HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Religion & Spirituality » Religion (Group) » Vatican removes Pope's re...

Mon Aug 27, 2018, 07:18 PM

Vatican removes Pope's remarks on psychiatric help for gay children

Francis was asked by a journalist what he would say to parents who observe homosexual traits in their children.

"I would say first of all pray, not to condemn, to dialogue, to understand, to give space to the son or the daughter," he responded, before adding that parents must also consider the age of the child.

"When it [homosexuality] shows itself from childhood, there is a lot that can be done through psychiatry, to see how things are. It is something else if it shows itself after 20 years," he said.

The Pope added that ignoring a child who showed homosexual tendencies was an "error of fatherhood or motherhood".



https://www.france24.com/en/20180827-vatican-catholic-church-pope-francis-gay-children-parent-psychiatric-help

He did apparently order his minions to try to walk that back, but this was still appallingly stupid to get caught saying on his way home from the Ireland debacle.

20 replies, 2041 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 20 replies Author Time Post
Reply Vatican removes Pope's remarks on psychiatric help for gay children (Original post)
Pope George Ringo II Aug 2018 OP
Merlot Aug 2018 #1
Pope George Ringo II Aug 2018 #2
pnwmom Aug 2018 #3
Mariana Aug 2018 #5
pnwmom Aug 2018 #6
Mariana Aug 2018 #7
pnwmom Aug 2018 #9
Mariana Aug 2018 #10
pnwmom Aug 2018 #11
Pope George Ringo II Aug 2018 #12
Mariana Aug 2018 #15
Major Nikon Aug 2018 #16
Pope George Ringo II Aug 2018 #8
Act_of_Reparation Aug 2018 #18
Major Nikon Aug 2018 #19
MineralMan Aug 2018 #4
Bretton Garcia Aug 2018 #13
Pope George Ringo II Aug 2018 #14
Major Nikon Aug 2018 #17
Major Nikon Aug 2018 #20

Response to Pope George Ringo II (Original post)

Mon Aug 27, 2018, 07:32 PM

1. Wasn't this supposed to be the "good" pope?

The one that everyone thinks is so forward thinking?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Merlot (Reply #1)

Mon Aug 27, 2018, 07:53 PM

2. We keep hearing that.

The evidence seems to contradict it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Merlot (Reply #1)

Mon Aug 27, 2018, 08:28 PM

3. I bet many 81 year olds think that. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #3)

Mon Aug 27, 2018, 09:16 PM

5. And why do they think that?

Because their religious leaders taught them to believe that. Religious leaders like the Pope.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #5)

Mon Aug 27, 2018, 09:28 PM

6. You must be very young. "Sexual orientation disturbance" wasn't removed from the DSM-11

of the American Psychiatric Association till 1987.

As recently as 1973 it was still listed as a mental disorder in the DSM-11, and the WHO still lists the possibility of an "ego-dystonic sexual orientation."

So it was taught both by religious leaders and by medical doctors.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hide-and-seek/201509/when-homosexuality-stopped-being-mental-disorder

In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) asked all members attending its convention to vote on whether they believed homosexuality to be a mental disorder. 5,854 psychiatrists voted to remove homosexuality from the DSM, and 3,810 to retain it.

The APA then compromised, removing homosexuality from the DSM but replacing it, in effect, with "sexual orientation disturbance" for people "in conflict with" their sexual orientation. Not until 1987 did homosexuality completely fall out of the DSM.

Meanwhile, the World Health Organization (WHO) only removed homosexuality from its ICD classification with the publication of ICD-10 in 1992, although ICD-10 still carries the construct of "ego-dystonic sexual orientation". In this condition, the person is not in doubt about his or her sexual preference, but "wishes it were different because of associated psychological and behavioural disorders".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #6)

Mon Aug 27, 2018, 09:44 PM

7. I doubt most 81 year olds have read the old DSM editions.

But an awful lot of them have listened to sermons and have read holy books telling them that homosexuality is an abomination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #7)

Mon Aug 27, 2018, 09:54 PM

9. Men the Pope's age grew up in an era where gay men got arrested and charged with CRIMES

for having consensual sex with other men. The ENLIGHTENED view was that it was "only"a mental illness -- but as recently as 2003 in the US, gay men could be arrested and charged with sodomy for having sex. That was when the SCOTUS finally struck down sodomy laws across the US.

This happened because in 1998 two men were arrested for having sex at home in a bedroom.

