why dismiss research done about homosexuals?

Question

When most people hear about research done about homosexuality and why it is wrong, people just dismiss it saying that is not true.

Now looking at the facts, ones sees that at one side the researcher has bothered himself/herself to spend some of his/her time to do some research about why homosexuality is wrong, but then here comes a h omo supporter and says : oh it is not true and dismisses them all together even with out looking at the facts.
I have posted other postings about this issue but people, who call me close minded or worth, has responded in a close minded way, and instead of answer in a responsible way they just go on dismissing the research information all together.

here are sources:
for scientists,
http://www.afec.org/issues/homosexuality/facts.htm

for religious people,
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c040.html

for politicians,
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/5014/CFI/family/index.htm

Answer 1

You’re right, I’ll dump my gay partner of 16 years and turn straight tomorrow. Thanks for bringing these facts to my attention, have a nice night.

Answer 2

I encourage "looking at the facts" but not simply believing something because it looks official.

There are many factors to consider when deciding whether or not to accept a study as fact. For example, some of the studies cited in your first link are from over twenty years ago. Given the amount of social change within the homosexual community over the past couple of decades, it is unlikely that these same findings still apply.

Another thing to look at is the samples from which this data was obtained, most importantly; how large the sample is, what the sample population consists of, and where the sample was obtained. There are many ways to skew data by adjusting the sample so that it seems to be, but is not really, representative of the poplulation you wish to study.

Another important thing to note, is by what methods the data is obtained. Survey? Controlled experiment? Observation? Many of the studies referenced in the first link were conducted by survey. There is a stong instance of response bias in surveys, especially when dealing with a controversial issue such as homosexuality. By response bias, I mean that there is a high chance that people lied or that some people, knowing what would be asked, simply refused to answer. This happens for many reasons, one of which is that the person being surveyed does not want to appear bad or wrong to the one conducting the survey. Especially if the survey presents the issue in question in a negative light.

Finally, it is difficult to accept a study as fact if the experiment has not been repeated, which many of the ones you have referenced have not. Without repeated studies yeilding consistant results, it is very unclear whether or not the data is actually true or if the results stem from certain factors that may have been present in the first study's samples, but may not be in subsequent ones.

Answer 3

Trust me...people aren't responding in an irresponsible way here...they're just offended by your irresponsible question. You keep mentioning "research about why homosexuality is wrong" when in fact the sole purpose of research about homosexuality isn't to prove that it is wrong but simply to figure out why it exists.

Your sources are also extremely biased against homosexuality which doesn't make your point very credible. I actually didn't waste much time on researching it but I wouldn't be surprised if those websites were fraudulent/made up.

To have a defensive reaction to this type of offensive question would be a person's natural response...but I'm sure you know that already. Maybe you should go back to school and focus more on improving yourself rather than interfering with the lives of others...

Answer 4

The problem is that most of that is rubbish. Everyone knows now you can't rely on surveys to accurately tell if someone is gay or straight. This is easily illustrated by the difference between men and women. It used to be said men had more sexual partners than women, which made no sense. But turns out if you make it completely confidential then they start being honest, and the truth comes out that their numbers match. It's not magic, it just proves basic surveys don't work.

Plus where do they conduct their survey? Do they conduct it everywhere, covering everyone in a country, or select populations? If select populations(which is usually the case), then where are they from? LGBT people will usually be more open in larger cities, so if you poll there, you'll have a higher percentage of the population that is LGBT, but if you poll in a small town with say 1000 people, you'll find very few of them will identify as LGBT.

I could shoot holes in a lot of the rest, but it's pointless. You're not spreading research, you're trying to validate your point of view. And I'm sorry but that doesn't fly.

It's so sad that people can't just let us be, no wonder the LGBT community has so many problems, there's all these nosy people always trying to tell us what to do and how to live, who really can stay perfectly fine all the time under that constant pressure and scrutiny? I could be a gay version of mother Theresa and I'd still hear constant nagging about how I'm a bad person, including studies to back it up.

We're not the problem, your attempts at homogenization are. Diversity is natural, homogenization is anti-natural.

I'm just going to stop here now, I'm sure you don't really care or think I'm just attacking.

Answer 5

Personally because most of that research isn't done by non-biased sources. The validity of scientific research is only as good as that of the scientists that perform the studies. And no offense...but any statistics from the "Arkansas Faith and Ethics Council" just aren't that trustworthy to me. Even if the people performing the studies were intending to be non-biased...the simple fact that they have such strong opinions would make that impossible. Surveys are only as true as the people who are answering them, studies are only as accurate as the population is, and a group that advocates as well as researches is probably only going to solicit from within their group for studies and only survey those related to the group in some way. It's an almost automatic skewing of the data unless they try to combat it. Which no offense but I don't trust them to be fair. If the AMA comes out with something I might pay some attention...but I'm sorry I'm too "deviant" (personally I call it intelligent) just to blindly listen to any statement with a "So and So says..." tacked on the front

Answer 6

I think it might have something to do with the "research" having been published by right wing fundamentalist organizations who have vested interests in making sure the evidence fits the theories, this "research" being no more than the compilations of the personal "observations" and views of preachers pretending to be researchers who make up their own numbers in order to sound more authoritative to their followers.

I've checked your links, one is to the "Arkansas Faith and Ethics Council", the second one is obvious, and the third to Beverly LaHaye's political group.

Unless you have links that to *credible* scientific organizations, and not to churches operating out of post office boxes somewhere in the "Bible Belt" claiming to be full blown scientific organizations, this alleged "research" is going to wind up being dismissed out of hand.

That's all there is to it.

But if you do have links to well known, established, well respected and highly credible research institutes that can back up your points, I would certainly be interested in reading their studies, and promise to do so with an open mind.

Answer 7

The Arkansas Faith and Ethics Council?? The Christian Answers Network?? The Concerned Women for America??

Really unbiased sources you chose there now aren't they??

Come back when you find sources that don't have a religious slant to them.

Answer 8

Your "science" facts are grossly misconstrued. The numbers are outrageous and often humorous in an offensive sort of way. Why can't you simply get off your high horse and acknowledge the fact that your research is as biased towards heteros as FOX news is toward conservatives.

Answer 9

I have been looking for SCIENTIFIC data, or MEDICAL data, that is accepted by the majority of the related field for a while. When I saw your link to your proof, from the scientists, I thought I finally found a scientific group who had the answer !

Your source from the scientists, www.afec.org, has nothing to do with science. It is a RELIGIOUS group. I got the following paragraph from their website - verbatim.

Welcome to the Arkansas Faith & Ethic Council's website (AFEC). Use the menu on the left to find out more about AFEC, the issues we deal with and God's mandate to us to be "salt" and "light". In addition, you will find ways in which we can serve you, your church and your community.

I am open minded, and am just looking for PROOF. If you accept any RELIGIOUS, or POLITICAL beliefs, and claim that they are scientific, then you are worse than close minded - you are believing fiction as fact.

I suggest that you OPEN your mind, and do a bit of real reading on the subject. Don't speak about what you know nothing of, as is evident by your ranting in your question.

First things first, learn the difference between SCIENTIST and RELIGIOUS GROUPS.

Second thing, stop passing off religious blatherings as SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH.

And finally, I want to let you know that I did answer this in a responsible way. Now, will you please be responsible and don't call the religious beliefs or political beliefs research.

TO WIDE AWAKE:
Although I do believe in the AMA and APA, I don't believe that they have stated anything about homosexuality being inborn. They don't know what the cause is, but what they both agree on, is that it is NOT a disease. If you can show me any links (APA or AMA links) that verify your statement about being inborn, I would be forever grateful.

Very Interesting - 6 hours after posting, I have 6 thumbs up, and 5 thumbs down. That means at least 5 people don't like FACTS ! No wonder people can't understand things anymore when they disagree with FACTS. I challenge ANYONE to prove my statements wrong, especially the ones that give me a thumbs down.

Answer 10

Because its biological. you dont need research. You biologically like to look at people of the opposite sex, and are in turn attracted to them. Homosexual people see someone of the same sex and feel the same way you do when you see a hot @ss girl or guy. its just simple science, thats all. think of one certain type of people that do not turn you on at all, thats what it could be equated to for homosexual people to look at people of the opposite sex, you can view them as an attractive person, but you wouldnt want to get down with that person. thats how i would view it. i personally love girls and do not find men physically attractive, but you cant act like "why do all those girls think that brad pitt is so hot?!?!?" he is was better looking than most dudes hahahah

Answer 11

All of your sources are from religious organizations, thus a clear bias persists with the intention to find homosexuality unnatural and wrong. You would be better served to find secular examples of dissention, if such examples exist.