Unfortunate timing, Jim.

Perhaps you hadn't read the news when you penned this piece. In a pretty major development last week, American psychiatrist Dr Robert Spitzer declared that the findings of his famous 2001 research showing ‘highly motivated’ people could change from gay to straight were false.

Yes. Robert Spitzer's findings. False. He has said so himself. At last.

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/04/11/4406240/dr-robert-spitzer-renounces-infamous.html

Spitzer’s findings had certainly conflicted with other scientific knowledge, such as from the animal kingdom which concluded long ago that same-sex orientation was normal, healthy, non-contagious and confined to a small proportion of the community. And they were contradicted by almost all other psychiatric research.

But the Pray-the-gay-away groups have always had old Bob to rely upon for their 'conversion' therapies. But, alas, no longer.

Margaret Court is simply wrong. So was Dr Spitzer. So is Prof John D'Emilio. And so are you, Jim. The Press Council is correct. The claim by mainstream science that sexual orientation is a fixed, unchangeable, God-given gift now has overwhelming support.

And the amazing thing for us theists - Christian and Jewish - is that this is what Scripture has taught us all along:

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=13472

Jim is right on the money but only with this comment "whether an aggressive minority can impose" yes Jim should we let the aggressive minority far right christians such as yourself determine modern Australia's values.

Jim we have limited free speeach in this country and I don't think we need to change one way or the other.

It seems to me that when Jim uses the phrases "aggressively intolerant which does not line up with their views" and "aggressive minority can impose a (new) definition" he is actually making an auotobiographical description of himself, and a manifesto of his own applied politics (of intolerance)

Jim

sorry but I don't follow you. You are saying the press council was wrong for requiring its judgement to be inserted in the online version?? that's the travesty of free speech you are complaining about?

You're also saying that homosexuality is a choice, that gays actively choose such a lifestyle? From the way the article is written I initially had exactly the opposite impression of your arguments.

If my second impression is correct, do you have any evidence that choice is possible? Do you know of any cases where gay people have switched sides? I don't know of any such case, but if you can think of an example let's hear it.

'God-given gift'

hohohoho that's gonna hurt:-)

As the Doug Pollard in question I find it very amusing that Mr Wallace could not be bothered to Google the very extensive research that is available online that does indeed provide the scientific evidence he prefers not to seek: reference has been made to the now repudiated Switzer research and Rachel Maddow yesterday dealt with this issue inn two excellent items here http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/rachel-maddow-how-the-ex-gay-movement-has-harmed-every-gay-persons-life/politics/2012/04/19/38259

As I pointed out in my Herald Sun rebuttal, almost every posterboy the 'gay cure' lobby has ever put up as 'proof' has eventually either admitted that nothing changed and they are still gay (see the Maddow link above) or been sprung cruising gay bars in their spare time.

It would be a joke if this holy rubbish didn't do severe psychological damage to the poor souls caught up in the cycle of self-hatred and despair these people promote.

One Australian man who was trapped in this horror freed himself and now helps others: Paul Martin http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/gay-psychologist-sees-the-light/2008/12/17/1229189662679.html

Anthony Venn-Brown is another, who was an evangelical preacher before he too faced facts and now helps people reconcile their homosexuality and their faith. Now THAT'S a REAL Christian.