Christian psychotherapist found guilty of professional misconduct for reparative therapy

[Ridgerunner]

ALL official psychologicial associations in the USA and UK believe that SSA is not curable, and that any attempt to do so leads to disaster. This is based on evidence on studies of people who tried “cure” therapy.

No surprise to the declaration that “official” psych associations declare that, though the Catholic Medical Association dissents from that point of view, as do others. The homosexual lobby had it removed from the DSM long ago, though it left other sexual perversions in, and is still wrestling about with some of those. So, you expect the various associations to contradict the DSM now? I have personally known psychiatrists who didn’t think homosexuality was an “incurable, natural state”, but they won’t fly in the face of the DSM or the ideological wisdoms of the psych community openly. It is possibly of interest to note that the psychiatrist who was instrumental in excluding homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM has had second thoughts about it. narth.com/docs/hope.html

So “any” cure attempt leads to disaster? Homosexual suicide rates suggests that disaster might not be avoided, necessarily, by ignoring it as a problem.

And, of course, the “conventional wisdom” psych community now believes pedophelia is “incurable”, though it once thought it was definitely curable. About hebephilia, they’re just not sure. Some say it is, some say it isn’t. Some say it belongs in the DSM, some say not. Some say it’s a subcategory of pedophilia; some say it’s just garden-variety homosexuality, and therefore “normal”. Since about 30% of homosexual men had their first homosexual experience when they were minors, and since the majority of adult homosexuals have had sexual experiences with minors, likely the “it’s just a variation of normal” people will win out on hebephilia. Remains to be seen.

Do you really think this sting operator was the only person who ever approached this psychologist saying (falsely on his part) that he wanted to be normal? I greatly doubt it. He is probably the only one who came in and lied about it in order to strike a blow for the homosexualist cause.

 

[Kaninchen]

No surprise to the declaration that “official” psych associations declare that, though the Catholic Medical Association dissents from that point of view, as do others. The homosexual lobby had it removed from the DSM long ago, though it left other sexual perversions in, and is still wrestling about with some of those. So, you expect the various associations to contradict the DSM now? I have personally known psychiatrists who didn’t think homosexuality was an “incurable, natural state”, but they won’t fly in the face of the DSM or the ideological wisdoms of the psych community openly. It is possibly of interest to note that the psychiatrist who was instrumental in excluding homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM has had second thoughts about it. narth.com/docs/hope.html

So “any” cure attempt leads to disaster? Homosexual suicide rates suggests that disaster might not be avoided, necessarily, by ignoring it as a problem.

And, of course, the “conventional wisdom” psych community now believes pedophelia is “incurable”, though it once thought it was definitely curable. About hebephilia, they’re just not sure. Some say it is, some say it isn’t. Some say it belongs in the DSM, some say not. Some say it’s a subcategory of pedophilia; some say it’s just garden-variety homosexuality, and therefore “normal”. Since about 30% of homosexual men had their first homosexual experience when they were minors, and since the majority of adult homosexuals have had sexual experiences with minors, likely the “it’s just a variation of normal” people will win out on hebephilia. Remains to be seen.

Do you really think this sting operator was the only person who ever approached this psychologist saying (falsely on his part) that he wanted to be normal? I greatly doubt it. He is probably the only one who came in and lied about it in order to strike a blow for the homosexualist cause.

Well, I’ve nothing against Churches providing counselling for gay people who think they could become straight, even if it furthers the Catholicualist cause. Religion on the NHS, though, is another matter altogether.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Ridgerunner - Can you find a non-biased source which says that homosexuality can be cured?

Some Christian groups who say it can obviously have something to prove, they have an interest in promoting an agenda - homosexuality is a curable illness. The CMA have a political motive.

Can you find some proof from a source which does not have a vested interest in one result?

Homosexual suicide rates are not because they cannot deal with having SSA, but because they cannot deal with bullying and the social stigma. That’s what the people themselves are saying.

