Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37

Thread: George Rekers, Christian Right Leader, Denies Gay Prostitution Allegation

  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: George Rekers, Christian Right Leader, Denies Gay Prostitution Allegation

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    So thousands of people who were gay, or at least lived a homosexual lifestyle and considered themselves gay and were considered gay by everyone who knew them, who (through therapy or religion or whatever) "turned hetero"... they don't know anything because some (not all) scientists have decided otherwise. Ok.
    There are also men who lived heterosexual "lifestyles" their entire lives and at age 40 decided to stop lying to themselves and pursue meaningful relationships with other men.

    You cannot provide evidence that demonstrates that those men were engaged in anything other than strong denial, unless they weren't gay in the first place. My sister was almost exclusively with women from age 20-28, but now she is happily married to a man and has a kid. She didn't identify as gay though.

    I think the labeling scheme also confuses things. It creates weird expectations. My personal view is that sexuality is much more fluid. I identify as a gay man and have only been with men. Even though it seems impossible to me now, I may some day decide to be with a woman. That wouldn't make me "cured" or something.

    All this shows is that sexuality is complex.

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: George Rekers, Christian Right Leader, Denies Gay Prostitution Allegation

    Sorry, I forgot to add... we were talking before about homosexuality as a mental disease, and you said that is something you've heard arguments from both sides on. That is one arena where I won't accommodate you. Sexuality is not a mental illness, it just garners certain social approvals or disapprovals depending on how you wish to express it.

  3. #23
    Bus Driver to Hell
    Thorgasm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 06:57 PM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    68,198

    Re: George Rekers, Christian Right Leader, Denies Gay Prostitution Allegation

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    So thousands of people who were gay, or at least lived a homosexual lifestyle and considered themselves gay and were considered gay by everyone who knew them, who (through therapy or religion or whatever) "turned hetero"... they don't know anything because some (not all) scientists have decided otherwise. Ok.

    I don't really know why I care about this topic honestly, other than I'm bored right now but too tired to do anything more intresting than frack around on DP.
    It's not "some scientists". It's the consensus of the scientific community as a whole.

    Do you think it's possible to turn someone gay?
    Quote Originally Posted by faithful_servant View Post
    Being a psychiatric patient does not mean that you are mentally ill.



  4. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Last Seen
    09-24-12 @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,963

    Re: George Rekers, Christian Right Leader, Denies Gay Prostitution Allegation

    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    Once again it's proven, people that work so hard to demonize something, are so often self loathers, and engage in that very activity.
    Well said.

    I wonder about the homophobes on DP. Me things they doth protest too much...

  5. #25
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,184

    Re: George Rekers, Christian Right Leader, Denies Gay Prostitution Allegation

    Quote Originally Posted by independent_thinker2002 View Post
    It's not "some scientists". It's the consensus of the scientific community as a whole.
    Let's make sure we're talking about the same thing here: I'm talking about sexual orientation being inherent and immutable, unchangeable.

    I have my doubts about that. I did a little research at one point when I became intrested in the subject, and no there isn't a scientific "consensus"... consensus implies a near-universal agreement.

    Do you think it's possible to turn someone gay?
    I have no idea. Maybe.

    I think back to one time at a gym, I overheard two gay guys talking. One of them was talking about some young straight guy and that he was "working on him" (his words, not mine) to get him in the sack. Anecdotal, I know, but it certainly gave me the impression that at least some gay guys think they could "turn" a straight.


    The fact of the matter is, I have serious doubts about this whole "inborn and immutable" theory of sexual orientation. I'm sure you (or CC or someone) could cite the research of Dr. Feelgood and Dr. Strangelove or whoever, supporting your view. So how do I know that your sources aren't citing agenda-driven research? Agenda-driven research happens all the frigging time, if for no other reason than because it's easier to get funding for PC research than non-PC research, and your liberal friends at the University will still invite you to cocktail parties.

