Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Monday, August 27, 2007
Mike Adams :: Townhall.com Columnist
Of Mice and Mormons
by Mike Adams
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Once upon a time, there was a man named Darwin West who decided to enroll in the master’s degree program at Purdue University Calumet so he could study Marriage and Family Therapy. Because he was a member of the LDS Church he subscribed to its belief that sex is to be confined to marriage, which is a lifetime commitment between one man and one woman.

The year after he enrolled in the master’s program, Mr. West worked for LDS Family Services. This was to fulfill some of the practicum hours required for the master’s program. At least three other students in the program had worked for LDS Family Services before Mr. West. All were allowed to count their hours toward the practicum requirement.

During Mr. West’s first year at Purdue, no faculty member ever raised any concerns about his academic performance. No one expressed concerns over his ability to relate to other classmates or potential clients. He had a good year.

But, then, the next summer, one Professor Trepper agreed to meet with the director of LDS Family Services. This was so they could formalize the relationship with the master’s program so it would be an officially recognized training site for students. But, alas, the meeting never occurred.

Later on that summer, Mr. West met with a young male who sought counseling from LDS Family Services. The teenager felt attracted to other men and wanted help so he could overcome those desires. After talking with the teen, Mr. West mentioned the situation to his supervisor, Professor Hecker. Mr. West had never discussed this type of situation in any of his classes so he wanted guidance. Because Professor Hecker was confused, she asked many questions about the work Mr. West was doing at LDS Family Services.

The next week, Professor Hecker informed Mr. West that he could no longer help the teen who wanted to overcome his attraction to other men. Instead, she said that he had to help the client embrace the desires he was trying to extinguish. Mr. West was confused because this was the opposite of what the client came to LDS Family Services to receive. But she was insistent.

Mr. West then asked the learned professor whether therapists are ethically bound to help a client reach his goals rather than to advance the therapist’s political agenda. And he further asked Professor Hecker if she would want Mr. West to change his views concerning the matter simply because she disagreed with him. The good professor was visibly shaken by the question.

Not long after Mr. West’s conversation with Professor Hecker, Professor Trepper decided that LDS Family Services was no longer a good place for practicum students to work. Professor Trepper informed Mr. West that none of his hours there would count towards his degree. Mr. West was very upset.

At the end of the next semester, Mr. West met with Professor Wetchler to receive his semester evaluation. Until that point, no faculty members had raised concerns over his academic or professional performance. But Professor Wetchler suddenly announced that the faculty had discussed his file and that he was in jeopardy of being kicked out of the program.

Mr. West was shocked and inquired into the reason for this drastic change in his standing with the program. Professor Wetchler admitted that Professor Hecker had relayed some of Mr. West’s questions concerning counseling the teen who wanted help getting rid of his same-sex attractions. From these questions, it was concluded that Mr. West had trouble dealing with clients who engaged in homosexual conduct. Professor Wetchler also admitted that Professor Trepper had expressed a concern regarding Mr. West’s values as they relate to sexuality.

Still in shock, Mr. West consulted with one Professor Byrd at the University of Utah School of Medicine. Byrd mentioned the possibility of challenging the bias, discrimination, and intimidation at Purdue. But Mr. West wanted to graduate, so he did not take any legal action against them.

A few days later, Mr. West met with Professor Trepper to discuss his concerns with Mr. West’s performance. Professor Trepper said he had been intimidated by Mr. West, despite his position high above West in the program’s hierarchy. It seems Trepper had his concerns about Mr. West’s conservative beliefs regarding sexuality.

Mr. West did not hear anything more about being kicked out of the program that year. He continued earning straight “A”s and thinking all was well. But things were not well. Things were not well at all.

…To be continued.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Mike Adams is a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington and author of Feminists Say the Darndest Things: A Politically Incorrect Professor Confronts "Womyn" On Campus.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to receive Mike Adams' column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.

Marriage
What is the first (the main) definition of marriage in any standard English dictionary?

What is the definition of marriage in our local or state or federal laws?

Freedom..
Hey, Mr. Freedom..here is my e-mail

adams_dean@sbcglobal.net

I hope we can keep these topcs going. I have a TH blog "Tenore" but I haven't figured out how to update it very well.

renny: Hope we can talk..

tenmore, renny
thanks. If you want to coninue offline, my email is freedomresponsibility1@yahoo.com

enjoy a good labor day weekend..

Freedom, renny
I gather that you may belong to the LDS Church, as do I.

If "renny" sees this I hope he will not think we are ganging up on him. He is obviously a very good student of the scriptures and I would also like to communicate with him.

You also. I am 76 yrs old so you are probably faster than I am, but you last post was well done.

I'll watch for you. By the way, I have 2 ID's, "Tenore" and "Tenore2" since I also use my business e-mail.

Renny
Thank you for your response. Though I don't share all of them, nevertheless, it is wonderful to see people as yourself willing to discuss the doctrine of salvation!

If i may, your line of reasoning has certain implications. Here is what struck me:

First, to me, a belief does not save, per se. The belief must be based on truth.

1) Truth #1 - Christ is the only name that saves (Acts 4:12). He put no time limit on that. It is the only name for all people, of all times, whereby they can be saved. The God of Abraham can't save, unless that God is Christ. I believe Christ was the God of Abraham before birth, and is the Son of God in the NT.

2) If you maintain that the name of Christ was not taught in the OT times, then it is impossible for all people born before Christ to be saved if you adhere to Truth #1 per your reasoning.

3) Truth #2 it doesn't matter what men believe - what religious persuasion they hold to if it is not true and authorized by Heaven. Opinion and belief will not save - only belief in true principles and recognized authority from heaven saves.

4) If #2 above is correct, then God is not just. Else how can He damn every one of His children because they were simply unfortunate to be born before Christ was born? Christ himself said that unless we are born of water and spirit, we cannot be saved (John 3:5)

How do you reconile this in your beliefs?

There is some light on how the plan is to work for these people who lived before, in the NT. See 1 Corinthians 15:29, and 1 Peter 3:18-20, and 1 Peter 4:6.

Love to hear your thoughts..can discuss offline as well if you desire. I'll provide an email addrss if you like.



No one has to subscribe to
someone else' beliefs in practicing religion. I don't believe in the treatment of women by orthodox Jews like the Hasidim. I certainly don't agree with the jihadist elements of Islam.

Actually, as far as Old Test. Hebrews are concerned, Jews believe they will be raised by their Messiah on their judgment day. Jews of the Old Test. and New Test. have their own beliefs in the afterlife. It isn't the same as Chrisians'.

You are free to pray for Abraham, but the God of Abraham will care for him.

I personally do not believe Christ meant offering himself as a sacrifice for mankind meant he then excluded the world not official members of some recognized church. In Jesus' lifetime, there was no Christian Church.

renny
Actually the gentiles were taught the gospel and the first gentile baptism of record was performed by Ananias. This occured after Peter received a revelation that taught Peter that the Gospel was to include the gentiles.

One of the truly remarkable dissertations was given by Steven as recorded in Acts 7. Here it is disclosed that the gospel was taken away from the majority of the Israelites because of their stiffneckedness (rebellion). They were then given the Law of Moses as a school to prepare them for the eventual revelation of Christ.

I find it very difficult to understand how someone can read the New Testament and not realize that it was a result of the Old Testament.

It is also important to realize that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Ephraim, etc. did NOT live under the Law of Moses. Again, a careful and prayerful study (not just reading but study, ponder and pray about) will, I affirm, reveal this to you.

You might also think about how God reveals His truths to mankind (definitely including women). As paul said in I Cor 2:10-14, the Spirit of the Lord is the only means to discern spiritual things.

Now, please do not accuse me of saying you are not spiritual, but sometimes we can be led by others. Each of us must find the truth for ourselves.

This thread is running out, but I for one will continue if you, or others wish. I also have activated a blog "Tenore" where I plan to spend as much time as possible on these subjects.

Gospel of Jesus Christ taught in OT
The entire 7th chapter of Acts, as well as the last half of the 17th chapter, refutes the dispensationalist viewpoint. It is true that the mechanisms of the Gospel preached to Moses or Isaiah was different from that mouthed by Peter, but the underlying Gospel was the same. Job 14:14 shows that the ancients knew the Gospel (see 1 Cor 15:1~7).

Paul also makes the point in Gal 3:8 "And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed." Abraham received the Gospel, and his righteousness (most definitely including his faith in Christ) saved him.

For anyone to claim that Gospel was unknown to the Old Testament people is to must deny the vast
treasury of scripture that reveals the opposite.

The point is that since the ancestors of Jesus knew His words, their practice of polygyny was in accord with that Gospel. I have shown that God *gave* David his wives and threatened to give them one of David's neighbors. We have seen that married men were not excused from taking their brother's widows -- God commanded polygyny in that case. We have seen that Paul (and other Apostles) failed to denounce polygyny when he discussed related issues. The fabric of scripture, from Genesis to Revelation, is one piece, coming from one God, Whose focus is to save His creation unto Himself.

Le
==
Please visit http://www.schoolandstate.org

Renny
I appreciate your comments. However, if you don't believe Christ and His Gospel was taught during OT times, then you must explain how can these people be saved and inherit eternal life? Or, do they have no chance? Moses, Job, Abraham, Noah, Isaiah, and others, how could they be saved if they knew nothing of Christ?

Scriptures are clear that there is no other name given that men and women are saved save by Christ. (Acts 4:12). And if God is an unchangable God, and no respector of persons, he must have shown the way of salvation to the OT people (why then did God take so much effort calling and raising up prophets?) The Christ was known of and worshipped long before his birth as the babe in Bethlehem.

LS
Your comment greatly interested me:

"The Bible does make the point of a nation of Priests (and even of prophets) -- my statement was not that it is invalid, but that no one in the orthodox world practices the concept. Does the average Promise Keeper, for instance, claim to be a "Priest of the Most High God". If so, I have never heard it."

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints does believe and claim that this royal priesthood has been restored, and all worthy male members can be priests to the Most High. In fact, here is a test to discern where the true authority resides. The true authority of God would have to comply with this pattern you so aptly describe.

Once you find this true authority, issues like polygamy and other difficult concepts from ancient scripture are made very easy to understand - because divine authority and revelation from God can instruct. How difficult it is today to make headway from only the Bible! Just looking at these posts only confirm that it's impossible to reason a concept out from only the scriptures. Authority and Revelation are needed - desparately needed.

If you think Christianity
is taught in the Old. Test., believe what you wish, but you aren't actually comprehending the text.

You can't have Christianity before Jesus, and you simply cannot claim that ancient Hebrews of 700-600 bc believed in Christianity, which became a practice that BROKE AWAY from Judaism c. the time of Saul (St. Psul)--a generation after Jesus--as it was Saul who turned the "Christian reform" movement that was functioning within Temple Judaism into a Gentile religion.

I also never said there was NO poyugamy in Jesus' time. I said it was not the common practice it had been centuries earlier. The world of the prophets was MANY CENTURIES before Christ, just like the times of Columbus and Elizabeth I are not our times. The times of the original Books of Moses are much greater than a thousand years before Christ. You cannot quote from anywhere in the Bible out of context and then apply it Jesus' life.

To be really accurate, Jesus as a practicing Jew of his day, a rabbi, did not have an Old Testament. Modern Judaism such as we know it, even the most orthodox, will not be invented until after Jesus' time.

Carbuncle
Gee, I said one for you, too.

"Pertenent" should be "Pertinent"
No child deserve the 12-year sentence.
Save yours from the government's youth
concentration camps.

Le
==
Please visit http://www.schoolandstate.org

Van and jo j
Hopefully you won't be angry because I said a prayer for you.

Pertenent to the article -- HOW?
As I said in my post on August, 27, 2007 7:36 PM: "It is most annoying to read ignorant posters try to make the Bible say what they believe, rather than what it actually says."

As Tenore pointed out, the Bible imposes an obligation on a married man to take his widowed sister-in-law as his plural wife if the dead brother had no offspring. Assuming the God of the Bible is "the same yesterday, today and forever", as I do, it is implausible to also assume that He repudiates all polygynists. He never says He does, and even the most restrictive biblical passages do not demand monogyny of all believers, no matter how we read them while respecting the words of the Greek or Hebrew.

The Bible does make the point of a nation of Priests (and even of prophets) -- my statement was not that it is invalid, but that no one in the orthodox world practices the concept. Does the average Promise Keeper, for instance, claim to be a "Priest of the Most High God". If so, I have never heard it. Thus, for anyone to use that ignored principle as a reason for monogyny is itself a fallacy.

Le
==
Please visit http://www.schoolandstate.org

ddoouubbllee
The postin on this thread is strange. Sorry about the duplicates.

