Of course many of these studies are questionable for a myriad of reasons. The point is that they found a "doctor" in some pit of hell to give it his seal of approval.
Source?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Of course many of these studies are questionable for a myriad of reasons. The point is that they found a "doctor" in some pit of hell to give it his seal of approval.
Not always. Sometimes they make sense with all but their conclusions. in any case, th ats why you not only present a study but analise it yourself. How it was done, what did they find, how does what they find lis to their final conclusions, etc.
You have not yet put exampes though. Te cases I am talking about are not about something found good wheit was bad, but the other way around, which is harder.
Haven't you seen enough examples on RF to learn that everybody has a PHD in their corner?
Not at all.
I havent seen a single biologist with a PhD pretending evolution never happened for example.
I havent seen someone with a PhD saying rape is good for e character or some silly thing like that either.
Its important to clarify that we mean PhD in the APPROPIATE field. A PhD in geology does not make one an authority in sociology for example.
Pick any disputed topic, ideally one with moral/religious implications, and do an internet search on it. Make an actual effort to learn both sides of the arguments and you'll see what I mean.
Why me? You are making the extraordinary claim.
I thiink Me, Sunstne and Father are still waiting for you to cite this doctors that say pedophilia and worst things are good for people (I doubt any of us is holding breath though)
Why me? You are making the extraordinary claim.
I thiink Me, Sunstne and Father are still waiting for you to cite this doctors that say pedophilia and worst things are good for people (I doubt any of us is holding breath though)
The NAMBLA website would be a good place to start I would think. Anyone want to venture over there?
Of course many of these studies are questionable for a myriad of reasons. The point is that they found a "doctor" in some pit of hell to give it his seal of approval.
Haven't you seen enough examples on RF to learn that everybody has a PHD in their corner?
The NAMBLA website would be a good place to start I would think. Anyone want to venture over there?
The NAMBLA website would be a good place to start I would think. Anyone want to venture over there?
Hasn't history taught us that "scientific findings" are often a reflection of the morals in our culture?
Another example of this principle is the scientific racism found 100+ years ago.
Children are women under 12 and men under 14. Abuse is non consensual sex.
When they become teen, they are able of consense.
Children are children, they can easily be manipulated for that very reason. Turning 12 does not make you an adult.
*sighs*
Here we go again. Yeah, yeah, yeah....I am only justifying my deviant behavior by coercing a "doctor" to tell me it's okay when I really only need to admit that my "orientation" isn't an orientation at all, that it's a choice, and that I need to stop thinking such nasty horrible thoughts about women (which is no better than thoughts about raping a child), and to just pray the gay away and try really really hard next time.
Heard it a million times. Next?
For once, we agree.