A Cure for the Gay.

[Superlative]

The 'disease' of homosexuality



-- "Has anyone ever heard of restless legs syndrome? It’s where you move your leg about in your sleep. It’s awful. You may have it. It may not keep you awake; it doesn’t really harm you in any way. It may not bother you in the slightest, but nonetheless it’s awful. The pharmaceutical companies have declared it so.
So they’ve invented a drug, and you simply must take it. If you haven’t heard of restless leg, by the way, you probably have attention deficit disorder. Awful. We’ve got a lot of drugs for that one. You must take them.
You’re depressed.
You’re not sleeping enough.
You think you’re shy, but you’ve actually got a social anxiety disorder,
Irritable bowel syndrome?
You people have all kinds of ailments you don’t know about.

Luckily, we’ve got drugs for every one of them.

You must take them. My colleague has a case involving a “Forgetting Pill.” You can take that one to forget you ever had restless leg or irritable bowels.

What is this all about?

Same-sex Attraction Disorder?

And what troubles me is why the folks in Big Pharmaceutical haven’t invented a pill for this disease. Clearly, they’re in the business of selling sickness.
If there was a profit to be made, they would make it.

And with an estimated gay population of over 10 million in the U.S. alone, there’s certainly a big enough market.
Could it be that they can’t cure it?
Well, not to worry.
If Big Pharmaceutical can’t do it,

maybe Big Religion can.
And they are. They’re the ones who coined the term,

“Same-Sex Attraction Disorder.”

It’s a very good name. Very important, a good name. It’s a crucial first step in disqualifying homosexuals as a segment of the population and categorizing them as a disease.
Makes homosexuals seem less like people and more like the flu.

And with terrible, awful symptoms, but curable, and therefore less concerning when it comes to things like an individual’s rights:
freedom, privacy, marriage.

Big Religion is very concerned with marriage.

Big Religion is the one filling the pockets of Congress.
It actually got them to propose a Constitutional ban on gay marriage.

Think about that. A governmentally imposed, systematic prejudice against a class based on their sexual orientation.

Never mind that one of the most trusted evangelical advisors to the President was himself having a homosexual affair on the side.
Nevermind that one of our Congressmen was writing naughty e-mails to his teenage male pages.
Isn’t it just adisease? And I thought it was curable.
That’s what they told me down at the church.
Well, you can legislate against it.

You can give it a clever name and treat people for it.

You can shut your eyes, have sex with your wife, and pretend it all feels right.
You can join the church and swear to be celibate.
You can drive around on a Saturday night with a baseball bat and try to beat it out of some poor soul you happen to meet.
You can even come to this courtroom and testify as to your new leaf and how well it’s all working.
What a miracle!
My only response is: Give it time. We’ll see.

Meanwhile, this company took $40,000 from my client, promising to cure him of his 'gayness'.
Only in America!
Only in a country that overtly and notoriously celebrates its prejudice against a class of people by proposing Constitutional amendments.
God bless us all!
Home of the brave! Shame on you.

Couldn’t you have at least offered a money-back guarantee, and thrown in a blender?"--

ALAN SHORE


BOSTON LEGAL

 

[Bern80]

Amazing that this is my favorite show on television even though it is yet another show where libs interject their causes in a ficticious medium in an attempt to make believe the the shit I'm eating is in fact not shit.

 

[Dr Grump]

Still, makes a great point...

 

[Bern80]

Still, makes a great point...

Thank you, it really is a great show.

 

[Gunny]

Still, makes a great point...

I don't see it. Looks like an attempt to dishonestly correlate non-related ideas to push an agenda.

There's no "pill" for cancer either ... does that make it normal, okay and otherwise healthy?

 

[Superlative]

I don't see it. Looks like an attempt to dishonestly correlate non-related ideas to push an agenda.

There's no "pill" for cancer either ... does that make it normal, okay and otherwise healthy?

You can die from Cancer, You cannot die from being gay, and dont even bother bringing up aids, cause straight people die from that too.

 

[Gunny]

You can die from Cancer, You cannot die from being gay, and dont even bother bringing up aids, cause straight people die from that too.

