Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 69: Line 69:     
Hey Rob, great job discussing it on the talk page.  You need to raise the objections to the "theory" from the APA; otherwise it's wrong.  Say it's the APA; not "some groups."  And remember, it's just a theory ;-) -'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 17:04, 30 April 2007 (EDT)
 
Hey Rob, great job discussing it on the talk page.  You need to raise the objections to the "theory" from the APA; otherwise it's wrong.  Say it's the APA; not "some groups."  And remember, it's just a theory ;-) -'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 17:04, 30 April 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
== "Not Any Scientific Reasoning" ==
 +
You realize there's no scientific basis for calling homosexuality a mental disorder, right?  And, assuming ''arguendo'' no evidence for NOT calling it a mental disorder, don't you think it's best to err on the side of declassifying, so as not to offend?-'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 17:09, 30 April 2007 (EDT)
2,732

edits

Navigation menu