Magic Johnson's son goes public with boyfriend

Why would anyone try to debate someone who turns a blind eye to factual information?


As you said earlier, its like arguing with a two year old.
I have read the articles YOU provided, as I have read my researched articles . I have quoted my articles, as I have quoted your articles, in order to make my points.

Where have I ignored facts?

You turned one quote into an entirely different meaning. And you obviously didn't pull anything away from the articles if you stuck by your reasonings.
 
Why would anyone try to debate someone who turns a blind eye to factual information?


As you said earlier, its like arguing with a two year old.
I have read the articles YOU provided, as I have read my researched articles . I have quoted my articles, as I have quoted your articles, in order to make my points.

Where have I ignored facts?

Did you not say homosexuality wasn't in the DSM?

Did you not imply homosexuality is a direct cause of depression?

Did you not express that you're going by an outdated DSM with your points, completely ignoring a revised edition?
 
Why would anyone try to debate someone who turns a blind eye to factual information?

As you said earlier, its like arguing with a two year old.

This is very true. I'm guilty of this. You know, sometimes it's hard to ignore someone so incredulous. But you can't shake logic into someone who ignores facts. I should have ignored [COLOR=#red]WhatCanISay[/COLOR] the moment he refused to ignore anything past the DSM II
 
I'm going to say a few things.

If you keep comparing one thing to the next irrelevant subject, you aren't going to see the whole picture.

Where is your proof about how parenting, and how it affects the child throughout life? Did you conduct a personal case study yourself?
Voting isn't a major part of life either, but women and blacks made sure that they got that .



Equality is the main issue here.
You don't participate in stereotypes, they are used against you. They are a schema about a specific type of person.

If a Mexican man mows lawns he isn't participating in the stereotype, he is just a victim.
i mean you can do a simple google search and see stats concerning teen pregnancy...high school drop out rates, prison system etc...as well as other things and it will clearly show a child from the numbers % wise are more successfull when there is a farther and mother in the home. And voting still to me in grand scheme of things isnt a big deal... they basically fought and put lives on the line for a non factor. I wont go deep into that because they at the time probably didnt know any better, but its safe to say a decent amount of ppl know voting with the exception of possibly at the local level means nothing.

Many ppl do participate in stereotypes... hell the biggest minority actor/director in tyler perry built an billion dollar empire off of basically participating and promoting stereotypes. Hell you got ppl who go out their way to fall into stereotypes ie reality tv. wshh, so on and so forth.

You really can compare a mexican mowing his lawn, to a homosexual male who goes out of his way to be on tv...and makes it a point to display every single stereotype associated with gay men. Its one thing for a asian to be in school and have all a's and does exceptional in math...its another if an asian builds a career and make a show that revolves around asians driving badly. There is a big difference in the two.
 
Shoelyesses, taking rights away from people by law due their sexual orientation is wrong. Period.


Stereotypes is a whole other thread, you might find better information on that in the white privilege thread.
 
Why would anyone try to debate someone who turns a blind eye to factual information?

As you said earlier, its like arguing with a two year old.

This is very true. I'm guilty of this. You know, sometimes it's hard to ignore someone so incredulous. But you can't shake logic into someone who ignores facts. I should have ignored [COLOR=#red]WhatCanISay[/COLOR] the moment he refused to ignore anything past the DSM II

:lol:

It happens man. You guys gotta be calmer about it, if you keep people from feeling offended by your opposition to their opinion, it makes the whole thing go much smoother.

Opens up the door for learning instead of them shutting everything down and hitting you with the "lalala I can't hear you lalala you're trolling".

I agree though, when people say certain things I'm stuck with the :x face like son you really think this?
 
