Transgender teen who died of an apparent suicide: ‘Fix society. Please.’
- Status
S
spedteacherita
Guest
Regardless of how any of us feel about “conversion therapy,” this is again an attempt of the US government to take control out of the parents’ hands. Parents (normally) know what is best for children. I definitely don’t agree with not letting parents be solely responsible for their children’s health.
There is only caveat that I will yield to and that is if the child(ren) are in an abusive relationship with thir position,
Looking forward to hearing others’ points of views.
Peace, Rita
G
Graubo3
Guest
The first U.S. female president usually gets what she wants.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
The devil will be in the details, as always with this administration.
But in no time at all, “conversion therapy” will be interpreted to include such things as religious teaching about homosexuality. Guaranteed. After all, who thought “universal healthcare” included making nuns pay for abortifacients?
But in no time at all, “conversion therapy” will be interpreted to include such things as religious teaching about homosexuality. Guaranteed. After all, who thought “universal healthcare” included making nuns pay for abortifacients?
J
Johann_du_Toit
Guest
Governor Chris Christie-a Conservative Catholic Republican-signed into law a ban on conversion in New Jersey because,based on the evidence he viewed, there was no scientific or psychological basis for it and it in fact caused more long term psychological damage.
Whether we approve of homosexual acts and the gay lifestyle is one thing, but trying to coerce people into becoming something they are not using a method of therapy that has been wholly discredited is another.
Also, the Catholic church has never endorsed conversion therapy or demanded that homosexuals become “straight”. It merely asks of them to abstain and be celibate. (Please correct me if my interpretation of church teaching is wrong).
Whether we approve of homosexual acts and the gay lifestyle is one thing, but trying to coerce people into becoming something they are not using a method of therapy that has been wholly discredited is another.
Also, the Catholic church has never endorsed conversion therapy or demanded that homosexuals become “straight”. It merely asks of them to abstain and be celibate. (Please correct me if my interpretation of church teaching is wrong).
J
J_Peterson
Guest
How many minors are affected by this nationally? Why can’t it be handled on the state level?
G
Graubo3
Guest
M
MacBP
Guest
As far as I’m aware, there is no evidence that “conversion therapy” is effective and most of the evidence seems to suggest that it is harmful to the overall psychological well being of those involved. I suppose it is possible that there are several reasons that some individuals experience same-sex attraction, and that conversion therapy may be efficacious in some of those cases, but overall this would seem like a prudent move based upon the clinical outcomes of these treatments.
However, it is not inconceivable that in the future an effective form of conversion therapy without the nasty effects of the current models might be discovered. In that case, this may be problematic. I don’t see that happening any time soon, and so for the foreseeable future this seems to be the right call.
I think it would be far more effective for Christian parents and their children to accept their child’s orientation and encourage them to live chastely while still giving them the unconditional love and support that is owed to them by virtue of their relationship. A much better witness to the culture and it is much more likely to be effective in the long run.
However, it is not inconceivable that in the future an effective form of conversion therapy without the nasty effects of the current models might be discovered. In that case, this may be problematic. I don’t see that happening any time soon, and so for the foreseeable future this seems to be the right call.
I think it would be far more effective for Christian parents and their children to accept their child’s orientation and encourage them to live chastely while still giving them the unconditional love and support that is owed to them by virtue of their relationship. A much better witness to the culture and it is much more likely to be effective in the long run.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
As it should be. The federal government needs to stay out of it.
U
ucfengr
Guest
I don’t know whether “conversion therapy” works or not, but I’m always skeptical “studies say” argument. The soft sciences (psychology, etc.) are hotbeds of liberal/progressive ideology, and that ideology shows up strongly in their research.
T
Took2Long
Guest
With all due respect, I don’t believe the issue is whether it has merit or not. I, for one, fail to see the merit in so-called conversion therapy, but I’d be slow to support the government’s attempt to limit it. As a separate example, I see no merit in the church movement that dances around with snakes. Still, I support their religious freedom despite the fact that I am not in line with their methods. We seem to be, increasingly so in the United States, willing to ban practices we ourselves do not participate in. Protecting the freedoms we cherish is the easy part, protecting the freedoms someone else cherishes seems to be more difficult for many. My reasoning for not supporting governmental bans, has everything to do with supporting parental rights and the religious rights of those that would support such a choice over government objections. Yes, I am making the “slippery slope” argument, but I believe it has merit here. If we allow the banning of such discredited tactics, we will have opened the door to additional government overreach on any number of other issues, like the “snake dancers” of Appalachia. (who despite the fact that I believe their religious practices have been discredited, still should be free from government intervention)
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Seems to me “conversion therapy” is abusive or it isn’t, and by criteria having nothing to do with the ostensible objective of it. By way of analogy, if I, as an adult, volunteer to have a special forces guy waterboard me so I can just see what it’s like, then I am not abused if he does it. On the other hand, if some 15 year old is waterboarded against his will in order to make him give up alcohol every time one smells alcohol on his breath, it doesn’t take any genius to figure out that violates existing statutes on child abuse.
If “conversion therapy” is undertaken by willing adults, there should be no penalty for those who administer it, however mistaken someone else thinks it is to do it. If it is given to children, then there are child abuse statutes prohibiting physical or mental abuse of children, and there is no need for a special statute relating to 'conversion therapy" only.
But I don’t think that’s the point of the proposal. The real objective, I fear, is to identify religious precepts concerning homosexuality with abuse. If, say, I have a spiritual advisor and I tell him I am addicted to homosexual behvior, and if he tells me any number of things; pray, ask for grace, avoid the occasions of that sin, read the life of some saint, undertake some form of mortification like fasting, then is that director going to be guilty of the “crime” of “conversion therapy”?
Being leery of the bona fides of this administration, I have little doubt that the spiritual director could, and eventually would, be convicted of a crime. And that, I fear, is the whole idea behind this proposal, though perhaps it’s more than that. Would a priest be guilty of the “crime” if he simply said homosexual behavior is mortally sinful, particularly if his saying so caused me mental anguish? I have a suspicion that’s on the agenda too.
M
mikekle
Guest
How do you explain all the young people that have said this conversion was a great thing? In their cases, it did work…Ive seen quite a few testimonials like this, where conversions did work, so I dont think they should be discounted altogether.
E
estesbob
Guest
The Lefts war on science continues. A decision on whether to kill ones child is supposed to be between a woman and her Dr. A decision on what kind of therapy your child needs must be approved by the federal Govt. Go figure/
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
True, although I am skeptical that a brainwashed society that believes man+man = man+woman will notice…
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
Couple other comments: some people have been trained to assume “conversion therapy” means shock therapy or other torture of whatever that was used 40 years ago. The term “conversion” implies that the person truly is “gay,” and the therapy seeks to change that. The term “reparative” therapy implies that the person is not really gay, but has a disorder of some kind, perhaps related to associative identity disorder, that needs repair.
I am reminded of data from such studies as the 2009 study by Wilson and Widom, which states: *“Individuals with documented histories of childhood sexual abuse were significantly more likely than controls to report ever having had same-sex sexual partners…” *(source). Such a study would indicate that such men suffered an alteration in their sexuality that otherwise would not have occurred if not for the abuse. This is not the only study of its kind with regard to abuse and homosexual tendencies developing in the victim.
Would Obama ban therapy to a person who is truly suffering from psychological trauma? And would he do this in the name of science and love or other Orwellian triggers?
I am reminded of data from such studies as the 2009 study by Wilson and Widom, which states: *“Individuals with documented histories of childhood sexual abuse were significantly more likely than controls to report ever having had same-sex sexual partners…” *(source). Such a study would indicate that such men suffered an alteration in their sexuality that otherwise would not have occurred if not for the abuse. This is not the only study of its kind with regard to abuse and homosexual tendencies developing in the victim.
Would Obama ban therapy to a person who is truly suffering from psychological trauma? And would he do this in the name of science and love or other Orwellian triggers?
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Of course he would ban it. But for the sake of politics, relativistic ideology, and to put his thumb in the eye of religion, not for love of science, certainly.
7
7_Sorrows
Guest
The Obama administration isn’t happy unless they are banning or vetoing something.
G
gilliam
Guest
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
The problem with this testimonial style (touchy music notwithstanding) to make an argument is that there are testimonials on the opposite side of the argument, such as with David Pickup, Joseph Nicolosi, or Chris Rosik and their groups.
Secondly, in the state of California’s move to ban “conversion therapy,” they appealed to the studies of the American Psychological Association’s 2009 Report of the Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation. The studies by that task force include the following statement:
*
The gay movement has invested far too much in the concept of “born that way,” in order to make the “this is like racism” and other emotional appeals. However, they have not been able to substantiate that assertion for every single person with same-sex attraction.
So apparently there remain doctors and psychologists who believe that some form of therapy, whatever one wants to call it, can be of benefit to those who actively seek such help. If they are smart, they will just give it a name other than “conversion therapy” and circumvent the Obama Administration by playing the same game in which it so often engages itself.
- Status