Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member wittywonka
    Chocolate Expert
    05 Aug '11 02:45 / 1 edit
    http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/08/04/psychologists.gay.marriage/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
  2. 05 Aug '11 04:39 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by wittywonka
    http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/08/04/psychologists.gay.marriage/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
    Was this after they changed their minds about homosexual behavior being a disorder in the 1970's?
  3. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    05 Aug '11 05:26
    Originally posted by whodey
    Was this after they changed their minds about homosexual behavior being a disorder in the 1970's?
    There's been a lot of progress in the last 40 years.
  4. 05 Aug '11 15:03
    Originally posted by FMF
    There's been a lot of progress in the last 40 years.
    If gay marriage can curb the AIDS epidemic perhaps it has merit. Otherwise they are simply endorsing a sexual practice that is inherently unhealthy.
  5. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    05 Aug '11 18:33
    Why is a scientific organization endorsing a political agenda?

    If, say, the American Automobile Mechanics Association endorsed tax hikes for the rich, would we pay attention to them?

    The resolution also points to evidence that ongoing political debate about marriage creates stress for gay men and lesbians and perpetuates stigmas and prejudice about their communities. This stress can make people physically and psychologically sick, the APA says, calling the link between stress and illness "well established."


    That political debate upsets some people is not a good enough reason to end the political debate. Sorry. In any case, giving up on legalization of same sex marriage would have an equally effective impact on ending the "political debate about marriage" but presumably they are not pressing for that conclusion.
  6. 05 Aug '11 18:54
    Originally posted by FMF
    There's been a lot of progress in the last 40 years.
    Some progress may not be so progressive.
  7. Standard member Palynka
    Upward Spiral
    05 Aug '11 18:57
    Originally posted by sh76
    Why is a scientific organization endorsing a political agenda?

    If, say, the American Automobile Mechanics Association endorsed tax hikes for the rich, would we pay attention to them?

    [quote]The resolution also points to evidence that ongoing political debate about marriage creates stress for gay men and lesbians and perpetuates stigmas and prejudice about ...[text shortened]... "political debate about marriage" but presumably they are not pressing for that conclusion.
    It's endorsing a practice that it feels is beneficial from a psychological health viewpoint. I don't see why it's such a big issue.

    If the American Economic Association endorsed tax hikes for the rich, shouldn't we pay attention? Or the APHA regarding the public health of distributing condoms to teenagers? I think we should pay attention as another factor in the equation.
  8. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    05 Aug '11 21:14
    Originally posted by Palynka
    It's endorsing a practice that it feels is beneficial from a psychological health viewpoint. I don't see why it's such a big issue.

    If the American Economic Association endorsed tax hikes for the rich, shouldn't we pay attention? Or the APHA regarding the public health of distributing condoms to teenagers? I think we should pay attention as another factor in the equation.
    I agree that it's not a big issue. In fact, that was kind of my point.
  9. 05 Aug '11 22:00
    Originally posted by whodey
    If gay marriage can curb the AIDS epidemic perhaps it has merit. Otherwise they are simply endorsing a sexual practice that is inherently unhealthy.
    Getting married is not usually considered a sexual practice.
  10. 05 Aug '11 22:25
    Originally posted by whodey
    If gay marriage can curb the AIDS epidemic perhaps it has merit. Otherwise they are simply endorsing a sexual practice that is inherently unhealthy.
    To call something "inherently unhealthy" would imply that it always has negative health consequences. This is of course not true of homosexual intercourse if sensible precautions are taken.
  11. 07 Aug '11 16:08 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by sh76
    Why is a scientific organization endorsing a political agenda?

    If, say, the American Automobile Mechanics Association endorsed tax hikes for the rich, would we pay attention to them?

    [quote]The resolution also points to evidence that ongoing political debate about marriage creates stress for gay men and lesbians and perpetuates stigmas and prejudice about "political debate about marriage" but presumably they are not pressing for that conclusion.
    Yep, politics and science, a marriage made in hell.

    Has the APA endorsed cap and trade yet?
  12. 07 Aug '11 16:09
    Originally posted by JS357
    Getting married is not usually considered a sexual practice.
    If sex is not part of the equation, then it is simply a relationship.

    Yes, it is sexual practice.
  13. 07 Aug '11 16:22
    Originally posted by whodey
    If sex is not part of the equation, then it is simply a relationship.

    Yes, it is sexual practice.
    No it isn't.
  14. Standard member Palynka
    Upward Spiral
    07 Aug '11 16:31 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by sh76
    I agree that it's not a big issue. In fact, that was kind of my point.
    No, you hinted we shouldn't pay attention and asked why a scientific organization would have a position. But feel free to ignore what I said about both these things.
  15. Standard member wittywonka
    Chocolate Expert
    07 Aug '11 16:59 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    If gay marriage can curb the AIDS epidemic perhaps it has merit. Otherwise they are simply endorsing a sexual practice that is inherently unhealthy.
    I'll bite. How is the APA's endorsement of same-sex marriage effectively an endorsement of a sexual practice? And how is the APA's endorsement of same-sex marriage an endorsement of an unhealthy practice?

    And while you're at it, go ahead and resolve for me your paternalistic concern for homosexuals affected by the HIV epidemic and your ever-present fear of government encroachment on individual liberty, too.