Though the American Psychiatric Association had changed their manual by 1987, Lawrence v. Texas in 2003 caused a sea change in the law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #9)

Mon Aug 27, 2018, 11:38 PM

10. And those laws that criminalized homosexual acts

existed in the first place because religious authorities and their "holy" texts proclaimed (and still proclaim) that homosexuality is an abomination, and that people who engage in homosexual activity deserve execution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mariana (Reply #10)

Tue Aug 28, 2018, 12:09 AM

11. Do you think Pope Francis was born the Pope? He was a baby in 1936

and grew up in a world where the entire establishment -- scientific, medical, religious, and political -- considered homosexual acts to be deviant. Even criminal.

For a man his age, his views are not uncommon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #11)

Tue Aug 28, 2018, 07:04 AM

12. Al Capone wasn't born a mob boss either.

Ancient Rome didn't have a problem with homosexuality, as long as you were basically a "top." Really, they just wanted their leaders to be consistently in charge. That all changed when the religion did.

The culture you're trying to pass the blame to is the church you're trying to excuse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #11)

Tue Aug 28, 2018, 08:00 AM

15. Why were those views so entrenched in society?

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. (Leviticus 18:22).

If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. (Leviticus 20:13).

In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire. (Jude 1)

In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. (Romans 1:27).

Etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #11)

Tue Aug 28, 2018, 08:34 AM

16. Age does not give you a pass for narrow mindedness

It's really the lamest excuse people give for it. Open mindedness is a requirement of wisdom. When age is given as an excuse for bigotry, it only proves the person managed to stay stupid over a longer period of time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #6)

Mon Aug 27, 2018, 09:48 PM

8. As a general statement, those "associated psychological and behavioral disorders"

are very often the result of being told they're evil and going to be tortured throughout eternity simply for being who they are. Care to guess whose fault that is?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #6)

Tue Aug 28, 2018, 08:57 AM

18. Roman numerals giving you trouble?

It's DSM-II, not DSM-11.

Google University is just handing out degrees these days...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Act_of_Reparation (Reply #18)

Tue Aug 28, 2018, 10:23 AM

19. It's also cited by people who don't understand what it really is

Psychology is a soft science that often pretends to be a hard science. Even calling it soft science is pretty generous as it quite often falls into the realm of junk science. When fewer than half of the highest quality psychology studies are repeatable, it's pretty hard to assign much credibility to the DSM. Then when you discover how politicized it is and try to find any sort of reasonable definition for "mental disorder", you start to realize it's mostly crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Merlot (Reply #1)

Mon Aug 27, 2018, 08:59 PM

4. I believe so.

Wrong again, though...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pope George Ringo II (Original post)

Tue Aug 28, 2018, 07:27 AM

13. I study ambiguous, equivocal language; in religion, etc...

I'd say Francis is equivocating between liberal and conservative views. Which is mildly better than being arch conservative.

He 1) says not to "condemn" gays. Without saying they are good or bad.

He 2) supports psychiatric observation. But that is an ambiguous note.

As he 3) suggests it can allow " space" for a gay person. Possibly, space to be gay.

Even as 4) parents should observe children carefully. But saying they should not" ignore" signs of homosexuality, is ambiguous. It says we should pay attention. It does not tell us very clearly to condemn, or encourage, or guide.

So as a specialist in religious equivocal language? I'd say Francis is equivocating,. As many religious leaders do. As the Bible does.

I'd say Francis is trying to strike an ambiguous balance between the conservative and liberal wings of the Church.

Which unfortunately may be about the most we could expect from such an extremely conservative, 1,700 year old institution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bretton Garcia (Reply #13)

Tue Aug 28, 2018, 07:32 AM

14. He also wanders around in the "hate the sin, love the sinner' equivocation.

He's not letting go of the error that there's something fundamentally wrong with actually doing gay things, even if he's willing to concede that gays may be people too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bretton Garcia (Reply #13)

Tue Aug 28, 2018, 08:49 AM

17. Given the context of the pope's statements, he's doing a piss-poor job of equivocating

What the pope is saying is perfectly consistent with what he's been saying for decades and the current state of RCC doctrine and dogma. It's exactly the same as any other Christian parroting out the "hate the sin, love the sinner" gibberish. The pope claims to be OK with gay people, just so long as they don't act on their sexual orientation. Telling parents to take their children to a doctor is directly suggesting there's something wrong with them. There's nothing ambiguous about it when the context is considered.

Apathy is really the only excuse for setting such low expectations on the RCC. Time's up on their bigotry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pope George Ringo II (Original post)

Tue Aug 28, 2018, 10:29 AM

20. Before and after

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread