Comments on: NARTH pulls the Melonakos article https://wthrockmorton.com/2006/12/22/narth-pulls-the-melonakos-article/ A [retired] college psychology professor's observations about public policy, mental health, sexual identity, and religious issues Fri, 05 Jan 2007 14:28:55 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3 By: Jim https://wthrockmorton.com/2006/12/22/narth-pulls-the-melonakos-article/#comment-3102 Fri, 05 Jan 2007 14:28:55 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com//2006/12/22/narth-pulls-the-melonakos-article/#comment-3102 Dr Throckmorten, I clicked on the Lifesite News link in this post and the link does not work. Maybe they followed NARTH’s lead and removed it from their page.

]]> By: Jim https://wthrockmorton.com/2006/12/22/narth-pulls-the-melonakos-article/#comment-3101 Wed, 03 Jan 2007 13:33:36 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com//2006/12/22/narth-pulls-the-melonakos-article/#comment-3101 As a NARTH member, I am glad to see them remove this article. I was near quitting last year, but if NARTH changes I may stick with it. I am not a pyschologist but I believe people change, I have family members who have so I think NARTH can be very helpful. I hope this is a sign of better things to come.

]]> By: Warren https://wthrockmorton.com/2006/12/22/narth-pulls-the-melonakos-article/#comment-3100 Wed, 03 Jan 2007 05:02:02 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com//2006/12/22/narth-pulls-the-melonakos-article/#comment-3100 Anon – While Michael is not a promoter of innate and immutable per se, I agree that the professions often do promote this view. Dogmatism on either side is not warranted by research.

]]> By: Michael Bussee https://wthrockmorton.com/2006/12/22/narth-pulls-the-melonakos-article/#comment-3099 Thu, 28 Dec 2006 21:02:20 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com//2006/12/22/narth-pulls-the-melonakos-article/#comment-3099 I am a suppoerter of gay rights (actually equal rights for all citizens) but I for one have NEVER expressed a conclusion that homosexuality “must be inborn”. The FACT of the matter is that no one (repeat no one) knows what “causes” homosexuality. We also do not know what “causes” heterosexuality for that matter. Soy? Dysfunctional parents? Demons? Eunuchs from birth? The list goes on and on…

There are many THEORIES about what “causes” sexual orientation, but theories are only guesses (or possible explanations) for a phenonmenon. Theories are not facts. Some “guesses” seem to be more likely and seem to have more emperical evidence. Some do not. It is arrogant (and unscientific) for “gay rights supporters”, NARTH or any other individual or group to state categorically that they KNOW.

One other important point: NARTH presents itself as a “scientific” organization and seeks the validation of other scientific organizations (like the APA). NARTH therefore has a greater responsibility to be clear that they are stating an OPINION only (a theory) and NOT present their religious/political bias as “science”.

]]> By: anon https://wthrockmorton.com/2006/12/22/narth-pulls-the-melonakos-article/#comment-3098 Thu, 28 Dec 2006 05:07:48 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com//2006/12/22/narth-pulls-the-melonakos-article/#comment-3098 Michael, while it is certainly true that NARTH has made up its mind about homosexuality and isn’t interested in considering other views, how does this differ from the approach of gay rights supporters who are determined to conclude that homosexuality must be inborn?

]]>