Comments on: Disgraceful Dr. Phil Show Elevates Fringe Anti-gay Activists To ‘Expert’ Status

By: Ozymandias71

Ozymandias71 — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 20:20:29 +0000

wayne, we’ve seen exactly what happens when anti-Gay proponents present their ‘side’ in a court of law… see Proposition 8.

By: wayne

wayne — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 19:01:57 +0000

Does a judge only listen to only one side of an argument? Is it fair or scholarly to only allow only “Pro-Gay” proponents to voice their views?

By: pepperstone.com

pepperstone.com — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 21:48:52 +0000

pepperstone.com…

[...]Truth Wins Out – Disgraceful Dr. Phil Show Elevates Fringe Anti-gay Activists To ‘Expert’ Status[...]…

By: 10 Good Reasons You Should Hate Oprah Winfrey « $U!C!D3 says:

10 Good Reasons You Should Hate Oprah Winfrey « $U!C!D3 says: — Sat, 16 Jul 2011 07:36:24 +0000

[...] perfect for sound bites, but nearly impossible to apply in real life. He’s given airtime to notorious anti-gay activists, legitimizing their bigoted views. And he used his celebrity to extend his brand into the lucrative [...]

By: Ten Good Reasons to Hate Oprah | Nerve Entertainment

Ten Good Reasons to Hate Oprah | Nerve Entertainment — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 05:01:51 +0000

By: chris

chris — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 00:28:39 +0000

seen this show last week it is shown really late here in ireland. that psychologist Joseph Nicolosi hadnt a clue, Glenn Stanton was just an ass. i feel sorry for her daughter though as racist people like that exsist in this world, i dont care if anyone is transgender there still human there born with female brains. its who you are inside that you got to be not outside, this show would probally added more people to the list who hate Les Gay Bi Tran people. but that psychiatrist on the show was a very intelligent man,

By: a. mcewen

a. mcewen — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 21:33:19 +0000

Michael, I were merely responding to the comment about “gender mutilation.” As we know, the situation involving transgenders is very complex and to reduce it to talking about someone “getting their parts removed” is wrong. That was the only thing I was responding to.

By: Michael Airhart

Michael Airhart — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 20:22:21 +0000

In other words, guys, I’m glad that you’re commenting here, and if you wish to discuss science or health, please take just a moment to substantiate your comments with links to reliable information sources.

Thanks.

By: Michael Airhart

Michael Airhart — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 14:17:32 +0000

Albert and A. McEwen, you offered no scientific facts or links in your comments. So really, neither of you have shown that the medical or mental-health professions are on your side.

Albert in particular, you offered just one isolated — and unsubstantiated — assertion. Stripped of context, that is indeed an anecdote. And your projection of your own self-righteousness onto others is a form of strawman argumentation. That is not acceptable here.

By: albert levy

albert levy — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 06:48:26 +0000

The “anecdote” about Johns Hopkins is not that.Why not call them up and ask them?.But then again,if you don’t get the response you get,then you simply dismiss it.Please don’t employ the word “science” whenever you use it.Obviously you ain’t one.I imagine it’s almost impossible for you to think you might be wrong.