Sin & Psychiatry

[Flanders]

More sin means more income to organized religion’s parasites.

Priests have been a pestilence infecting mankind from the day money was invented; so I would take the privilege away from priests first. If anyone is dumb enough to tell priests anything they do not deserve protection.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...he-4th-Of-July

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D_Czh0RU4AEYLyv.jpg

More mental illness is akin to more sin. More definitions of mental illness means more money to psychiatrists. So I would eliminate the confessional-privilege for couch-jockeys two seconds after I take it away from the Bible-thumpers.

LIVERPOOL, England — No two people are exactly alike. Therefore, attempting to classify each unique individual’s mental health issues into neat categories just doesn’t work. That’s the claim coming out of the United Kingdom that is sure to ruffle some psychologists’ feathers.

More people are being diagnosed with mental illnesses than ever before.

Multiple factors my ass. Hundreds of dollars an hour for analyses is the only factor.

Multiple factors can be attributed to this rise; many people blame the popularity of social media and increased screen time, but it is also worth considering that in today’s day and age more people may be willing to admit they are having mental health issues in the first place. Whatever the reason, it is generally believed that a psychiatric diagnosis is the first step to recovery.

That’s why a new study conducted at the University of Liverpool has raised eyebrows by concluding that psychiatric diagnoses are “scientifically meaningless,” and worthless as tools to accurately identify and address mental distress at an individual level.

Researchers performed a detailed analysis on five of the most important chapters in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Heath Disorders (DSM). The DSM is considered the definitive guide for mental health professionals, and provides descriptions for all mental health problems and their symptoms. The five chapters analyzed were: bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, and trauma-related disorders.

Researchers came to a number of troubling conclusions. First, the study’s authors assert that there is a significant amount of overlap in symptoms between disorder diagnoses, despite the fact that each diagnosis utilizes different decision rules. Additionally, these diagnoses completely ignore the role of trauma or other unique adverse events a person may encounter in their life.

Perhaps most concerning of all, researchers say that these diagnoses tell us little to nothing about the individual patient and what type of treatments they will need. The authors ultimately conclude that this diagnostic labeling approach is “a disingenuous categorical system.”

“Although diagnostic labels create the illusion of an explanation they are scientifically meaningless and can create stigma and prejudice. I hope these findings will encourage mental health professionals to think beyond diagnoses and consider other explanations of mental distress, such as trauma and other adverse life experiences.” Lead researcher Dr. Kate Allsopp explains in a release.

According to the study’s authors, the traditional diagnostic system being used today wrongly assumes that any and all mental distress is caused by a disorder, and relies far too heavily on subjective ideas about what is considered “normal.”

“Perhaps it is time we stopped pretending that medical-sounding labels contribute anything to our understanding of the complex causes of human distress or of what kind of help we need when distressed.” Professor John Read comments.

The study is published in the scientific journal Psychiatry Research.

Study: Psychiatric Diagnoses Are ‘Scientifically Meaningless’ In Treating Mental Health
by John Anderer
July 9, 2019

https://www.studyfinds.org/study-psy...y-meaningless/

Dirty little moralists do not have to be priests. They spring up like weeds around every opportunity to dictate behavior. That is why there is never a shortage of wannabe priests lusting after a buck. Preaching morality from a pulpit in a church, or in television studio, is the fastest way to acquire wealth known to man —— without contributing anything.

NOTE: No hard-ass pews for the weak-minded. Psychiatrists provide comfortable couches for the slow-witted.

Thanks to the XVI Amendment, leading Democrats getting rich by contributing nothing more to society than objecting to a non-existent sin is outdistancing priests in the race to the money:

Just like every priesthood that ever was, Socialists try to make the transition from prohibiting and punishing reprehensible behavior to telling everyone how to conduct their daily lives. Socialists can, and do, get away with abolishing private property, taxing incomes, perverting the law, betraying the country, and violating the Constitution at every turn. For all of the things Socialists in government can do they cannot govern unless they force people to do as they are told. In short: YOU MUST NOT becomes YOU MUST.

Designer-sin was followed by designer-science. Sharpshooters running the environmental movement invented designer-science as a scare tactic.

Nine years ago designer-science morphed into political-agenda-sins. In 2008 the Vatican fashioned seven new sins and named them social-sins. Social diseases was the first thing I thought of, but clap did not make the cut.

1. "Bioethical” violations such as birth control
2. "Morally dubious" experiments such as stem cell research
3. Drug abuse
4. Polluting the environment
5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and poor
6. Excessive wealth
7. Creating poverty

Vatican bishop points to modern social sins
Vatican City, Mar 11, 2008 / 02:02 am (CNA).-

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/ne...n_social_sins/

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...36#post2758136

I am okay with the first two on the list:

1. Bioethical violations such as birth control

2. Morally dubious' experiments such as stem cell research

NOTE: Genetic manipulation is new, while selective breeding has been around forever —— breed the best to the best and hope for the best. That unwritten rule applies to the wealthy and thoroughbred race horses.