Straight people didn't die from AIDS until gays intoduced it into the heterosexual community. But you assume. I wasn't going to respond with that anyway.

Whether or not you can dies from being gay is irrelevant to the question I asked.

Homosexuality is abnormal behavior, period. Doesn't matter how you twist it, package it and sell it, that's what it is.

Cancer is an abnormality within the cells of the human body.

THAT is a correlation.

The initial post is nothing but a strawman argument.

 

[Superlative]

Homosexuality is abnormal behavior, period. Doesn't matter how you twist it, package it and sell it, that's what it is.

WHO says its "abnormal"? you? the Church? The BIBLE? GOD? was it GOD? did he speak with you and say that gay-homo-sex is a sin?

 

[Superlative]

I don't see it. Looks like an attempt to dishonestly correlate non-related ideas to push an agenda.

There's no "pill" for cancer either ... does that make it normal, okay and otherwise healthy?

The IDEA that it correlates, is that if Homosexuality was indeed a "Disease" than Pharmaceutical companies would jump all over finding a cure for it, but Pharmaceutical companies are full of intelligent people who know its not a disease. did you read the first post?

A pill for cancer? they have dozens of treatments and medicines to battle cancer.

 

[wiggles]

Actually, there's a conservative Baptist leader named Albert Mohler who wants to test for homosexuality in utero.
"Is Your Baby Gay? What If You Could Know? What If You Could Do Something About It?"

Not only that, he's after a medical "cure" for homosexuality -- a shot or a patch.

Which is interesting on many levels. For one thing, one of the big beefs that religious conservatives like Mohler have with homosexuality is that it’s supposedly an unnatural choice rather than an inborn trait. So what is Mohler doing advocating testing for gay genes in utero then?

 

[Dr Grump]

I don't see it. Looks like an attempt to dishonestly correlate non-related ideas to push an agenda.

There's no "pill" for cancer either ... does that make it normal, okay and otherwise healthy?

It is on abnormal in the sense that the number of people who gay is small. Much like Michael Jordan is abnormal for a basketball player or Pele was as a footballer. It's not abnormal in a bad way...

 

[Puddles]

It is on abnormal in the sense that the number of people who gay is small. Much like Michael Jordan is abnormal for a basketball player or Pele was as a footballer. It's not abnormal in a bad way...

That still doesn't make it abnormal (in a good or bad way), it's just less common and less popular, that's all. Homosexuality has been around as long as the act of sex has been around.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

The 'disease' of homosexuality



-- "Has anyone ever heard of restless legs syndrome? It’s where you move your leg about in your sleep. It’s awful. You may have it. It may not keep you awake; it doesn’t really harm you in any way. It may not bother you in the slightest, but nonetheless it’s awful. The pharmaceutical companies have declared it so.
So they’ve invented a drug, and you simply must take it. If you haven’t heard of restless leg, by the way, you probably have attention deficit disorder. Awful. We’ve got a lot of drugs for that one. You must take them.
You’re depressed.
You’re not sleeping enough.
You think you’re shy, but you’ve actually got a social anxiety disorder,
Irritable bowel syndrome?
You people have all kinds of ailments you don’t know about.

.

Meanwhile, this company took $40,000 from my client, promising to cure him of his 'gayness'.
Only in America!
Only in a country that overtly and notoriously celebrates its prejudice against a class of people by proposing Constitutional amendments.
God bless us all!
Home of the brave! Shame on you.

Couldn’t you have at least offered a money-back guarantee, and thrown in a blender?"--

ALAN SHORE


BOSTON LEGAL

Well, actually they do have a pill for it. Its called viagra.

Think about it. When a normal heterosexual man cant come to arousal when presented with a naked female body, they acknowledge something is wrong.

In fact, they use that basic concept to discover pediophiles under investigation. They show them pictures of naked children and record the pediophile's physiological reactions. If stimulated to erection, obviously the guy is a pedo. Hmmm, yea, but hey, why bother, theres certainly nothing wrong with being sexually stimulated by something other than women, right?