Van the Gay Man
Van would use this very same argument to make us all believe that homosexuality is natural and should therefore be accepted into society...just like incest, bestiality, and pedophilia.

Van's argument is that because it's an urge, it must be embraced so that the human mind is not "mutilated"...when in fact, acting on many urges that appear "natural" can be indeed detrimental.

It's easy to see from Van's arguments that he does not prescribe to constraint, self-control, or restraint. In Van's world, it's "do as you please because that's what you like"...eat, drink and be merry. For tomorrow we shall die".

renny, LS, etal
16. Jesus later appeared to the eleven Apostles and demonstrated that His resurrection was physical; not spiritual!
17. Jesus abode with His Apostles and other disciples for 40 days after His resurrection.
18. Jesus ascended in the sight of the Apostles while two withnesses (angels) affirmed that He would return someday in a like manner.

This is the Jesus Christ that I not only believe was the Savior, but I also believe what He said. "If ye love me, keep my commandments."

I am going to post this; you, or anyone else, is invited to comment if you choose to do so.

But, please pay me the respect of respecting my sincere faith in Christ, and I am, therefore a Christian!

renny, LS, etal
16. Jesus later appeared to the eleven Apostles and demonstrated that His resurrection was physical; not spiritual!
17. Jesus abode with His Apostles and other disciples for 40 days after His resurrection.
18. Jesus ascended in the sight of the Apostles while two withnesses (angels) affirmed that He would return someday in a like manner.

This is the Jesus Christ that I not only believe was the Savior, but I also believe what He said. "If ye love me, keep my commandments."

I am going to post this; you, or anyone else, is invited to comment if you choose to do so.

But, please pay me the respect of respecting my sincere faith in Christ, and I am, therefore a Christian!

renny, LS, etal
1. Jesus Christ was chosen to be our Savior before the foundations of the world were laid, before the earth was created.
2. The prophets of the Old Testament were called by God; check out, for example; Moses walked and talked with God.
3. The prophets of the Old Testament knew of Christ, including Moses. (The two trips Moses made up the mountain has more significance than most realize.)
4. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Joseph knew of Christ.
5. John the Baptist knew of Christ while still in his mother's womb.
6. Jesus was born of a virgin named Mary, His Father was God The Father. (Mary was not born of a virgin, just to clarify.)
7. Jesus was obedient to His Father's commandments, including undergoing baptism by John; John had the authority to perform this ordinance.
8. Jesus selected twelve special witnesses (Apostles) and sent other seventy (ordained) to teach the Gospel.
9. Jesus organized a Church and, after His death, the authority to act in His name was given to the twelve.
10. Jesus suffered tremendous pain and suffering in the Garden of Gethsemane; He sweat great drops of blood while there.
11. Jesus was condemned by His "Friends" (see Isaiah, 54, etal.) and was hung on a tree to die.
12. Jesus was buried, and resurrected on the following Sunday (Friday was the day of death).
13. Jesus was resurrected with a physical body that still had the wounds that were inflicted while on the cross.
14. Jesus appeared to Mary after His resurrection and as Mary attempted to embrace Him, she was told not to touch Him since He had not yet been to the Father.
15. Jesus informed her that He was going to ascend to His Father and to her Father; to His God and to her God.
(TBC)

renny, LS, etal
1. Jesus Christ was chosen to be our Savior before the foundations of the world were laid, before the earth was created.
2. The prophets of the Old Testament were called by God; check out, for example; Moses walked and talked with God.
3. The prophets of the Old Testament knew of Christ, including Moses. (The two trips Moses made up the mountain has more significance than most realize.)
4. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Joseph knew of Christ.
5. John the Baptist knew of Christ while still in his mother's womb.
6. Jesus was born of a virgin named Mary, His Father was God The Father. (Mary was not born of a virgin, just to clarify.)
7. Jesus was obedient to His Father's commandments, including undergoing baptism by John; John had the authority to perform this ordinance.
8. Jesus selected twelve special witnesses (Apostles) and sent other seventy (ordained) to teach the Gospel.
9. Jesus organized a Church and, after His death, the authority to act in His name was given to the twelve.
10. Jesus suffered tremendous pain and suffering in the Garden of Gethsemane; He sweat great drops of blood while there.
11. Jesus was condemned by His "Friends" (see Isaiah, 54, etal.) and was hung on a tree to die.
12. Jesus was buried, and resurrected on the following Sunday (Friday was the day of death).
13. Jesus was resurrected with a physical body that still had the wounds that were inflicted while on the cross.
14. Jesus appeared to Mary after His resurrection and as Mary attempted to embrace Him, she was told not to touch Him since He had not yet been to the Father.
15. Jesus informed her that He was going to ascend to His Father and to her Father; to His God and to her God.
(TBC)

renny; LS
The subjects of Christianity and polygamy can be very devisive and subject to much speculation.

I do not believe this is the best forum for an effective and informative discussion. There are so many viewpoints that can be taken and if we are not careful, it is posible to create an air of hostility where none should exist. Those who believe the Bible should not become opponents; we should instead try to find the truth as far as we are enlightened.

There is little doubt that polygamy was practiced in the Jewish community; consider the parable of the brother of a deceased man who had a responsibility to raise up seed in his brother's name. Christ did not say that if you are "not married" you should do this; it was an implied responsibility regardless of the marital status of the survivng brother.

Just so that I do not lead you to think I am deceiving anyone, I will state, as I have in other posts, that I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints. I am well acquainted with the position many will take that I am, therefore, not a Christian. I may not be a Christian as defined by the Pope, or Ted Haggart, or other "Christians" but I believe as follows:

renny, LS
The subjects of Christianity and polygamy can be very devisive and subject to much speculation.

I do not believe this is the best forum for an effective and informative discussion. There are so many viewpoints that can be taken and if we are not careful, it is posible to create an air of hostility where none should exist. Those who believe the Bible should not become opponents; we should instead try to find the truth as far as we are enlightened.

There is little doubt that polygamy was practiced in the Jewish community; consider the parable of the brother ao a deceased man who had a responsibility to raise up seed in his brother's name. Christ did not say that if you are "not married" you should do this; it was an implied responsibility regardless of the marital status of the survivng brother.

Just so that I do not lead you to think I am deceiving anyone, I will state, as I have in other posts, that I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints. I am well acquainted with the position many will take that I am, therefore, not a Christian. I may not be a Christian as defined by the Pope, or Ted Haggart, or other "Christians" but I believe as follows:
(TBC)

renny; LS
The subjects of Christianity and polygamy can be very devisive and subject to much speculation.

I do not believe this is the best forum for an effective and informative discussion. There are so many viewpoints that can be taken and if we are not careful, it is posible to create an air of hostility where none should exist. Those who believe the Bible should not become opponents; we should instead try to find the truth as far as we are enlightened.

There is little doubt that polygamy was practiced in the Jewish community; consider the parable of the brother of a deceased man who had a responsibility to raise up seed in his brother's name. Christ did not say that if you are "not married" you should do this; it was an implied responsibility regardless of the marital status of the survivng brother.

Just so that I do not lead you to think I am deceiving anyone, I will state, as I have in other posts, that I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints. I am well acquainted with the position many will take that I am, therefore, not a Christian. I may not be a Christian as defined by the Pope, or Ted Haggart, or other "Christians" but I believe as follows:
(TBC)

Renny
And one follow on point, if Christ wasn't taught in the OT world, are all of the people not saved, because they had the unfortunate luck to be born before He came? The Savior said that we all must believe, repent, be baptised to be saved. Would be a very unjust God to not save those people. But Christ was taught, and they all looked forward, as we all look backward, to the great and infinite sacrifice that saves us all. I would honestly be interested to hear your views on how the OT world are saved? What happens to them in your view?

LS
Hi LS,

Read with interest your comments. Really enjoyed it. Your comment:

"Then, too, it seems odd that no orthodox church (and few others) recognize this "nation of priests" John notes. There are no "Priesthood Orders" among the laity in the Baptist or Episcopal church. "

But the NT does talk to this is few places. In my mind God does want a nation of kings/priests:

1) 1 Peter 2:9: "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light"

2) Rev 1:5-6: "And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen"

The concept of a nation of saints, holding the priesthood, a peculiar people, has been a dominant theme through both the Old and New Testaments.

For RENNY:

Your comment "Christianity is not "taught" in the Old Test. Most of the remarks alluding to the Old Test. are attempts to legitamize Christ as a "foretold" religious leader" is unfortunately completely incorrect. He was taught from Day 1:

I cannot see how one can read Isaiah 53 and come away with the idea that Christ was not taught in the OT. Indeed, the entire Law of Moses, with it's ordinances, performances, and sacrifices was to point the people to Christ, the Great Sacrifice. One cannot see the story of Abraham and Issac as but the symbol to the entire OT world of the sacrifice of the Son of God for the sins of the world. These are just 3 examples. All the prophets testified of Christ, to one degree or another.

Norman
"If Van had been intellectually honest he would have either discussed the issue at hand, or kept out of it altogether. Instead he chose to twist the facts and attack the Conservative. That's mighty tolerant don't you think?"

Excuse me, but Van wasn't attacked for being intellectually dishonest and attacking conservatives - that's done all the time, in the reverse on this blog.

Van was attacked for not quoting the bible to condemn gays and not sucking up to "Dr." Adams.

Wisewoman
Don't know if you are reading this still, but I'm wondering if you have read anything about the psychopathology of attitudes/fears towards homosexuality.

I just decided to print out this entire thread and do some research on my own.

No Jesus and "wives" statement
If you search the N. Test. for "Jesus wife" you get three hits and all refer to a person with one wife.

"Jesus wives" gets no answer.

"Jesus marriage" gets three responses, two of them for the wedding at Cana.

"Jesus wedding" produces no reponses.

Polygamy was not common in the Middle East of the first century "before" Christ, Jesus' time. It was common throughout the area c. 1000 bc and before. That't OLD TESTAMENT time.

I stated previously Saul (St. Paul) speaks of marriage, but Christ doesn't. To argue Christianity and the Bible, it helps to know Christianity and the Bible.

This may be an absolutely stupid statement but much that is part of "Christian tradition" like the Holy Grail and all the orthodoxies' saints ARE NOT in the Bible. Protestants don't have any saints. Eastern or the Greek Orthodox Church celebrates Christmas and Easter on different dates than most Western churches. Christmas trees and Easter bunnies are not Christian symbols, but either holiday decorations or ancient pagan symbols anachronized into the present.

Polygamy and child brides
People who make the case for homosexuality as being "normal", tend to ignore the fact that it is actually easier to make the case for polygamy and child brides than for homosexual unions. They blather on about "consenting adults", while so much of human history required neither for a marraige. It is very euro-centric to confine our ideas about marraige to the Western model, when most of humanity has not followed it.

In an arranged marraige, the parents take into consideration the best interest of their child, rather than leaving the most important decision of their lives up to hormones and seduction. In a polygamous marraige, a man generously provides for the well-being of many women. Prove this wrong, without relying on your Western bias.

This is the problem with detaching morality and public interest from the institution of marraige: you can justify just about anything you want.

Homosexuality as pathology
The core question in determining a pathology is whether the feelings or behaviour interfere with the patient's quality of life. In the case cited in this column, the young man was feeling tremendous stress as a result of his same-sex attractions, and as such it should qualify as a pathology. The problem is that many mental health professionals see conventional morality as the pathology, and try to extinguish the conscience rather than the illness.

I don't know why we're on polygyny II
Why, if Paul had needed to convey a divine decree against such marriages, did he bother to mention bishop and deacons specifically, but not the Saints in general? The only reason is that God does not condemn polygynists, unless He limits the practice (as in 1 Tim 3:2, 12). When Paul condemned the Corinthians for tolerating fornication among them (1 Cor 5:1), why did he not condemn the father for having a plural wife, rather than just the son for having had sex with the second?

Le
==
Please visit http://www.schoolandstate.org

I don't know why we're on polygyny I
jacob the barbarian sez:

>> The implication [of 1 Timothy 3:2] is clear that a man of a single wife is preferred
>> for service in the church. Also since we are all called to be priest in the church:
>> [see Rev 1:5b-6]

Two points:

The Greek word episkopos [overseer in your "translation"] is the direct ancestor of "bishop"--trying to make the passage generic to "Elders" and "Pastors" is fallacious. Furthermore, the office of "priest" is substantially different from those of elders and pastors. So no legitimate connection is reasonable among them.

Then, too, it seems odd that no orthodox church (and few others) recognize this "nation of priests" John notes. There are no "Priesthood Orders" among the laity in the Baptist or Episcopal church.

You can't find it because it doesn't exist in the New Testament. It's in the Old, and even then, it's not what you claim. God commanded Moses that if a man took a second wife, and stopped loving his first wife, he was not to hurt her. He ad to give her her food, clothing, etc., and "marital rights", even so.

There is no condemnation of plural marriages in the Bible, neither the Old nor New Testament. I have been looking for decades and cannot find one, and no one I have ever heard or read had found one. As I said, in the three places (2 in 1 Timothy) where it would have been most logical to find such a commandment, that law does not appear.

Le
==
Please visit http://www.schoolandstate.org

sloopy
The third option would be for the therapist to only agree to help the patient in ways that are likely to be to the psychological benefit of the patient.

A patient who comes in to see a therapist because she would like to lose wait, but has a psychological block against purging after meals should not be treated so that she finds it easier to purge after meals.

To the degree that it is harmful to a homosexual man to delude himself into living as if he were straight, it would be similarly irresponsible for a therapist to help aid in such a delusion.

If the department at Purdue Calumet believes that such therapy is harmful to its patients, it is not surprising that they would not want to lend their authority to such a thing.

Although as the story is playing out above, it appears that they did grant a degree to Mr West but they did not grant the counseling service that included this type of counseling with its ok. This hardly makes them seem like they are on a crusade against the LDS church.

sloopy
The third option would be for the therapist to only agree to help the patient in ways that are likely to be to the psychological benefit of the patient.

A patient who comes in to see a therapist because she would like to lose wait, but has a psychological block against purging after meals should not be treated so that she finds it easier to purge after meals.

To the degree that it is harmful to a homosexual man to delude himself into living as if he were straight, it would be similarly irresponsible for a therapist to help aid in such a delusion.

If the department at Purdue Calumet believes that such therapy is harmful to its patients, it is not surprising that they would not want to lend their authority to such a thing.

Although as the story is playing out above, it appears that they did grant a degree to Mr West but they did not grant the counseling service that included this type of counseling with its ok. This hardly makes them seem like they are on a crusade against the LDS church.

LS: On Polygamy
Paul did have something to say on the subject of polygamy:

1 Timothy 3:2 "Therefore an overseer(Elder or Pastor) must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,"

The implication is clear that a man of a single wife is preferred for service in the church. Also since we are all called to be priest in the church:

Rev 1:5b-6 "To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood 6and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father"

If we are all called, then a single wife is the proper course.

Further, though I cannot find it, find I recall a passage in which Christ said that if one has more than one wife one must love each of them equally, which is impossible for man.

TurnLeft –Done Left Leave of Reality
“Of course, the APA is just a left-wing radical commie group, right?”

In my opinion, the APA’s position on the subject of the deviant behavior of sodomites has forfeited any claim they may have to legitimacy. It should be no surprise that they deny the validity of conversions of homosexuals, considering their utterly dismal failure to affect real cures for mental illness. I can respect their skill at recognizing and classifying personality types, but when it comes to remedial care, they offer little lasting benefit. The use of mind altering drugs to control mental illness is not a cure. What else can they point to as a profession? So, it is easy to see why they would say that it is wrong to attempt to change the behavior of homosexuals, as professionals, they have demonstrated that they can’t. But the same can be said of most other mental disorders which they cannot cure. Their solution, turn them out of the asylums, fill the streets with helpless, mentally ill individuals. Oh yea, we should look to the APA for the answer, not…

I wouldn’t call them a left-wing commie group, that would be the NEA. I would call them a community of quacks, who have wondered from their field and dare to tell us about morality.

call to authority
Christianity is not "taught" in the Old Test. Most of the remarks alluding to the Old Test. are attempts to legitamize Christ as a "foretold" religious leader.

Regardless, my pt. was polygamy--the assertion made by another--is not promoted in the N. Test. And the polygamy of the time was cultural (throughout the entire "Middle East") and at one pt. explained as a necessity due to fatherless families, so there is some reason to believe it wasn't the "ideal." Ideals are always hard to practice.

My other pt. is that people who rummage the Old Test. to disparage Christianity miss the pt.: the New Test. is theoretically a new direction, partly because Christianity broke from Judaism and became a Gentile religion and because this new faith acknowledged its continuation from the Torah.

The canon of the N. Test. has fluctuated for centuries. Puritans took out the Book of Nancy. Catholics do not have exactly the same lexicon as most Prostestants. When exactly each book of either of the Test.'s were written is not fixed by scholarly agreement. Archeologists dispute between the meximalists and minimalists if and what the kingdoms of Solomon and David were, if they were. Those disputes, however, are not reasons or bases for the hatred and loathing people with little knowledge express for Christianity.






Van
Here's some help for you dear:
http://www.amazon.com
Buy a dictionary, an English grammar book,a copy of "See Spot Run" and some tape. Then tape your mouth shut and stay off the keyboard until you learn to read for context and learn to write and spell. You noxious rantings are bad enough due to a lack of understanding of the subject at hand, your egregious lack of spelling skills makes wading through your rants even more laborious. I will be skipping over them in the future.

Unfortunately...
Homosexuality used to be classified as a Psychiatric dosorder which could be treated. Now it has been removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (the "Bible of Mental disorders). The APA has condemned attempts to reorient sexual preference (at least, of homosexuals--I suspect they wouldn't oppose attempts to help heterosexuals explore whether they have latent homosexual tendencies as well.)

Since the APA in a major provider of malpractice insurance and writes the ethical standards for psychiatrists, therapists and other mental health professionals as well as influences courses of study, what happened to Darwin West is totally predictable.

A couple examples: One of my professors did not participate in a prestigeous internship program because he would have had to help homosexual couples stay together. In a course on ethics I had to take the teacher was openly gay and almost all the role plays generated by the students in class involved gay situations.

Those of us in the secular field who believe in traditional (Biblical) morality keep our mouths shut to avoid trouble. That's the goal of political correctness, isn't it?

Of course there are ways to get around the PC problem in the privacy of the counseling office as the client is helped to articulate his problems and find ways to improve his life.

renny
renny writes: Monday, August, 27, 2007 9:09 AM
You aren't reading
the N. Testament.

Polygamy is the Bible is in the Old Testament, talking about times pre-1000 bc. One explanation in the Old Test. is the necessity to raise the families left fatherless of orphaned by war and conflict.

Christians are Christians not because of the Old Test., but because of the N. Testament where Christ's life is written. Christ says nothing on marriage. It is St. Paul who avers on marriage, not Christ.
____***********___end of quote

I don't wanr to offend, renny, actually Christianity (The Gospel Of Christ) was taught in the Old Testament.

When The Savior said: "search the scriptures, they are they which testify of ME!"

A careful reading of Paul's writings will show that he taught from the scriptures.

When Philip met the eunick who was reading from Isaiah, it was Isaiah teaching about Christ.

It is important to note that the only scriptures available at that time was "The Old Testament." There was no New Testament until sometime in 300 AD, and the New Testament, as we know it today, was not the same as was compiled in the 4th century.

I know this is a difficult hurdle to someone whose faith is based on what they have been taught; but, it should be (in my humble opinion) a blessing to know that the Gospel and it's saving teachings and ordinances were around long before the Savior's birth, life, death and, above all, His resurrection!

Due to space and time limitations, I will stop here; but anyone wishing to discuss this subject more can reach me on the blog "tenore." I have two e-mail addresses; this is "tenore2."


Lon
Sorry if i misunderstood what you were trying to convey.

Part of my point was that we don't know exactly what went on with Mr. West, the professors or the(possibly homosexual) young man so we shouldn't jump to conclusions, but it does appear on the surface that the professors were following the "politically correct" course (with which I strongly disagree).

You say: "it is a quite plausible situation in which the professors heard what he wanted to do, warned him that in their view, what he was proposing was irresponsible in their professional opinion,"

If we are to believe the narrative, "she (the professor) said that he had to help the client embrace the desires he was trying to extinguish. Mr. West was confused because this was the opposite of what the client came to LDS Family Services to receive. But she was insistent.". If that is true, Prof. Wecher was out of line.

Although I have had no personal dealings with LDS Social Services, I would be much more favorable to their approach than that of some college professor who seems to want to push her ideas off on a client who expressly went to LDS Social Services for the exact opposite purpose. It is not as though they dragged him in the door to push their point of view on him.



Lilly-pointless
Enough said.

lilly, continued
Lilly, your point is?

As a small business owner, I know the danger of being too top heavy!

A quote:
"For every liberal parent there is a conservative parent. Compromise is necessary. This means that sometimes a parent may have to sit down with the kid and explain that compromise and cooperation are the price of living in civilization. If your values at home are different, you can explain that, but please do so without teaching your kid to disrespect the teacher, the school, or the other students."

Are you serious? If a teacher teaches that it is ok to do what ever feels right, any parent (con or lib) should take exception and challenge the teacher or the school.

You may not believe this, but there are absolutes in human behavior.

Again, what is your point?


lilly, say what/
Lilly, your point is?

It appears that parents (taxpayers) should not have any say in the ideas taught by the self-proclaimed "educators."

Somehow, that is exactly what the liberal teachers, that I know, believe. Parents have no right to attend the schools to find out what is being taught. Well if you had said that to my father, you would have run into a buzz-saw. And, if you say that to my son or my three daughters, you will also find the heat applied. (Combined they have produced 21 children.)

Teachers are not gods; there are great teachers, and I had many even in a small country school, but there are many who are lazy, incompetent, uneducated (in spite of having a teacher's BS) and are there because no one can fire them. (They have a union, you see?)

Too much of the funds spent for "education" are spent to maintain "political correctness" and to be sure that boys don't flirt with the girls. (Boy, I am gratified that I lived at a time that I was able to flirt with girls without the fear of being accused of sexual harassment! The girls were pretty adept at the flirting game.)

How many administrators does a school need? It seems that there is almost a one-to-one ratio of teachers to administrators.

As a small business owner, I know the danger of being too top heavy!


Posting problem
Can't get any result when posting.

Another reason psych psucks
In my prior post I neglected to mention the other reason I left the study of psychology. While there were a few mostly sane students seeking to become psychologists out of genuine concern for the well-being of their fellow man, my classes seemed to be populated mostly by crazies.

I can't count the number of students who used themselves as case-studies for nearly every assignment. Some were seeking the degree in order to understand and help themselves. Others seemed to want the degree in order to perform studies that, in the end, would justify their craziness and/or prove there was nothing wrong with them. Believe me, when you pursue a degree in order to prove that it was okay for you to leave your kids with your meth dealer druggie p!mp boyfriend so you can turn a few tricks, YOU ARE A LOON, despite the "scientific evidence" you have compiled to the contrary.

A newly retired social worker uncle of mine confirmed for me that this is true for the entire counseling field - physicians seeking to heal their own psyches by doing irreparable damage to their unsuspecting patients.

Tragic.


myOpine
That was HILARIOUS! More evidence I made the right decision.

The answer: Unsympathetically.
Long term, locked down, padded room, heavily medicated, 10 hours of group therapy daily.

Those people are mentally-ill sex-addicts and should be treated as such. The funny thing is that their flambouyance and ostentatiousness do their cause far more damage than good.

One hint. If you want respect, act respectfully.

The Grad at Purdue
I earned a doctorate in the same field, I even once interviewed at Purdue and did not like their program, and I soon discovered that among the faculty (or faculties) those members who push for a leftist agenda are in the vast majority. Also, it is not uncommon for a faculty member to be intimidated by a talented student. I knew a female faculty member who caused severan Masters and Doctoral students to leave their progam and enroll elsewhere. If you didn't agree with her leftist politics, if your model involved serving the goal that the client identified, of if you were more competent than her you were going to have problems. I survived and so did many others, but many did not.

Dr. Don Rhudy

lon
I summary both approaches: HS is abnormal or immoral and it is impossible to change and one should not attempt are all dogmatic.

lon
Where do get this idea of risk. With a dogmatic therapist, there might be a risk with a judgmental approach. You approach as an experiment and let us see what happens; you gather data from your experiences; you acquire knowledge of yourself; what you are capable of.After all it is the client who came in with the idea of changing. Even catholics who were immersed in their religion both belief wise and thru family change.
Treat people as individuals not as statistics.
Pedophilia is much easier to change with those committed to change and especially if they already have wife and children; it is easier because to stay with it is clearly damaging to the person and his family and he knows that.
Whereas in HS there is not a moral issue(there might be if religious)
IF we take the student that is subject of article, he was honest to state that if client want therapy to help him adjust to his HS, he would excuse himself. That is fair and square.

len...
Please... stop...

What you are saying... makes too much sense...

My Liberal worldview is melting... agghhhhhh

LOL.

Wingo
How would you counsel this case?

http:americansfortruth.com/news/remember-that-joke-about-a-lesbian-trapped-in-a-mans-body-cnns-larry-king-promotes-she-male-rights.html

How'd we end up on polygyny? II
Furthermore, we read that God *gave* David his plural wives: "and I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that were too little, then **would I add unto thee so much more** ... Thus saith the LORD: Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and **give them unto thy neighbour**, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun." (2 Sam 12:8, 11, Jewish Publication Society Bible).

There are only two verses in the New Testament that even **limit** who can have multiple wives. Yet, there is no wording forbidding such marriages generally. There is **no** place in the Bible (Old or New Testament) where plural marriage is condemned. In the three places where we would expect to find just such a commandment, it mysteriously isn't there.

I suggest you give a quick look at truthbearer.org, a "Christian" web site that advocates plural marriage, something I do not, in any form -- it's not in my nature. ('Sides, my wife of 37 years, 1 day, would be very unhappy and that would make me unhappy, too.)

However, it is most annoying to read ignorant posters try to make the Bible say what they believe, rather than what it actually says.

Le
==
Please visit http://www.schoolandstate.org

lon
Where do get this idea of risk. With a dogmatic therapist, there might be a risk with a judgmental approach. You approach as an experiment and let us see what happens; you gather data from your experiences; you acquire knowledge of yourself; what you are capable of.After all it is the client who came in with the idea of changing. Even catholics who were immersed in their religion both belief wise and thru family change.
Treat people as individuals not as statistics.
Pedophilia is much easier to change with those committed to change and especially if they already have wife and children; it is easier because to stay with it is clearly damaging to the person and his family and he knows that.
Whereas in HS there is not a moral issue(there might be if religious)
IF we take the student that is subject of article, he was honest to state that if client want therapy to help him adjust to his HS, he would excuse himself. That is fair and square.

How'd we end up on polygyny? I
"Polygamy was never part of God's plan. ... Abraham and Sarah, the wife, and Hagar, the wife's Egyptian handmaiden/slave,... . And on and on , among the patriarchs and the kings--none following God's will."

Yet "osthode" fails to mention that there was a strict commandment that a man whose brother died without issue take the new widow as his own wife. It's called the Law of the Levirate (Deut. 25:5–10), and it antedates Moses by 400 years (see the story of Judah and Tamar, Gen 38:8).

The law was inviolate; no exemptions for the already married. So, at least in this instance, a man must have become a polygynist to obey the law of God.

It is most annoying to read ignorant posters try to make the Bible say what they believe, rather than what it actually says.

Le
==
Please visit http://www.schoolandstate.org

lon
Your response shows total disrespect for he client's(notice client; not patient) autonomy. Human behavior is not like of lowly insect dependent on reflexes. I dont like the word reparative either. You dont repair anything when you change your religion or attitudes toward life or whatevere. You simply change. As philosphy major you should be aware that the language you use determines how one approaches things.
I am not one for holy roller exeriences or the 10 step program. There are many kids who abused drugs and then at 20 shape up.

That said, I am not saying that it is a snap of the fingers and one adapts to hetersexual style is easy. But the fact that some do is sufficient that it can be done. And one approaches as an experiment. Quite a different language than therapy which implies illness or repairing something. And to think that all homosexuals are so fragile that will crack up exploring possibilites is to insult them. So the bottom line is that if someone who is homosexual expresses some desire to change, you dont talk him out of it by saying it is impossible nor is it immoral to want to change. You act as coach and some may make it to that step; and some may find it is not for them. But in all cases accepting and non-judgmental.
Notice, no dogma here.

I am reacting against the dogma that our fate is fixed.

Lon
You say,
"My point was that the claim, which I have quoted twice now, that the student had a choice of doing what the client wanted and following the politically correct views of his professor was a false dilemma. In between those two extremes is a quite plausible situation in which the professors heard what he wanted to do, warned him that in their view, what he was proposing was irresponsible in their professional opinion, and that they were not willing to lend the respect of their institution to such practices."

Forgive me for being slow. You say that it is a false dilemma. What, exactly, are you suggesting was his third option?

typo
1st sentence should have ended "to do so."

APAs devolving scientific standards
I once wanted to be a counseling psychologist and was studying to . Then, in 1999 the APA Journal published a "study" (unduplicated) entitled "A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples" which found, among other conclusions, that child molestation can occasionally have positive effects on the child.

Of course NAMBLA jumped on the APA bandwagon and proclaimed they were helping society by raping children (not their words, obviously). Then the APA began their crabwalk, trying to dodge the hailstorm of criticism that deservedly came down on them without ever acknowledging that it was irresponsible and unprofessional of them to publish a study that had come to an unverifiable conclusion. I quit the psych program after that semester - couldn't, with good conscience, operate under the watchful eye of such a farcical "scientific" organization.

Despite the fact that the APA has repeatedly and profusely refuted the claim that they endorse pedophilia, the study (along with a lengthy explanation on how it should be used/taught) is still on the APA website. It would be easier to take the APA seriously if there was any evidence that they took seriously their responsibility to the scientific method (soft-science though it may be).

irresponsible in their professional o??
We are told that the professor said the following:

"Instead, she said that he had to help the client embrace the desires he was trying to extinguish."

How does that square up with the APA's own statements as quoted in my previous post?

"that 'psychologists...respect the rights of individuals to privacy, confidentiality, SELF-DETERMINATION and autonomy'

and

""'in their work-related activities, psychologists respect the rights of others to hold values, attitudes, and opinions that differ from their own'

TurnLeft's "FACTS"
Turnleft says his link provides "mounds of evidence verifying the permanent mental health damage of reparative therapy" and justifies "censure of Mr. West, and LDS Family Services".

Funny, I can't find those "facts" ANYWHERE in his link. But let's look at what IS in his link:


"the ethics, efficacy, benefits, and potential for harm of therapies that seek to reduce or eliminate same-gender sexual orientation are under EXTENSIVE DEBATE in the professional literature.."

"'in their work-related activities, psychologists respect the rights of others to hold values, attitudes, and opinions that differ from their own' "

"that 'psychologists...respect the rights of individuals to privacy, confidentiality, SELF-DETERMINATION and autonomy'

Now, I doubt intend for their own words to be used against them...but that's what happens when you choose to act as some of them are. *shrug*

Sorry about your lack of "facts", TurnLeft.

Len
I am not sure where you got the idea that I am in the hard sciences, since I said I was in philosophy which is not a science at all. But it does happen that most of my work was in the philosophy of physics, and what few publications I had were mostly in physics journals.

That said, I am not sure whether an appeal to the soft sciences gives cover to reparative therapies. It would not surprise me if it was dangerous to cure pedophiles, but given the nature of pedophilia, and its necessarily non-consenual nature, that seems a risk worth taking. But given someone's sexual orientation towards consenual sex with his own sex rather than the other sex, it is not clear that it is responsible for psychologists to agree to such attempts. Perhaps this is no worse than plastic surgeons who agree to ridiculous changes to bodies because clients want it. But I don't think medical schools need to give their imprimature to that either. Doctors do have the principle, first of all do no harm.

Time to Start Teaching?
Yo Mikee isn't it time to start the new semester? You know, preparing notes, getting ready for class? Stuff they pay you for?

Wally
There seems to have been some confusion here. I thought you were supporting Adams attack on the professors at Purdue Calumet. As I noted in my first post, it is silly to make such a judgement based on a slanted account based on one side of the contraversy. You now seem to be agreeing with me on this point.

My point was that the claim, which I have quoted twice now, that the student had a choice of doing what the client wanted and following the politically correct views of his professor was a false dilemma. In between those two extremes is a quite plausible situation in which the professors heard what he wanted to do, warned him that in their view, what he was proposing was irresponsible in their professional opinion, and that they were not willing to lend the respect of their institution to such practices.

You know seem to be acknowledging that that is possible. Your argument now is that it is possible that that is not the case. And that is true, it is also however possible that it is the case, so Adams account above should not be taken too seriously without a better account of the facts.

So while we have been arguing back and forth, it now appears we are in agreement on the main points, and can come together on those two points. There is not enough information to tell whether the professors at Purdue Calumet acted properly or not, and Mr West oversimplified the situation by suggesting that the only choices were doing what the patient wanted or bowing to political correctness.

Have we in fact reached a meeting of the mind on these points?

Turn Left
"Of course, the APA is just a left-wing radical commie group, right?"

You mean the American PATHALOGICAL Assoc.?
Pretty close! They have come up with some really wierd (and wicked) stuff. They may as well be a branch of NAMBLA.

You say (refering to Hecker) "she would have mounds of evidence verifying the permanent mental health damage of reparative therapy"...

That's a load of CRAP! The damage, if any is in the methods used. Not in the desire to be "normal" or to have a family.

Best evidence is that there may be an inborn tendency in some people to choose homosexuality and that they choose it sub-consiously through their sexual fantasies. Not much different than the way in which some people develop a fear of flying, claustrophobia, agorophobia etc. and others choose to be rich and successful! The unconcious mind is very powerfull. It can be your best friend or your worst enemy and it CAN be guided.

Ion2
You can't challenge anything even tangentially related to homosexuality today. It is the sainted condition.

Surely, people have all kinds of feelings they might want/need changed, from a smoking habit to OC handwashing, and they could seek help. Heaven forefend the poor kid/adult/male of any kind who may not like his feelings about the same sex.

The PC response is to make him like them. Better, embrace them. Better, join some pressure group and encourage them in many others.

lon 3
Therer was another client referred to me by female colleague who was dating a homosexual. HE was able to have sex with her but it was a flat experience and something was missing of an emotional quality he had with men. HE wanted to see if things could be changed because he would like to ahve a family and he was fond of the woman. We were not able to achieve change.
The point i each case is unique. It maybe that 85% are difficult to change.
The point is that not to be locked into a mode that it cant be done. One should not be pressured. It should be looked at as an eperiment without any religoius guilt or that stuff.

Most men have impulses toward many woman(part of bio heritage) yet all dont act out; some do; some dont; some a little. Human behavior is very variable; it is not simple as the invariant NA + CL =NaCL
HS is not an illness; nevertheless, there is nothing wrong or immoral in wanting to change and make reasonable attempts and to experiment; observe the results and make a decision.

lon 2
Let me give you an egs how complex this is. Way back in 1968 I was treating people with sexual problems. An engineer was referred to me who had just made a suicide attempt for the stated reason that he had been fondling his 3 yr old daugher and could control his impulses. He had a fantasy history since a child with little girls. However, you want to put it, he was wired as a result of history(and who knows, genes). Clearly, his behavor had to stop for his benefit and that of his entire family. He wanted to change. So here you have strong impulses from childhood and a desire to change; he was paying me. No court was involved. Leaving aside what I did which was quite comprehensive(with no guilt) we, me and him, altered his behavior to the point where the child asked why he stopped. I only have data for one year after treamtment termnated and at that point fine.
Did he stilll have impulses. Yes, but very attentuated and they no longer controlled him. His marriage improved(i also saw his wife but she was unaware of the that problem).

What research???
In the 50s, homosexuality was Biblical anathema, but since the word was never mentioned or written, no one knew what it was.

In the 60s, homosexualtiy was a physchiatric disorder with its own "code" in AMA speak and was treated by talk therapy, aversion therapy, and the psycho-tropic drugs of the day. People who didn't go to psychiatrists for treatmentn sometimes went to psychologists. It was a disorder.

In the 70s, homosexualtiy became a lifestyle choice. Libs. and art critics used encrypted words like "experimenting" and "living on the edge" and "testng middle class conformity." Has anyone met a middle class conformist? College campuses went nuts promoting gayness, to prove universities oppose middle class conformity.

In the 80s, HIV/AIDS became the "gay" disease and suddenly everyone was talking about homosexuality and anal intercourse, a wonderful turn of events. Concerned citizens demanded kindegarten kiddies learn about gay sex. It seemed a little less than gay.

In the 90s, homosexuality became a probably genetically linked inherited characteristic, based on whose research? But the Sup. Ct. upheld a GA sodomy law, and people laughed when others said the next big push would be homosexual matriage.

Now, the 2000s, homosexuality is just like the guys next door who own a flower shop. The Sup. Ct., barely giving itself a decade of stare decisis (something we know MUST be applied to Roe 30 yrs. later), reversed the GA decision and threw its weight toward a TX sodomy case. The MA Sup. Ct. in its great judicial legislative tradition said the MA const. offered legalized homosexual marriage. The gay agenda became the repetition of genetic causes.

My guess is if a gene is found, gays will not want the knowledge known, as at least some fertile couples will not want a homosexual child. The sword cutteth several ways.

hey uber...
get lost!

and take lilly with you too

Lon
You are in the hard sciences and you make the mistake of analogizing to the soft sciences. You refer to "research"that it is dangerous to mental health to affect change for homosexuals. There is no such research. Remember when you mix NA and Cl, you invariably get NaCL. Very simple. Human behavior is much more complex. Defining someone as homosexual, aggressive, shy is not the same as defining NA by the number of atoms. The psych terms are loose. No two shy people are same either in quantity(for lack of better word) or quality.
There is a continuum in traits. With sexual impulses it go from severe revulsion to one sex to bi sexuality and that only labels two points.
Genetics is not destiny. There is no evidence for a HS gene; and my guess is all that you will find,if anything, will complex genetic predisposition that does uniquely determine behavior. Regardless, that does not mean it cannot be altered and by alterned I mean from complete disspearance to various degrees of impulses that may or may not interfere with a hetersexual relatonship.
The point i that we are in the dark here. And hence, if someone wants to make an attempt to live a hetersexual life, it i worth a try(keeping religion out of it). It is done as an experiment. PArt w continues

Hecker was right
If Prof. Hecker was using information provided by the American Psychological Association, which would be apt considering we're talking about therapy and all, then she would have mounds of evidence verifying the permanent mental health damage of reparative therapy, and her censure of Mr. West, and LDS Family Services, was justified.

Sorry, folks, but that's a fact:

http://www.apa.org/pi/sexual.html

Of course, the APA is just a left-wing radical commie group, right?

In other words...
...none of us really has a clue what we're talking about because we don't have all the facts. What a pointless conversation.

Institutional liability
Lon has stated the case here very well. A faculty member in a state institution,in particular, must be very careful about having a student engage in therapy practicum. As I understand it, if the institution sanctions the therapy paracticum described, it is implicitly giving its endorsement. If the therapy is not supported by sound research and the institution allows a student to practice it under their auspices, they could be sued for mal-practice.

It appears to me that Adams may have completely misunderstood why the department felt it necessary to separate itself from the LDS program.

Lon
The point you missed was that Mr. West went to his professor for GUIDANCE. Nowhere does it say that he was trying to "cure" the boy.

We don't even know from the article that the boy was actually a "homosexual", only that he felt some attraction to members of his own sex. He may well have been attracted to girls as well. It doesn't say! It also doesn't say that he wanted to change for "social reasons".

You also say: "My own guess is that genetics plays a role, as can childhood issues."

You not only assume the boy IS homosexual but that it is genetic as well, even though you admit that "childhood issues" can play a role.

You are jumping to conclusions without having the facts of the case. Maybe you should have studied logic instead of philosophy.


The "Gay" gene... LOL
For those who are offended easily, I am apologizing in advance.

Man 1: So your "brown eyes" genes came from your Dad, and your "blonde hair" genes came from your Mom, where'd you get the "gay" gene from?

Man 2: From the old pervert across the street.

Wally
You have your views on the subject. The field of psychology has a different view on the subject. It is not surprising that a department would be upholding the view backed by their research rather than your view.

My own guess is that genetics plays a role, as can childhood issues. It is not clear that the latter means that homosexuality is "curable". There is not some fixed dichotomy whereby things that come from genetics are fixed and other changes are not.

I can certainly tell you that a boy who as a teenager feels an attraction to other boys has a very different orientation than mine. It is hard to imagine that "curing" me of my attraction to girls could have ever been done without doing psychological damage to me. Perhaps your personal experience is different than mine on this point. Maybe you can identify better with this supposedly natural heterosexual attraction to people of ones own sex.

But if, as the story suggests, this was a homosexual boy who for social reasons wanted to be treated into being no longer homosexual, then the accepted psychological view is that helping him would do him more harm than good. So I am not surprised that a University would not want to have its name attached to such things.

Is the point that I missed really supposed to be that this was a heterosexual boy with desire for other boys? Or is it something else?

The points that I find most interesting.
Is the fact that first off the teenager felt compelled to seek out help, not through a secular counseling forum or with Homosexual advocates, but instead with a religious family oriented counseling group. The teenager already knew what he wanted. Most Gay advocates will claim that the teenager doesn't really want to have his homosexuality taken from him, he just has been brainwashed to believe that Homosexuality is evil by religious fanatics. But this is a case where the teen has obviously thought carefully about the issue and has decided that Homosexuality is not for him.

The second point that I found interesting is that Mr. West could have used religious resources to try and help the teen. He could have taken the issue to many different people in the Mormon or even other Christian religions. Instead he chose to seek help from his "secular" professors at Purdue. He specifically kept religion and politics out of the issue although he could have used religion to browbeat this kid into submission. It was the teen who looked towards religion for guidance, but Mr. West hoped to use secular resources.

This story is hardly one of oppressive Christianity pushing their views on others. Instead it is one of oppressive Liberalism, pushing their views on others.

Hey, FreedomResponsibility
It's "polygamy", not "pologamy".

Once a marine writes:

Your story should not shock me, but it sure as H makes me mad.

I am 67 and have a 13 year old to raise. Where can I send him to college five years from now. He's an arguer, like his dad's family, they'll crucify him.

Mellisa55 : I wish him & you -luck - I know nothing about higher education other than my short 3 year experience. I wonder if it would help if you sent him to a Protestant or Catholic university or has the liberal establishment taken them over, also? It is sad that liberals cannot accept the existence of our world view & feel theirs is the only right way. I was a very naive 38 year old, dreamed of 'sitting at the feet of Socrates...' was the way my husband put it.I'm a debater,too, and hard-headed. Makes life difficult but interesting.

Lon
I think that you may be a little confused, (possibly due to the fact that you studied philosophy). You say:

"where there is evidence that a candidate is going to use his degree from the institution to engage in practices that the best research suggests is harmful to the patients, then I can certainly understand what a degree program would not want to lend its name to such practices."

You must have read a different article than I did. It states "The teenager felt attracted to other men and wanted help so he could overcome those desires." He then goes on to say that "Mr. West mentioned the situation to his supervisor, Professor Hecker. Mr. West had never discussed this type of situation in any of his classes so he wanted guidance."

Where did you infer from wanting "guidance" that he intended to engage in any practices "harmful to the patient"?

Do you accept the idea that homosexuality is entirely genetic? If so, why are men who were molested as children many times more likely to be homosexual than those who were not? Is it in the genes of some children to be molested?

If it is not entirely genetic to be HS, then finding ways for a person who does not want to be homosexual to guide his own destiny towards heterosexuality is no different in principal than helping him overcome acrophobia.

response to osthode - pologamy
Osthode wrote that "pologamy never was part of God's plan." Not clear where osthode gets this, but the scriptures are clear of many examples, God sanctioned.

The problem we run into is "linear thinking", meaning something happens once in scriptures, and we assume it remains that way forever - straight line. Yes, God place Adam and Eve in the Garden. But that doesn't contradict what He allowed Abraham, Jacob (Israel), and others to have multiple wives.

God covenants with Abraham great things after he has Hagar. He is promised special marvellous things. I cannot accept that had Abraham been committing adultrey that he would have received such promises. Abraham is actually held up in the OT world as the prototype of the Father, and Issac the Son, for the great and eternal sacrifice of the Father and the Son. No way he is held up as the "father of the faithful" if he himself wasn't doing exactly what God told him. Do you really think he would have had the strength to sacrifice Issac, if he was committing adultry?

This is one of many examples of why authorized revelation is so critical. What God requires at one time is not the same as another.

Student should have done his research...
When you pursue training in applied secular humanistic counseling (only type of counseling outside of biblical counseling I believe) at a secular humanist college - in a course taught by secular humanists....who is at fault? If the student wants to pursue counseling from a moral / ethical perspective he should have researched both his institution, department and professors views. So, the student is at fault - he voluntarily put himself in the wrong context. That being said....I think he is absolutely right to help the teenager - he should refer him to a group with success in this area like 'Exodus' or others.

CVN65
No, I don't think I missed the point at all! (see my post of 1:30)

I suspect we will see more tomorrow, but it seems clear to me that it is about academia promoting their "state religion" and trying to silence anyone they consider a threat to their authority as the ultimate arbiters of what is right or wrong. They are anti-Christ, anti-God and they are wrong. They promote evil and call it "good". They try to supress good and call it "evil".

What else would you expect of "liberals"?

Wally
I do not think there is anything wrong with heterosexuality. I am happily heterosexual myself. But if for some reason I decided that I didn't want to be heterosexual and went to a therapist to cure my of my heterosexuality, I think that any therapist who took me up on the offer would be doing me harm.

The problem lies not in the fact that it is heterosexuality rather than homosexuality, but rather in the possibility that what the therapist is doing is helping a patient in self-delusion that is likely to hurt him in the long run.

In a field like the one I studied, philosophy, in which what is involved directly is a fight over ideas, I tend to think faculty should avoid judging candidates on what positions they take. But in something applied, where there is evidence that a candidate is going to use his degree from the institution to engage in practices that the best research suggests is harmful to the patients, then I can certainly understand what a degree program would not want to lend its name to such practices.

On the otherhand, I take it from your post that you agree that the quote I gave above is nonsense.
"Mr. West then asked the learned professor whether therapists are ethically bound to help a client reach his goals rather than to advance the therapist’s political agenda."

We are only differing on whether this is one of the cases that shows that the quote is nonsense or not. But at least we agree that Mr West is confused about the nature of therapy, and so we have less reason to trust his side of the story implicitely.

Brett
GET A GRIP MAN!

1. The article wasn't about Romney or Mormonism.

2. Duncan Hunter is a good guy but probably will not be the nominee.

3. Your contentention that "Mormon First Vision taught by the Mormon Missionaries says God told Joseph Smith not to join any Christian Church" is not exactly accurate. I just looked it up on line at: http://restorationbookstore.org/articles/testimonies/joseph-ownstory/part1.htm

It doesn't even mention "the Christian Church". He talks about certain "sects" and the individuals promoting them and says: "those professors were all corrupt, they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me;"

I suspect that the early ninteenth century had it's share of "Elmer Gantrys", just as we do today. That is hardly a condemnation of all Christendom and your attempt to saddle Mitt Romney with that idea is a little disengenuous.

wally
You are completely missing the point. The LGBT lobby doesn't want you to have ANY opinion on LGBT issues. Since you are not one of them, you are not allowed to say anything CRITICAL about any of their issues. This is very similar to the feminists who maintain that no man may have an opinion an any issue pertaining to abortion. To go against the LGBT lobby is to be guilty of bigotry, hate, and, if they have their way, hate crimes. That is what you are seeing here. Even though we all know (except dear Lilly) that this article was about a professor and dept head forcing their politically correct views onto a powerless student, the LGBT lobby has tried mightily to make this an issue on the morality of LGBT issues. And failed. Adams said nothing about morality and homosexuality and they know it. Anyone that is actively trying to silence debate should post elsewhere.

Mr. West
Did I miss something here? What I got was that the young man came to Mr. West for guidance in handling his attraction to men. Could it have been that the young man had been reared to believe what his church told him that certain behavior was sinful and was trying to figure out what to do?

And how about Mr. West? When he refused to promulgate (look it up, folks)the politically correct theme, he was told to stop counseling the young man, by one of the enlightened elite of acadamia. What about the original question from the young man, did anybody ever address that?

The old coot

Mr. West
Did I miss something here? What I got was that the young man came to Mr. West for guidance in handling his attraction to men. Could it have been that the young man had been reared to believe what his church told him that certain behavior was sinful and was trying to figure out what to do?

And how about Mr. West? When he refused to promulgate (look it up, folks)the politically correct theme, he was told to stop counseling the young man, by one of the enlightened elite of acadamia. What about the original question from the young man, did anybody ever address that?

The old coot

Thanks, Barbudo!
When I was at Purdue in 1963, and again as a safety engineer in the late 1960s, I never heard of the HAMMOND, INDIANA campus which is apparently called Calumet, just as the location in Indianapolis wasn't installed until decades later and in now called IUPUI (IndianaUniversityPurdueUniversityIndianapolis).
What threw me was Calumet City being in ILLINOIS, right across the border as a close suburb of Chicago.
But that entire area,I must admit, is considered as "Chicagoland."
Thanks again, for the link. It fueled lotsa memories.

yeah where's the rest of the column?
props to wally

I'll wait to see how this turns out
But if it ends with Mr. West being injured academically for his LDS beliefs, the appropriate answer can be summarized in one line:

Pull your kid out of Purdue, and don't send any more money to it.

EAGER TO READ THE REST OF THE COLUMN
Some of you seem to think it is about homosexuality, some of you think its about Mitt Romney, some of you think its about religion and one guy seems to think its about gun control.

Seems to me that it just may be about the arrogance of certain liberal academicians who consider THEMSELVES to be the ultimate moral authority even as they counsel others not to make "value judgements" about such things as homosexuality. They are simply promoting THEIR religion, i.e. athiesm, and they are doing it with tax money.