3) Yes, I was using an outdated DSM, because enough evidence was not provided to completely rule out Homosexuality as a mental illness.(IMO) Heck, even Laws cannot be considered as full "truths". And these are laws of Physics, where REAL experiments and calculations are done. >D

Hooker administered three projective tests (the Rorschach, Thematic Apperception Test [TAT], and Make-A-Picture-Story [MAPS] Test) to 30 homosexual males and 30 heterosexual males recruited through community organizations. The two groups were matched for age, IQ, and education. None of the men were in therapy at the time of the study.

Unaware of each subject's sexual orientation, two independent Rorschach experts evaluated the men's overall adjustment using a 5-point scale. They classified two-thirds of the heterosexuals and two-thirds of the homosexuals in the three highest categories of adjustment. When asked to identify which Rorschach protocols were obtained from homosexuals, the experts could not distinguish respondents' sexual orientation at a level better than chance.

Hooker concluded from her data that homosexuality is not a clinical entity and that homosexuality is not inherently associated with psychopathology.

Is that controlled experiment not enough for you? It was enough to get homosexuality (under all names) removed from the book.
 
Did you not say homosexuality wasn't in the DSM?


Did you not imply homosexuality is a direct cause of depression?


Did you not express that you're going by an outdated DSM with your points, completely ignoring a revised edition?
1) Yes, because it's not in the DSM.

2) Yes, and your article states it .

3) Yes, I was using an outdated DSM, because enough evidence was not provided to completely rule out Homosexuality as a mental illness.(IMO) Heck, even Laws cannot be considered as full "truths". And these are laws of Physics, where REAL experiments and calculations are done. >D

So, sue me for thinking in a different wavelength than the 3 of you. I'm dang proud of it.

1. It was in the DSM you were going by, in the same category as pedophilia and masochism.

2. No, it states that outside factors cause these things.

3. Do you know what "revised" means? Do you understand how science works?

At this point in time, evidence points to homosexuality not being a mental disorder. That's just how it is. I don't think you saying "not enough evidence" is going to sway leading researchers in a field you admittedly know little about.

I don't know why you're bringing physics into this. I don't see the two subjects as comparable.

This has become quite redundant and will be locked soon. Its pretty much just ban bait at this point.
 
Y'all dudes man 
laugh.gif


There's research out there supporting both theories....this would literally go on forever 
laugh.gif
 
Shoelyesses, taking rights away from people by law due their sexual orientation is wrong. Period.


Stereotypes is a whole other thread, you might find better information on that in the white privilege thread.
i agree and it shouldnt be a factor... i mean i havent worked in years but i never seen str8/gay on a application...cant recall seeing str8 only in restaurants etc..... Like i said i dont think the gay community thinks so long as we can adopt get married etc... then all is good, from what i gather many say they are discriminated/mistreated in just day to day life....ie like going out to eat, looking for a job, school, catching a cab, riding a train, admittance to clubs, etc. To this i say i cant see how could they be treated stereotypical unless they make it a point to act, or subscribe if you will to those stereotypes.

Like i said you can easily stereotype discriminate day to day a person because of race, being overweight etc... because it can be clearly seen. But like for example i couldnt see someone stereotyping, mistreating, discriminating someone the likes of a neil patrick harris, unless he just went out of his way to say he is gay, or acted/conducted himself in a manner that is stereotypical to gay males. Again im not encouraging anyone to deny who they are, but you dont have to scream from the mountain tops about it either.

Its like i see with blacks and the whole cornball brother thing... you can just be yourself be down etc... but you dont have to go out your way and display every stereotype associated with black males just to show, yea im cool im down im a real brother.
 
i care that people keep their lifestyle & what they do behind closed doors
not on my tv screen or seeing 2 women tongue kissing while i'm walking down the street with my brother and he has to explain that to his young daughter when she's asking him "why are 2 girls kissing"

Relax. I was pointing out your grammar. As for your reasoning example, people explain adult things that kids can't understand all the time.

"Dad, where do babies come from?"
"From the stork."

You get what I'm saying. This issue of having to explain something isn't the issue here, that's not what this is about.
 
Back
Top Bottom