in the home with parents of the same-sex were ‘disadvantaged.’

And others opposed to equal protection rights for same-sex couples have likewise failed in subsequent proceedings.

Sorry Clayton - irrelevant and over ruled
Not much legally acceptable evidence available , but let the Fags have some orphans [And I don't mean Lebos, but male fags] and it won't be long b4 there's plenty of evidence. What the hell - lets throw a few kids to the Lions and let them get ripped up- at least you'll be politically correct - Case Disnissed

Gays and lesbians have been adopting children for many, many years now. There is plenty of evidence that our children are at no disadvantage to the children of straights. The lack of evidence is on the side of the anti-gay folks. This is why the anti gay side keeps losing...they trot out discredited quacks to testify for them.

Horse Feathers !

Gay Connecticut couple accused of raping adopted children will face trial


Gay couple accused of sexually abusing adopted Russian boy for years

Gay Adoption Horror: Duke University Official Molested Adopted African American Son, Pimped Son to Cop in Web Sting


Homosexuals more likely to molest kids, study reports

Gay couple cage, beat adopted son to death in Chicago

white gay men molest their 2 black adopted children

 

[GreenBean]

I'm a moderate democrat. Personal freedom has limits in a democratic society that regulates behavior by a majority rule. You may have heard of the civil and penal code system? Are you proposing eradicating majority rule so deviant sexuals can get to the business of adopting kids in "mother/father" role-playing pairs?

Silhouette, I just lost a great deal of the admiration and respect I had for you, although I still have respect- A Democrat ! oy vay !!!

I just don't cop to extremes. But the more and more the dems embrace this cult movement, the further and further I slide to the right. But fracking? No, never. I went to college with a science emphasis. So the far right is as nutty to me as the far left.

The Far Right is as nuty as the Far Left,however the Republican Party is the saner of the two and stands upo for the people unlikethe Democrats who are simply a power hungry obsessive Fascist organization. I have voted Democratic a few times over the years - but I will NEVER forgivethat party for the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American Public - Barrack Obama - NEVER - they forfeited their right to exist.