Mike Adams, here
To the poster who states that I never write about anything but homosexuality, I offer this slight correction:

"Mike Adams writes about lots of topics but I, being a homosexual, only comment on the ones about homosexuality."

Homosexuality is the core of your existence. You are nothing without it. That is unhealthy. Much moreso than sodomy.

Anyone Surprised?
snore....public university discriminates against religiously informed student...Hard Left running Perdue's psychiatric dept....maybe if we could find one public university who would NOT discriminate against a religiously informed student, that would be news....

jo j...
While I will admit that some posters on this topic have been a bit rough with Van, very few have attacked him personally except for the fact that they've called him out for twisting the entire story to fit his own political agenda. His arguments were based on the scenario of an Evil Conservative trying to force his views onto a helpless gay teen and refusing to listen to the sensible advice of his college professors.
Unfortunately, that scenario has NOTHING to do with the above story, which therefore makes it a moot point. Instead, this gay teen, didn't want those thoughts and feelings, didn't want to be apart of the Gay community, didn't want to march in a parade wearing nothing but a codpiece and a leather hat. He wanted help to do what he felt was right. Mr. West didn't know what to do, so he turned to his professors, and in exchange they tried to shove their personal beliefs down his and this teenagers throats.
If Van had been intellectually honest he would have either discussed the issue at hand, or kept out of it altogether. Instead he chose to twist the facts and attack the Conservative. That's mighty tolerant don't you think?

BG - clever spin
My thoughts on your 2 points:

1. How do Mormon Missionaries actually build up the entire Church going community when the
Mormon First Vision taught by the Mormon Missionaries says God told Joseph Smith not to join any Christian Church because they were all corrupt? Are you saying that by bearing false witness against the Christian Church, Mormon Missionaries actually are helping the Christian Church? I would think you are trying to be funny, except it appears you are serious.

2. Based on your logic above in 1, you should be thanking the anti Mormon Spin Machine for being an "important part of the conversion process". However, instead of thanking AMSM, I bet you call them bigots. Because the reality is, AMSM point out the strange teachings of Mormon Prophets Smith and Young that cause most normal people to NOT convert to Mormonism.

Mitt Romney is Not a devout Mormon (he is a politician more like Mormon Harry Reid), and is not trustworthy like most politicians.

I like Duncan Hunter and hope he gets the nomination.




college & psychology
onceamarine: just be careful where you send your son. have him prepared with sound reasons backing his beliefs. teach him to argue calmly, without anger or rancor. he'll be an awesome addition!!

as for the article... I am just beginning my MA in Psychology - Clinical. I have no idea how I am going to approach this chasm between many of my political/theological beliefs and the APA "party line". I hope to flesh out my reactions carefully and thoughtfully as I go. I also hope to be careful where & with whom I practice when/if I achieve my LPC. This program had an opportunity to calmly and rationally explain the situation from the "party line" viewpoint. They had the chance to listen to the student explain his thoughts. They had the chance to delineate what the student must do in order to fulfill the program's requirements. However, they seem to have chosen the panic attack approach - over-reaction and phobic attention on that they do not understand. I think that is where they went wrong here. We'll see how it goes...

wally

Thank you for that piece on "shot yourself in the foot".

It calms me down just a bit, and you sure did a sweet job on Lon whom I haven't read.

Time to switch columns.

Spiceman

""When we try to make other people feel small, we are smaller than they. Help a friend don't betray. Love your enemy so peace will have its way.""·

Spiceman: I respect you and would be pleased to call you friend.

Some people are not nor ever will be my friend, nor are they good enough to be my enemy. They are simply helpless no nothings who clutter up the day and make you wish you hadn't run across them.

Maybe today is not my best day. I generally, and as a long standing rule, ignore the trash until it's carried out to the street for removal.


jo j
You need another brain cell to rub together with the one you already have.

Lon
You shot yourself in the foot with your "straw man argument" e.g. "if a patient came in noting that he had urges to molest small children but felt guilty about it, and he wanted the doctor to help him get rid of the feelings of guilt associated with the thoughts, it would not actually be the job of the therapist to help the client reach his goals."

So... would it be the therapists job to help him accept his feelings and stop feeling guilty about his DESIRE to molest children?

You seem to assume that pederasty is wrong (a feeling I share) but that since you seem to assume that HS is not wrong, one would be harming the patient by helping him reach his goal. Why? Do you think that it is wrong to be heterosexual? If not, what right does the therapist have to tell the patient that he shouldn't want to be heterosexual?

Here's another ONE
jo j writes: 11:16 AM
Van
You go. It's obvious you've hit a very potent subject that is very threatening to (male) conservatives here. Of course, Adams is unable to write about anything else, and the inevitable gays-are-evil rhetoric along with bible verses are sure to follow, people worried and insecure about their own sexuality are always the first to line up on these threads.""
---------------------------------------------------
Where did you get that, "worried about their own sexuality".??. Oh, that's right. You learned it in the classes you took. WOW. Aren't you educated.

No, you are not educated. They told you that you are educated, and you believed it. You should go into business buying bridges. There are a lot for sale. Maybe a good deal in Minneapolis would suit you. GO away...............lib.......

Talk about sick. You were fed garbage in your classes and think you dined like royalty.


The story so far...
...illustrates what bullies, and cowards, these Socialists really are.

I hope the second installment has Mr. West contacting FIRE.

Hillary delenda est.

Dale Carnage’s How to Lose Friends and …
onceamarine writes: Monday, August, 27, 2007 12:37 PM
VAN - the limp hand -
Van writes: Monday, August, 27, 2007 6:45 AM
Now"""""""""

When we try to make other people feel small, we are smaller than they. Help a friend don't betray. Love your enemy so peace will have its way.

Cheers!

Mellisa55

Your story should not shock me, but it sure as H makes me mad.

I am 67 and have a 13 year old to raise. Where can I send him to college five years from now. He's an arguer, like his dad's family, they'll crucify him.

Soon to Master-quick to leare our folly!
jo j writes:
Monday, August, 27, 2007 11:16 AM
Van

Socrates said, "There is but one good and one evil, that good is knowledge, that evil ignorance."

"We that excuse our selves, accuse our selves."

"Adam died that man might be, and men are that they might have joy." Men from the Hebrew, means: a man, woman, and child.

There is an opposition in all things, black and white, knowledge of good and evil. Mediocre people someone said, "are always at their best." They do not differentiate or progress as someone who experiences adversity. Gays just like all of us at some point have, or have been in some way addicted to a behavior, or substance that makes us feel okay, even when we are not. That is not health. Sexual addiction is polymorphic in nature and homosexuality is one expression of that. And any heterosexual person who is driven by inordinate sexual desire, who has not mastered their passions, is in the same boat.

We are here to learn to direct our lives through positive avenues together. We are definitely not her to hinder one another, but for some reason, with our attitudes we do hider others even ourselves.

The student is not always at fault, sometimes it is the teacher and even the messenger. We just need to be honest, compassionate, and have respect for one another. We are hear to overcome weakness, not to give in to it, through Self-mastery. Thank you all for the education. Cheers!

corr
FOWG should be FUBAR

VAN - the limp hand -
Van writes: Monday, August, 27, 2007 6:45 AM
Now"""""""""

I was so struck by your asinine piece that even though half of TH already had a piece of you I couldn't sit still and ignore your rantings.

Your oil ain't(sic) leaking it's gone and your motor has burnt up. You didn't even comprehend what you thought you read.

Good gawd man, you are a MAN aren't you, did someone step on your tail.??. Yep, he's got a tail.

I am embarrassed to even write you. FOWG

Lilly
"The watchword in ethical professional counseling is client self-determination, not intrusion of the counselor's or therapist's personal moral agenda."

You need to re-read the article. You seem to be very confused as to what it is about. I.E. "Mr. West then asked the learned professor whether therapists are ethically bound to help a CLIENT reach HIS goals rather than to advance the THERAPIST'S POLITICAL AGENDA."

Did you get it that time Lilly?

My experience in a community college
I think the extreme liberal bias in higher education must be very wide spread. I am a housewife who took only 3 years of classes at a community college. I wore my cross, a wooden one that my husband had made for me, every day. I worked very hard and did well. Some teachers were kind, some neutral & even seemed to appreciate an older student who was there to learn and who obviously loved knowledge and learning.

But I finally could go no further - several of my teachers put me through hell - just disliked me so much - a science professor, in an interview, revealed his extreme prejudices towards Christ,Christianity & all Christians- said God didn't exist, the usual stuff. The pressures of dealing with these teachers was overwhelming for a humble housewife who had never been exposed to higher education, before. I found it very challenging to take on the submissive attitude of youth at 38 & some of the fault may be mine but a lot of the fault was their's, I was never aggressive in my faith.
I fled and never returned. Now I look back and I think, at 56, I could do the work even better, but I fear if someone talked to me like that science professor did I would tell him what I thought of arrogant fools with delusions of self importance ... so why return to such a toxic environment when I can study on my own? There needs to be a 'housecleaning' in our college system so anyone of any faith or philosophy can find a home. They are trying to make their world view the ONLY acceptable world view.Keep the rest of us out in the cold, ignorant - the hippies of the past have become what they hated most - the Establishment !

Tenore2
Suppose that the "first-rate student" who feels "intimidated" is in a Master's counseling program, and is assigned to work in the school's counseling center with a 19 year-old female who thinks she might be lesbian and is on the fence about this. Now suppose our "first-rate student" happens to be a rather militant lesbian who undertakes to push that student over the line by "trying" a lesbian relationship because this lesbian counselor happens to think that would be a good thing. Trust me, that student counselor needs to be "intimidated", and in a hurry.

Or suppose that student counselor is an Evangelistic Christian who preaches to a young male homosexual client that he is committing a sin and must pray to Jesus for forgiveness. Again, it is the job of that student counselor's supervisor (a teaching clinician) to intervene, and fast. Whether or not the student "gets all A's" is irrelevant. If he or she can't contain his or her own feelings and moral beliefs with the help of a supervisor, a spiritual guide, and possibly a therapist, then he or she should be "intimidated" into a different kind of Master's program.

problematic false dillema
It is not, of course, possible to judge a disagreement of this sort by reading the facts as laid out by one side to the dispute. One comment though was interesting:

"Mr. West then asked the learned professor whether therapists are ethically bound to help a client reach his goals rather than to advance the therapist’s political agenda."

This would seem to misunderstand the role of therapist. After all therapists are not like convenience store clerks who simply grab the product asked for. They are supposed to be closer to doctors.

Just to take a, hopefully less contraversial example, if a patient came in noting that he had urges to molest small children but felt guilty about it, and he wanted the doctor to help him get rid of the feelings of guilt associated with the thoughts, it would not actually be the job of the therapist to help the client reach his goals. Or would trying to convince the patient that he should focus on controlling the urges rather than the guilt be a case of the therapist advancing his political agenda?

If a department is of the belief that a student is likely to use the degree conferred to hurt patients by advancing theories that are rejected by the psychological profession as harmful, this does not seem to be an unreasonable reason to not want to confer a degree.

Again whether that is the case here would require having a more balanced set of the facts. But the defense that the patient says he wants X so therapy designed to produce X must be ok, is certainly confused. And it reflects poorly on the side of the guy who apparently made that claim.


Tenore2
The problem with your idea is that what YOU want for your kids in public school may be the opposite of what some other parent wants for his kids in public school. A teacher is not an octopus. He or she must serve a wide and varied constituency. For every conservative parent there is a liberal parent. For every liberal parent there is a conservative parent. Compromise is necessary. This means that sometimes a parent may have to sit down with the kid and explain that compromise and cooperation are the price of living in civilization. If your values at home are different, you can explain that, but please do so without teaching your kid to disrespect the teacher, the school, or the other students.

Explanation
If Purdue's Marriage and Family program is anything like any other program I have ever heard of that teaches any form of counseling or psychotherapy, anywhere, its students would NOT be allowed to "help a client overcome his attraction to other men". The watchword in ethical professional counseling is client self-determination, not intrusion of the counselor's or therapist's personal moral agenda. The same would go for whether or not a client was going to involve himself or herself in an extramarital sexual relationship. Moral preaching has its place in churches. It has no place in the mental health trade, where the whole idea is to help the client clear a space where he or she may begin, perhaps for the first time, to think for himself or herself.

Let me qualify this, however. There may well be church-based counseling programs where the church's teachings are pushed. Purdue, however, has no business being one of them.

Sorry...
After reading through all the comments I see that others have already pointed out that Darwin West does exist and went to Purdue and have also included the link I provide.

Regarding Van, he clearly follows the mold of so many libs these days--attack anything that doesn't meet their own views and call all such people hate-mongers (ignoring, of course, that their own response is nothing but hate!) And it is also obvious arguing with folks like him are a lot like wrestling a pig in the mud--the pig likes it and all you get is muddy. We'll never be able to change his mind (if he actually ever uses it).

Van
You've probably already noticed that most posters here can't stand up to your opinions or arguments, so they attack you personally, which is all they can do. That's The engine that drives this blog.

What shapes the mind and will of man?
The Root of Human Behaior

Behavior & action are considered most important, yet attitude & disposition are almost ignored; they are the composer & director behind the scenes.

Behavior flows from the fountains of emotional & mental habits we cultivate & choose to give energy to. So disposition and attitude shape & motivate all behavior.

Choose the best; the highest standards & values. Entertain & cherish them in spirit, heart & mind. Do this to cultivate better emotional & mental habits, that tame and train behaviour.

Let Christ be our Councilor and His Spirit our guide.

Van
You go. It's obvious you've hit a very potent subject that is very threatening to (male) conservatives here. Of course, Adams is unable to write about anything else, and the inevitable gays-are-evil rhetoric along with bible verses are sure to follow, people worried and insecure about their own sexuality are always the first to line up on these threads.

Adams strikes a vein of fear that runs through America - which is why his columns always generate such heat. The posts here will be followed by wholesale trashing and generalization about liberals, it always happens.

The few columns on TH that are about something important; the war, the justice department, education, etc. get about 10 posts because their not juiced up with sex and emotional hysteria, which is what the visitors to TH love best.

Darwin West and Purdue
Darwin West does exist and did get an MS from Purdue University. Check out the link below for his doctoral dissertation:

http://krex.k-state.edu/dspace/bitstream/2097/272/1/DarwinWest2007.pdf

van is a tyrant
van is a tyrant
Let us stick to the facts. The client was uncomfortable with his HS impulses. Van states that is the duty of the therapist to make the client comfortable with such and act on them. Van does not want to allow the client a choice to control these and attempt to form hetersexual relationships. An honest therapist who respected the client attempt to deal with this. He would enter into an experimental situation with the client such that the choices would be:

1. Let us see how it goes and modify things as we go along.
2. So let us see if we can increase hetersexual attraction and see how it goes.
3. Let see if we can not be bothered that we have HS impulses; it does not mean you have to act on them.
4. And if that does not work, then Plan B which allows you to accept such, HS, and act on it.

An experiment on progress which respects the client and does not push HS. The moral decision is to respect the client and guide him in experimentation and allow the results to be controlling instead of some ideology.

Remember the preferred alternative in our society is hetersexuality just as two arms is preferred to one arm. It does not mean we demean those who are HS or only have one arm. But let us not idealize the less preferred alternative.


Notes from the retarded
> If Romney is elected, you can kiss your guns goodby... <

Because, of course, the president is all-powerful and can change the Constitution with the snap of a finger.

Concerned Christians
Many Christians are reluctant to support Romney as they fear it will help the Mormon missionary effort.

I have 2 thoughts.

1. The percentage of people who actually join the Mormon Church after listening to the Mormon Missionaries is relatively small. A larger percentage decide, in the process of listening to the Missionaries, to activate in their original faiths. In other words the Mormon Missionaries activate more Catholics, Baptists etc. for those denominations than they convert. The Missionaries actually build up the entire Church going community not just the Mormon Church. The 53000 Missionaries do the other denominations a big favor. They activate more than they convert.

2. The Romney campaign primarily helps the missionary effort by getting attacked by the anti Mormons. That drags the anti Mormon misconceptions, distortions and fabrications into the public arena where they can be dealt with. It creates interest in people who would not normally get interested and causes them to seek information about the Mormon Church. The anti Mormon Spin Machine is an important part of the conversion process. There is opposition in all things. The AMSM creates interest and makes the converts stronger. The harder it spins the more it builds the Church in the longer run.

You will not damage your own denomination by supporting Romney.

What Does Isaiah mean here
We are here to overcome our carnal nature, to increase in spirituality, To subdue of our carnal nature. So often we fail because we put our eggs in one bucket. We are spirit, heart, mind and body. We are Spiritual in that we seek to live by Christ like values, because we love and have faith in Him, and He in us. We feel that love and hope in Him, which carries us through the challenges of each day. Too many times, we use the devils tools to build the Kingdom of God and Christ the Master Builder. We only see in part and know in part, and for this reason there are so many contradictions. It is because we fail to understand God’s will for us. In Isaiah is found one such seeming contradiction. Why do we not understand, God’s real purpose for man.

Isaiah 4:1-2
1 AND in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.
2 In that day shall the branch of the LORD be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel.

Reading this very short chapter humbles me. We must know the will of God and we learn that as we seek Him in humility and overcome our selfish, prideful nature to show love, respect and appreciation or we can in no wise build together with Christ who is mighty to save. This we do by sharing and not imposing our will, even when we feel it is God’s will. He was gentle with his sheep, and taught that we should be compassionate, loving, and caring, so that we may seek out and rescue his lost sheep. Yes even those who do not recognize his voice.

This is the path through our faith and obedience to Christ that we overcome through Him, all corrupt things. Self-mastery through faith in Jesus Christ loves and serves the needs of others. Then when others know that you care, they want you to share what you have and what you know.

Van
1) Get a grip.

2) Learn to read.

The teen in question said HE wanted to fight those urges...I've known a few gays who - for religious reasons - feel their sexuality is inappropriate and take measure to control the urges and live a chaste life.

You're so consumed with pelvic issues, you refuse to acknowledge that just because someone has same sex attraction it doesn't mean he/she always wants to act on that attraction.

You accuse conservatives of being intolerant and lacking compassion for trying to help people who've made the decision not to embrace such a lifestyle while you yourself ignore their very real, very true feelings.

As for the notion that we're against "hate crime" laws because we want to beat up gays, you're wrong and that's an ignorant, moronic position.

We're against "hate crime" laws because they attempt to police thought. I have a right to think that homosexuality is wrong. I do not have a right to hurt someone based on that feeling - but we already have laws on the books to deal with that.


Link to Darwin West
gkong3, the link you provided doesn't work at this point.
(The identifier 2097/272/1/DarwinWest2007.pdf does not correspond to a valid Bitstream in K-REx. This may be because of one of the following reasons:

The URL of the current page is incorrect - if you followed a link from outside of K-REx it may be mistyped or corrupt.
You entered an invalid ID into a form - please try again. )

I found the article by searching on Darwin West (case matters) and found the doc you reference at this link:
http://krex.k-state.edu/dspace/handle/2097/272. Then you click on the link at the bottom to get to the page that you reference.

Just following up to see if he's a real person. As a talk show host is wont to say, " Don't believe everything you hear...."


Re Malaprop Producer
Nam, that was Samuel Goldwyn.

Counseling and Ethics
I once knew an LDS student trying to get into this field. I asked him how he would deal with potential same-sex attraction cases, and he gave me what I thought was about the only thing he could say to avoid both compromising his principles and raising the hackles of the current wave of pro-gay therapists. He said that if a patient posed same-sex attraction to him as a problem they were trying to overcome, he had only one option available to him based on his religious and moral beliefs: counsel him/her on how to overcome the feelings and not allow such thoughts to spill over into actions. If, on the other hand, the patient did not share the conviction that homosexual behaviors were always ultimately self-destructive, his only ethical option would be to recuse himself from counseling on the grounds that the patient's goal, in the counselor's opinion, professional AND religious, was that counseling him/her to accept and explore those feelings could only harm the patient, and the very center of the oath the counselor took was to do no harm.

Reflections on Van
Van I would like to help you with the various issues that you presented.

When dealing with the evils in your view, please remove the mirror. For the evils that you so in-eloquently presented. Were a mere reflection of your own uncivil attitudes and malevolence towards others.

I wish you well.

Purdue
Purdue has a satellite campus in Calumet. I think it bears saying, Purdue is a state university - funded by the taxpayers of the State of Indiana, including those who are Christian and Mormon.

More evidence ...
"Mr. West then asked the learned professor whether therapists are ethically bound to help a client reach his goals rather than to advance the therapist’s political agenda."

This is more evidence that Leftism is all about taking away peoples' freedoms.

Monogamy Heathen Custom
Polygamy slowly died out of the East under Roman rule, though possibly never quite extinguished, for we find prohibitions of it renewed by the Emperors down to Diocletian, before whose time all subjects had become citizens.

http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=2004&chapter=138477&layout=html

i.e. Christian cherry picking to excuse their adoption of heathen moral standards.

Polygamy
was never part of God's plan. He created ONE man and then ONE woman. After the fall, sin entered the world. It was sin that led to all those polygamous relationships, even among "men after God's own heart." God did not strike them dead, but they all paid for their relationships in one way or another. Examples abound--Abraham and Sarah, the wife, and Hagar, the wife's Egyptian handmaiden/slave, produced nothing but trouble: Ishmael and Isaac, the forefunners of the Arabs and the Jews. And on and on , among the patriarchs and the kings--none following God's will.

If one is going to interpret the Bible, it would be helpful to read the entire thing and then one could understand individual items in context.

Least we fail to understand WHY.
Look at ourselves; the new years resolutions make, hoping to break a habit, don’t they more often turn out failures? Changing undesirable habits is a daily persistent effort.

Habits whether emotional, mental, or physical, they are all connected, but require an understanding of the nature of their influence in our lives. Ignorance on our part leaves us vulnerable. West was inquiring what and how he should proceed in helping this young man master himself to redirect his energy into more rewarding and fulfilling pursuits. The university was hobbled by the passing of a rule by the APA December 1973 and perhaps in agreement with it, this ruling by the APA in brief.

Sexual Politics And Scientific Logic: The Issue Of Homosexuality
Link to; http://www.geocities.com/kidhistory/homopolo.htm
Charles W. Socarides
The Journal of Psychohistory, 19(3), Winter 1992
Bayer laid bare developments that took place in December 1973...

…For the next 18 years, the APA decision was to serve as a Trojan horse, opening the gates to widespread psychological and social change in sexual customs and mores. The decision was to be used on numerous occasions for numerous purposes with the goal of normalizing homosexuality and elevating it to an esteemed status.

To some American psychiatrists this action remains a chilling reminder that if scientific principles are not fought for they can be lost - a disillusioning warning that unless we make no exceptions to science, we are subject to the snares of political factionalism and the propagation of untruths to an unsuspecting and uninformed public, to the rest of the medical profession, and to the behavioral sciences.

All art has its science and all science has its art.

You aren't reading
the N. Testament.

Polygamy is the Bible is in the Old Testament, talking about times pre-1000 bc. One explanation in the Old Test. is the necessity to raise the families left fatherless of orphaned by war and conflict.

Christians are Christians not because of the Old Test., but because of the N. Testament where Christ's life is written. Christ says nothing on marriage. It is St. Paul who avers on marriage, not Christ.

uber
First of all, the singular is womAn.

Secondly, you are correct. The bible never does say one man, one woman. It does say "thou shalt not commit adultery" and "a man shall cleave unto his wife and none other."

Prof. Adams never claimed the bible said one man, one woman. What he said was, "Because he was a member of the LDS Church he subscribed to its belief that sex is to be confined to marriage, which is a lifetime commitment between one man and one woman." Which is a recitation of LDS doctrine.

skunkworks
Let's let the good professor finish his story before jumping to any conclusions:

http://www.calumet.purdue.edu/

Uber, Uber Are Yo In Pain
You start out with a very broad context – the Bible. But, then you narrow the context to Christians and their view on monogamy. So I will respond to this last.
Jesus said the following to a woman who was suffering in her latest intimate relationship (having had five failed marriage relationships). He spoke to her in a caring way and was helping her to put her life back on track:
John 4: 16 He told her, “Go, call your husband and come back.” 17 “I have no husband,” she replied. Jesus said to her, “You are right when you say you have no husband.
18 The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true.” Her life was a disaster because she had not honored God’s design for intimate relationships.
Paul wrote this to the Church:
Ephesians 4:31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”[2]
32 This is a profound mystery–but I am talking about Christ and the church.33However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.
1 Corinthians 7:2 But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband.

Is that enough or do you want more.

Uber
You go guy.

From the New Testament, show all us "christens", the "plethora" of passages promoting polygamy and homosexuality.

Come on. I'd settle for just one passage. We are waiting breathlessly.


Christian moral relativism
The bible promote One man and One women? Since when? Show me the passage and I will show you a plethora of passages in which the bible promotes one man and as many women as he wants.

One man and one women? Just another example of the type of moral cherry picking for which christens are notorious.

Gays aren't suffering on campus
If this must be about homosexuality, Van nor any other "gay" need worry about the mod. Am. campus.

There's gay evertthing: stud. union, dorms, studies, and sometimes an aggressive professorate.

A former colleague, Ph.D. from the ivy leagues and internationally known women's advocate, was offered a women's studies at RU in NJ, but she didn't last two years because she was not lesbian.

A lesson here is parents should be very careful where they put their coll. ed. monies and where their children enroll. There can be a very powerful "try it, you'll like it" homosexual advertising from gays on campuses.

I can't imagine as much admin. support for outwardly Christian organizing.

Van is wrong. His mania is catered to everywhere.

mikescott
I'm still laughing, great post

Van
Folks , don't bother with Van. If he couldnt read the original story w/o distorting it to fit what he thinks it means. He will clearly do the same with any response you post.

Van asked
"...Anything goes as long as gays suffer, that seems to be your motto..."

As long as you grab foolishness like that out of thin air and claim it's a direct product of your supposed ability to read minds, no one is going to take you seriously, son.

We know, we know. Any disagreement with your narrow views will not be tolerated. Everybody's a biggot except for good 'ol 'tolerant' Van, Huh?

Hey - got a pin-up of Algore in your locker at school? :-)

exactly 4bear!
There is a venomous hatred of Christians and Mormons, which should unite them against a common enemy...

Van translated into English
me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me ...

"Hey, look at me" said Van.



Van Without A Compass
Van’s post seethes with hatred and bitterness. His venom for Christianity or any religious thought that can be lumped together with it is exactly the kind of thinking MA is bringing into focus with this article. It is irrational, prejudicial and simple bigotry. The university system is saturated with people of like mind. Dr Alan Bloom warned of this cultural shift in the academy, and even though his book (Closing of the American Mind) was a best seller for years, no one did anything about it. We have inherited his worse nightmares. Bloom, it should e noted, is reported to have been a homosexual. Yet he saw the purging of academia of any essence of traditional, religious based values as an intellectual disaster. Van is only expressing the views of most of the gatekeepers of our society. One must ask, what shall be the standard that guides our culture’s evolution? Where is this taking us, when yesterday’s pervert or deviant, is today’s normal person and the true believer is to be dispised?

Read Coulter's "Godless"
If you want to understand what is going on here. The radical left, who have unfettered control over institutions of higher learning, have a belief system that is every bit as intolerant, bigoted and prejudicial as anything they accuse the religious right as being. There are certain religious tenets that cannot be challenged, like 'homosexuality is innate and cannot be changed,' 'global warming is real and man-made,' and 'evolution is not a theory, it is undeniable.'

Anyone who questions these closely held core beliefs is, in the mind of the radical left, deserving of persecution and even, jihad.

But, read Ann's book. It is all in there, and undeniable. ;-)

The article is not about
homosexualtiy.

It's about the treatment of an enrolled Purdue student, Darwin West, involved on a doctoral program being discriminated against because his superiors determined his religion interferred with their preconceived notions of a prospective patient's problem.

No one knows what the teen in question has really felt. He's entitled to seek therapeutic help for emotional difficulties, and his presumed attraction to boys/men may simply be on a theoretical or fanciful level that indicates nothing but adolescent confusion.

For anyone to jump in here and start attacking Christians is mind boggling.

Christianity is prob. the reason anyone can write here at all. There's no ind. rights and press freedoms in China, Uganda, Pakistan, or Indonesia.

jimbo
What tolerance? Are you asking people to suuprot and tolerate the spiritual and psychological violence in the name of "tolerance"... no wonder you're against hate crimes laws, after all you should be entitled to beat up gays in the name of your religion. And all opposition of such would be accused of being "intolerant".

Anything goes as long as gays suffer, that seems to be your motto... I hope this West character was kicked out of university.


dukas
as if you need any encouragement is your despise.

The case here is anout a "therapist" who thinks it's OK to try to change a man with homosexual urges and that his religioj entitles him to both spiritually and psychologically to mutilate this young man.

Homsexual feelings do not necessarily make one gay (although I kinda think that they usually do) but there's no need to try to stifle and destroy them either (outside religious prejudice, fear and self loathing, that is.)

What he sought for was a permission to increase this youn man's self loathing and thus place his psychological health into serious jeopardy. Not that such thing would be any concern to a true Christianist like Adams...

Van
Man - you are so full of hate you are confusing overt points in Adams' column with the stories the boogey-'person' (who lives under your bed) whispers in your ear while you sleep. Try more thorzine.

The direction of this story seems painfully obvious, huh? Those who claim sole ownership of "tolerance" failing miserably to demonstrate any.

Another 'hypocritical liberal' story. (But what other kind of story about liberals is there?)

Go Mike - love your columns.

Teen not gay
The young man seeking help from Mr. West was NOT gay, but as a teen was experiencing some uncomfortable sexual feelings.

Telling adoloscents that any vague attraction to the same sex is automatically a fixed homosexuality is a lie.

The "advising" professors should not be counseling anyone if they believe any sexual desire, which in young men could be even for their sisters or mothers, means a fixed sexualtiy is a misuse of the therapeutic model.

Religion belongs everywhere. That's why it's included in the First Amendment. The writers of the Bill of Rights addressed its importance first.

Van
You could benefit from a remedial reading comprehension course.
You completely and totally missed or deliberately twisted the "facts" as presented by Dr. Adams. West was a grad student doing practical work in his subject (much as med students do internships as part of the teaching/learning process. When he was presented with a case history that he felt unqualified to deal with on his own, he asked for direction. It was specifically stated that the young man asked for help overcoming tendencies he was uncomfortable with with the hope of getting over them. Had he asked for help in dealing with homosexuality, it would be a different story altogether. But he did not. Twisting the details to fit your preconceived notions does no one any service.
No wonder there are so many confused people in American Universities. Can't understand what was written.

Now
let's see: this man who was not qaulified as therapist wants to "cure" homosexuality even though he has no knowledge of it is supposed to be done and has no skills even to tackle the "problem" outside the prejudice of his beliefs. But he had the audacity to claim nthat appropriate clinical practice is about "political agenda" and his religious bidgotry and willingness to hurt this gay man is his right?

Is it OK that people's heads can be messed with unqualified "therapists" who seek to to "cure" homosexuality and in the process causimg immeasurable damage to their clients in the name of religion? Why not allow female circumscisionand other mutilations is the name of "religion"? Why restrict yourself just to torture people spiritually and psychologically?

This obnoxious man, West, who has no knowledge nor skills even to attempt the impossible he's about to do ddeserves everything he gets. he was willing to subject this man under psychological mismanagement and spiritual torture and now Adams whones for him.

Should the universities allow any kind of mismanagement in the name of religion? They would fire incompetent surgeon too, why not get rid of incompetent "therapist" who seeks only a lisence to psychologically mutilate his clients.

And don't give me the usual ex-gay fraud as an excuse. Those liars have been exposed so many times before and this West character is another snake oil merchant in the list of religious extremists, nothing new there.

I know that Adams favors aeverything that aims to hurt gays even when practiced by mormons... to a Christian like him it doesn't matter who does the hurting as long as it's a gay man who suffers.

Who was ...
...the old Hollywood producer known for his malapropisms who once said"Anyone who would go to a psychiatrist ought to have his head examined".It reminds me of this case under discussion.The problem here I think is that Dr West's choice of study is not a "science".When people hear the word "science",they associate it with the physical "science" of "two plus two equals four".I majored in Political "Science" in college and pursued Military "Science" in my professional life.But ,of course,these were not "Science's",they were "Arts".I think the headshrinking business falls into the same catagory.

And speaking of headshrinking,have you noticed that it didn't take long for some posters here to change the subject from the posted argument to whatever THEY wanted to talk about?Now what would the "Shrinks" say about THAT behavior?

Purdue
Yes, there is a Purdue University Calumet.

Pirate
Someone has pirated your brain and you are guilty of reading the doctrine of Democrats...don't worry we (Big Government) will take care of you from birth to death.

errata
hompsexual s/b (It's obvious!)

unherited s/b inherited

My old fingers are to blame; well..maybe I'm making excuses.

gkong3
I hope you are right about the young man getting the help he requested.

As you know, we all have tendencies and traits that are unhealthy; the fact that we can recognize them is the first step in changing them.

In my 76 yrs I have seen many miracles; not the "moving mountain" types but even more thrilling, watching a positive change in a person's life. That includes my own! I thank God that He helped me to see the beauty of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I have never been so blessed in any other way.

I pray that the seeker of help received it and is able to walk in the light. This is not a condemnation of those who have hompsexual tendencies; but the practice is equivalent to fornication between those of the opposite sex. God has a definite reason to try to help us all overcome that which can destroy the spiritual soul that we all unherited from our Father.

I didn't mean to get carried away, but it breaks my heart to see the loss that sin brings. We all have to continually persist in the fight.

Pirate
Quit worrying about your right to own a gun if Mitt is elected. He will not take them away from you, or from me.

If the dishwater blond becomes president and has a democratic congress behind her, then you have real cause for concern. And not just about guns!

She wants to be your MOMMY and take care of you, and see that you are properly fed (with her idea of what is proper) and that you can go to any doctor for free if you get a tummyache.

She has absolutely no practical experience; only a disturbed and sick man for a role model.

The offices of Sec of State, AG, etc... will all be dictated by her; she will force her will on any who oppose her.

Her consistency is so bad that Kerry looked like a straight-arrow in comparison.

QED vote for *** for loss of freedom and big MOMMY government.

Mitt Romney is Anti-Gun...

I don't care about his "magic underwear" or his religion. I *DO* care about his attitude toward law abiding gun owners.

Mitt Romney changed a $5/lifetime "FID" card to a $100/every four years card. And when gun owners (some elderly, some on fixed incomes) protested this - and the fact that some police chiefs were literally denying permits on a whim - Romney said that people "didn't have to own guns" and that the state would be happy to dispose of the guns.

Mike this means YOU: If Romney is elected, you can kiss your guns goodby... Hillary wouldn't dare try to grab guns, but Romney would.

QED vote Shillary for Gun Rights...

Some details are verifiable
Darwin R West is a real person, and he did get a degree from Purdue, and he also wrote this paper (see below) for his PhD. And, seeing as he graduated from Brigham Young, I daresay he's Mormon as well. (or he was, at any rate). As he obtained his Masters in 1999, and is currently pursuing a doctorate in marriage and family therapy, I believe (and hope) this story turned out well.

krex.k-state.edu/dspace/bitstream/ 2097/272/1/DarwinWest2007.pdf

PS I also hope the fellow who wanted assistance wrt his attraction to other guys - well, I hope the story ends well for him too.

DR. MIKE:
I hope you are not "putting us on here."

Actually, I hope that the story is not true; it would bolster my hope that major universities would be above such nonsense.

spelling error
intiminated s/b intimidated; sorry!

I wouldn't want, however, to go back to the grammar schools of today. When I went to a six room school house in the country, we had to learn to read, write (cursive), spell and work arithmetic.

If I make spelling errors, it's mainly because I never had the opportunity to learn to type properly. Please excuse and old man!

If this goes
where I think it may be going; there is every reason to stop ALL taxpayer support to any school (from kindergarten to the most prestigious elite universities) that allow a "first rate" student to be intiminated.

The school systems have gone so far away from solid moral values, and actually teaching educational topics, that I fear for the youngest of my 21 grandchildren. I have several who are less than 12 yrs old. I am warning my children (obviously) their parents to keep alert about this insidious practice.

Teacher's in public schools have no business foisting values on children that are not acceptable to parents. Since I pay taxes to support the schools, I am going to become much more agressive about this in my locality.

Dr. Adams has in the past taken a very negative point of view with respect to the LDS Church (of which I am a member); I hope this series will be fair and balanced. (Now, where have I heard that!)

I have actually lived something similar
it was in a different field and at a different (and real) college but it happens.

The only difference between the bigots of yore and the bigots running higher education today is that the ones today have the IQ and education to know better....

What in the world is the difference
when trying to help someone overcome ANYTHING and whether they are LDS members or not? I don't see any point to that.
But the fact that a PROFESSOR felt INTIMIDATED by a STUDENT on any issue is ludicrous! (Why is that word *intimidated* used so often when speaking of homosexuals or their behaviors? Another word is *harassed*. Can they/you/we not find some other words??)
Lastly, the supression of the person's RIGHT TO CHOOSE how he conducts his life - wanting to change his homosexual preferances, is immoral at least. To force him to accept without possiblity of change, WHEN HE WANTS TO CHANGE, is contemptible.

Mr. Adams. You've scooped the MSM!
Unless you are funnin' us, from just this timy tidbit,, I infer that this will be the big blast of the MainStreamMedia's attempt to derail Mr. Romney's Presidential aspirations.
Right?
Then again, I'm just being overly suspicious.
Say . . . Wait a moment!
When did Purdue have a campus in Calumet?
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.