    Try getting funding and University backing for a research project whose goal is "to prove that homosexuality isn't inborn or immutable" and see how far you get. Not far at all, is my guess.

    To be honest, I think that ANY position that goes something like "ALL gays are that way because of _______" are wrong. (Whether your blank is filled with "inborn", "early influences", "abuse", "gender identification" or "choice"/etc.) I don't think it is actually that simple, I don't think human behavior is that easily pigeonholed and defined. I think it is a spectrum rather than a light-switch.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  6. #26
    Bus Driver to Hell
    Thorgasm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 06:57 PM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    68,198

    Re: George Rekers, Christian Right Leader, Denies Gay Prostitution Allegation

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Let's make sure we're talking about the same thing here: I'm talking about sexual orientation being inherent and immutable, unchangeable.
    Then you shouldn't have said "curable". You implied that they were ill and needed treatment. I was talking about it not being a disease and I thought you were too. Now we aren't. Okay.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    I have my doubts about that. I did a little research at one point when I became intrested in the subject, and no there isn't a scientific "consensus"... consensus implies a near-universal agreement.
    No, they don't have a consensus for this context.

    They do have a consensus that it is not an illness.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    I have no idea. Maybe.

    I think back to one time at a gym, I overheard two gay guys talking. One of them was talking about some young straight guy and that he was "working on him" (his words, not mine) to get him in the sack. Anecdotal, I know, but it certainly gave me the impression that at least some gay guys think they could "turn" a straight.
    Even if the gay guy did sleep with him, it wouldn't necessarily make him gay. He may be bisexual or bi-curious.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    The fact of the matter is, I have serious doubts about this whole "inborn and immutable" theory of sexual orientation. I'm sure you (or CC or someone) could cite the research of Dr. Feelgood and Dr. Strangelove or whoever, supporting your view. So how do I know that your sources aren't citing agenda-driven research? Agenda-driven research happens all the frigging time, if for no other reason than because it's easier to get funding for PC research than non-PC research, and your liberal friends at the University will still invite you to cocktail parties.
    Peer reviewed journals are as honest and unbiased as it gets.

    Gays obviously don't have that much power to get the whole scientific community on their side. They are a minority. The most I have seen is that they make up 10% of the population. I believe it to be at 4-6%.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Try getting funding and University backing for a research project whose goal is "to prove that homosexuality isn't inborn or immutable" and see how far you get. Not far at all, is my guess.
    Basically, by doing studies to prove it is inborn, you very well could prove that it isn't. So, yeah, studying the issue at all is doing that. You see, the study is "Is homosexuality inborn?". Without any evidence, you can't prove one way or the other. They are merely collecting data. If your study was to prove something, you would have to have a hypothesis that you would then test. i.e. "By changing hormone levels, you can change someone's sexual orientation." Good luck finding test subjects on that one.

    Also, nothing is stopping the private market from doing a study. If the methodology is not flawed, the scientific community would recognize it. To do so would also be a major breakthrough. Whoever does that will be able to write a book and make millions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    To be honest, I think that ANY position that goes something like "ALL gays are that way because of _______" are wrong. (Whether your blank is filled with "inborn", "early influences", "abuse", "gender identification" or "choice"/etc.) I don't think it is actually that simple, I don't think human behavior is that easily pigeonholed and defined. I think it is a spectrum rather than a light-switch.
    Are you familiar with the Kinsey Scale?

    I think he was correct.
    Quote Originally Posted by faithful_servant View Post
    Being a psychiatric patient does not mean that you are mentally ill.



  7. #27
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,184

    Re: George Rekers, Christian Right Leader, Denies Gay Prostitution Allegation

    Quote Originally Posted by independent_thinker2002 View Post
    Then you shouldn't have said "curable". You implied that they were ill and needed treatment. I was talking about it not being a disease and I thought you were too. Now we aren't. Okay.
    I didn't say it was an illness. If I'd known the use of that word "cureable" was going to freak everyone out, I would have said "orientation change" or something instead. 'Scuze the @#$ outta me.



