Behavioural Modification Camps in the USA - Page 13

On May 30 2011 03:08 NicolBolas wrote:
It's amazing how a post about some asshole parents wanting their daughter de-gayified by sending them to a hell-camp has degenerated into religion-bashing.



"They" do? Really?

Some of them do, but painting all Christians as anti-Gay only serves to undermine your point and turn you into exactly the kind of thing you're ostensibly struggling against. There are plenty of pro-Gay Christians around. However, because they're not of the holier-than-thou asshole variety, they don't run around with their Christianity on their sleeves to get attention.



Um, no it isn't.

The most you can say is that religion can be used as a convenient excuse. The Romans did not go to war to honor Mars. They said that, but they went to war because they were assholes and Mars was something they could use to cover that up.

If people didn't have that excuse, they'd just come up with a different one. Perhaps instead of the Crusades, it might have been a war between the nations of Europe. Or something else.

People often talk about the wars started by religion, yet nobody ever talks about the good side of religion. Probably because it doesn't get much press. The hope that it brings people. The moral compass that it helps people develop. The communities it helps to keep together. Religion isn't necessary for those things, but it isn't necessary for war either.



So you want to cast off your religion and... join a religion. You realize that Buddhism is a religion, right? Or do you just not consider it a religion because it doesn't have a God in it?

On May 28 2011 07:22 roflSloth wrote:


Read her reddit posts, she actually only mentioned it was a Mormon program because it wasn't mentioned anywhere; she even said she wouldn't have made a big deal out of it if they advertised they were Mormon.

As for the evidence, well, if you read her transcript carefully, she mentions many religious themes present in Cross Creek's program. Combine that with the staff being 95% Mormon (her words, not mine), and that's a pretty easy conclusion to make, in my opinion.


As much as I disagree with religion in general, however, I definitely agree with your point that we shouldn't bash the Mormon point of view. There are extremists and douchebags from all beliefs; Christians, Muslims, Mormons, even atheists. I definitely see too many people on TL boards instantly condemning the religion involved when things like this happen.

On May 28 2011 15:51 KwarK wrote:

This post is stupid beyond belief. You use meds to treat a physical problem. They give glasses to people whose eyes don't work. You give meds to people whose brains don't work. No more broken than someone with poor eyesight and I highly doubt you're perfect.

On May 28 2011 07:02 jdseemoreglass wrote:
Where is the evidence that this is a Mormon organization? It doesn't mention it anywhere on the site and google is turning up nothing. She said part of the evidence that it was Mormon was that she wasn't allowed to have caffeine?

I just want to get the facts straight here before we start bashing the "Mormon point of view." I know several Mormons and I know not a single one of them would support a program like this.

And just because some staff are Mormon doesn't make it a Mormon organization either.

On May 30 2011 04:10 Barrin wrote:

It's actually funny because you're starting to remind of me of my very devout Mormon mother. She can't help herself but to assume things and make inferences off of pretty much everything. Trust me, I rarely mean more than what I'm literally saying. All I said was that I prefer not to interact with gay people (and also that I would never bother them about it unless they asked me or out etc. which hasn't even happened in a long time), not that I never or even rarely have. When I said "gay people telling me from their own mouths" it doesn't necessarily rule out the possibility that they weren't even directing their words right at me (it could mean that I just overheard conversations). But actually it's all three: One person has indeed talked directly to me about it, I have overheard multiple conversations (if you really want to know I used to be a patient in a mental institution for severe depression many years ago, which is also where most of my less-than-pleasant encounters with gay people happened (I actually love life nowadays btw)), and I've also just read about them (both people writing about them and them writing about themselves).

The funny thing is that from your point of view i.e.

is that there were indeed factors that help cause me to become straight (instead of bi). If I'm not mistaken, I basically mentioned that many posts ago. In fact I can definitely recognize masculine beauty when I see it, but never have I wanted to fuck it.

But like I said I never said or even thought that gay people need treatment, so you're pretty much just as bad as those religious people who say that gays do.


Actually what I said was it would relieve "tension". Think about it. If a person cannot enjoy heterosexual activity, then they can never really get to have sex with someone unless they do homosexual acts. Are you not aware what happens to a person when they cannot have sex for a very long period of time? That's the tension I was talking about.

You know I actually gave you plenty of material to work with if you had just thought about it rationally for a moment.



If you think about this for a moment and use your awesome inference skills, it's not hard to come to the conclusion that I think pretty much everyone has the capacity to perform and enjoy homosexual acts (when they're ready) from birth. This doesn't inherently mean that they will, of course, so it doesn't necessarily mean that I think people are born "gay". In fact this is an argument to suggest that they chose to be gay (but like I said, I don't really think there's enough information either way).

On that note, I think I've given plenty of evidence to suggest that it might actually be a choice (and have essentially proven that it is for some people, just like it's my choice to stay straight (even though I didn't choose the experiences that lead me to be)).

---

I'm not really sure why you seem to have some kind of vendetta against me. I am not a part of these religious people that oppress gays (and nor have I done so independently). If you haven't realized all I was doing was explaining the Mormon's thought process (something I don't necessarily agree with, and even though it is flawed does not make it wholly illogical (I pity people who choose a side without trying to understand all sides)). The only thing I did that could have possibly offended you is that I do not think there is enough evidence to suggest that people can be "born gay". I only presented the information I know: that some people do essentially choose to be gay (much in the same way that gamers decide to play games). I even admitted multiple times that I do not know enough about it to come to a conclusion one way or the other (which is almost an open invitation for you to logically show me why you think one way or the other).

I tried to be nice, but it's clear that no amount of logic is going to convince you that what you believe in might be wrong (wow... that sounds a lot like religious people doesn't it). Think, man.

On May 30 2011 00:17 Olinim wrote:

No, that's a blatant lie or just plain ignorance.


'If a man has sex with a man in same way as with a woman, they have committed an abomination. They are certainly to be put to death.'

While it is certainly true that most Christians deviate away from this, and certainly would not kill a homosexual, it merely is a testament to the fickleness of religion.


Leviticus 18:22 (New International Version)

22 “‘Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.

On May 30 2011 05:10 Qaz wrote:


It's important to realize that the Bible reflects the time in which it was written, and while some Christians still follow the Bible word for word (often fundamentalists who use specific quotes out of context), the vast majority have taken a more figurative approach where the message, rather than the story is key.

The book of leviticus was meant to give guidelines to Israelites away from the pagan religions of Egypt. For a large part of the Christian faith, not all these rules apply today.

One purpose of religion is to support a code of ethics (to make better, kinder people). There is no justification for such demeaning and damaging treatment of children.