KeithP

I do not know Mr. Speicher but from the way you speak of him he must be very intelligent. What seems strange about all of this is his reaction. Instead of investigating the matter and seeking to have the issue addressed to his satisfaction, he just left. That probably means that this forum is of very little value to him. I think the moderator in question is guilty of little more than over-zealous moderating. In the final analysis what has really happened here? Is it so serious that one should just leave without further comment? The cause and effect relationship here seems to be unbalanced. Keith

What about more mainstream conspiracy theories such as the assassination of JFK? Are there many Objectivists who believe it was a conspiracy? Keith

Thanks for pointing that out. I think you and I generally have the same belief about this subject. Do you agree with the other posters statement that if homosexuality IS proven to be a form of mental illness it would not be neccesary to try and correct it? Keith

I see what you are saying and I agree. Perhaps Ayn Rand perceived it as a mental illness and this is the reason she made those statements calling it "immoral"? Until 1973 it was classified as a mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association. If mental illness were really an illness in the same sense that physical illnesses are illnesses, the idea of deleting homosexuality or anything else from the categories of illness by having a vote would be as absurd as a group of physicians voting to delete cancer or measles from the concept of disease. But mental illness isn't "an illness like any other illness." Unlike physical disease where there are physical facts to deal with, mental "illness" is entirely a question of values, of right and wrong, of appropriate versus inappropriate. At one time homosexuality seemed so weird and hard to understand it was necessary to invoke the concept of mental disease or mental illness to explain it. After homosexuals made a big enough spectacle of themselves and showed their "strength in numbers" and successfully demanded at least a small measure of social acceptance, it was no longer necessary and no longer seemed appropriate to explain homosexuality as a disease Keith

Primacy of consciousness in the sense that they "want" it to be accepted and normal based on their subconscious desire and attraction to the same sex ignoring the root cause of those feelings. I am sure there have been many studies about this topic with conclusions being reached in both directions. I am not attempting to reach a conclusion as to whether it is or isnt (a mental illness) in this thread. The point I guess I was trying to make and did so incorrectly by stating my theory as fact is to whether or not a person would be moral for embracing a mental illness because it "seemed" right to them. Keith

Is that analogy valid? Isnt homosexuality primacy of consciousness? Whereas the spirit of invention and betterment of man something completely different? Unless you can somehow call homosexuallity invention... Isnt the bottom line whether or not homosexuallity is a mental illness or not. And if it is a defective way of thinking would a person only be moral if they accepted that and attempted to cured?

If homosexuallity is a psychological problem and it certainly seems that it is- because nature certainly intended for people to be attracted to the opposite sex. Wouldn't an homosexual Objectivist be moral only if he recognized this? To try and bend reality to suite their desire seems immoral. Keith

That is interesting. How does attributing the causes of these maladies to the "government" instead of their true culprits make them feel any better? Is it a persecution complex? Keith

What is wrong with the epistemology of people who are prone to believe every conspiracy theory about nearly every world event? The people who think there were UFO autopsies, 9/11 was orchestrated by the government of the US, life on mars has been found and hidden from the public. Etc... I know some very intelligent people who are willing to believe the worst about nearly every major occurence of the 20th century. Keith