    Even if the gay guy did sleep with him, it wouldn't necessarily make him gay. He may be bisexual or bi-curious.
    See, this is where I think there is some self-fulfilling prophesy going on here. I had this out with CC one time. You guys want to say that if someone does change from straight homo behavior to something else, then either they were not really gay to start with, or they're just engaging in non-gay behavior right now but that doesn't mean their orientation has changed. Holy crap, dude, talk about making square pegs fit round holes!

    I wish I could get Vegas to let me change the rules of the game in the middle like that, and redefine terms to force facts to fit my theory.

    It's sorta like this. Let's say that I observe some circles in the wild, and I observe some of the circles changing into squares. From this observation, I would conclude that at least some circles can change into squares, and speculate that shape is not immutable.

    The alternative theory being thrown out here is "well they weren't really circles to begin with, they were just acting like circles temporarily; or else they aren't really squares now, they're circles pretending to be squares".


    Peer reviewed journals are as honest and unbiased as it gets.

    Gays obviously don't have that much power to get the whole scientific community on their side. They are a minority. The most I have seen is that they make up 10% of the population. I believe it to be at 4-6%.
    Actually it isn't simply GBLTs themselves, but the roughly 30% of the general public who seems to feel compelled to support and endorse all things that they think seem pro-homosexual whether they make sense or not. Since probably three-fourths of academia fall within that 30% supporter faction...




    Are you familiar with the Kinsey Scale?

    I think he was correct.
    Yes, I am, but frankly I wouldn't buy anything Kinsey wrote without a large helping of salt on the side. He may have stumbled across some fragments of the truth but I have grave doubts about his professionalism and lack of bias.
    Last edited by Goshin; 05-07-10 at 11:37 PM.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  8. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: George Rekers, Christian Right Leader, Denies Gay Prostitution Allegation

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    It's sorta like this. Let's say that I observe some circles in the wild, and I observe some of the circles changing into squares. From this observation, I would conclude that at least some circles can change into squares, and speculate that shape is not immutable.

    The alternative theory being thrown out here is "well they weren't really circles to begin with, they were just acting like circles temporarily; or else they aren't really squares now, they're circles pretending to be squares".
    I'm sorry to make this so long but I think you are an intelligent person who might be open to some of my ideas, so I need to elaborate a bit.

    I can only speak from my personal beliefs here, but I do think that it's possible for some to change, not all. You have to avoid generalizations here. Just because some people can change does not mean that all can change, nor should anyone be expected to change.

    In relation to that, I think only a very small number can change, and it has to do with people who have evolved minds and a level of openness with themselves and others that transcends the notion of fixed orientations. After all, the labels of "gay" and "straight" are modern inventions and they are being applied to feelings and impulses that are much more complicated. I've only met a couple of people in my entire life who have willfully transcended the orientation point at which they started, but they are extremely rare.

    Because they are rare, I avoid saying that the change is possible at all, because opponents to homosexuality will obfuscate what I'm saying and make it seem like an orientation change is possible for everyone; and the general populous is, frankly, not ready to have that subtle level of discussion that requires finely tuned intelligence and awareness of some of the deeper levels to human sexuality.

    You can't bring the argument to that level with many people because most are still stuck on the idea that men having sex with men is wrong. Homosexuality has to be an issue before it's a non-issue; and once it's a non-issue, then society can move to the next level of discourse on human sexual nature. Honestly, right now, the general arguments I am seeing in the political sphere are extremely rudimentary. In many cases, it is still essentially a human rights battle over whether or not men should even be allowed to be with men. You have to put the time line of gay rights in perspective to really understand this. The battle feels long but historically it has not been, and the right wing has been pushed fast to increase its tolerance of things that were formerly abhorrent to it -- perhaps too fast.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Actually it isn't simply GBLTs themselves, but the roughly 30% of the general public who seems to feel compelled to support and endorse all things that they think seem pro-homosexual whether they make sense or not. Since probably three-fourths of academia fall within that 30% supporter faction...
    I don't believe there to be academic bias and I can assure you, I have studied this much more in depth than you have; I was studying it when I was younger and coming to terms with my sexuality, and as a medical professional in adulthood. Academics aren't rallying around information because they're trying to be PC and are avoiding false information; there are genuinely interesting facts uncovered by sexology research.

