Great, at least someone who's not a hypocrite. But now you've opened Pandora's box (we'll leave pedo's out of it to make life a bit easier). Law makers nightmare.
Buy on AliExpress.com
Gay couples as fit to adopt as heterosexuals: study (14 Viewers)
- Thread starter Martin
- Start date
Buy on AliExpress.com
They changed the definition of mental disorder. What do you mean "no new evidence being found"? New evidence for what? There is absolutely nothing in homosexuality that meets the criteria by which you may classify something as a disorder (regardless of the definition you use to describe disorder). Homosexuality has a lower frequency in nature. And only because a trait is observed less frequently doesn't make it less "moral" or a disorder per se. Now what does it have to do with pedophilia? Yeah, people may be born that way or they may be not (as is the case with homosexuality), so what?
Definition of mental disorder (Merriam Webster): a mental or bodily condition marked primarily by sufficient disorganization of personality, mind, and emotions to seriously impair the normal psychological functioning of the individual—called also mental illness
The normal psychological functioning of the individual is heterosexuality. It's not about being less moral or merely less frequent in nature. The normal psychological functioning of the invidivual is heterosexuality (due to evolution; only evolutionary purpose of sex is reproduction), so by definition homosexuality is abnormal and preventing the normal psychological functioning of the individual.
I have nothing against homosexuals, they can do whatever they want it's none of my business. I'm simply saying that homosexuality is a mental disorder according to any serious definition of the term.
The normal psychological functioning of the individual is heterosexuality. It's not about being less moral or merely less frequent in nature. The normal psychological functioning of the invidivual is heterosexuality (due to evolution; only evolutionary purpose of sex is reproduction), so by definition homosexuality is abnormal and preventing the normal psychological functioning of the individual.
I have nothing against homosexuals, they can do whatever they want it's none of my business. I'm simply saying that homosexuality is a mental disorder according to any serious definition of the term.
What BS. So because only evolutionary purpose of sex is reproduction, a person who cannot have children is abnormal and is unable to have normal psychological functions and is thus having a mental disorder?
These (below) are the serious definitions of mental disorder. Funny that you talk about "serious" and refer to layman definitions.
"In DSM-IV, each of the mental disorders is conceptualized as a clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome or pattern that occurs in an individual and that is associated with present distress (e.g., a painful symptom) or disability (i.e., impairment in one or more important areas of functioning) or with a significantly increased risk of suffering death, pain, disability, or an important loss of freedom."
"A mental disorder is a syndrome characterized by clinically significant disturbance in an individual's cognition, emotion regulation, or behavior that reflects a dysfunction in the psychological, biological, or developmental processes underlying mental functioning. Mental disorders are usually associated with significant distress in social, occupational, or other important activities. An expectable or culturally approved response to a common stressor or loss, such as the death of a loved one, is not a mental disorder. Socially deviant behavior (e.g., political, religious, or sexual) and conflicts that are primarily between the individual and society are not mental disorders unless the deviance or conflict results from a dysfunction in the individual, as described above."
So no, homosexuality is not a disorder. It is observed less frequently than heterosexuality and that doesn't mean anything per se.
There is no "norm" defined in evolution. Evolution is in fact not meant to define norms. Evolution is merely studying the frequency of different traits at different points of time, and homosexuality is a trait that has remained in nature despite its lower frequency. Now there are two different arguments conjecturing why: one is homosexuality has transferred through homosexuals' direct/indirect role in upbringing of their relatives' children and the other argues that it's because it's not a chosen behavior. So this nature or nurture debate is futile. I wish i knew how it is related to pedophilia or necrophilia, and what it has to do with gay "marriage".
These (below) are the serious definitions of mental disorder. Funny that you talk about "serious" and refer to layman definitions.
"In DSM-IV, each of the mental disorders is conceptualized as a clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome or pattern that occurs in an individual and that is associated with present distress (e.g., a painful symptom) or disability (i.e., impairment in one or more important areas of functioning) or with a significantly increased risk of suffering death, pain, disability, or an important loss of freedom."
"A mental disorder is a syndrome characterized by clinically significant disturbance in an individual's cognition, emotion regulation, or behavior that reflects a dysfunction in the psychological, biological, or developmental processes underlying mental functioning. Mental disorders are usually associated with significant distress in social, occupational, or other important activities. An expectable or culturally approved response to a common stressor or loss, such as the death of a loved one, is not a mental disorder. Socially deviant behavior (e.g., political, religious, or sexual) and conflicts that are primarily between the individual and society are not mental disorders unless the deviance or conflict results from a dysfunction in the individual, as described above."
So no, homosexuality is not a disorder. It is observed less frequently than heterosexuality and that doesn't mean anything per se.
There is no "norm" defined in evolution. Evolution is in fact not meant to define norms. Evolution is merely studying the frequency of different traits at different points of time, and homosexuality is a trait that has remained in nature despite its lower frequency. Now there are two different arguments conjecturing why: one is homosexuality has transferred through homosexuals' direct/indirect role in upbringing of their relatives' children and the other argues that it's because it's not a chosen behavior. So this nature or nurture debate is futile. I wish i knew how it is related to pedophilia or necrophilia, and what it has to do with gay "marriage".
1. Apples and Oranges
2.The APA changed the definition of mental disorder to kick homosexuality out of it, that much is clear. You should take a look at what the definition of mental disorder was in DSM II before they changed the classification of homosexuality, they pandered to pressure from the LGBT lobby.
3. It certainly is a disorder, you should look at what Dr. Nicholas Cummings, former President of the APA, said on the definition of mental disorders and the 1973 amendment.
4. The only evolutionary reason men have penises and women have vaginas is for reproduction. That much is pretty clear.
2.The APA changed the definition of mental disorder to kick homosexuality out of it, that much is clear. You should take a look at what the definition of mental disorder was in DSM II before they changed the classification of homosexuality, they pandered to pressure from the LGBT lobby.
3. It certainly is a disorder, you should look at what Dr. Nicholas Cummings, former President of the APA, said on the definition of mental disorders and the 1973 amendment.
4. The only evolutionary reason men have penises and women have vaginas is for reproduction. That much is pretty clear.
Butthurt much? 
I refuted his point.
You don't even know why you have to keep babbling about pedophilia. You have probably heard/read it somewhere and think that mentioning it makes you look better in a discussion about homosexuality. It is not, unfortunately.
You were not even able to form a couple of properly constructed arguments. I'd like to help you with your ignorance but unfortunately i have to repeat my previous post, to which you are not able to respond, as is evident with this post of yours. A shame, cause you always struck me as a person who is fond of healthy arguments.
- - - Updated - - -
lol.
I refuted his point.
You don't even know why you have to keep babbling about pedophilia. You have probably heard/read it somewhere and think that mentioning it makes you look better in a discussion about homosexuality. It is not, unfortunately.
You were not even able to form a couple of properly constructed arguments. I'd like to help you with your ignorance but unfortunately i have to repeat my previous post, to which you are not able to respond, as is evident with this post of yours. A shame, cause you always struck me as a person who is fond of healthy arguments.
- - - Updated - - -
lol.