Baaaaaaaaaaa

GOT SHEEP?

 

[LuvRPgrl]

That still doesn't make it abnormal (in a good or bad way), it's just less common and less popular, that's all. Homosexuality has been around as long as the act of sex has been around.

No it hasnt. That would make the FIRST pair of animals that ever had a male and female to procreate, homosexuals. Hmmm, but that would be odd, if only one male horse, and one female horse were around, and both were homosexual horses, hmmm, I guess they would just become extinct. Too bad those horses cant masturbate eh?
I guess the idea of having two genders to copulate with each other is just a secondary reason mother nature had sexual differences in animals evolve.
What is more important is the sheer pleasure involved, and absolutely NOTHING wrong with being homosexual.

This is simply one of the many, many issues that liberals show how utterly fucking brain dead they are. You guys simply ignore the obvious. I mean, if a guys penis is designed for copulating in a womans vagina to procreate, and the pleasure of such act is designed to cause them to do this act, so that the species can populate itself, then its the most obvious thing in the world that something is wrong if the male is not stimulated by the female.

 

[Puddles]

No it hasnt. That would make the FIRST pair of animals that ever had a male and female to procreate, homosexuals. Hmmm, but that would be odd, if only one male horse, and one female horse were around, and both were homosexual horses, hmmm, I guess they would just become extinct. Too bad those horses cant masturbate eh?
I guess the idea of having two genders to copulate with each other is just a secondary reason mother nature had sexual differences in animals evolve.
What is more important is the sheer pleasure involved, and absolutely NOTHING wrong with being homosexual.

This is simply one of the many, many issues that liberals show how utterly fucking brain dead they are. You guys simply ignore the obvious. I mean, if a guys penis is designed for copulating in a womans vagina to procreate, and the pleasure of such act is designed to cause them to do this act, so that the species can populate itself, then its the most obvious thing in the world that something is wrong if the male is not stimulated by the female.

Oh you just had to throw a 'liberal' remark in there right..that really strengthened your argument

I think anyone with an ounce of common sense would know I was talking about human sexuality as opposed to other species...so I can understand why you made that 'argument'

 

[Superlative]

Well, actually they do have a pill for it. Its called viagra.

Think about it. When a normal heterosexual man cant come to arousal when presented with a naked female body, they acknowledge something is wrong.

In fact, they use that basic concept to discover pediophiles under investigation. They show them pictures of naked children and record the pediophile's physiological reactions. If stimulated to erection, obviously the guy is a pedo. Hmmm, yea, but hey, why bother, theres certainly nothing wrong with being sexually stimulated by something other than women, right?

Baaaaaaaaaaa

GOT SHEEP?

Erectile dysfunction does not mean you are gay, check the sites, I did. And i could find NO mention that if you cant get a boner you must be homosexual. That is ridiculous. there are a lot of different reasons, like poor blood circulation, go look it up,
if viagra was invented for gay men to be attracted to women, the church would have been all over that from the start, giving that shit out every sunday, nevermind, EVERYDAY.

http://www.emedicinehealth.com/causes_of_erectile_dysfunction/article_em.htm

http://hcd2.bupa.co.uk/fact_sheets/html/Impotence.html

http://www.allabouted.com/english/understanding/causes.html

And as for your pedophile comment, why isnt the church lobbying to harshen the sentances for them? why arent priests that molest children in jail? getting stabbed in general population with other pedophiles? why does the church pay off parents and make everyone sign confidentiality agreements not to further expose the situation?

According to the

National review Board for the protection of children and young people Established by the United States conference of Catholic Bishops 2004

"US clerics accused of abuse from 1950-2002: 4,392.
About 4% of the 109,694 serving during those 52 years.
Individuals making accusations: 10,667.
Victims' ages: 5.8% under 7; 16% ages 8-10; 50.9% ages 11-14; 27.3% ages 15-17.
Victims' gender: 81% male, 19% female
Duration of abuse: Among victims, 38.4% said all incidents occurred within one year; 21.8% said one to two years; 28%, two to four years; 11.8% longer.
Victims per priest: 55.7% with one victim; 26.9% with two or three; 13.9% with four to nine; 3.5% with 10 or more (these 149 priests caused 27% of allegations).
Abuse locations: 40.9% at priest's residence; 16.3% in church; 42.8% elsewhere.
Known cost to dioceses and religious orders: $572,507,094 (does not include the $85 million Boston settlement and other expenses after research was concluded). (Hartford Courant, 2/27/04)
It should be noted that 30% of all accusations were not investigated as they were deemed unsubstantiated or because the accused priest is dead."


Thats in the church, thats not gayness, those priests undergo so called 'treatment' and are cured, they repent and are forgiven for ruining the lives of the children they molest. but that is off topic, unless you think gay pedophile priests have anything to do with gay marriage, which i dont. thats a whole other church of sins.

Back to the topic, being Gay is OK.

 

[Superlative]

No it hasnt. That would make the FIRST pair of animals that ever had a male and female to procreate, homosexuals. Hmmm, but that would be odd, if only one male horse, and one female horse were around, and both were homosexual horses, hmmm, I guess they would just become extinct. Too bad those horses cant masturbate eh?
I guess the idea of having two genders to copulate with each other is just a secondary reason mother nature had sexual differences in animals evolve.
What is more important is the sheer pleasure involved, and absolutely NOTHING wrong with being homosexual.

This is simply one of the many, many issues that liberals show how utterly fucking brain dead they are. You guys simply ignore the obvious. I mean, if a guys penis is designed for copulating in a womans vagina to procreate, and the pleasure of such act is designed to cause them to do this act, so that the species can populate itself, then its the most obvious thing in the world that something is wrong if the male is not stimulated by the female.

"...Giraffes have all-male orgies. So do bottlenose dolphins, killer whales, gray whales, and West Indian manatees. Japanese macaques, on the other hand, are ardent lesbians; the females enthusiastically mount each other. Bonobos, one of our closest primate relatives, are similar, except that their lesbian sexual encounters occur every two hours. Male bonobos engage in "penis fencing," which leads, surprisingly enough, to ejaculation. They also give each other genital massages.

As this list of activities suggests, having homosexual sex is the biological equivalent of apple pie: Everybody likes it. At last count, over 450 different vertebrate species could be beheaded in Saudi Arabia. You name it, there's a vertebrate out there that does it. Nevertheless, most biologists continue to regard homosexuality as a sexual outlier. According to evolutionary theory, being gay is little more than a maladaptive behavior....."


http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/2006/06/the_gay_animal_kingdom.php?page=all&p=y

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

http://www.bidstrup.com/sodomy.htm



Are you going to suggest a ban on gay giraffes??

Why arent priests and bishops out there with big sticks prying animals apart and berating them? Dont the animals know they are horrible sinners? that they are hurting the children and making unborn babies gay?

 

[Gunny]

Homosexuality is abnormal behavior, period. Doesn't matter how you twist it, package it and sell it, that's what it is.

WHO says its "abnormal"? you? the Church? The BIBLE? GOD? was it GOD? did he speak with you and say that gay-homo-sex is a sin?

Biology.

 

[Gunny]

The IDEA that it correlates, is that if Homosexuality was indeed a "Disease" than Pharmaceutical companies would jump all over finding a cure for it, but Pharmaceutical companies are full of intelligent people who know its not a disease. did you read the first post?

A pill for cancer? they have dozens of treatments and medicines to battle cancer.

You're making assumptions that aren't there. I did not say that homosexuality was a disease. I said it was abnormal.

Yeah, I read the first post. It's a strawman. It makes an assumptive argument trying to tie the business practices of pharmaceutical companies to legitimize homosexuality as normal since those businesses do not try and sell a cure for it.

If there was enough money it, they damned sure would.

 

[Bern80]

WHO says its "abnormal"? you? the Church? The BIBLE? GOD? was it GOD? did he speak with you and say that gay-homo-sex is a sin?

By definition it would be because the occurrance of being gay is less frequent than the occurance of being straight. Is is therefore not the norm.