    The main problem is that the vast, vast amount of sexology research is focused on heterosexuals. Only a comparatively minuscule amount has delved into homosexuality beyond what Kinsey did.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Yes, I am, but frankly I wouldn't buy anything Kinsey wrote without a large helping of salt on the side. He may have stumbled across some fragments of the truth but I have grave doubts about his professionalism and lack of bias.
    I don't necessarily disagree with your view on this. Kinsey had some flawed research methods, but he did uncover some important truths. Let's not throw the baby out the with the bath water here.

    On the other hand, you will be hard pressed to find a chronology of "cured" stories beyond the past 15-20 years, or those that don't involve religious coercion. Essentially all of the homosexual "treatment" centres that exist in the year 2010 are religiously motivated, which is why it's difficult to evaluate with them objectively. Just because people claim they are cured and can give the appearance of being heterosexual (i.e. by taking a partner of the opposite sex, pro-creating heterosexually, etc.), it does not mean they are inherently functional that way. I, for example, am not opposed to the idea of procreating through natural means with the right woman when the time comes; but just because I could function sexually with a woman does not mean my heart and soul would thrive with a woman.

    Before the gay rights movement, the majority of homosexuals in the U.S. either remained single or adopted socially acceptable heterosexual lifestyles in order to blend. Many had same sex relations on the side. In China (where I have spent a lot of time), it is equivalent to the 1950's right now in terms of awareness of homosexuality. Men live family lives by day, fulfilling their traditional obligations, and by night anything goes. My friend and I were walking around Xuan Wu lake in Nanjing one night and we accidentally came across two men having sex in the bushes. It was incredibly awkward, but that sort of thing is not that uncommon in places where homosexuality is forced underground by the mainstream.
    Last edited by Orion; 05-08-10 at 12:10 AM.

  9. #29
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,184

    Re: George Rekers, Christian Right Leader, Denies Gay Prostitution Allegation

    Thank you for taking the time to address these issues thoughtfully and openly, I appreciate this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    ...

    I can only speak from my personal beliefs here, but I do think that it's possible for some to change, not all. You have to avoid generalizations here. Just because some people can change does not mean that all can change, nor should anyone be expected to change.

    In relation to that, I think only a very small number can change, and it has to do with people who have evolved minds and a level of openness with themselves and others that transcends the notion of fixed orientations. ...
    Because they are rare, I avoid saying that the change is possible at all, because opponents to homosexuality will obfuscate what I'm saying and make it seem like an orientation change is possible for everyone; and the general populous is, frankly, not ready to have that subtle level of discussion that requires finely tuned intelligence and awareness of some of the deeper levels to human sexuality.
    Let me say how much I appreciate your honesty and openness in the above statements, and that I understand how "giving ammo to the enemy" is something anyone is loathe to do.

    In return, I will openly give back some ammo...

    I would tend to agree with you that while some apparently can, not everyone who is homosexual is capable of changing their orientation. I again refer to my own life-experience in an example: a gentleman I've known since childhood, a man of the highest character and quality, very bravely chose to marry an "ex-lesbian" woman who had supposedly changed her orientation and wished to pursue a hetero life. They were married and had a baby...and when the baby was about a year old, she left him and went back to her former lesbian partner. He was heartbroken... but he also said that he felt like she had honestly tried and just couldn't cope with the change.