My own experience - I used to have SSA, I did have a girlfriend at one point. But then I realised it wasn’t me and I “grew” out of it. Does that mean I was “cured”? No. But if someone like me took part in CMA therapy and then was “cured”, could that be because it is curable or was it because their subjects were only going through a phase/similar experience to me themselves? Interesting thought.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Well, I’ve nothing against Churches providing counselling for gay people who think they could become straight, even if it furthers the Catholicualist cause. Religion on the NHS, though, is another matter altogether.

Me neither, but I have had a look at the supporting evidence and if you look at the research methods/subjects/who paid for the study… well, it’s not believable.

The NHS is meant to be for all in the UK. If there was a Christian therapy service, then there would also have to be a Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu…

 

[Kaninchen]

Me neither, but I have had a look at the supporting evidence and if you look at the research methods/subjects/who paid for the study… well, it’s not believable.

The NHS is meant to be for all in the UK. If there was a Christian therapy service, then there would also have to be a Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu…

Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s quackery, but people get into all sorts of curious therapies and remedies for all sorts of things, real or imagined, however useful, harmless or completely ill-advised and that’s their choice.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Well, I’ve nothing against Churches providing counselling for gay people who think they could become straight, even if it furthers the Catholicualist cause. Religion on the NHS, though, is another matter altogether.

The “Catholicualist” cause? Back when the KKK was ascendant, I was called a “Catlicker”. “Catholicualist” is something they evidently didn’t think of.

 

[Kaninchen]

The “Catholicualist” cause? Back when the KKK was ascendant, I was called a “Catlicker”. “Catholicualist” is something they evidently didn’t think of.

Seemed to go nicely with homosexualist.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Seemed to go nicely with homosexualist.

Good point.

 

[irishpatrick]

I think Catholics should be very careful not to decide that God can no longer act within any person’s life. Prayer does work–prayers are answered–miracles and Divine assistance is still given.

None of us should exclude God from the picture–ever. That is a huge mistake the so-called modern and enlightened world makes all the time.

Let us not push away God’s hand.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Ridgerunner - Can you find a non-biased source which says that homosexuality can be cured?

Some Christian groups who say it can obviously have something to prove, they have an interest in promoting an agenda - homosexuality is a curable illness. The CMA have a political motive.

Can you find some proof from a source which does not have a vested interest in one result?

Homosexual suicide rates are not because they cannot deal with having SSA, but because they cannot deal with bullying and the social stigma. That’s what the people themselves are saying.

My own experience - I used to have SSA, I did have a girlfriend at one point. But then I realised it wasn’t me and I “grew” out of it. Does that mean I was “cured”? No. But if someone like me took part in CMA therapy and then was “cured”, could that be because it is curable or was it because their subjects were only going through a phase/similar experience to me themselves? Interesting thought.

I don’t make a study of homosexuality, and never did. I only cited what I readily found, and there are sources within that which you might want to look up and review. But when it comes to the “curability” of homosexuality, I very much doubt anyone writes about it without a point of view.

I don’t think there is any really persuasive proof that suicide rates among homosexuals are what they are because of bullying and social stigma. In 1960 there was probably a very good argument for that proposition. But now, when homosexuality is affirmed and protected virtually everywhere? I am not persuaded. Yes, I realize there are studies purporting to “prove” that, but the ones I have seen do not demonstrate a true cause-effect relationship.

I can’t say why you gave up homosexuality, and I guess you can’t either. Nor can I say how "curable’ anyone else might be, or what the means of cure might be in any particular case. I’m sure it varies a great deal. But I don’t think one can categorically state that nobody could be aided in “growing out of” it or any other thing one might consider a “phase” by a skilled practitioner.

I realize it’s not the same thing, but we all think penicillin, for example, is a “cure” for many diseases. It isn’t. All it does is suppress bacterial mitosis for a time so the body has a chance to muster its own defenses before it’s overwhelmed. It’s definitely an aid, but the patient actually heals himself.

And, I think most psychiatrists and psychologists would not claim they “cure” anybody of anything. They would say they facilitate self-healing on the part of the patient. They will also say the patient has to want to be healed and be active in his own healing. If he/she doesn’t, no amount of counseling on earth will make it happen.

 

[irishpatrick]

I don’t make a study of homosexuality, and never did. I only cited what I readily found, and there are sources within that which you might want to look up and review. But when it comes to the “curability” of homosexuality, I very much doubt anyone writes about it without a point of view.

I don’t think there is any really persuasive proof that suicide rates among homosexuals are what they are because of bullying and social stigma. In 1960 there was probably a very good argument for that proposition. But now, when homosexuality is affirmed and protected virtually everywhere? I am not persuaded. Yes, I realize there are studies purporting to “prove” that, but the ones I have seen do not demonstrate a true cause-effect relationship.

I can’t say why you gave up homosexuality, and I guess you can’t either. Nor can I say how "curable’ anyone else might be, or what the means of cure might be in any particular case. I’m sure it varies a great deal. But I don’t think one can categorically state that nobody could be aided in “growing out of” it or any other thing one might consider a “phase” by a skilled practitioner.

I realize it’s not the same thing, but we all think penicillin, for example, is a “cure” for many diseases. It isn’t. All it does is suppress bacterial mitosis for a time so the body has a chance to muster its own defenses before it’s overwhelmed. It’s definitely an aid, but the patient actually heals himself.

And, I think most psychiatrists and psychologists would not claim they “cure” anybody of anything. They would say they facilitate self-healing on the part of the patient. They will also say the patient has to want to be healed and be active in his own healing. If he/she doesn’t, no amount of counseling on earth will make it happen.

Thus, my point that is a very bad idea to exclude God regarding any problems humans run into or experience. God does hear prayers…

 

[Ridgerunner]

Seemed to go nicely with homosexualist.

I get it. Except that “homosexualist” is a mainstream term used to denote a movement promoting the imposition of homosexual societal agendas on those who do not necessarily favor it or, in fact, oppose its imposition on society.

“Catholicualist” is simply a term you made up to denigrate Catholicism. And no, opposition to the imposition of homosexual agendas is not peculiarly Catholic, as you know.

“heterosexualism” or “heterosexism” would, I suppose, be the parallel term denoting what I take it you oppose, without expressing religious bigotry in the process.

I do not make up terms to deride your religion, or state them on here, and never have, so please refrain from doing so with mine.

 

[Kaninchen]

I get it. Except that “homosexualist” is a mainstream term used to denote a movement promoting the imposition of homosexual societal agendas on those who do not necessarily favor it or, in fact, oppose its imposition on society.

“Catholicualist” is simply a term you made up to denigrate Catholicism. And no, opposition to the imposition of homosexual agendas is not peculiarly Catholic, as you know.

“heterosexualism” or “heterosexism” would, I suppose, be the parallel term denoting what I take it you oppose, without expressing religious bigotry in the process.

I do not make up terms to deride your religion, or state them on here, and never have, so please refrain from doing so with mine.

Denigrating Catholicism, nope. Making fun of denigration, yes.

 

[LemonAndLime]

I don’t make a study of homosexuality, and never did. I only cited what I readily found, and there are sources within that which you might want to look up and review. But when it comes to the “curability” of homosexuality, I very much doubt anyone writes about it without a point of view.

I don’t think there is any really persuasive proof that suicide rates among homosexuals are what they are because of bullying and social stigma. In 1960 there was probably a very good argument for that proposition. But now, when homosexuality is affirmed and protected virtually everywhere? I am not persuaded. Yes, I realize there are studies purporting to “prove” that, but the ones I have seen do not demonstrate a true cause-effect relationship.

I can’t say why you gave up homosexuality, and I guess you can’t either. Nor can I say how "curable’ anyone else might be, or what the means of cure might be in any particular case. I’m sure it varies a great deal. But I don’t think one can categorically state that nobody could be aided in “growing out of” it or any other thing one might consider a “phase” by a skilled practitioner.

