Changes

<div style="padding-left:40px;">&mdash; Journal of Clinical Psychiatry<ref name="Satinover1996"/> </div>

<div style="padding-left:40px;">&mdash; Journal of Clinical Psychiatry<ref name="Satinover1996"/> </div>

|}

|}

Perhaps the most prominent – and damaging - modern offshoot of the ideomotor effect is the phenomenon of the so-called [[LGBT|LGBTI/gender ideology]].{{#tag:ref|cf. The social and behavioral sciences have a long history of being shaped and driven by politics and ideology. This is partly because researchers often choose to study issues implicating controversial questions of public policy. And it is partly because it is often impossible to perform the kind of objective observations and controlled experiments that are standard in the physical sciences. History is littered with notorious examples of false theories gaining wide acceptance among respected social and behavioral scientists, some of which supported pernicious public policies.<ref>{{cite web |title=The shaky science behind same-sex marriage |author=Harvey C. Mansfield and Leon R. Kass |publisher=Institute for Marriage and Public Policy |date=26 Mar 2013 |url=http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/the_shaky_science_behind_same-sex_marriage |accessdate=8 Feb 2016}}</ref>|group=note}} There is no special force or agent at play, and a conclusion can be made that far from being some bizarre supernatural event, acting out [[same-sex attraction]]s by intercourse with the person of the same sex is nothing more than ''‘a quasi-involuntary muscular action’'' that can be easily explained within the framework of the [[OCD]].

Perhaps the most prominent – and damaging - modern offshoot of the ideomotor effect is the phenomenon of the so-called [[LGBT|LGBTI/gender ideology]].{{#tag:ref|cf. The social and behavioral sciences have a long history of being shaped and driven by politics and ideology. This is partly because researchers often choose to study issues implicating controversial questions of public policy. And it is partly because it is often impossible to perform the kind of objective observations and controlled experiments that are standard in the physical sciences. History is littered with notorious examples of false theories gaining wide acceptance among respected social and behavioral scientists, some of which supported pernicious public policies.<ref>{{cite web |title=The shaky science behind same-sex marriage |author=Harvey C. Mansfield and Leon R. Kass |publisher=Institute for Marriage and Public Policy |date=26 Mar 2013 |url=http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/the_shaky_science_behind_same-sex_marriage |accessdate=8 Feb 2016}}</ref>|group=note}} There is no special force or agent at play, and a conclusion can be made that far from being some bizarre supernatural event, acting out [[same-sex attraction]]s by intercourse with the person of the same sex is nothing more than ''‘a quasi-involuntary muscular action’'' that can be easily explained within the framework of the [[OCD]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Men and Women Who Have Experienced Authentic Change in Sexual Orientation Through Therapy that Works! |publisher=PATH: Positives Alternatives to Homosexuality |url=http://www.voices-of-change.org |quote=The testimonials presented on this site are authentic Voices of Change by men and women who have experienced profound changes in their sexual orientation.  These brave men and women represent thousands of people around the world who feel same-sex attraction (SSA) but don't believe these unwanted feelings represent who they truly are as people nor did they believe these feelings to be unchangeable.  Because they understood their SSA was not inborn but rather the result of a number of underlying risk factors, they chose to work on and resolve these issues, such as: emotional and/or sexual abuse; unmet emotional needs; depression, OCD or other co-morbid disorders; and childhood wounds to their psychosexual and/or psychosocial development. |accessdate=26 Feb 2017}}</ref>

 

The reported cases of [[ex-homosexuals]] had revealed there is no mysterious force at play, natural or [[supernatural]], [[biological]] or otherwise – just a propensity for men and women to delude themselves. The evidence is clear – believing to be ''‘born that way’'' is nothing more than self-delusion buttressed by yet another variant of the ideomotor effect. The very existence of the ex-gay movement shows that the 'born-that-way' [[myth]] is a lie.<ref name="Lively2009"/>

The reported cases of [[ex-homosexuals]] had revealed there is no mysterious force at play, natural or [[supernatural]], [[biological]] or otherwise – just a propensity for men and women to delude themselves. The evidence is clear – believing to be ''‘born that way’'' is nothing more than self-delusion buttressed by yet another variant of the ideomotor effect. The very existence of the ex-gay movement shows that the 'born-that-way' [[myth]] is a lie.<ref name="Lively2009"/>

