Homosexuality can be 'overcome': charity

They cure homosexuality?..... "through the power of Jesus Christ"?..... Oy, this is one F'ed up world.

Ya right. Homosexuality is genetic. Not a choice! And it doesn't matter if you are Christian or not. The only thing being brainwashed by bible thumbers does is create anxiety and cause mental illness. Theses charlatans who try and preach this stuff are just causing caos for the gay people. But nice try though!

For once, I agree with Kenmore and QBC.

There are genetically stupid people,

stupid people that are a product of their envirement,

and potentially smart people that choose to be stupid.

I think the later is the most common.

Ya' gotta' love this generation's bigots. One day we'll be telling our kids about these goofs in the same vein as those that thought African-Americans were "children" and Jews weren't people. There's truly no bounds for ignorance.

I prefer not to refer to homosexuals as goofs or ignorant.

And let's not forget the bigots who think that indigenous people in Canada are just a bunch of lazy drunken thieves and that there couldn't possibly be deeper problems that cause them to behave that way.

Or that they're hard working, fiscally responsible stewards of the environment.

I prefer others learn how to read before commenting. The "goofs" were the bigots (in this case, Exodus Global Alliance) and the parallels drawn were quite clear. Next time, ask for clarification instead of stumbling on in...thanks.

If you want to get technical, there's no evidence that it's genetic, just indications or theories that it is genetic (personally, I'm inclined to believe the viewpoint that it's genetic because of papers demonstrating sibling/relative trends, but that's me). This is, unfortunately, one of those topics where studies are relative and evidence is anecdotal/qualitative so coming to a firm conclusion is likely a long time away. It does not help that various forms of advocacy science have leaped into the fray in recent years.

Mind, there's no proof it isn't either, yet ironically churches use that sort of thinking to provide their point. Atheists slam churches through exactly the same sort of thought processes of "neener neener, you can't prove it and the onus in on you for proof" yet somehow this pseudo-skeptical (ie not proper way to approach the discussion) position is suddenly scientifically valid and acceptable and atheism is a fount of scientific brilliance in a religious morass of corruption and unethical behaviour.

I agree with the general response thus far. This organization is doing dick all to appropriately approach an issue and should not be given charitable status, especially since it's driving goal has been left out of many of it's applications domestically and internationally. Omitting the main goal of this movement says a lot more than anything else about what the people behind this movement think, and they know that in today's society this sort of movement is deemed wrong. Personally, I believe what they are doing is also wrong, and that the NDP, Kenmore, QBC and raydan are all correct (boy, that's all over the political spectrum) in what they said.

If you want to get technical, there's no evidence that it's genetic, just indications or theories that it is genetic (personally, I'm inclined to believe the viewpoint that it's genetic because of papers demonstrating sibling/relative trends, but that's me). This is, unfortunately, one of those topics where studies are relative and evidence is anecdotal/qualitative so coming to a firm conclusion is likely a long time away. It does not help that various forms of advocacy science have leaped into the fray in recent years.

Mind, there's no proof it isn't either, yet ironically churches use that sort of thinking to provide their point. Atheists slam churches through exactly the same sort of thought processes of "neener neener, you can't prove it and the onus in on you for proof" yet somehow this pseudo-skeptical (ie not proper way to approach the discussion) position is suddenly scientifically valid and acceptable and atheism is a fount of scientific brilliance in a religious morass of corruption and unethical behaviour.

I agree with the general response thus far. This organization is doing dick all to appropriately approach an issue and should not be given charitable status, especially since it's driving goal has been left out of many of it's applications domestically and internationally. Omitting the main goal of this movement says a lot more than anything else about what the people behind this movement think, and they know that in today's society this sort of movement is deemed wrong. Personally, I believe what they are doing is also wrong, and that the NDP, Kenmore, QBC and raydan are all correct (boy, that's all over the political spectrum) in what they said.

Excellent post. Certainly the point with me is not so much that the Church claims it can cure it as opposed to it being genetic. I also believe it to be genetic as I've seen it manifest itself quite early on in children as opposed to it simply being in adult. And you provide a good point with there being no absolute proof of homosexuality being either genetic or a choice so that both sides are rally just posturing on pseudo-science and a moral highground.

What gets my goat is not that the Church says it can change homosexuals, but that it wants to. I get the moral arguments, but still, it comes down to an organization choosing a group of people and saying that as a group they are less desirable and that should be changed.

No evidence? Interesting. I'd say that homosexuality as a largely innate sexual orientation is hardly predicated on "anecdotal" information. Besides, if it's learned, why does it transcend culture, ethnicity and history? That's a little bit more objective.

The funny thing is that we never question "being straight" to be a choice or not. It is what it is. Why is "being gay" such a point? Why should that have to be proven?

Because bigoted moron, ignorant morons think it's a "lifestyle choice", that's why