I realize it’s not the same thing, but we all think penicillin, for example, is a “cure” for many diseases. It isn’t. All it does is suppress bacterial mitosis for a time so the body has a chance to muster its own defenses before it’s overwhelmed. It’s definitely an aid, but the patient actually heals himself.

And, I think most psychiatrists and psychologists would not claim they “cure” anybody of anything. They would say they facilitate self-healing on the part of the patient. They will also say the patient has to want to be healed and be active in his own healing. If he/she doesn’t, no amount of counseling on earth will make it happen.

Do you really think that it’s OK to be homosexual in today world?

I’m female, and while I had a girlfriend I was spat at, sworn at, lost half of my friends, and was openly laughed at and mocked. I only had a girlfriend during my last year of school. If I had to cope through all of that through my school years…

There are numerous cases of teenagers killing themselves because of bullying from parents, friends, family for being homosexual. That’s what the whole “it get’s better” campaign was all about. I think you’re burying your head in the sand if you think its a non-issue.

And I think some psychiatrists do claim they can cure homosexuality. However, studies showing that attempting to cure it are done by a variety of people from a variety of different backgrounds. The only research I’ve seen which attempts to prove that a course of therapy can lead to a cure was paid for by very conservative Christian groups, who are often part of a group called “Families together” or similar, which happen to campaign against gay marriage… yeah, you can very easily connect the dots.

 

[LemonAndLime]

I get it. Except that “homosexualist” is a mainstream term used to denote a movement promoting the imposition of homosexual societal agendas on those who do not necessarily favor it or, in fact, oppose its imposition on society.

“Catholicualist” is simply a term you made up to denigrate Catholicism. And no, opposition to the imposition of homosexual agendas is not peculiarly Catholic, as you know.

“heterosexualism” or “heterosexism” would, I suppose, be the parallel term denoting what I take it you oppose, without expressing religious bigotry in the process.

I do not make up terms to deride your religion, or state them on here, and never have, so please refrain from doing so with mine.

I had never heard of the word “homosexualist” before I came onto this forum, so I think it’s only mainstream within certain groups… if at all. When I first heard it, I thought it wasn’t a word taken seriously. Turns out it is. I actually find it insulting in tone, and find it amusing that the same people who think calling someone a “homosexualist” is okay, in the same breath will say that the word “homophobic” is offensive.

I believe the British term for that is “kettle black”.

 

[Kaninchen]

I had never heard of the word “homosexualist” before I came onto this forum, so I think it’s only mainstream within certain groups… if at all. When I first heard it, I thought it wasn’t a word taken seriously. Turns out it is. I actually find it insulting in tone, and find it amusing that the same people who think calling someone a “homosexualist” is okay, in the same breath will say that the word “homophobic” is offensive.

I believe the British term for that is “kettle black”.

I think it all depends on whether you’ve got an ‘agenda’ or not.

It’s something only naughty people have.

 

[LemonAndLime]

I think it all depends on whether you’ve got an ‘agenda’ or not.

It’s something only naughty people have.

Of course. The bad guys have a “secret agenda” (which you can’t prove or find evidence of because they’ve hidden it that well, and they’re all in ‘cahoots’), the good guys are honest, just trying to do the right thing, and have no motive behind their actions and words.

 

[Kaninchen]

Of course. The bad guys have a “secret agenda”, the good guys are honest, just trying to do the right thing, and have no motive behind their actions and words.

Exactly.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Exactly.

I’ve edited my post to include an important point - there is no trace of this agenda. No evidence - because it’s hidden that well. Only the good guys know the truth of this. Those in the agenda include all government officials and scientists, they meet in a secret base in a volcano, and scheme…

 

[Kaninchen]

I’ve edited my post to include an important point - there is no trace of this agenda. No evidence - because it’s hidden that well. Only the good guys know the truth of this. Those in the agenda include all government officials and scientists, they meet in a secret base in a volcano, and scheme…

I don’t know why but I’m always reminded of those very old BT ads with Maureen Lipman, the one where she’s a Jewish grandmother with a grandson who’s failed everything but pottery and sociology - ‘He’s got an -ology’.