Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7
TrueBeliever

Gay Marriage

1,007 posts in this topic

Gregory Herek, Ph.D composed himself an elaborate resume for internet. He lists his 127 publications, that he served as a consultant to the U.S. Government and has been an expert witness in various monumental court cases. What he is more than anything, however, is a hero to the gay community. He is also part of it. He feeds that community a seemingly never-ending supply of writings in defense of every element of their lifestyle. The problem is that gays accept everything he says and never learn anything about their fellow gay, Gregory Herek.

The tomes of “research” churned out by Herek and his fellow gay activists under the guise of their professional status was so disturbing that the former president of the American Psychological Association said at their annual conference that their organization was being attacked by “intellectual arrogance and zealotry” because their work was being “dominated by social-activist groups.” He charged that these activists conduct research “when they know what the outcome is going to be . . . . only research with predictably favorable outcomes is permissible.”

The point was proven when at yet another conference of APA, the lesbian president would not permit a researcher to speak, saying, “I don’t know what yu are going to say, but there is nothing you and I can agree on, because you are a straight white male and I am a lesbian.” The power of the activism within an organization dedicated to professionalism is so great that this woman was president even though she had her license suspended weeks earlier for having an “improper dual relationship with a female patient.”

The problem grew to such proportions that Jeffrey Satinover, M.D. dealt with what he titled, “Judicial Abuse of scientific Literature on Homosexuality by the American Mental Health Professional Organizations.” He told of how associations permitted themselves to be used by gay activists “who distorted the research findings to serve their own socio-political aims.”

Satinover complained that when gay activists were called as expert witnesses their briefs were “sophisticated, nuanced” but their later testimony “rarely matched the references they footnoted” and almost never directly cited as corroborating evidence. Why? Because the content of their briefs were “entirely untrue.”

Now we come to Gregory Herek, from the case of Romer vs. Evans where Herek “he (Herek) distorted the findings of the authors of the research he cited; omitted available contrary evidence” that he “defined the term ‘homosexual’ in an arguable manner that worked most effectively to meet the aims of his brief - - a definition that was the outcome solely of his own work, and that deviated from widely-used, neutral scientific standards. To try to prove that same-sex attracted peple wee a well-adjusted as straights, he used the Hooker Study that is known to be “notoriously flawed, and out-of-date and in its usage in courts, has been overturned multiple times.”

In four cases where Herek was called as an “expert witness,” his briefs contained 93% of all references coming from his own works, thus his own opinions.”

In the Romer vs. Evans case, Herek referenced John Money, PhD who published in the Dutch Journal of Pedophilia, “If it (man and boy sexual relations) is consensual, it can be constructive.”

Herek referred to John de Cecco, PhD who wrote in the Journal of Homosexuality, positive comments about “intergenerational intimacy.” In other words, pedophilia.

"The malfeasance is relentless," Satinover concluded. "It is appalling beyond imagination."

Being recommended and approved to be a Congressional witness should be something positive to put in one’s resume, but if the witness is gay and is recommended by Rep. Barney Frank, the honor is diminished.

So here we have this magnificent study that “I probably didn’t read” and find it to be wanting for its lack of expanded application into the true world of research and the rules that govern it. In the 127 publications Herek has put to his credit, there is no writing addressing the need to address any negative problem existing within that community. So much for objectivity.

Now, are there heterosexual “experts” doing the same thing? You bet. Dr. Paul Cameron was so aggressive in his anti-gay campaign that his membership in APA was cancelled. But what am I doing here? Presenting a negative against the heterosexual side of the issue, something Herek and his kind fail to do. Cameron was highly criticized for calling Herek a “flaming gay” in a public debate. Cameron said that homosexuals commit 43 times more crimes per capita than do heterosexuals and I never quoted that figure. I did quote the 5-1 ratio found in other, more responsible studies.

Does Herek have the credentials to present his opinions? Yes, but he cannot build later “research” based upon his opinions while ignoring those of others. He cannot appear in court as an expert witness and cite only himself. His ability to be unbiased has been called into question numerous times and his record of influencing court decisions is dismal. In two cases, his testimony was omitted from transcripts.

Herek supported the gay marriage movement and made an official statement to the APA representing an “expert” in the field and his scientific reasoning for his support? “Love is a beautiful thing.” There was nothing more to his “professional opinion.”

So, for the person who “knows more about this than anyone here,” I did read the report even though I had read it earlier, before it was posted in this forum. I did not respond to it because it was difficult to believe anyone would really use Herek as a valid authority on questions of gay criminality and gay pedophiles.

We could provide countering experts forever. There are multiple studies to support each side of the debate. But the final conclusion is determined by arrest records, the number of victims, the FBI crime statistics, the Catholic Church scandals, the National Crime Information Center. Those numbers have no denial or offer the opportunity for challenge. The number of court convictions (yesterday, a bishop convicted for concealing multiple cases of homosexual priests molesting and raping young boys) and the subsequent data.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, has anyone yet mentioned that Europe has done perfectly well legalizing same-sex marriage without the huge spike in child abuse and rape that Dr. D predicts? I think that's worth mentioning.

Europe has 45 nations. Eleven permit same sex marriage.

This is the type of constant exaggeration, misrepresentation and manipulation of fact that represents the gay arguments, always.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is your google broken? I found this in 3 minutes.

Okay, since Taylor is offline I'll throw this out there:

Probably, Koss, Gidycz, & Wisniewski, (1987).

*edit* Maybe the second study, I don't know right now, so find it yourself.

Is your google broken? I found this in 3 minutes.

Okay, since Taylor is offline I'll throw this out there:

Probably, Koss, Gidycz, & Wisniewski, (1987).

*edit* Maybe the second study, I don't know right now, so find it yourself.

Is your google broken? I found this in 3 minutes.

Okay, since Taylor is offline I'll throw this out there:

Probably, Koss, Gidycz, & Wisniewski, (1987).

*edit* Maybe the second study, I don't know right now, so find it yourself.

Neither study, the 1987 or 2004 contained a figure so blatantly high. In fact, both studies criticize the definitions often used for rape which were expanded to create higher incident levels. An "unwanted sexual experience" was counted in the rape category even though it might mean that a boyfriend touched her breast.

No, it is not these studies and I still want to see where this figure came from.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Europe has 45 nations. Eleven permit same sex marriage.

This is the type of constant exaggeration, misrepresentation and manipulation of fact that represents the gay arguments, always.

Depends, When people throw the Europe word around, people tend to talk about Europe as only those in the EU zone - at least in the western world those in the EU are considered the "relevant Europe" or the "western Europe" this does matter because there are countries technically geographically in Europe yes, but are not in the least bit westernised nor have the culture. Many of which are not even near civil or forwards enough to be allowed near qualifying as a EU country.

That would be 27 countries then with an over all pop of 500mill. And based on these figures of those who support gay marriage or haven't made up their mind yet, some countries such as the UK represent a total of 3, when technically they really should represent 1. Got to bare in mind that the figure could be inflated because of multiple Kingdoms within nations sometimes independently handling such matters.

Edited by bLu3 de 3n3rgy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I was raised a christian, in fact I lived in a town in Texas, Keene that was about 5,000 christians, at work most the christians speak constantly of how gays are going to hell...so yes dear...I speak to living breathing face to face christians who are some of the meanest humans I have ever met.......on the other hand, some of the nicest people I know are christians.....that's lovely that your congregation is so supportive and kind...but it is the Bible that instigates this nonsense.....and as an atheist...it wasnt the people that made me one....it was reading the Bible:)

I am not a christian (I'm an atheist actually) but even I can see the difference between some Christians and the majority of them.

The Rev Phelps's of the world are no more representative of Christianity than the 9/11 terrorists are representative of Islam. All religions have their extremists who use religion as a excuse for hate. But in every religion that majority of people are pretty sane and level headed.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Europe has 45 nations. Eleven permit same sex marriage.

This is the type of constant exaggeration, misrepresentation and manipulation of fact that represents the gay arguments, always.

I didn't say all of Europe. I apologize if I forgot to mention that. I can see how that would be misconstrued. I was perfectly aware of how many nations in Europe permit same-sex marriage. Either way, you haven't addressed the fact that they are doing perfectly well after having instituted it, without the increase in child abuse/molestation you've suggested. Care to explain?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say all of Europe. I apologize if I forgot to mention that. I can see how that would be misconstrued. I was perfectly aware of how many nations in Europe permit same-sex marriage. Either way, you haven't addressed the fact that they are doing perfectly well after having instituted it, without the increase in child abuse/molestation you've suggested. Care to explain?

Studies supporting your claim? Please also note the differences in definition of molestation in Europe.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Studies supporting your claim? Please also note the differences in definition of molestation in Europe.

Do you have any studies indicating an increase in child molestation in European countries that have instituted same-sex marriage? I don't see why there should be studies explicitly supporting my position in the first place, given that my claim to begin with is that there was no significant change. If there wasn't any significant, change, why would anyone bother to do a study of it in the first place? I mean, they could, but it seems it would be a waste of time.

Edited by Arbitran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends, When people throw the Europe word around, people tend to talk about Europe as only those in the EU zone - at least in the western world those in the EU are considered the "relevant Europe" or the "western Europe" this does matter because there are countries technically geographically in Europe yes, but are not in the least bit westernised nor have the culture. Many of which are not even near civil or forwards enough to be allowed near qualifying as a EU country.

That would be 27 countries then with an over all pop of 500mill. And based on these figures of those who support gay marriage or haven't made up their mind yet, some countries such as the UK represent a total of 3, when technically they really should represent 1. Got to bare in mind that the figure could be inflated because of multiple Kingdoms within nations sometimes independently handling such matters.

Norway, Andorra, Liechtenstein, Russia . . . . they would all be interested to know that they are not relevant or that their cultures are too anemic for membership. Switzerland will be disappointed to learn they are not sufficiently advanced in spite of their Hadron Collider. Croatia will be interested to know they are not culturally qualified even though they have the oldest culture in Europe.

Do you have any studies indicating an increase in child molestation in European countries that have instituted same-sex marriage? I don't see why there should be studies explicitly supporting my position in the first place, given that my claim to begin with is that there was no significant change. If there wasn't any significant, change, why would anyone bother to do a study of it in the first place? I mean, they could, but it seems it would be a waste of time.

So you cannot support the claim you made and you want me to support the claim I didn't make?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you cannot support the claim you made and you want me to support the claim I didn't make?

I'm asking you to disprove the claim I made (for now, given that at the moment I don't have the time to go and search for a study). (And again, I don't much expect to find a study in the first place, given my proposition involves a lack of significant change from the norm; why would anyone think to do a study at all unless there was something to study?)

Edited by Arbitran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Norway, Andorra, Liechtenstein, Russia . . . . they would all be interested to know that they are not relevant or that their cultures are too anemic for membership. Switzerland will be disappointed to learn they are not sufficiently advanced in spite of their Hadron Collider. Croatia will be interested to know they are not culturally qualified even though they have the oldest culture in Europe.

Norway and Switz have partial membership as in trade membership and benefits, they also share a common culture with western Eur and don't join for their own reasons, a bit like the UK who are not fully immersed into it but take the benefits that suit from it on their own terms. Croatia is actually in the EU, they just don't get formalised as the 28th member until 2013. They are still clearing. Russia is not a western culture, it is far eastern although it is adopting it more over time. Anyway that is not what this is about - just showing how you can not trust stats and that people refer to Europe in different contexts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find there's two main problems when bringing the Cathic church scandal in.

First, the molestestations were committed by priests. The problem there is that these priests are catagorically denied the right to be with another adult of either gender. Celebacy is problematic because it's like with anything that a person bottles up: it's liable to explode at some point.

Second is that this scanal shows that the church catergorically defended pedophiles.They didn''t turn them over to the authorities, but instead simply moved them elsewhere without informing anyone (thus enabling them to do it again) and covering it up. Unfortunately, that resulted in a whole group of pedophiles being protected and able to harm more children. It's also important to note, that the priests molested bys simply because they had more access to them.

As a final point, there's an odd thing with the church. The catholic chuirch actively defended and concealed pedophiles for years. They actively put thousands of children at risk. And yet there are two odd things. First the 'not every priest is a pedophile' line is accepted, without thought. Second, although the church actively put people at risk, it is the gay community that gets the blame.

In the case of the church scandals one group, and one group alone gets the blame: ad that's the church itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm asking you to disprove the claim I made (for now, given that at the moment I don't have the time to go and search for a study). (And again, I don't much expect to find a study in the first place, given my proposition involves a lack of significant change from the norm; why would anyone think to do a study at all unless there was something to study?)

In other words, you are confessing that you posted, "Also, has anyone yet mentioned that Europe has done perfectly well legalizing same-sex marriage without the huge spike in child abuse and rape that Dr. D predicts? I think that's worth mentioning," even though you knew of no existing statistic, no study, no professional research, no governmental report, NOTHING to back it up???? And now you are asking me to "disprove" the unsubstatiated claim YOU made. It leave me in absolute awe. They should name a battleship after you.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Norway and Switz have partial membership as in trade membership and benefits, they also share a common culture with western Eur and don't join for their own reasons, a bit like the UK who are not fully immersed into it but take the benefits that suit from it on their own terms. Croatia is actually in the EU, they just don't get formalised as the 28th member until 2013. They are still clearing. Russia is not a western culture, it is far eastern although it is adopting it more over time. Anyway that is not what this is about - just showing how you can not trust stats and that people refer to Europe in different contexts.

These nations have agreements no different from what existed before the creation of the EU. and being a member of the European Economic Community cannot be translated as a “partial membership.”

Your concept of statistics is intriguing. The fact that the majority of the EU nations do not recognize gay marriage cannot be manipulated by their numbers or trying to disqualify some nation by a criteria fitting your agenda. A nation prohibiting gay marriage does not become a statistic any more than your age is a statistic to you. It is a condition representing a collective standard or principle. Nothing more, nothing less.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How stats are represented do matter when you take a country like Great Britain who could easily be perceived as representing one country and therefore one stat count for the church not accepting gay marriage. But Britain and the churches of England and Scotland are not handling the issue that way, England, Wales, North Ireland and Scotland are handling it independently - therefore that is 3 towards the stats, not 1. I don't have an agenda, I'm just saying it's a reason to question the stats and check what context of Europe is being implied. The stats themselves on what the church wants or doesn't want to do doesn't really support anything, to me that is another discussion regarding religion, and religion isn't what speaks or defines how things should be for everyone anyway.

Edited by bLu3 de 3n3rgy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other words, you are confessing that you posted, "Also, has anyone yet mentioned that Europe has done perfectly well legalizing same-sex marriage without the huge spike in child abuse and rape that Dr. D predicts? I think that's worth mentioning," even though you knew of no existing statistic, no study, no professional research, no governmental report, NOTHING to back it up???? And now you are asking me to "disprove" the unsubstatiated claim YOU made. It leave me in absolute awe. They should name a battleship after you.

Well, apart from personal experience, no, as I said, I did not feel it necessary to link a study. I should have thought it largely common knowledge, but apparently not...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, apart from personal experience, no, as I said, I did not feel it necessary to link a study. I should have thought it largely common knowledge, but apparently not...

"Also, has anyone yet mentioned that Europe has done perfectly well legalizing same-sex marriage without the huge spike in child abuse and rape that Dr. D predicts?" is common knowledge?

In March of this year, European judges ruled that gay marriage is not a human right. The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg heard the case of a lesbian couple wanting to adopt a child. The couple had gone to the higher court because French courts had denied them the adoption. Their claim was that their marriage was a representation of a “human right” which should include adoption rights. The court did not agree. Their ruling stated, “The European Convention on Human Rights does not require member states’ governments to grant same-sex couples access to marriage.”

Same sex marriage in Europe is NOT the ideal state you would like to present. The University of Bristol study (2006) stated, “In the survey, more than a third of respondents (38.4%, 266/692) said that they had experienced domestic abuse at some time in a same sex relationship. This included 40.1% (169/421) of the female and 35.2% (94/258) of the male respondents. Echoing this, individuals identifying as lesbian, gay women, or queer were most likely to say that they had experienced domestic abuse.” The amended report also indicated that many homosexual partners reported violence to the police but their complaints were not officially accepted because untrained officers viewed them as “men” and told them to settle their problems “like men.”

In Denmark, a form of homosexual marriage has been legal since 1989. Through 1995, less than 3% of Danish homosexuals had gotten married, and 28% of these marriages had already ended in divorce or death. 41% of the deaths were from AIDS.

About 3% of the gays in Norway and Sweden marry but even among that small number, divorce is more prevalent. Divorce is listed as 50% more likely with male homosexuals and 200% more likely with lesbians. Whereas heterosexual couples often stay together in the interest of their children, divorce was more common if children were living with the same-sex couple.

At the same time, European same-sex marriages are experiencing about the same statistical level of domestic violence as seen in the same partnerships in North America. This tendency toward violence cannot be responsibly denied. Do you think all these people wrote only because the topic was interesting?

A Professional's Guide to Understanding Gay and Lesbian Domestic Violence: Understanding Practice Interventions (Edwin Mellen Press Symposium Series)

The prevalence of domestic violence among Gay and Lesbian couples is approximately 25 - 33%.

Barnes, It's Just a Quarrel', American Bar Association Journal, February 1998, p. 25.

Battering among Lesbians crosses age, race, class, lifestyle and socio-economic lines.

Lobel, ed., Naming the Violence: Speaking Out About Lesbian Battering, 183 (1986).

Each year, between 50,000 and 100,000 Lesbian women and as many as 500,000 Gay men are battered.

Murphy, Queer Justice: Equal Protection for Victims of Same-Sex Domestic Violence, 30 Valparaiso University Law Review. 335 (1995).

While same-sex battering mirrors heterosexual battering both in type and prevalence, its victims receive fewer protections. Barnes, It's Just a Quarrel', American Bar Association Journal, February 1998, p. 24.

Seven states define domestic violence in a way that specifically excludes same-sex victims. States with sodomy laws basically require same-sex victims to confess to a crime in order to prove they are in a domestic relationship.

Barnes, It's Just a Quarrel', American Bar Association Journal, February 1998, p. 24.

Lundy, Abuse That Dare Not Speak Its Name: Assisting Victims of Lesbian and Gay Domestic Violence in Massachusetts, 28 New England Law Review 273 (Winter 1993).

Gay and Bisexual Domestic Violence Victimization: Challenges to Feminist Theory and Responses to Violence by Patrick Letellier. Violence and Victim, Vol 9, No 2, 1994, pp. 95-106.

ARTICLE: Same-Sex Sexual Violence

Research and Advocacy Digest, Vol 6, No. 1, December 2003 from the Washington Coalition of Sexual Assault Programs.

Brown, L. S. (1995). Therapy with Same-Sex Couples: An Introduction. In N. S. Jacobson and A. S. Gurman (Eds.), Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy (pp. 274-291). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Bryant, A. S., and Demian (1994). Relationship Characteristics of American Gay and Lesbian Couples: Findings from a National Survey. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Social Services, 1(2), 101-117.

Burke, L. K., and Follingstad, D. R. (1999). Violence in Lesbian and Gay Relationships: Theory, Prevalence, and Correlational Factors. Clinical Psychology Review, 19(5), 487-512.

Burke, T., Jordan, M. and Owen, S. (August, 2002). A Cross-National Comparison of Gay and Lesbian Domestic Violence. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 231-257.

Cruz, J. M., and Firestone, J. M. (1998). Exploring Violence and Abuse in Gay Male Relationships. Violence and Victims, 13(2), 159-173.

Cruz, J. M., and Peralta, R. L. (2001). Family Violence and Substance Use: The Perceived Effects of Substance Use Within Gay Male Relationships. Violence and Victis, 16(2), 161-172.

Davies, M., Pollard, P., and Archer, J. (2001). The Influence of Victim Gender and Sexual Orientation on Judgments of the Victim in a Depicted Stranger Rape. Violence and Victims, 16(6), 607-619.

Ford, T. M., Liwag-McLamb, M. G., and Foley, L. A. (1998). Perceptions of Rape Based on Sex and Sexual Orientation of Victim. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, Vol. 13(2), 253-263.

Gardner, R. "Method of Conflict Resolution and Characteristics of Abuse and Victimization in Heterosexual, Lesbian and Gay Male Couples." (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Georgia, 1988) Dissertation Abtracts International, 50, 746B.

Gottman, J. M., Levenson, R., Swanson, C., Swanson, K. R. , Tyson, R., and Yoshimoto, D. (2003a). Observing Gay, Lesbian and Heterosexual Couples' Relationships: Mathematical Modeling of Conflict Interaction. Journal of Homosexuality, 45(1), 65-91.

Gottman, J.M, Levenson, R.W. Gross, J., Fredrickson, B. L. McCoy, K. Rosenthal, L. Ruef, A. and Yoshimoto, D. (2003b). Correlates of gay and lesbian couples' relationship satisfaction and relationship dissolution. Journal of Homosexuality, 45(1), 23-43.

Grossman, A. H., D'Augelli, A. R., and O'Connell, T. S. (2003). Being lesbian, gay, bisexual and sixty or older in North America. In L. Garnets and D. Kimmel (Eds.), Psychological Perspectives on Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Experiences (2nd ed., pp. 629-645). New York: Columbia University Press.

Guss, J. (2000). Sex Like You Can't Even Imagine: "Crystal," Crack and Gay Men. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Psychotherapy, 3 , 105-122.

Howard, J. A. (1984a). The 'Normal' Victim: The Effects of Gender Stereotypes on Reactions to Victims. Social Psychology Quarterly 47: 270-281.

Howard, J. A. (1984b). Societal Influences on Attribution: Blaming Some Victims More than Others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 47: 494-505.

Jablow, P. M. (2000). Victims of Abuse and Discrimination: Protecting Battered Homosexuals Under Domestic Violence Legislation. Hofstra Law Review, 28, 1095-1145.

IPARV (2002). Intimate Partner Abuse and Relationship Violence. Intimate Partner Abuse and Relationship Violence Working Group, American Psychological Association.

Johnson, M. P. and Ferraro, K. J. (2000). Research on Domestic Violence in the 1990s: Making Distinctions. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 948-963.

Kurdek, L.A. (1994). The Nature and Correlates of Relationship Quality in Gay, Lesbian, and Heterosexual Cohabiting Couples: A Test of the Individual Difference, Interdependence, and Discrepancy Models. In B. Greene and G.M. Herek (Eds.), Lesbian and Gay Psychology: Theory, Research, and Clinical Issues (pp. 133-155). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Merrill, G. S. (1998). Understanding Domestic Violence Among Gay and Bisexual Men. In R. K. Bergen (Ed.), Issues in Intimate Violence (pp. 129-141). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Merril, G. S., Wolfe, V. A. (2000). Battered Gay Men: An Exploration of Abuse, help Seeking, and Why They Stay. Journal of Homosexuality, 39(2), 1-30.

Murphy, N. E., (1995). Note: Queer Justice: Equal Protection for Victims of Same Sex. Domestic Violence, 30 Valparaiso University Law Review 335, 344.

Peacock, J. R. (2000). Gay Male Adult Development: Some Stage Issues of an Older Cohort. Journal of Homosexuality 40(2), 13-29.

Sloan, L. M., and Edmond, T. (1996). Shifting the Focus: Recognizing the Needs of Lesbian and Gay Survivors of Sexual Violence. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Social Service, 5, 4, 33-51.

Turrell, S. C. (2000). A Descriptive Analysis of Same-Sex Relationship Violence for a Diverse Sample. Journal of Family Violence, 15(3), 281-293.

Williamson, T. A. (2000). The Relationship Between Formal Education/Training and the Ability of Psychologists and Marriage and Family Therapists to Assess and Intervene when Counseling with Female Victims of Domestic Violence. (Doctoral Dissertation, Claremont Graduate University, 2000) Dissertation Abstracts, International, Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 2000, Oct; Vol 61(4-A); 1311.

Wise, A. J., and Bowman, S. L. (1997). Comparison of Beginning Counselors' Responses to Lesbian vs. Heterosexual partner abuse. Violence and Victims, 12(2), 127-135.

Edited by Dr. D
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gay Marriage does not threaten staright marriage, what it does is insult the believers that their dogma is not being adhered too. It really is that simple. You guys can ramble on and on, hell I ramble on about most subjects..lol...but this one is simple...........IF YOU DON"T LIKE GAY MARRIAGE DON'T GET GAY MARRIED. If anything staright marriage is a threat to civilization...it has created many a crazy dysfunctional home and childhood. It sure left me with a mesmerizing array of neuroses.......that and my family put the DISS in function. lol

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What study?

The latter study's conclusions were that "The children in the group studied were unlikely to have been molested by identifiably gay or lesbian people."

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How stats are represented do matter when you take a country like Great Britain who could easily be perceived as representing one country and therefore one stat count for the church not accepting gay marriage. But Britain and the churches of England and Scotland are not handling the issue that way, England, Wales, North Ireland and Scotland are handling it independently - therefore that is 3 towards the stats, not 1. I don't have an agenda, I'm just saying it's a reason to question the stats and check what context of Europe is being implied. The stats themselves on what the church wants or doesn't want to do doesn't really support anything, to me that is another discussion regarding religion, and religion isn't what speaks or defines how things should be for everyone anyway.

I know of no one so unfamiliar with geography as to consider Great Britain to be a country. When did I mention the church?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me we humans either don't think enough, or think too much too long, or maybe it's just a stalling tactic so that someone doesn't have to reluctantly admit support to individuals denied a most basic civil right.....because really its not THAT difficult to fight for anothers rights.....unless you think you are far superior and your way is the only way...you know like a bigot thinks.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Also, has anyone yet mentioned that Europe has done perfectly well legalizing same-sex marriage without the huge spike in child abuse and rape that Dr. D predicts?" is common knowledge?

In March of this year, European judges ruled that gay marriage is not a human right. The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg heard the case of a lesbian couple wanting to adopt a child. The couple had gone to the higher court because French courts had denied them the adoption. Their claim was that their marriage was a representation of a “human right” which should include adoption rights. The court did not agree. Their ruling stated, “The European Convention on Human Rights does not require member states’ governments to grant same-sex couples access to marriage.”

Same sex marriage in Europe is NOT the ideal state you would like to present. The University of Bristol study (2006) stated, “In the survey, more than a third of respondents (38.4%, 266/692) said that they had experienced domestic abuse at some time in a same sex relationship. This included 40.1% (169/421) of the female and 35.2% (94/258) of the male respondents. Echoing this, individuals identifying as lesbian, gay women, or queer were most likely to say that they had experienced domestic abuse.” The amended report also indicated that many homosexual partners reported violence to the police but their complaints were not officially accepted because untrained officers viewed them as “men” and told them to settle their problems “like men.”

In Denmark, a form of homosexual marriage has been legal since 1989. Through 1995, less than 3% of Danish homosexuals had gotten married, and 28% of these marriages had already ended in divorce or death. 41% of the deaths were from AIDS.

About 3% of the gays in Norway and Sweden marry but even among that small number, divorce is more prevalent. Divorce is listed as 50% more likely with male homosexuals and 200% more likely with lesbians. Whereas heterosexual couples often stay together in the interest of their children, divorce was more common if children were living with the same-sex couple.

At the same time, European same-sex marriages are experiencing about the same statistical level of domestic violence as seen in the same partnerships in North America. This tendency toward violence cannot be responsibly denied. Do you think all these people wrote only because the topic was interesting?

A Professional's Guide to Understanding Gay and Lesbian Domestic Violence: Understanding Practice Interventions (Edwin Mellen Press Symposium Series)

The prevalence of domestic violence among Gay and Lesbian couples is approximately 25 - 33%.

Barnes, It's Just a Quarrel', American Bar Association Journal, February 1998, p. 25.

Battering among Lesbians crosses age, race, class, lifestyle and socio-economic lines.

Lobel, ed., Naming the Violence: Speaking Out About Lesbian Battering, 183 (1986).

Each year, between 50,000 and 100,000 Lesbian women and as many as 500,000 Gay men are battered.

Murphy, Queer Justice: Equal Protection for Victims of Same-Sex Domestic Violence, 30 Valparaiso University Law Review. 335 (1995).

While same-sex battering mirrors heterosexual battering both in type and prevalence, its victims receive fewer protections. Barnes, It's Just a Quarrel', American Bar Association Journal, February 1998, p. 24.

Seven states define domestic violence in a way that specifically excludes same-sex victims. States with sodomy laws basically require same-sex victims to confess to a crime in order to prove they are in a domestic relationship.

Barnes, It's Just a Quarrel', American Bar Association Journal, February 1998, p. 24.

Lundy, Abuse That Dare Not Speak Its Name: Assisting Victims of Lesbian and Gay Domestic Violence in Massachusetts, 28 New England Law Review 273 (Winter 1993).

Gay and Bisexual Domestic Violence Victimization: Challenges to Feminist Theory and Responses to Violence by Patrick Letellier. Violence and Victim, Vol 9, No 2, 1994, pp. 95-106.

ARTICLE: Same-Sex Sexual Violence

Research and Advocacy Digest, Vol 6, No. 1, December 2003 from the Washington Coalition of Sexual Assault Programs.

Brown, L. S. (1995). Therapy with Same-Sex Couples: An Introduction. In N. S. Jacobson and A. S. Gurman (Eds.), Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy (pp. 274-291). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Bryant, A. S., and Demian (1994). Relationship Characteristics of American Gay and Lesbian Couples: Findings from a National Survey. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Social Services, 1(2), 101-117.

Burke, L. K., and Follingstad, D. R. (1999). Violence in Lesbian and Gay Relationships: Theory, Prevalence, and Correlational Factors. Clinical Psychology Review, 19(5), 487-512.

Burke, T., Jordan, M. and Owen, S. (August, 2002). A Cross-National Comparison of Gay and Lesbian Domestic Violence. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 231-257.

Cruz, J. M., and Firestone, J. M. (1998). Exploring Violence and Abuse in Gay Male Relationships. Violence and Victims, 13(2), 159-173.

Cruz, J. M., and Peralta, R. L. (2001). Family Violence and Substance Use: The Perceived Effects of Substance Use Within Gay Male Relationships. Violence and Victis, 16(2), 161-172.

Davies, M., Pollard, P., and Archer, J. (2001). The Influence of Victim Gender and Sexual Orientation on Judgments of the Victim in a Depicted Stranger Rape. Violence and Victims, 16(6), 607-619.

Ford, T. M., Liwag-McLamb, M. G., and Foley, L. A. (1998). Perceptions of Rape Based on Sex and Sexual Orientation of Victim. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, Vol. 13(2), 253-263.

Gardner, R. "Method of Conflict Resolution and Characteristics of Abuse and Victimization in Heterosexual, Lesbian and Gay Male Couples." (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Georgia, 1988) Dissertation Abtracts International, 50, 746B.

Gottman, J. M., Levenson, R., Swanson, C., Swanson, K. R. , Tyson, R., and Yoshimoto, D. (2003a). Observing Gay, Lesbian and Heterosexual Couples' Relationships: Mathematical Modeling of Conflict Interaction. Journal of Homosexuality, 45(1), 65-91.

Gottman, J.M, Levenson, R.W. Gross, J., Fredrickson, B. L. McCoy, K. Rosenthal, L. Ruef, A. and Yoshimoto, D. (2003b). Correlates of gay and lesbian couples' relationship satisfaction and relationship dissolution. Journal of Homosexuality, 45(1), 23-43.

Grossman, A. H., D'Augelli, A. R., and O'Connell, T. S. (2003). Being lesbian, gay, bisexual and sixty or older in North America. In L. Garnets and D. Kimmel (Eds.), Psychological Perspectives on Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Experiences (2nd ed., pp. 629-645). New York: Columbia University Press.

Guss, J. (2000). Sex Like You Can't Even Imagine: "Crystal," Crack and Gay Men. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Psychotherapy, 3 , 105-122.

Howard, J. A. (1984a). The 'Normal' Victim: The Effects of Gender Stereotypes on Reactions to Victims. Social Psychology Quarterly 47: 270-281.

Howard, J. A. (1984b). Societal Influences on Attribution: Blaming Some Victims More than Others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 47: 494-505.

Jablow, P. M. (2000). Victims of Abuse and Discrimination: Protecting Battered Homosexuals Under Domestic Violence Legislation. Hofstra Law Review, 28, 1095-1145.

IPARV (2002). Intimate Partner Abuse and Relationship Violence. Intimate Partner Abuse and Relationship Violence Working Group, American Psychological Association.

Johnson, M. P. and Ferraro, K. J. (2000). Research on Domestic Violence in the 1990s: Making Distinctions. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 948-963.

Kurdek, L.A. (1994). The Nature and Correlates of Relationship Quality in Gay, Lesbian, and Heterosexual Cohabiting Couples: A Test of the Individual Difference, Interdependence, and Discrepancy Models. In B. Greene and G.M. Herek (Eds.), Lesbian and Gay Psychology: Theory, Research, and Clinical Issues (pp. 133-155). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Merrill, G. S. (1998). Understanding Domestic Violence Among Gay and Bisexual Men. In R. K. Bergen (Ed.), Issues in Intimate Violence (pp. 129-141). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Merril, G. S., Wolfe, V. A. (2000). Battered Gay Men: An Exploration of Abuse, help Seeking, and Why They Stay. Journal of Homosexuality, 39(2), 1-30.

Murphy, N. E., (1995). Note: Queer Justice: Equal Protection for Victims of Same Sex. Domestic Violence, 30 Valparaiso University Law Review 335, 344.

Peacock, J. R. (2000). Gay Male Adult Development: Some Stage Issues of an Older Cohort. Journal of Homosexuality 40(2), 13-29.

Sloan, L. M., and Edmond, T. (1996). Shifting the Focus: Recognizing the Needs of Lesbian and Gay Survivors of Sexual Violence. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Social Service, 5, 4, 33-51.

Turrell, S. C. (2000). A Descriptive Analysis of Same-Sex Relationship Violence for a Diverse Sample. Journal of Family Violence, 15(3), 281-293.

Williamson, T. A. (2000). The Relationship Between Formal Education/Training and the Ability of Psychologists and Marriage and Family Therapists to Assess and Intervene when Counseling with Female Victims of Domestic Violence. (Doctoral Dissertation, Claremont Graduate University, 2000) Dissertation Abstracts, International, Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 2000, Oct; Vol 61(4-A); 1311.

Wise, A. J., and Bowman, S. L. (1997). Comparison of Beginning Counselors' Responses to Lesbian vs. Heterosexual partner abuse. Violence and Victims, 12(2), 127-135.

what is the freaking point? staright couples have domestic violence? oh boy STOP all marriage cause there are cases of domestic violence?? whatever! you know courts upheld at one time that slavery of black men and women was perfectly LEGAL and ok....but it was wrong...wasn't it? I dont care what any court says gay people have a right to be married! and they will get that right.....it just takes time to cut down bigotry.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me we humans either don't think enough, or think too much too long, or maybe it's just a stalling tactic so that someone doesn't have to reluctantly admit support to individuals denied a most basic civil right.....because really its not THAT difficult to fight for anothers rights.....unless you think you are far superior and your way is the only way...you know like a bigot thinks.

Humans do not have intrinsic human rights. They have the rights their communities grant to them. Those rights will be granted based on a reality, or a perception, of what is best for all, not just the individuals effected.

For example, why shouldnt brothers and sisters be allowed to marry. ( a growing issue given sperm donation, surrogacy, and other factors) Why shouln't public sexual acts be legalised. Why should a country expect and require its young men to undertake military service and die for their country?

Who are the bigots in those issues? Why does a woman in some jurisditions have basically a unfettered and unlimited right to kill her own unborn? Why can't any adult human being, of sane mind, take their own life, legally, any time they want to?

Indeed, why should the state have any say in the regulation of marriage/legal union between people? Why is bigamy and polygamy illegal? Who are the biigots on those issues, and who are the realists? Who is "right", who is "wrong", and how do you decide?

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Humans do not have intrinsic human rights. They have the rights their communities grant to them. Those rights will be granted based on a reality, or a perception, of what is best for all, not just the individuals effected.

For example, why shouldnt brothers and sisters be allowed to marry. ( a growing issue given sperm donation, surrogacy, and other factors) Why shouln't public sexual acts be legalised. Why should a country expect and require its young men to undertake military service and die for their country?

Who are the bigots in those issues? Why does a woman in some jurisditions have basically a unfettered and unlimited right to kill her own unborn? Why can't any adult human being, of sane mind, take their own life, legally, any time they want to?

Indeed, why should the state have any say in the regulation of marriage/legal union between people? Why is bigamy and polygamy illegal? Who are the biigots on those issues, and who are the realists? Who is "right", who is "wrong", and how do you decide?

lIke I said earlier straight marriages have produced some really effed up kids and totally dysfunctional families.......to disallow gay marriage based on that same basis...is ding ding ding bigotry! saying it is ok for starights because some Bible says it is ok but not ok for gays because some allegedly holy book says it isn't ok? come on...reality time...NOW is the time to THINK for some of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Humans do not have intrinsic human rights. They have the rights their communities grant to them. Those rights will be granted based on a reality, or a perception, of what is best for all, not just the individuals effected.

How would homosexuality affect anybody besides those whom wanted to be gay married?

For example, why shouldnt brothers and sisters be allowed to marry. ( a growing issue given sperm donation, surrogacy, and other factors) Why shouln't public sexual acts be legalised. Why should a country expect and require its young men to undertake military service and die for their country?

I think drafting is bull. Most of the wars America drafts people to go fight in are pointless and stupid (i.e., the Gulf War, the Iraq War).

Who are the bigots in those issues? Why does a woman in some jurisditions have basically a unfettered and unlimited right to kill her own unborn? Why can't any adult human being, of sane mind, take their own life, legally, any time they want to?

Also bull. However, isn't the latter a mental issue?

Indeed, why should the state have any say in the regulation of marriage/legal union between people? Why is bigamy and polygamy illegal? Who are the biigots on those issues, and who are the realists? Who is "right", who is "wrong", and how do you decide?

Marriage shouldn't be in the hands of anybody--the church, the state or the feds. You could marry a tree stump for all I care.

EDIT: 900th comment!

Edited by Taylor Reints

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.