    You can't bring the argument to that level with many people because most are still stuck on the idea that men having sex with men is wrong. Homosexuality has to be an issue before it's a non-issue; and once it's a non-issue, then society can move to the next level of discourse on human sexual nature. Honestly, right now, the general arguments I am seeing in the political sphere are extremely rudimentary. In many cases, it is still essentially a human rights battle over whether or not men should even be allowed to be with men. You have to put the time line of gay rights in perspective to really understand this. The battle feels long but historically it has not been, and the right wing has been pushed fast to increase its tolerance of things that were formerly abhorrent to it -- perhaps too fast.
    Well, I myself belong to a religion which views homosexuality as a sin. As an adherent of that religion, I am morally obligated to view homosexual activity with disapproval. Consider yourself "viewed with disapproval".

    Okay, now that that's out of the way... ... politically I don't think Gov has any business sticking its nose in the bedroom. Nor do I have any business sticking my nose in your bedroom. It's when these issues move into the public eye that things become more complicated. On the issue of gay marriage I have concerns and have not yet been convinced that the normalization of SSM is altogether desireable.

    I don't believe there to be academic bias and I can assure you, I have studied this much more in depth than you have; I was studying it when I was younger and coming to terms with my sexuality, and as a medical professional in adulthood. Academics aren't rallying around information because they're trying to be PC and are avoiding false information; there are genuinely interesting facts uncovered by sexology research.
    There was a time when I viewed science, and scientists, with enormous respect and a sense of awe at the "pure quest for knowlege". This was back in my early years at college when I still had some thought of becoming a scientific researcher myself. That was before I was actually exposed to the world of academia and researchers, and the pursuit of grants/funding/tenure/publication. The cut-throat internal politics I saw quite disgusted me and changed my perceptions of science and scientists dramatically. Further experiences with agenda-driven "polling" and "research" left me highly suspicious of all such sources, and extremely reluctant to believe in anyone's objectivity.

    Accordingly, I take what any "expert" or researcher says about any subject that is politically charged with a large helping of salt. Actually I am more inclined to listen to the well-reasoned words of individuals, who have impressed me with their honestly on a personal level and have some valid experience with the topic in question, than some faceless academic I've never met.




    On the other hand, you will be hard pressed to find a chronology of "cured" stories beyond the past 15-20 years, or those that don't involve religious coercion. Essentially all of the homosexual "treatment" centres that exist in the year 2010 are religiously motivated, which is why it's difficult to evaluate with them objectively. Just because people claim they are cured and can give the appearance of being heterosexual (i.e. by taking a partner of the opposite sex, pro-creating heterosexually, etc.), it does not mean they are inherently functional that way. I, for example, am not opposed to the idea of procreating through natural means with the right woman when the time comes; but just because I could function sexually with a woman does not mean my heart and soul would thrive with a woman.

    Before the gay rights movement, the majority of homosexuals in the U.S. either remained single or adopted socially acceptable heterosexual lifestyles in order to blend. Many had same sex relations on the side. In China (where I have spent a lot of time), it is equivalent to the 1950's right now in terms of awareness of homosexuality. Men live family lives by day, fulfilling their traditional obligations, and by night anything goes. My friend and I were walking around Xuan Wu lake in Nanjing one night and we accidentally came across two men having sex in the bushes. It was incredibly awkward, but that sort of thing is not that uncommon in places where homosexuality is forced underground by the mainstream
    Okay, this makes a certain amount of sense, though I wouldn't overemphasize the religious "coercion" aspect when typically people enter these programs voluntarily....not to say that some might not do so reluctantly.

    As I've said, I don't claim to be an expert on this topic. My chief objection has been to the way some people want to paint it as strictly black-and-white, and assert that "NO homosexual-oriented person could possibly change their orientation ever" when I don't think it is at all that simple, nor that the evidence supports a strictly A-or-B viewpoint.

    Intresting discussion, thank you.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  10. #30
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,756

    Re: George Rekers, Christian Right Leader, Denies Gay Prostitution Allegation

    I just saw a news item on TV in which Rekers is now claiming (After nobody believed his first 2 excuses) that he brought rentboy with him in order to cure rentboy of his homosexuality.

    Looks like Reker's plan was to blow that homosexuality right out of rentboy. LOL.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •