BS: 'Gay marriage' question

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 07:47 AM

""Actually I am quite a "good" person, I find it difficult to "hate" anyone""

Except Gays, Travellers and those of us who disagree with you.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 07:54 AM

Don....do you ever read any posts?
I have just spent an amount of time responding to Tia's civil question on this subject.

If you scroll up a few posts, you can read why I do not think this legislation will improve the alarming male homosexual infection rates.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:02 AM

Saul, I am sorry but I don't wish to be involved with you on this forum.......You are an extremely disingenuous person.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:14 AM

Your question is simply,"when did you stop beating your wife".

I may have had a basic education, but I am far from stupid.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: saulgoldie
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:16 AM

Why thank you for that, ake. Please elaborate. Actual quotes of my disingenuity would help me reflect and to become a better person like you.

Saul

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 08:49 AM

Eliza....Your posts would sit better on the pages of some teenagers pop magazines, than on the pages of Mudcat.
The membership here is perfectly capable of wrestling with the intricacies of divisive social issues......if they have the will!!

Please show me where I have ever displayed any "fierce vicious hatred" against homosexuals, I am against this bad legislation, not homosexuals.    Homosexuals are part of society along with several other sexual minorites and to be "against them" would be ridiculous.

Someone up above asked why smokers were not discriminated against, which of course they are in the UK at least.....so it should be clear that "equality" is not always the only word that matters.

On use of the word "gay", would it be nice if we thought up cosy words to describe other less well supported sexual, racial,or political minorities?.....

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 09:24 AM

""Don....do you ever read any posts?
I have just spent an amount of time responding to Tia's civil question on this subject.""

Yes Ake, I do read posts, even yours, and nowhere in the post to which you refer is there any sensible response to either of my questions.

You certainly make a lot of basically suspect assertions, based in bad arithmetic, which do not stand up to scrutiny, predicated, as they are, upon your purely personal opinion that:-

1). Homosexuals are by nature more promiscuous than heterosexuals. STD statistics clearly indicate they are NOT!
2). Homosexuals do not want to enter the state of marriage (where did you acquire your mindreading expertise, BTW?). The queues of them booking weddings wherever it is permitted give the lie to that assumption.
3). That homosexuals' relationships revolve around sex only, rather than any real loving commitment. Nothing could be further from the truth.
4). That telling children in school about the existence of homosexuality is promoting it as a safe "lifestyle" and will persuade some of them to "convert". Simple claptrap! They are either straight or gay and either way, knowledge will not hurt them.

Your very insistence upon calling homosexuality a "lifestyle" (which it is not) is a blatant attempt to cast gender orientation in the worst possible light.

You are, whether you know it or not, posting homophobic lies.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 10:17 AM

I'm rather flattered, akenaton, that you feel my 'posts would sit better on the pages of some teenagers pop magazines'. Although I don't read those sorts of publications, it would be a jolly good idea to encourage the young to see the world in a kinder, more accepting light than you appear to do. As it happens, I didn't actually name you (or anyone else on this thread) as displaying fierce, vicious hatred. My observation was general. But of course, if the cap fits...

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 11:00 AM

Cop out Liz.......   :0)

Don if you insist that male homosexuals are no more promiscuous than heteros.....why is there such a huge difference in infection rates?

You cant have it every way, either the cause is promiscuity, or there is a problem with male to male sex?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Musket
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 11:05 AM

Just to move things on a bit, rather than give undue prominency to one sad soul who is scared and confused that some people are not the same as others in some regard, but all still people...

The Archbishop of York, who despite his eccentricity (and therefore very engaging personality) disappointed many people when he said that government have no right to legislate on marriage as it isn't in their gift.

Putting aside the fact that it is, so hopefully he will read up on his obligations before he next takes his place in The House of Lords; If government can't legislate on marriage, then who can? Ah! They say, The Church can!.

But if you don't believe in all that superstitious nonsense, and the government can't legislate according to the church.. You can define marriage by your own belief principles?

So.. All this is for nothing after all. Local government through their registrars conduct marriages. Local governments have to have published decrees setting out how they guarantee equality. Can't see how gay marriage can be seen as anything other than legal myself.. Churches have charitable trusts, so The Charities Commission are guilty of dereliction of duty if they don't remove the charitable status of churches who don't promote equality. After all, it is an obligation of a charitable trust...

Come to think about it, The House of Lords, which some Bishops have the right to sit in, have an equality statement saying that membership is irrespective of race or gender.

Christians don't want religious equality at all. They seem to enjoy religious privilege... Nice landing pad for rabid bigots. No wonder membership has dropped in the census.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 02:09 PM

You miss the point musket, this is not about "equality", that can be gained through civil union. Its about perception.....about being viewed as "the same".

Being "the same" does not mean being "equal"

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Allan Conn
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 03:09 PM

"Allan...The Scottish govt said before the "consultation", that they "were of a mind to introduce the legislation".....could that not be seen as an attempt to affect the result?"

They've been quite open about the fact that they'd like to introduce the legislation. Doesn't stop them having a consultation exercise! But it wasn't in itself an actual official vote on the subject. Just a test of opinion and views and it wasn't even restricted to people in Scotland. The polls taken randomly by people like Mori are surely a better clue as to what actual opinion is in the country - and they show a reasonable majority in favour of the legislation. As to the SNP being just like other politicians then well of course they are!

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 10:47 PM

Steve Shaw: "Being concerned with someone else's sex life--now, THAT'S NEUROTIC! Damn. Wish I'd thought of that. Nice one, Don!"

he almost believes it...when he's not reading 'The National Enquirer' at the check out stands!!!

BTW, Steve..You have NO credibility..you busted yourself bigger than shit!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Dec 12 - 11:22 PM

GoofuS, I haven't looked at a copy of the National Enquirer in twenty-five years, and that was in a supermarket. And I couldn't help looking at it because it was right by the cashier.

If I want to read Science Fiction, I read classics by Clarke and Asimov.

I leave things like the National Enquirer to folks like you. But I suggest your time, and Ake's time, would be better spent reading things like "Scientific American" or "Psychology Today" that things than bear headlines like "Jane Fonda has Alien UFO Pilot's Baby!"

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Dec 12 - 01:16 AM

Don..sometimes I do browse an occasional Psych Today.....but then I read a whole lot of that.....even wrote my thesis...I have my degree in Psych....

BTW, did you read any bios on Baldwin?..He was another homosexual...who changed his 'mind'....check it out!

But alas...are you still promoting bad science in the name of 'civil rights'?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Dec 12 - 07:43 AM

""why is there such a huge difference in infection rates?""

Go on then. You tell me why there is a huge difference in all the other STDs.

You take a group which is a small minority, quite separate from the mainstream distributors of Gonorrhea, Chlamidia et al, and a specific infection gets into that group, quite by chance, and is spread through the group because it is small and isolated.

In Africa the reverse is true. AIDS got into the hetero population first and in some places 40% of the hetero population is infected.

If 40% of gays were infected and 40% of straights, the actual number of infected gays would still be a tiny proportion of the whole.

That still doesn't explain why you would deny them the safety of monogamous marriage.

None of your comments ever tackle that one, so we draw the obvious conclusion.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Dec 12 - 09:44 AM

Don, STIs are established in both communities, and there is crossover via bisexuals.
In the West the infection rate is much greater in MSMs than any other group.
They are a very high risk group, and in the West the very highest.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Raedwulf
Date: 17 Dec 12 - 11:00 AM

Ake, didn't I tell you to shut up? Once again, you are not making a great deal of sense. Once again, it's just too much to ask to wade through every damn post. However, I thought the title of this looked familiar and, having found my last response, I read through a fair few more before giving up somewhere around 12/12/12...

Hetreosexuals are. Homosexuals are. Promiscuity has nothing to do with either state and, frankly, sod all to do with gender either. If you think females are not as promiscuous as males, you are almost certainly kidding yourself. Or do you think that 90% of the men are fucking only the 'floozy' 10% of women? Come off it.

The thread isn't about sex; it's about marriage. It's about two people making a lifetime commitment to each other. Even if you have any statisitcs to prove homosexual marriage is flakier than heterosexual marriage, I don't care. Why SHOULDN'T two people who love each other be allowed to make a firm commitment in law? That's what marriage is, from the legal point of view. It doesn't have anything to do with race, gender, age, or anything else. It's a consenting contract between two people.

Why the hell do you have so much trouble with it? I don't tell you how to live your life (well, apart from telling you to shut up occasionally! ;-) ). Why the hell should you have any right to tell other people how they should live theirs?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Dec 12 - 12:09 PM

Oh!....alright then. :0(

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Dec 12 - 01:04 PM

Being as 'promiscuity' seems to be the culprit, in both hetero and homosexuality, are we now going to take another look at promiscuity??...or just slough it off and think it's alright for homosexuality OR heterosexuality??
Haven't enough people been hurt, or made ill by its 'side effects'????
Hasn't enough families been destroyed by it yet, before a light goes on??..Oh sure, we can pontificate about how one or the other has a 'right' to do whatever they want..as long as we close our eyes to the aftermath....but then there is a saying,.."A hard dick has no conscience"....so does that mean we always have to defer to a lesser intelligence?..or tolerate those who do?
Look at the campaign against cigarettes, and their ill-effects on our, and everyone else's health....but it's OK, to be promiscuous because it 'feels' better, and we are not thinking of anything that it causes..except, of course, how 'good' we feel while engaged in thoughtless acts of selfishness!..Besides, because we don't want to look at the FACT, that it is a destroying factor to both families, identities, and the psychological damage it causes on both the participants, (whether you think so or not),..because you don't immediately SEE the damage, I guess a lot of people don't 'FEEL' it is a stupid practice....so now we argue who is at the greater fault.
if you 'feel' the need to fuck someone...fuck yourself!...and promote the practice of being both faithful and committed. Loyalty has its own rewards!...that more than the participants benefit!!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Dec 12 - 02:30 PM

""Being as 'promiscuity' seems to be the culprit, in both hetero and homosexuality, are we now going to take another look at promiscuity??...or just slough it off and think it's alright for homosexuality OR heterosexuality??
Haven't enough people been hurt, or made ill by its 'side effects'????""

Blimey, I'm agreeing with Goofus, whatever next?

Well, actually that comment simply demands the question. Why, if you are saying we must reduce promiscuity, are you only willing to permit heteros to use the most effective reducing agent yet discovered, namely marriage?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 17 Dec 12 - 02:39 PM

Next question for akentaton;
There are no confimred cases of female to female transmission of HIV in the CDC database (http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/women/resources/factsheets/wsw.htm).
So, do you oppose same-sex marriage for women?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Dec 12 - 03:14 PM

Goofus, if you are referring to James A. Baldwin, the author, he was homosexual. But I find nothing about him "changing his mind." In fact, he says, "Everybody's journey is individual. If you fall in love with a boy, you fall in love with a boy. The fact that many Americans consider it a disease says more about them than it does about homosexuality."

I agree with him.

As far as "bad science" is concerned, so-called "conversion therapy" has been an abject failure. The American Psychiatric Association has condemned it as "pseudo-science" based on false assumptions. A study conducted prior to 2002 showed an 80% recidivism rate, and of the remaining 20%, most of them embrace celebacy. Several people had to be treated for extreme depression following their so-called "conversion," and there were some six suicides.
   
And you claim that I am promoting "bad science!!"

And you claim to have a degree in Psychology. How long ago was that? Were they teaching trepanning? Drilling holes in the skull in order to let the Evil Spirits out?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Dec 12 - 05:37 PM

There you go again, Don..prattling on about something you alter in my posts. Don't you ever stop doing that??

If you would have read further, about Baldwin, he DID promote his lifestyle, especially when he had moved to Paris...however, when he returned to the U.S., he left that behind, and became a Christian(his Dad was a minister when James was younger).

Either you didn't read far enough, OR you intentionally left that out!...either way, your post is misleading!

Then you go on to claim I said you were promoting bad science...being as that has been true in the past, it wasn't about you...it was about those who promote bad science to prove a bogus point on which they are basing a political agenda on.....Is that you?....OH, then maybe you ARE in there, but it's not all about you!

Conversion therapy an abject failure???..Are you talking about transgender therapy, which of course, you are not..or therapy for homosexuals who no longer embrace or want to live that lifestyle?
We've been around this bush before..my position is this: IF a homosexual desires to no longer be a homosexual, then therapy should be available to him/her. Got a problem with that??...if so, maybe you need therapy!
..and don't pretend to know that you didn't know I was a counselor, (more while I was younger), and didn't still practice...HOWEVER, it is mostly for those I feel I can help...and BTW, for the last few years I've been doing it pro bono...and as a side note, my recovery rate is far beyond the national average...it's sorta like 'giving back' to humanity.
Any more off the wall questions??...this time let's stop being so deceiving to your perceived 'audience'.....you only halfway got away with it the first time.

Other than that, hope you are doing well....

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Dec 12 - 05:42 PM

Slight drift, as Don has raised this subject. Big drift, in fact; but there you go! ~~

No, probably not trepanning; but could well have been Electro-Compulsive Therapy, which had its disgraceful vogue in psychiatric treatment. (I take it it is not still going on?, but am not even sure of that.) A close relative of mine, my uncle, younger brother of my father, was subjected to it. Reading his diaries after his death I recall as one of the most traumatic experiences of my life: and that was just reading about it at second hand.

I am convinced that future generations will look back at our generation's use of ECT to treat schizophrenia with the same horror as we look back at bleeding as a sure-fire cure for the Plague.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Dec 12 - 05:47 PM

MtheGM,...AGREED!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Dec 12 - 06:39 PM

ECT stands for electroconvulsive therapy. The amazing thing is that Guffers, claiming to be some kind of psycho-fixer (physician, heal thyself, eh!), failed to pick Michael up on this elementary mistake. That's bad enough, but what's really revolting is Guffers' reference to his "recovery rate".

Recovery from what?

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Dec 12 - 09:54 PM

And there YOU go again, GoofuS, claiming that you didn't say something that you DID! Kinda dumb when it's right up there where anybody can read it for themselves!

Re: Baldwin. I don't know what you are referring to, but a bio of him that I read didn't mention anything like that. Care to name your sources?

And as far as the failure of conversion therapy (convert a homosexual into a heterosexual through counseling and various other means, such as aversion theraphy) to produce any desirable results is concerned, don't get on MY case, take it up with the American Psychiatric Association. THEY are the ones who condemned it as worse than useless!

And if YOU are any kind of a psychological counselor, then the skies are filled with flying pigs!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 12:54 AM

First of all..I do NOT recommend, nor have I ever, nor do I approve of ANY 'electro' treatments at all...NOR do I recommend NOR prescribe drugs. Those are for psychiatrists, of whom I have my differences with. (Its a psychologist/psychiatrist 'thing'). Because I don't relate to those therapies, nor agree with them, is the reason i didn't/don't even comment on them. If you disagree, I don't care, nor am interested in 'debating' it. They are treating symptoms, not causes.

Baldwin:..Read a better bio...preferably not in your National Enquirer..so put that down and ...(I might cobble one up for ya', but then if you don't like it, you'll, as in the past, start attacking the source)...when most people have never heard of him, or give a shit(unless you knew him...and that more toward the end, because he refuted quite a few of his earlier positions..and yes, even including his role in the Panthers...and homosexuality).

Not interested in much what the APA, nor the AMA endorse or not endorse....that's like believing a politician, about freedom and power, or a religion about freedom and power....take your pick!


Don Firth: "And if YOU are any kind of a psychological counselor, then the skies are filled with flying pigs!!"


Better invest in an umbrella, because a lotta' shit is going to be falling on ya'! ....Here's lookin' at ya'!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 01:23 AM

Steve ~~ That was what I posted, except that I put a hyphen in: can't see that as such a grievous error.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 01:48 AM

I'm not surprised that you don't agree with the American Psychiatric Association or the American Medical Association. One of their main concerns is maintaining high standards.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 02:18 AM

Well, until they cut their unholy alliance with the pharmaceutical corporations, then many of their 'promoted cures' are nothing more than the drug dealers on the street...except with the legal paperwork!
Not all....but enough where I'm leery..how 'bout you?

Nor do I accept all their 'findings' from funded(by whom?), because of advantages certain 'findings' are also very profitable, as well.

Do you agree?..or disagree?.....(not that it matters, as far as changing FACTS, that a lot of people are also aware of!)!!

If the AMA or the APA recommends it, hmm..we should 'buy' one of those 'recommendations!'............Not all...but enough to be leery.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 02:40 AM

In some places ECT is still used to treat severe depression.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Musket
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 04:12 AM

You know, I don't have differences with psychiatric professionals Goofus. After all, I have no recognised nor non recognised competency in the field. (I am involved in regulating mental health but that's another issue.)

However, as a member of the public, I may find treatments, clinical pathways and environments hard to understand and difficult for such professionals to convince me of their stance.

Your ability to have your differences with them displays an understanding of their field I had no idea you had. I'm impressed..

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 06:00 AM

How depressing, Keith!

~M~

No unworthy pun intended.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 06:54 AM

Michael, you said "electro-compulsive therapy", not electroconvulsive therapy. It wasn't so much that forgivable error, more that Guffers, our resident guru psychologist, failed to pick up on it when he "agreed" with you (poor you).

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 06:59 AM

In spite of my doctor sister advocating ECT for depression, and claiming that good results can be achieved with it, I've always thought it resembles kicking the TV to restore the picture.
To suggest that homosexuality is a disease would be laughable if it wasn't so insulting. One might as well suggest that one could be cured of a predilection for film-going or gardening or breeding Siamese cats by drug therapy or hynpotism. Why would one wish to? Unless one is a homicidal maniac, people should live and let live.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 07:07 AM

Oops ~~ so I did, Steve. A terrible dropped bollock indeed. Multi-apologies for not having proofread properly before posting! I shall go forthwith down the garden and eat worms...

~M~ with ☹ hung in shame!

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 08:26 AM

So Goofus doesn't think much of the regulatory bodies of, not just the Psychology/Psychiatry specialties, but also the whole medical profession.

What does that tell you about his likely qualification to counsel patients with psychological problems, among which there may be some closet gays with difficulties relating to their sexual orientation.

I shudder to think of the damage they might (probably will) suffer at the hands of a gender biased snake oil salesman, telling them they can simply deny who and what they are.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 02:08 PM

Don, you seem to have difficulties in distinguishing between the 'regulatory bodies' and what they are SUPPOSED to do, versus what they have become, in the wake of corruptible practices employed be the pharmaceutical companies, their lobbyists, the FDA, and popular political notions. Just look at that 'small' list...and ask yourself, "With all those 'regulatory bodies' protecting us, why was it necessary for Obamacare to get medical help to those who need it?

Have you watched the 'news' lately and noticed how many commercial sponsors are law firms gathering clients for large class action lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies for harmful drugs, that somehow slipped by those wonderful 'regulatory bodies', into regular medical use?...or how many recalls for 'medicines' that were deemed 'safe', by 'who'???...and turned out not to be so safe after all...and look at how many of them there are???
Has it occurred to you that SOMEBODY, in those 'bodies', isn't doing their job right...OR maybe they are...depending on who they are REALLY working for!

Also, for those who don't know, or are aware of...one major difference between a psychologist and a psychiatrist, is that a psychiatrist can prescribe drugs, whereas a psychologist doesn't. For years there has been a running battle in regards to that.
Psychologists see that treating patients with drugs is largely a scam that treats symptomatically, and does not address the cause, where psychiatrists, will say that the medications are necessary, easier and more convenient..........ask any child who has blown their brains out, committing suicide from the side effects of taking Ritalin!...But after all, it IS 'necessary, easier and more convenient'!
For a couple of years, I taught Math, to some students who were deemed to have ADD....some were even on regular routine of prescription drugs...Now to me, 'ADD' is another word for someone who is 'daydreaming' because they are BORED!...and do not give their attention to what they are 'supposed' to be thinking about...so they wander off into "I don't give a fuck land...I'm entertaining myself'!...and after all, thinking about what I WANT to think about isn't as hard as learning this other stuff that doesn't interest me, and that I'll probably never use, anyway!!"..............and to me, if you can't capture a child's imagination, and use it as a vehicle to learn, then you are probably a union protected teacher, more concerned with tenure and benefits, than being on the student's side, and getting him/her into the adventure of learning something that they WILL use!