When it comes to [[homosexual]] alias sodomical lifestyle, there is no need for the agency of ''‘gay gene’''{{#tag:ref|cf. Bogus claim: '''"Xq28 - Thanks for the genes mom"'''. ''T shirt sold in gay and lesbian bookstores in the mid-1990s.''<ref name="Ridley">{{cite book |author=Matt Ridley |title=Genome |publisher=Fourth Estate Ltd. |place=London |year=2000 |chapter=Chromosomes X and Y |pages=107 |isbn=978-1857-028355 |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=LVdQfSYU4AUC}}</ref> In 1991, J.M. Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard examined how widespread is homosexual alias sodomical lifestyle among twins when at least one sibling declares to be "homosexual". They reported to have found that 52 percent of the identical twins considered themselves to be "homosexual". From this they suggested that genetic makeup [[Logic of possibility|may]] be the reason so many identical twins were feeling to be "homosexual," i.e. following the homosexual alias sodomical lifestyle. For their hypothesis to be fact, however, there should ''never'' be a case when one identical twin would be so called "homosexual" and other heterosexual. It is genetically impossible since both identical twins share 100 percent of the same genes.<ref name="Satinover1996">{{cite book |title=Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth |author=Jeffrey Burke Satinover |publisher=Baker Books |year=1996 |chapter=12 |pages=83, 190–1 |isbn=9780801056253 |url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/62588.Homosexuality_and_the_Politics_of_Truth |quote=D.H. Golwyn and C.P. Sevlie, Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 54, no.1 pp.39-40}}</ref> Should sodomical behaviour be genetic, then both identical twins would always be either "homosexual" or heterosexual. Bailey and Pillard's findings of only 52 percent discredits their own hypothesis thus in fact they have showed that nongenetic factors play a significant part in shaping so called "sexual preference".<ref name="RBC">{{cite book |title=When Passions Are Confused |author=Jeff Olson |publisher=RBC Ministries, discoveryseries.org |year=1996 |pages=14 |url=http://jesus-revolution.com/Documents/When_Passions_Are_Confused_Understanding_Homosexuality.pdf}}</ref> The scientific community realises that ''“our genes do not make us  

When it comes to [[homosexual]] alias sodomical lifestyle, there is no need for the agency of ''‘gay gene’''{{#tag:ref|cf. Bogus claim: '''"Xq28 - Thanks for the genes mom"'''. ''T shirt sold in gay and lesbian bookstores in the mid-1990s.''<ref name="Ridley">{{cite book |author=Matt Ridley |title=Genome |publisher=Fourth Estate Ltd. |place=London |year=2000 |chapter=Chromosomes X and Y |pages=107 |isbn=978-1857-028355 |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=LVdQfSYU4AUC}}</ref> In 1991, J.M. Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard examined how widespread is homosexual alias sodomical lifestyle among twins when at least one sibling declares to be "homosexual". They reported to have found that 52 percent of the identical twins considered themselves to be "homosexual". From this they suggested that genetic makeup [[Logic of possibility|may]] be the reason so many identical twins were feeling to be "homosexual," i.e. following the homosexual alias sodomical lifestyle. For their hypothesis to be fact, however, there should ''never'' be a case when one identical twin would be so called "homosexual" and other heterosexual. It is genetically impossible since both identical twins share 100 percent of the same genes.<ref name="Satinover1996">{{cite book |title=Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth |author=Jeffrey Burke Satinover |publisher=Baker Books |year=1996 |chapter=12 |pages=83, 190–1 |isbn=9780801056253 |url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/62588.Homosexuality_and_the_Politics_of_Truth |quote=D.H. Golwyn and C.P. Sevlie, Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 54, no.1 pp.39-40}}</ref> Should sodomical behaviour be genetic, then both identical twins would always be either "homosexual" or heterosexual. Bailey and Pillard's findings of only 52 percent discredits their own hypothesis thus in fact they have showed that nongenetic factors play a significant part in shaping so called "sexual preference".<ref name="RBC">{{cite book |title=When Passions Are Confused |author=Jeff Olson |publisher=RBC Ministries, discoveryseries.org |year=1996 |pages=14 |url=http://jesus-revolution.com/Documents/When_Passions_Are_Confused_Understanding_Homosexuality.pdf}}</ref> The scientific community realises that ''“our genes do not make us  

do it”''.<ref>{{cite book |title=My Genes Made Me Do It! - Homosexuality and the scientific evidence |author=NE Whitehead |edition=3 |place=New Zealand |date=October 2013 |chapter=9. The “discovery” of the “gay gene” |url=http://www.mygenes.co.nz/PDFs/Ch9.pdf}}</ref>

do it”''.<ref>{{cite book |title=My Genes Made Me Do It! - Homosexuality and the scientific evidence |author=NE Whitehead |edition=3 |place=New Zealand |date=October 2013 |chapter=9. The “discovery” of the “gay gene” |url=http://www.mygenes.co.nz/PDFs/Ch9.pdf}}</ref>

The closed-minded partisans of antiscientific LGBTI/gender ideology feel however offended by [[scientific observation]]s and they call the [[scientific discovery|scientific discoveries]] and data, contrary to scientific principles (i.a. setting alternative explanations when dealing with a phenomenon) outlined by philosophers of science such as [[Karl Popper]], a ''“hate”''. Such was the case in Richmond, Virginia where [[Beth Panilaitis]], the executive director of Rosma, a [[pressure group]] promoting [[Gay agenda|LGBTI agenda]], called for restricting the provision of scientific information on local billboard to the general public in a [[totalitarian]] manner<ref name="Billboard2014">{{cite web |title= Gay Rights Activists Outraged Over Billboard’s Message About Homosexuality and Genetics |author=Billy Hallowell |publisher=The Blaze (originally WVUE-TV) |date=11 Dec 2014  |url=http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/12/11/nobody-is-born-gay-activists-outraged-by-billboards-message-about-homosexuality-and-genetics/ |quote=“Identical twins have the same genes or DNA. They are nurtured in equal prenatal conditions. If homosexuality is caused by genetics or prenatal conditions and one twin is gay, the co-twin should also be gay,” she said, according to WVUE-TV. “Because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated. No one is born gay.” |accessdate=30 Jan 2016}}</ref> despite that information is regarded as fundamental human right ''i.a.'' by Resolution 1003 (1993) of Parliamentary Assembly of Europe.<ref>{{cite web |title=Resolution 1003 (1993) |publisher=Parliamentary Assembly of Europe |url=http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=16414&lang=en |quote=8. Information is a fundamental right which has been highlighted by the case-law of the European Commission and Court of Human Rights relating to Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights ... The owner of the right is the citizen, who also has the related right to demand that the information supplied by journalists be conveyed truthfully, in the case of news, and honestly, in the case of opinions, without outside interference by either the public authorities or the private sector.}}</ref> [[Bill Harrison]],  executive director of Richmond Gay Community Foundation, another LGBTI [[pressure group]], went with nonsensical antiscientific fury even further and de facto absurdly argued, by using the [[non sequitur]] fallacy, that learning about a person to have quit sodomical lifestyle, for example such as [[Michael Glatze]], can cause ''“many people to commit suicide”''.<ref name="Billboard2014"/> To suggest that suicide prevention requires affirming a perrson's behavior or behavioral tendencies is simply foolish. Criminal behavior, for example, often leads to suicidal thoughts, but no one suggest that we must affirm criminal tendences to stop suicide.<ref name="Lively2009">{{cite book |title=Redeeming the Rainbow: A Christian Response to the "Gay" Agenda |author=[[Scott Lively]] |publisher=Veritas Aeterna Press |place=Springfield, MA |year=2009 |edition=1 (Version 1.1)|pages=173, 177-8 |url=http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09b/Redeeming_rainbow |quote=The “gays” also invented the myth that they are born that way. Despite decades of efforts and millions of research dollars that “gays” have never proved that homosexuality is innate. They can’t because it isn’t. God does not create people to have no choice in a behavior that He condemns.}}</ref>|group=note}} or ''‘gay epi-marks’''<ref>{{cite web |title=Homosexuality May Start in the Womb |author=Elizabeth Norton |publisher=AAAS |url=http://news.sciencemag.org/evolution/2012/12/homosexuality-may-start-womb?ref=hp |date=11 December 2012 |accessdate=2 January 2016 |quote=The "epi-marks" that adjusted parental genes to resist excess testosterone, for example, [[Logic of possibility|may]] alter gene activation in areas of the child's brain involved in sexual attraction and preference.}}</ref>{{#tag:ref|cf. [[Wishful thinking]]: ''"Although we cannot provide definitive evidence that homosexuality has a strong epigenetic underpinning, we do think that available evidence is fully consistent with this conclusion."''<ref name="Canalized Sex">{{cite journal |title=Homosexuality as a Consequence of Epigenetically Canalized Sexual Development |author1=William R. Rice |author2= Urban Friberg |author3=Sergey Gavrilets |journal=The Quarterly Review of Biology |volume=87 |issue=4 |date=December 2012 |pages=343–368|doi=10.1016/S0016-0032(38)92173-8 |url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/668167 |accessdate=28 January 2016}}</ref>|group=note}}, and the invocation of such agency contrary to [[Occam’s razor]] is the sign of a mind not merely unscientific, but also either uninformed, or, even worse, [[psychological manipulation|manipulative]].  