It will probably be many decades before genetic engineering is separated into acceptable practices and criminal behavior. I doubt if sin will influence the decisions. Priests usurping authority over criminal activity is just as dangerous as is politicians demanding moral authority over priests.

3. Drug abuse

Technically, alcohol is a drug. Morally —— drug use is no different than alcohol use. I suspect God will give drunks a pass on Judgement Day if they did not hurt others while under a full head of steam; so why not drugs?

Pollution made the cut just when headway was being made against the global warming hoax.

4. Polluting the environment

https://www.eduardosuastegui.com/wp-...Dumb-Ideas.png

Monsignor Girotti’s definition of pollution was made for former bartender AOC while she was short-pouring drinks for helpless drunks.

It was not Pope Benedict it was Monsignor Gianfranco Girotti who announced the new sins in an interview. I do not know anything about Girotti. I do not think he could have done the interview without then-Pope Benedict’s approval. From what I knew about Benedict, I thought he was an all-around good egg. I am not saying that my original impression was wrong, but I have to say that Eggs Benedict let me down. Bendedict stunned me for two reasons:

1. If polluting is a sin it must be a collective sin as much as it is a sin committed by individuals. I pray that I am not judged in the hereafter as one of a group. Judging an entire group as one person is causing enough trouble in this life without doing it in the next. I assume pollution means more than the sin of air pollution.

Even if polluting is treated as a criminal activity, collective liability can get out of hand mighty fast once the government charges everyone with everything just for being alive.

2. The environmental movement has become the home of displaced Communists since the Soviet Union imploded. Communists are not friends of Supreme Deity religions. The Roman Catholic Church least of all. That makes it difficult for me to understand why the Vatican would give credence to any part of the environmental movement.

I understood the Vatican trying to introduce new products in order to increase its customer base, but for the R.C.Ch. to call some of those things sins implies that the living will be judged in the next life for committing those sins.

Adding pollution to the list of long-established sins will attract more depraved human beings than you can catalogue with a supercomputer. Perverts do not pollute, they abuse children, they murder, they encourage depravity, then they lead marches for every environmental cause that comes along.

[Flanders]

More mental illness is akin to more sin. More definitions of mental illness means more money to psychiatrists. So I would eliminate the confessional-privilege for couch-jockeys two seconds after I take it away from the Bible-thumpers.

I changed my mind. Psychiatrists should lose the privilege first.

'Dangerous to an unprecedented degree': Psychiatrists warn Congress that Trump incites violence
by Kimberly Leonard
July 23, 2019 08:02 PM

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...cites-violence

[rjhenn]

More sin means more income to organized religion’s parasites.

Priests have been a pestilence infecting mankind from the day money was invented; so I would take the privilege away from priests first. If anyone is dumb enough to tell priests anything they do not deserve protection.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...he-4th-Of-July

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D_Czh0RU4AEYLyv.jpg

More mental illness is akin to more sin. More definitions of mental illness means more money to psychiatrists. So I would eliminate the confessional-privilege for couch-jockeys two seconds after I take it away from the Bible-thumpers.

LIVERPOOL, England — No two people are exactly alike. Therefore, attempting to classify each unique individual’s mental health issues into neat categories just doesn’t work. That’s the claim coming out of the United Kingdom that is sure to ruffle some psychologists’ feathers.

More people are being diagnosed with mental illnesses than ever before.

Multiple factors my ass. Hundreds of dollars an hour for analyses is the only factor.

Multiple factors can be attributed to this rise; many people blame the popularity of social media and increased screen time, but it is also worth considering that in today’s day and age more people may be willing to admit they are having mental health issues in the first place. Whatever the reason, it is generally believed that a psychiatric diagnosis is the first step to recovery.

That’s why a new study conducted at the University of Liverpool has raised eyebrows by concluding that psychiatric diagnoses are “scientifically meaningless,” and worthless as tools to accurately identify and address mental distress at an individual level.

Researchers performed a detailed analysis on five of the most important chapters in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Heath Disorders (DSM). The DSM is considered the definitive guide for mental health professionals, and provides descriptions for all mental health problems and their symptoms. The five chapters analyzed were: bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, and trauma-related disorders.

Researchers came to a number of troubling conclusions. First, the study’s authors assert that there is a significant amount of overlap in symptoms between disorder diagnoses, despite the fact that each diagnosis utilizes different decision rules. Additionally, these diagnoses completely ignore the role of trauma or other unique adverse events a person may encounter in their life.

Perhaps most concerning of all, researchers say that these diagnoses tell us little to nothing about the individual patient and what type of treatments they will need. The authors ultimately conclude that this diagnostic labeling approach is “a disingenuous categorical system.”

“Although diagnostic labels create the illusion of an explanation they are scientifically meaningless and can create stigma and prejudice. I hope these findings will encourage mental health professionals to think beyond diagnoses and consider other explanations of mental distress, such as trauma and other adverse life experiences.” Lead researcher Dr. Kate Allsopp explains in a release.

According to the study’s authors, the traditional diagnostic system being used today wrongly assumes that any and all mental distress is caused by a disorder, and relies far too heavily on subjective ideas about what is considered “normal.”

“Perhaps it is time we stopped pretending that medical-sounding labels contribute anything to our understanding of the complex causes of human distress or of what kind of help we need when distressed.” Professor John Read comments.

The study is published in the scientific journal Psychiatry Research.

Study: Psychiatric Diagnoses Are ‘Scientifically Meaningless’ In Treating Mental Health
by John Anderer
July 9, 2019

https://www.studyfinds.org/study-psy...y-meaningless/

Dirty little moralists do not have to be priests. They spring up like weeds around every opportunity to dictate behavior. That is why there is never a shortage of wannabe priests lusting after a buck. Preaching morality from a pulpit in a church, or in television studio, is the fastest way to acquire wealth known to man —— without contributing anything.

NOTE: No hard-ass pews for the weak-minded. Psychiatrists provide comfortable couches for the slow-witted.

Thanks to the XVI Amendment, leading Democrats getting rich by contributing nothing more to society than objecting to a non-existent sin is outdistancing priests in the race to the money:

Just like every priesthood that ever was, Socialists try to make the transition from prohibiting and punishing reprehensible behavior to telling everyone how to conduct their daily lives. Socialists can, and do, get away with abolishing private property, taxing incomes, perverting the law, betraying the country, and violating the Constitution at every turn. For all of the things Socialists in government can do they cannot govern unless they force people to do as they are told. In short: YOU MUST NOT becomes YOU MUST.

Designer-sin was followed by designer-science. Sharpshooters running the environmental movement invented designer-science as a scare tactic.

Nine years ago designer-science morphed into political-agenda-sins. In 2008 the Vatican fashioned seven new sins and named them social-sins. Social diseases was the first thing I thought of, but clap did not make the cut.

1. "Bioethical” violations such as birth control
2. "Morally dubious" experiments such as stem cell research
3. Drug abuse
4. Polluting the environment
5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and poor
6. Excessive wealth
7. Creating poverty

Vatican bishop points to modern social sins
Vatican City, Mar 11, 2008 / 02:02 am (CNA).-

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/ne...n_social_sins/

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...36#post2758136

I am okay with the first two on the list:

1. Bioethical violations such as birth control

2. Morally dubious' experiments such as stem cell research

NOTE: Genetic manipulation is new, while selective breeding has been around forever —— breed the best to the best and hope for the best. That unwritten rule applies to the wealthy and thoroughbred race horses.

It will probably be many decades before genetic engineering is separated into acceptable practices and criminal behavior. I doubt if sin will influence the decisions. Priests usurping authority over criminal activity is just as dangerous as is politicians demanding moral authority over priests.

3. Drug abuse

Technically, alcohol is a drug. Morally —— drug use is no different than alcohol use. I suspect God will give drunks a pass on Judgement Day if they did not hurt others while under a full head of steam; so why not drugs?

Pollution made the cut just when headway was being made against the global warming hoax.

4. Polluting the environment

https://www.eduardosuastegui.com/wp-...Dumb-Ideas.png

Monsignor Girotti’s definition of pollution was made for former bartender AOC while she was short-pouring drinks for helpless drunks.

It was not Pope Benedict it was Monsignor Gianfranco Girotti who announced the new sins in an interview. I do not know anything about Girotti. I do not think he could have done the interview without then-Pope Benedict’s approval. From what I knew about Benedict, I thought he was an all-around good egg. I am not saying that my original impression was wrong, but I have to say that Eggs Benedict let me down. Bendedict stunned me for two reasons:

1. If polluting is a sin it must be a collective sin as much as it is a sin committed by individuals. I pray that I am not judged in the hereafter as one of a group. Judging an entire group as one person is causing enough trouble in this life without doing it in the next. I assume pollution means more than the sin of air pollution.

Even if polluting is treated as a criminal activity, collective liability can get out of hand mighty fast once the government charges everyone with everything just for being alive.

2. The environmental movement has become the home of displaced Communists since the Soviet Union imploded. Communists are not friends of Supreme Deity religions. The Roman Catholic Church least of all. That makes it difficult for me to understand why the Vatican would give credence to any part of the environmental movement.

I understood the Vatican trying to introduce new products in order to increase its customer base, but for the R.C.Ch. to call some of those things sins implies that the living will be judged in the next life for committing those sins.

Adding pollution to the list of long-established sins will attract more depraved human beings than you can catalogue with a supercomputer. Perverts do not pollute, they abuse children, they murder, they encourage depravity, then they lead marches for every environmental cause that comes along.

More acute paranoia from Flanders.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk