California governor OKs ban on gay conversion therapy, calling it 'quackery'

[CopticChristian]

Are you saying that “reparative therapy” is an effective treatment modality, or that is should be continued as research tool?

I think that what both APA’s have opined, is that it is not an effective treatment method. But even beyond that, I think that both have said that it may be damaging, and therefore should not be attempted.

Personally, I think it is a matter of informed consent. The patient should be informed of both sides of the argument, and allowed to make a decision. In the case of mentally impaired (as to decision making), or children, where informed consent is not possible, then the treatment should not be used. I don’t see it as a parents’ right to subject a child to treatment which is so strongly disavowed by both of the relevant professional organizations.

Epan,

My position is that the American Psychiatric Association has removed the notion of homosexuality as disorder because of gay activists. My position is that the American Psychological Association has taken this stance and the position of the Psychological association is political and not scientific. This is based on independent thinking.

The group mentality of the Psychological Association does not reflect Scientific but rather Political correctness. I am not alone. Listen to these interviews. I think I am on the correct tract.

josephnicolosi.com/interviews/#videos

In this interview the past President alludes to Homosexuality as addictive behavior ie drug addiction. If you know anything about drug addiction, treating it like a disease fails miserably in succeeding. I agree that Homosexuality is not a disease but rather behavior and in that regard the notion that it is a disease makes as much sense. I believe also that the behavior is difficult to change and at the root of it is the desire to change. No change happens unless someone wants to change and when there is motivation to change, change occurs.

This same site has interviews and testimonials that should cause you to reflect and realize that there is polarity and not science directing the condemnation of an attempt to offer a homosexual the opportunity to change…

Interviews & Testimonials

Living in Harmony with One’s Biological Design: Interview with an Ex-Gay Man
Touching the Feminine Soul: Interview with Diane Eller-Boyko, R.N., L.C.S.W.
Interview: Jerry Armelli
Interview with a Former Gay Activist, Michael Glatze: Two-Year Follow-up
Interview with Andrew Comiskey

Let me know if you ascribe to accepting the group mentality that is biased or independent thinking that suggests other than that.

 

[CopticChristian]

The Church acknowledges that she is not in the field of medical science (genetics) or the field of the science & study of behavior (psychology). Her focus, her field, her expertise, is theology

 

[Slavonic]

To this:

I think that what both APA’s have opined, is that it is not an effective treatment method.

You replied:

Epan,

My position is that the American Psychiatric Association has removed the notion of homosexuality as disorder because of gay activists. My position is that the American Psychological Association has taken this stance and the position of the Psychological association is political and not scientific. This is based on independent thinking.

The group mentality of the Psychological Association does not reflect Scientific but rather Political correctness. I am not alone. Listen to these interviews. I think I am on the correct tract.

josephnicolosi.com/interviews/#videos

In this interview the past President alludes to Homosexuality as addictive behavior ie drug addiction. If you know anything about drug addiction, treating it like a disease fails miserably in succeeding. I agree that Homosexuality is not a disease but rather behavior and in that regard the notion that it is a disease makes as much sense. I believe also that the behavior is difficult to change and at the root of it is the desire to change. No change happens unless someone wants to change and when there is motivation to change, change occurs.

This same site has interviews and testimonials that should cause you to reflect and realize that there is polarity and not science directing the condemnation of an attempt to offer a homosexual the opportunity to change…

Interviews & Testimonials

Living in Harmony with One’s Biological Design: Interview with an Ex-Gay Man
Touching the Feminine Soul: Interview with Diane Eller-Boyko, R.N., L.C.S.W.
Interview: Jerry Armelli
Interview with a Former Gay Activist, Michael Glatze: Two-Year Follow-up
Interview with Andrew Comiskey

Let me know if you ascribe to accepting the group mentality that is biased or independent thinking that suggests other than that.

None of which says that conversion treatments are effective. Those testimonials are not proof of effective treatment. In fact, such testimonials are hallmark of a charlatan and shyster and not those of an “independent” thinking scientist (I use the term loosely).

Also, we’ve heard your reasons for why homosexuality was taken out of the DSM (gay activists, political motivations), why should homosexuality be in there?

 

[CopticChristian]

To this:

You replied:

None of which says that conversion treatments are effective. Those testimonials are not proof of effective treatment. In fact, such testimonials are hallmark of a charlatan and shyster and not those of an “independent” thinking scientist (I use the term loosely).

Also, we’ve heard your reasons for why homosexuality was taken out of the DSM (gay activists, political motivations), why should homosexuality be in there?

Epan,

You must not have watched the video. The past President of the American Psychological Association has reasons you should consider. It is politics that drives your opinion as emanating from the American Psychological Association, not science.

Where do you gather that I believe that homosexuality should be in the DSM?

My question is why was it put in? Why was it taken out? This is the issue at hand.

I find the DSM to be less than a useful tool. I am not alone. William Glasser, M.D. and those that were mentioned earlier agree. These are all Physicians. Are you a physician?

 

[Slavonic]

My question is why was it put in?

Sorry for misunderstanding you. You can answer that one, then. I just thought that if taking it out had no “scientific basis” and was “politically motivated” there was actually some legitimate reason that was ignored. Maybe I can just conclude that if it had no legitimate reason for being taken out, it also had no legitimate reason for being in, so really the conspiracy theorists (and really such people do have a lot in common with moon landing deniers and Birthers) who get upset about homosexuality being removed from the DSM are just upset that their own anti-gay sentiments are not backed-up by major scientific/professional organizations anymore.

 

[CopticChristian]

Sorry for misunderstanding you. You can answer that one, then. I just thought that if taking it out had no “scientific basis” and was “politically motivated” there was actually some legitimate reason that was ignored. Maybe I can just conclude that if it had no legitimate reason for being taken out, it also had no legitimate reason for being in, so really the conspiracy theorists (and really such people do have a lot in common with moon landing deniers and Birthers) who get upset about homosexuality being removed from the DSM are just upset that their own anti-gay sentiments are not backed-up by major scientific/professional organizations anymore.

Slavonic,

You are missing the point. The American Psychiatric Association represents a portion of all Psychiatrists, not all Psychiatrists. Some Psychiatrists dissent from opinions expressed by the APcA so as to distinguis from the American Psychological Association APsA.

I posted that Dr. Ablow, Dr Loren Mosher have resigned from the APcA and I pointed out that 3810 Psychiatrists dissented from voting to remove homosexuality from the DSM.

#213
Only 10,555 of the 17,905 APA members voted in the election. The results were as follows,

Total APA members eligible to vote: 17,905

Number of APA members that actually voted: 10,555

Number of members that “Abstained”: 367

Number of “No” votes -votes to keep “homosexuality” in the DSM as a mental disorder: 3,810

Number of “Yes” votes-votes to remove “homosexuality” from the DSM as a mental disorder: 5,854

I doubt that Mosher and Ablow are the only dissenters. They are just the ones we know.

You are aware that the DSM has a history of being a manual from the army, a statistical manual, and not what it has become today and what unfortunately people like Bradski, Ringil and others believe it to be, yet they accept that it has some value. They are welcome to believe that.

My point is that if you know the history of the DSM, how it became what it is today, how things were put in, taken out, and who did it and why then it should cause you to doubt the organization that puts out opinions that others accept as gospel, in particular any condemnation of any therapy in consideration that it is politics and not science that created these opinions.

If you understand that the opinion of condemnation and getting to the point where a ban is attempted and then notion that it is quackery is mouthed by a Politician absent knowledge of what it is he is talking about is unethical, not to be believed, to be doubted and should cause concern.

Can you think of any other issue where government steps in and tries to regulate what you think about a medical/psychological issue?

 

[epan]

Epan,

How did you come to decide that reparative therapy is not effective? Is it based on reading the information, studying what it is, and coming to your own conclusion or by taking what some organization says?

I never decided that. You are putting words into my mouth. Please stop that.

 

[Slavonic]

My point is that if you know the history of the DSM, how it became what it is today, how things were put in, taken out, and who did it and why then it should cause you to doubt the organization that puts out opinions that others accept as gospel, in particular any condemnation of any therapy in consideration that it is politics and not science that created these opinions.

If you understand that the opinion of condemnation and getting to the point where a ban is attempted and then notion that it is quackery is mouthed by a Politician absent knowledge of what it is he is talking about is unethical, not to be believed, to be doubted and should cause concern.

Can you think of any other issue where government steps in and tries to regulate what you think about a medical/psychological issue?

The government does not regulate what people think about a medical/psychological issue. It does regulate, through licensure, legislation, consumer fraud bureaus and other regulatory authorities, the treatments and therapies provided to the general public.

The politicians were aware that conversion therapy promotes, explicitly and implicitly, the false idea that homosexuality is undesirable and that LGB individuals are mentally ill. These ideas poison society and harm LGB individuals by legitimizing bigotry against and antiquated ideas and understandings of LGB people. For that reason alone the state has the right to step in.

 

[CopticChristian]

I never decided that. You are putting words into my mouth. Please stop that.

Epan,

Here is what you said…

I think that what both APA’s have opined, is that it is not an effective treatment method. But even beyond that, I think that both have said that it may be damaging, and therefore should not be attempted.

It is not unusual for someone to state what someone thinks suggesting that there is agreement.

You support the Gay agenda so what is it you think about reparative therapy?

 

[CopticChristian]

The government does not regulate what people think about a medical/psychological issue. It does regulate, through licensure, legislation, consumer fraud bureaus and other regulatory authorities, the treatments and therapies provided to the general public.

The politicians were aware that conversion therapy promotes, explicitly and implicitly, the false idea that homosexuality is undesirable and that LGB individuals are mentally ill. These ideas poison society and harm LGB individuals by legitimizing bigotry against and antiquated ideas and understandings of LGB people. For that reason alone the state has the right to step in.

Slavonic,

Then you should understand that the usual mechanism for dealing with a problem, if it is a problem, is through licensing Boards. This was not the case and raises suspicion. This is most unusual and you should be suspect. This attempt to silence NARTH will fail. We shall have this discussion at another time, but recall I said so.

 

[CopticChristian]

I find it very funny that you vehemently argue against the credibility of the APA, but yet your view of the causes of homosexuality (a combination of genetics and social influences) is exactly the same as theirs.
The APA states the following:

“There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, or homosexual orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.”

I also find it funny that you honestly do not understand that the statement “The APA has little credibility” and even the statement “The APA has plenty of credibility” are both opinions, not fact. There is no way to scientifically determine credibility.

However, on that note I find it extremely hard to believe how many tens of thousands of psychologists continue to be members of an organization which has as little credibility as you claim it has. I find it much easier to believe that a small minority of people think the APA has little credibility, mainly people who disagree with their positions.

But forget the APA. Is there ONE mainstream scientific organization which believes conversion therapy is possible and beneficial? Hint: neither NARTH nor JONAH are mainstream, both are extremely fringe organizations. I just find it hard to believe that conversion therapy is so “obvious” even though it has yet to be recommended by even one scientific organization.

I also would like to hear your response to the person who mentioned children who are forced into conversion therapy. How can this be prevented?

From your constant ignoring the topic, I assume you will not apologize for trying to deceive others by passing your opinions off as the teachings of the church, so I will dip the topic.

Kevin,

I believe you were mistaken in suggesting that I was saying that the American Psychological Association was not credible. I was speaking of the American Psychiatric Association that has been over run by homosexuals.

However since you brought it up I found this…

narth.com/docs/insiders.html

Psychology Losing Scientific Credibility,
Say APA Insiders

Speaking to a rapt audience of about 100 fellow professionals at the Marina Del Rey Marriott Hotel on November 12, 2005, psychologists Nicholas Cummings, Ph.D. and Rogers Wright, Ph.D. had much to say about the profession they had served throughout their long and distinguished careers – charging “intellectual arrogance and zealotry” within a profession that they say is now dominated by social-activist groups.

When writing their newly released book Destructive Trends in Mental Health, Wright and Cummings invited the participation of a number of fellow psychologists who flatly turned them down–fearing loss of tenure, loss of promotion, and other forms of professional retaliation. “We were bombarded by horror stories,” Dr. Cummings said. “Their greatest fear was of the gay lobby, which is very strong in the APA.”

**"‘Homophobia as intimidation’ is one of the most pervasive techniques used to silence anyone who would disagree with the gay activist agenda," said Cummings. "Sadly, I have seen militant gay men and lesbians-- who I am certain do not represent all homosexuals, and who themselves have been the object of derision and oppression– once gaining freedom and power, then becoming oppressors themselves." **

Cummings then discussed a 2004 resolution by the APA in favor of gay marriage, which APA recommended because it “promotes mental health.” What was the evidence APA offered? (Such a bold statement from APA, of course, would be used in the courts to decide key social issues.) The references APA cited, it turned out, actually proved only one claim-- that as a general matter, “loving relationships are healthy.” “That was one of the worst resolutions,” Cummings said.

"When we speak in the name of psychology we are to speak only from facts and clinical expertise," he explained. If psychology speaks out on every social issue, "very soon the public will see us as a discredited organization–just another opinionated voice shouting and shouting."

You see the American Psychological Association members themselves believe that the American Psychological Association is losing credibility. I reserve opinion on this other than to say that homosexuals have taken over this organization too.

Now when you understand that and then look at this…

catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=45290

GLAAD Sets Up Ministry of Propaganda to Silence Opponents of Homosexual Agenda
The effort recruits likeminded parties to “spy”. They are asked to send reports in to GLAAD if these commentators are featured in local media. GLAAD will then pressure the media sources to not feature their writing. In effect, the organization has established a ministry of propaganda. Its purpose seems to be to ensure that only the positions of the Homosexual Equivalency movement are allowed to be read, heard or considered

Gay activists want to silence anyone and everyone using the American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association and also attacks the media to be sure that their message gets out…

You might even think that on these forums here there are those that are trying to silence the likes of me…nahhh…just couldn’t be…nahhh…

 

[Agatha813]

Wow. The double-standard is clear. If you want to live an alternative lifestyle, and engage in all sorts of deviant sexual conduct that places you at risk of psychological and physical injury, well anything goes, as long as it is between two “consenting” adults!

BUT if you suffer from same-sex attraction and want to sit down and talk with someone who thinks you may be able to overcome those feelings in therapy, well, that’s now “illegal” because you might feel bad about yourself if you do? In other words, California now says, “You’re gay… just accept it and be happy about it.”

:banghead:

What a crazy world we live in!

Peace,
Robert

Agreed! People should have the right to seek help if they want it and feel that it may help them.

 

[CopticChristian]

I find it very funny that you vehemently argue against the credibility of the APA, but yet your view of the causes of homosexuality (a combination of genetics and social influences) is exactly the same as theirs.
**The APA states the following:

“There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, or homosexual orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.”**
I also find it funny that you honestly do not understand that the statement “The APA has little credibility” and even the statement “The APA has plenty of credibility” are both opinions, not fact. There is no way to scientifically determine credibility.

However, on that note I find it extremely hard to believe how many tens of thousands of psychologists continue to be members of an organization which has as little credibility as you claim it has. I find it much easier to believe that a small minority of people think the APA has little credibility, mainly people who disagree with their positions.

But forget the APA. Is there ONE mainstream scientific organization which believes conversion therapy is possible and beneficial? Hint: neither NARTH nor JONAH are mainstream, both are extremely fringe organizations. I just find it hard to believe that conversion therapy is so “obvious” even though it has yet to be recommended by even one scientific organization.

I also would like to hear your response to the person who mentioned children who are forced into conversion therapy. How can this be prevented?

From your constant ignoring the topic, I assume you will not apologize for trying to deceive others by passing your opinions off as the teachings of the church, so I will dip the topic.

Kevin,

This is marvelous that you point this out. Despite Ringil, Bradski, and any other lemmings that support the LGBT position this APsyA statement will be the undoing of this California law to ban NARTH. I know this because of my forensic background.

The readership should read Roe v Wade

In this argument, the argument is for abortion. The arguments discuss Theology, ancient beliefs, Theologic beliefs and after wrangling with the idea that some say life begins in the womb, etc…they conclude this…

oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1971/1971_70_18/

Texas urges that, apart from the Fourteenth Amendment, life begins at conception and is present throughout pregnancy, and that, therefore, the State has a compelling interest in protecting that life from and after conception. We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.

So the sympathizers with the LGBT agenda should realize that the courts are going to listen to and cull the disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology and say that there is no consensus as to wheter or not homosexuality or gender identiy is fixed…and this statement by the APsychA…

Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors.

will be the nail in the coffin of those that want to perpetuate the myth that gender is fixed, those wanting to seek help to change should be offered that hope, that those that offer that hope for change should practice… the courts will not speculate on when life begins in the womb nor will they speculate as to when gender is fixed as there is no consensus and the courts are not in the business of defining something for which there is no consensus.

If the readership wants some insights, read Roe v Wade and see all the things the court will look at and what the reality is as the courts decide in favor of an undecided opinion and no consensus.

I called Liberty Counsel, sent an email and will offer my services as a medical consultant on behalf of NARTH…free…just wanna help…

Amen…

 

[Slavonic]

Kevin,

This is marvelous that you point this out. Despite Ringil, Bradski, and any other lemmings that support the LGBT position this APsyA statement will be the undoing of this California law to ban NARTH. I know this because of my forensic background.

LGBT agenda should realize that the courts are going to listen to and cull the disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology and say that there is no consensus as to wheter or not homosexuality or gender identiy is fixed…and this statement by the APsychA…

will be the nail in the coffin of those that want to perpetuate the myth that gender is fixed, those wanting to seek help to change should be offered that hope, that those that offer that hope for change should practice… the courts will not speculate on when life begins in the womb nor will they speculate as to when gender is fixed as there is no consensus and the courts are not in the business of defining something for which there is no consensus.

If the readership wants some insights, read Roe v Wade and see all the things the court will look at and what the reality is as the courts decide in favor of an undecided opinion and no consensus.

You need to get your terms straight. Not “fixed” does not mean “changeable.” Saying that there are many factors at play in the development of an individual’s sexuality, as the major psychological and psychiatric organizations say, does not mean that it is not “fixed.” You’re presupposing that not black means white, when it very well mean gray, or a rainbow of colors. Logically speaking, it doesn’t hold up. Also, supposing sexuality is fluid, does not mean that there are methods or treatments that can actually change it or if such methods are required. Even if such methods exist, it does not mean they should be applied to people to make them conform to heterosexist standards. So, even if such a method exists, it may not even be ethical to apply it. And it very well may happen that such a “treatment,” if it does exist (it doesn’t), may be able to make the “change” but do great harm to a person and come a great cost, setting aside heterosexist and homophobic attitudes.

Show me evidence that the methods NARTH is defending, actually work and are ethical. Please use your medical expertise and name the highest feasible scientific standard and methodology for providing such evidence of success, not only of results but that the treatment itself caused those result, and then provide a study built around those standards.

 

[CopticChristian]

You need to get your terms straight. Not “fixed” does not mean “changeable.” Saying that there are many factors at play in the development of an individual’s sexuality, as the major psychological and psychiatric organizations say, does not mean that it is not “fixed.” You’re presupposing that not black means white, when it very well mean gray, or a rainbow of colors. Logically speaking, it doesn’t hold up. Also, supposing sexuality is fluid, does not mean that there are methods or treatments that can actually change it or if such methods are required. Even if such methods exist, it does not mean they should be applied to people to make them conform to heterosexist standards. So, even if such a method exists, it may not even be ethical to apply it. And it very well may happen that such a “treatment,” if it does exist (it doesn’t), may be able to make the “change” but do great harm to a person and come a great cost, setting aside heterosexist and homophobic attitudes.

Show me evidence that the methods NARTH is defending, actually work and are ethical. Please use your medical expertise and name the highest feasible scientific standard and methodology for providing such evidence of success, not only of results but that the treatment itself caused those result, and then provide a study built around those standards.

Slavonic,

I would love to dialoge more with you here. I suggest you review all of my past posts on this issue and try to come to terms with this issue. I must reserve my comments on this thread from this point forward.

Recall that I said I spoke with Dr. Nicolosi. Recall that I said that I contacted Liberty Counsel. I have received communication from Liberty Counsel and will avail myself to their efforts and do what I can with my 30 years of expert witness work and legal review to help Liberty Counsel and Dr. Nicolosi. I will be unable to discuss anything other than what has been said from this point forward.

The best I can offer you at this time is, stay tuned.

 

[Eleanora_Winter]

Dr. Nicolosi. is religiously fueled charlatan who failed on numerous occasions to prove his anti-scientific and extremely harmful views. he belongs to the same criminal ly insane gang that embraced Paul Cameron who is even more blatant abuser and charlatan trialed and proven guilty.

NARTH is an organization of outcasts, religious fanatics and extremists who let their illness affect their mind.Sadly.

They represent a tiny % of those who were cast away for misconducts and ethical violation on the grounds of religious hatred and abrahamic ideology by the world’s largest scientific circles, the real professionals, the real doctors and scientists.

They have no scientific grounds whatsoever.

I do hope our government deals with this snakes nest as soon as possible for all their crimes against Humanity, Reason, Reality, Nature, Science and Medicine.
I expect trials and prison sentences, no less. Enough is enough.

 

[Slavonic]

I would love to dialoge more with you here. I suggest you review all of my past posts on this issue and try to come to terms with this issue. I must reserve my comments on this thread from this point forward.

Recall that I said I spoke with Dr. Nicolosi. Recall that I said that I contacted Liberty Counsel. I have received communication from Liberty Counsel and will avail myself to their efforts and do what I can with my 30 years of expert witness work and legal review to help Liberty Counsel and Dr. Nicolosi. I will be unable to discuss anything other than what has been said from this point forward.

How convenient for you, how sad for me. Or is it how convenient for me and how sad of you?

 

[CopticChristian]

Dr. Nicolosi. is religiously fueled charlatan who failed on numerous occasions to prove his anti-scientific and extremely harmful views. he belongs to the same criminal ly insane gang that embraced Paul Cameron who is even more blatant abuser and charlatan trialed and proven guilty.

NARTH is an organization of outcasts, religious fanatics and extremists who let their illness affect their mind.Sadly.

They represent a tiny % of those who were cast away for misconducts and ethical violation on the grounds of religious hatred and abrahamic ideology by the world’s largest scientific circles, the real professionals, the real doctors and scientists.

They have no scientific grounds whatsoever.

I do hope our government deals with this snakes nest as soon as possible for all their crimes against Humanity, Reason, Reality, Nature, Science and Medicine.
I expect trials and prison sentences, no less. Enough is enough.

Eleanora,

Don’t hold back now. Speak right up. Have you read any of the studies you suggest fail to prove anything?

Our government does not harbor anymosity towards snakes, they do for crimes, humanity is a concern, Reason is always worth considering, Reality is key, Nature and Medicine are alive and well. Trials and prisons exist.

I agree. Enough is enough.

 

[CopticChristian]

How convenient for you, how sad for me. Or is it how convenient for me and how sad of you?

Slavonic,

This all depends on your view of convenience and sadness.

I am elated. Family and friends are ecstatic.

Are you happy or sad that the Catechism teaches what it teaches about homosexuality and the 10th commandment, or is it inconvenient to say?

Your perception is your reality.

 

[Bradski]

I am elated. Family and friends are ecstatic.

I’m quite pleased myself.