For instance: You give a child a problem of, find the remainder of a sum, minus 20% etc etc..blah blah blah...
Now to incorporate imagination to the problem:...Now Susie, your Mom is giving you $40.00 to go to the store to buy some shoes and socks. When you get to the store, you see '20% off' of everything in that department...how many shoes and socks can you buy, if the shoes are $19.95 per pair, before the discount, and socks are $2.98 a pair? By the way, you can stop at the ice cream counter and buy a cone for 50 cents, if you have enough change...and give Mom the rest back.
how many pairs of shoes and socks, how much were they, can you get the cone and how much change would be left, for Mom?
It is amazing, IF you verbally give the problem, involve the kids in the conversation, and let their imagination spur them on to get the answer....AND MAKE THE CLASS AND LEARNING FUN!
.............beats shoving some Ritalin at them!..because you are inconvenienced by taking the time!..........But after all, it IS 'necessary, easier and more convenient'!
So, yes, there is a difference between the two schools of thought...and in my humble, or 'not so humble' opinion, drugs should only be used in extreme, emergency situations.....and not in place of caring and loving your child, and being involved with them..where THEY live!
As far as psychologists, those are people you go to, when you don't have a knowledgeable, caring friend..so you go to a 'professional'!
In the post industrial revolution era, priorities for humans have been re-shuffled, to accommodate the 'needs' and 'stresses' of a synthetic world of 'needs' and 'stresses'....leaves VERY little time for the nurturing of the offspring....after all, we have to 'MAKE IT' in the 'real world'....don't have time for the kid??..he's acting weird..quick get the Ritalin or other meds, so I, selfish pig that I am, don't have to be bothered! It takes too much of my time and energies!

Does that give you a perspective of the differences?

GfS

BTW, in a related topic....a child's sexual identity CAN be distorted, as early as in the womb, by mothers whose stresses are setting up the nervous systems and receptors, of the newly forming fetus'...others can be screwed up by a emotionally detached father, as the child is growing up....sometimes offending the child who cannot 'let it go'...and.......wait a minute, I could go on huge about this one for just a 'P.S.'......perhaps another post....let me know.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 03:34 PM

Also, for those who don't know, or are aware of...one major difference between a psychologist and a psychiatrist, is that a psychiatrist can prescribe drugs, whereas a psychologist doesn't. For years there has been a running battle in regards to that.
Psychologists see that treating patients with drugs is largely a scam that treats symptomatically, and does not address the cause, where psychiatrists, will say that the medications are necessary, easier and more convenient..........ask any child who has blown their brains out, committing suicide from the side effects of taking Ritalin!...But after all, it IS 'necessary, easier and more convenient'!
For a couple of years, I taught Math, to some students who were deemed to have ADD....some were even on regular routine of prescription drugs...Now to me, 'ADD' is another word for someone who is 'daydreaming' because they are BORED!...and do not give their attention to what they are 'supposed' to be thinking about...so they wander off into "I don't give a fuck land...I'm entertaining myself'!...and after all, thinking about what I WANT to think about isn't as hard as learning this other stuff that doesn't interest me, and that I'll probably never use, anyway!!"..............and to me, if you can't capture a child's imagination, and use it as a vehicle to learn, then you are probably a union protected teacher, more concerned with tenure and benefits, than being on the student's side, and getting him/her into the adventure of learning something that they WILL use!

You are barking. If you haven't already been struck off you fully deserve to be.

BTW, in a related topic....a child's sexual identity CAN be distorted, as early as in the womb, by mothers whose stresses are setting up the nervous systems and receptors, of the newly forming fetus'...others can be screwed up by a emotionally detached father, as the child is growing up....sometimes offending the child who cannot 'let it go'...and.......wait a minute, I could go on huge about this one for just a 'P.S.'......perhaps another post....let me know.

This is just bollocks. You have no evidence for this malevolent nonsense. I hope to Christ you're lying to us about your having been some sort of practitioner, because, if you're not, you must have done a lot of damage to a lot of people.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 04:28 PM

GoofuS, I'm very much aware of the peccadilloes of organizations such as the ADA and the AMA and their relationship with the pharmaceutical companies. But here, we are not necessarily talking about drugs, we are talking about psychology and psychiatry, and trying to talk someone into believing that he is different from what he is, or feels himself to be.

If YOU have had success with conversion therapy, perhaps you should write up your results for the scientific journels, so your work can be subjected to PEER REVIEW.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 04:32 PM

". . . journals. . . ."

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:15 PM

As a qualified teacher with decades of experience GfS, I can state that your rambling remarks about children with Attention Deficit Disorder and other similar problems are far wide of the mark. They do not 'daydream because they are bored'. They can be seriously disturbed, hyperactive and sometimes violent. There is a vast difference between a naughty, bored pupil and a child with a disorder. I agree that Ritalin and other strong medication is not always the answer, but the problem is far more complex and serious than you seem to understand. Also, forgive me, but the style and ferocity of your posts make me doubt very much whether you are the type of person who should be counselling or offering therapy to others.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 05:54 PM

Exactly so!

GoofuS, it's the tenor of your discourse that makes me serious question whether you actually ARE a family counselor or are attempting to bull the rest of us into believing you have any qualifications whatsoever in this field.

I am convinced that it's the latter!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 Dec 12 - 11:31 PM

Eliza, I came in to only teach Math...I approached the teaching of it, by getting the students involved, in a way that WAS interesting to them..and it DID hold their attention. The is a LOT of misdiagnosis of kids, and some adults slough it off as ADD...when it was no such thing..and BTW, a child who hears that from his/her parents, and is treated as such, can cause more damage, than the actual condition.

Not ALL ADD is accurately identified..and when I hear someone say this or that person has it, I tend to be a bit skeptical..and ALWAYS consider the source!...and observe for myself.
The example I posted, was because the class was an alleged class of ADD kids....I related to them as one on one, with no anticipated ADD interactions...and it was amazing how well we related...AND they DID learn!

Don Firth: "GoofuS, it's the tenor of your discourse that makes me serious question whether you actually ARE a family counselor or are attempting to bull the rest of us into believing you have any qualifications whatsoever in this field."

When I first posted a few years ago, I think it was a topic about relationships of one form or another...and I warned that I did NOT want to get involved with the topic...because I did know what I was talking about, and through educated eyes....that's before I knew that a lot of the Mudcatters were politically wasted beyond the point of common sense.
It was to that same audience that you came on and played your games.
let's not repeat the same bullshit.
If you have a related topic, post it....not this 'rally the troops around my political cause', because you fancy yourself as some sort of political activist...OK?

Let's stick to facts and not try to play to the crowd, and persuade with mere sophistry..

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Don Firth
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 01:00 AM

GoofuS, I have NOT played any games with you, or with anyone else. Frankly, you are not that important to me.

Nor is there a prevailing political position here on Mudcat. Anyone who pays attention knows that. All one has to do is read through a few threads on controversial issues to easily see the diversity of opinion, so if you're under the impression that everyone here believes alike, you either haven't been paying attention or you're not bright enough to see beyond your own prejudices.

My interest is in the TRUTH, and in the RIGHTS of minority groups. I fully realize that in the minds of some, my dedication to the truth means that I've been "brainwashed," and my interest in the rights of minorities makes me a "liberal."

Liberal? Yes, in the classical, philosophical meaning of the term. Not in the silly, non-comprehending epithet that is tossed around "liberally" by people such as yourself.

I AM sticking to the FACTS. I am NOT promulgating my own prejudices as facts and claiming that I'm some kind of ill-defined "professional" in the the area, hence have special knowledge that others don't possess.

If you can't stand the heat, don't sit on the barbecue.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 02:14 AM

Of course you'd say that.....what else could you say??


Come on, who do you think you're kidding?....(But you knowledge of classical music is an exception!)

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: GUEST,999
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 10:50 AM

"'Gay marriage' question"

I ain't gonna do it, but if any of y'all want to it's OK with me. Just so's ya know.

Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question
From: Don Firth
Date: 19 Dec 12 - 02:13 PM

GoofuS, I would tell you to get a clue, but you couldn't get a clue if it were the middle of clue mating season and you rubbed your body in clue musk, then ran out into a field of horny clues and did the clue mating dance!!

Don Firth