The closed-minded partisans of antiscientific LGBTI/gender ideology feel however offended by [[scientific observation]]s and they call the [[scientific discovery|scientific discoveries]] and data, contrary to scientific principles (i.a. setting alternative explanations when dealing with a phenomenon) outlined by philosophers of science such as [[Karl Popper]], a ''“hate”''. Such was the case in Richmond, Virginia where [[Beth Panilaitis]], the executive director of Rosma, a [[pressure group]] promoting [[Gay agenda|LGBTI agenda]], called for restricting the provision of scientific information on local billboard to the general public in a [[totalitarian]] manner<ref name="Billboard2014">{{cite web |title= Gay Rights Activists Outraged Over Billboard’s Message About Homosexuality and Genetics |author=Billy Hallowell |publisher=The Blaze (originally WVUE-TV) |date=11 Dec 2014  |url=http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/12/11/nobody-is-born-gay-activists-outraged-by-billboards-message-about-homosexuality-and-genetics/ |quote=“Identical twins have the same genes or DNA. They are nurtured in equal prenatal conditions. If homosexuality is caused by genetics or prenatal conditions and one twin is gay, the co-twin should also be gay,” she said, according to WVUE-TV. “Because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated. No one is born gay.” |accessdate=30 Jan 2016}}</ref> despite that information is regarded as fundamental human right ''i.a.'' by Resolution 1003 (1993) of Parliamentary Assembly of Europe.<ref>{{cite web |title=Resolution 1003 (1993) |publisher=Parliamentary Assembly of Europe |url=http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=16414&lang=en |quote=8. Information is a fundamental right which has been highlighted by the case-law of the European Commission and Court of Human Rights relating to Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights ... The owner of the right is the citizen, who also has the related right to demand that the information supplied by journalists be conveyed truthfully, in the case of news, and honestly, in the case of opinions, without outside interference by either the public authorities or the private sector.}}</ref> [[Bill Harrison]],  executive director of Richmond Gay Community Foundation, another LGBTI [[pressure group]], went with nonsensical antiscientific fury even further and de facto absurdly argued, by using the [[non sequitur]] fallacy, that learning about a person to have quit sodomical lifestyle, for example such as [[Michael Glatze]], can cause ''“many people to commit suicide”''.<ref name="Billboard2014"/> To suggest that suicide prevention requires affirming a perrson's behavior or behavioral tendencies is simply foolish. Criminal behavior, for example, often leads to suicidal thoughts, but no one suggest that we must affirm criminal tendences to stop suicide.<ref name="Lively2009">{{cite book |title=Redeeming the Rainbow: A Christian Response to the "Gay" Agenda |author=[[Scott Lively]] |publisher=Veritas Aeterna Press |place=Springfield, MA |year=2009 |edition=1 (Version 1.1)|pages=173, 177-8 |url=http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09b/Redeeming_rainbow |quote=The “gays” also invented the myth that they are born that way. Despite decades of efforts and millions of research dollars that “gays” have never proved that homosexuality is innate. They can’t because it isn’t. God does not create people to have no choice in a behavior that He condemns.}}</ref>|group=note}} or ''‘gay epi-marks’''<ref>{{cite web |title=Homosexuality May Start in the Womb |author=Elizabeth Norton |publisher=AAAS |url=http://news.sciencemag.org/evolution/2012/12/homosexuality-may-start-womb?ref=hp |date=11 December 2012 |accessdate=2 January 2016 |quote=The "epi-marks" that adjusted parental genes to resist excess testosterone, for example, [[Logic of possibility|may]] alter gene activation in areas of the child's brain involved in sexual attraction and preference.}}</ref>{{#tag:ref|cf. [[Wishful thinking]]: ''"Although we cannot provide definitive evidence that homosexuality has a strong epigenetic underpinning, we do think that available evidence is fully consistent with this conclusion."''<ref name="Canalized Sex">{{cite journal |title=Homosexuality as a Consequence of Epigenetically Canalized Sexual Development |author1=William R. Rice |author2= Urban Friberg |author3=Sergey Gavrilets |journal=The Quarterly Review of Biology |volume=87 |issue=4 |date=December 2012 |pages=343–368|doi=10.1016/S0016-0032(38)92173-8 |url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/668167 |accessdate=28 January 2016}}</ref>|group=note}}, and the invocation of such agency contrary to [[Occam’s razor]] is the sign of a mind not merely unscientific, but also either uninformed, or, even worse, [[psychological manipulation|manipulative]].  

Despite the fact that nonsensical [[LGBT|LGBTI/gender ideology]] has no more scientific credibility than spiritism, its spectre haunts us even now. It is still reported uncritically in [[mainstream media]]; for example, in 2015, an article titled ''“'Gay genes': science is on the right track, we're born this way. Let’s deal with it.”'' popped up in [[The Guardian]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2015/jul/24/gay-genes-science-is-on-the-right-track-were-born-this-way-lets-deal-with-it

Despite the fact that nonsensical [[LGBT|LGBTI/gender ideology]] has no more scientific credibility than spiritism, its spectre haunts us even now. It is still reported uncritically in [[mainstream media]]; for example, in 2015, an article titled ''“'Gay genes': science is on the right track, we're born this way. Let’s deal with it.”'' popped up in [[The Guardian]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2015/jul/24/gay-genes-science-is-on-the-right-track-were-born-this-way-lets-deal-with-it

|author=Qazi Rahman

|author=Qazi Rahman