What is the Church's stance on conversion therapy for gays

[Baelor]

Then your opinion is unformed and the notion that science has anything to do with this is evident as you know the DSM removed homosexuality based on other than science.

That is an unjustified claim. If I publish a book claiming that homosexuality results from undetectable unicorns that sprinkle glitter on the unborn, not reading my book would hardly constitute ignoring valuable opinions and studies.

In order to justify your claim, you must justify Nicolosi’s book. You have not done that, so you cannot make that claim.

Do you believe that it is uncharitable to ask you to concede that your opinion is based on the status quo, based on authorities that are political to advance a cause and to ask you to expand your view? Should I dismiss any attempt to ask you to understand that perhaps you may want to rethink your position as it regards…

How does this apply any less to you, or anyone who holds any opinion whatsoever?

Morality…I believe that your opinions are in conflict with striving and teaching the moral life, and in my opinion blinded by your mindset within the context of your profession…

Not at all; they are consistent with Church teaching.

The answer and approach will differ when viewed by

Behaviorists
Psychoanalytical
Cognitive Behavioral
Gestalt
Licensed Minister
Life Coach

so who is correct?

Different persons are correct for different things, and in different ways. But if something is scientifically sound, then that person is most certainly correct regardless of anyone else.

One thing that a scientist learns, and I number myself among them, is when there is no one single answer for a problem, then the obvious is that no one knows for sure.

That does not mean that no one knows anything. We know that homosexuality occurs in both sexes, for example.

So ask, when the establishment does not like the message and they try to silence the message and crucify the message…what happens to the message…? It gets bigger, more evident, people start looking, and before you know it gains popularity and people see the truth…

Only if the message is the truth in the first place.

 

[CopticChristian]

That is an unjustified claim. If I publish a book claiming that homosexuality results from undetectable unicorns that sprinkle glitter on the unborn, not reading my book would hardly constitute ignoring valuable opinions and studies.

In order to justify your claim, you must justify Nicolosi’s book. You have not done that, so you cannot make that claim.

How does this apply any less to you, or anyone who holds any opinion whatsoever?

Not at all; they are consistent with Church teaching.

Different persons are correct for different things, and in different ways. But if something is scientifically sound, then that person is most certainly correct regardless of anyone else.

That does not mean that no one knows anything. We know that homosexuality occurs in both sexes, for example.

Only if the message is the truth in the first place.

Mr. B,

I don’t have to justify Nicolosi’s book. I pointed out those that have said it is valuable work. It is a piece of information that makes an attempt to understand a problem. I don’t say he is correct of that his view is the only view. For you to say that it is based on unicorns undermines meaningful dialogue. Have you read his book?

Do you believe that it is uncharitable to ask you to concede that your opinion is based on the status quo, based on authorities that are political to advance a cause and to ask you to expand your view? Should I dismiss any attempt to ask you to understand that perhaps you may want to rethink your position as it regards…

My opinion is not based on authorities, I have no political cause to advance, I dismiss the AMA as representing less than 1/3 of all Physicians and most of the membership is Students. I dismiss the authority of the American Psychiatric Association as do many in the field. The attempt to silence NARTH in California is opposition to a political agenda that I supported and gave information for…you can view this how you wish.

Different persons and different things and different ways is not science. My years of science and practice of medicine indicate that you do not know what you are talking about. Whenever, in any book, in any meeting, in any dialogue about a problem this issue surfaces…colleagues admit…the reason for numerous approaches is that there is no consensus on the problem or how to solve it…thank you for your insight.

Morality…I believe that your opinions are in conflict with striving and teaching the moral life, and in my opinion blinded by your mindset within the context of your profession…

You believe that Ringil’s admission that his view on Same sex relationships publically posted are consistent with Church teaching? Ok…

So ask, when the establishment does not like the message and they try to silence the message and crucify the message…what happens to the message…? It gets bigger, more evident, people start looking, and before you know it gains popularity and people see the truth…

So you believe that silencing true messages is the only predictor of spread? Ok, then look at the growth of Mormonism, after Joseph Smith was murdered…or attempts to suppress Islam…or any other issue…the tragedy is not that the issue has to be true just suppresed.

In the case of NARTH…it is an attempt to silence and stop any investigation as to the cause or attempt to change someone seeking help. The name by implication will of course cause problems…National Association Research Treatment Homosexuality…

True or not…attempts to stop any research in the world on something someone finds an interest in studying will fail…treatment is a bug a boo…because while it may or may not be treatment it is engaging people for change…

perhaps National Association for Reaching Troubled Homosexuals might work better…

 

[Baelor]

I don’t have to justify Nicolosi’s book. I pointed out those that have said it is valuable work.

That is irrelevant, just as you say the authority of the entire medical community on this issue is irrelevant because it is being usurped by partisan politics.

If Nicolosi’s book uses actual science, then it should be an easy task for you to lay out the only relevant information – his methodology.

It is a piece of information that makes an attempt to understand a problem. I don’t say he is correct of that his view is the only view. For you to say that it is based on unicorns undermines meaningful dialogue.

What makes Nicolosi’s book any less of an undermining work?

Again, you simply assert it is a “piece of information” without justifying why we should consider it such. Your request that all read the book and your admonishment of those who do not wish to is subsequently wrong.

You believe that Ringil’s admission that his view on Same sex relationships publically posted are consistent with Church teaching? Ok…

He made no such statement. See here:

ringil:

Who said that engaging in homosexual acts is not sinful- surely not I. I have said that an established sexual orientation with same-sex attraction emerging from childhood and/or adolescence cannot be converted into a heterosexual orientation.

This is entirely consistent with Church teaching.

So you believe that silencing true messages is the only predictor of spread? Ok, then look at the growth of Mormonism, after Joseph Smith was murdered…or attempts to suppress Islam…or any other issue…the tragedy is not that the issue has to be true just suppresed.

This is a discussion about science. Scientific truth. My statement applied only to science, which should have been obvious given that we were discussing science. Nice try though.

In the case of NARTH…it is an attempt to silence and stop any investigation as to the cause or attempt to change someone seeking help.

Such an attempt may be harmful. It is not enough to say that there is suppression, you must demonstrate that the suppression is unjustified.

True or not…attempts to stop any research in the world on something someone finds an interest in studying will fail…treatment is a bug a boo…because while it may or may not be treatment it is engaging people for change…

Possibly for change. And NARTH is not illegal, so there is hardly suppression.

 

[edwest2]

Very sad. There are people with unwanted behaviors. These can range from smoking to sex addiction. Here’s a group you can contact and get direct answers:

pfox.org/default.html

The following article touches on successes some men have had dealing with their same-sex desires.

nytimes.com/2012/11/01/us/ex-gay-men-fight-view-that-homosexuality-cant-be-changed.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

An early article that I think sheds further light on this issue:

catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=33842

I think this is more about politics and closing the door to the idea that gays and straights, must remain celibate. If gay marriage is to succeed, it must include the sexual component. Any attempt to question that gay sex is OK is immediately attacked. Any cracks in the wall of “sure, have all the gay sex you want, it’s OK” are being stopped.

The issue may be problematic for those forced into therapy. Apparently, we are told, such therapies can do more harm than good. However, it appears that same-sex attraction can either go away or remain, but with chastity, not gay marriage or acting on gay sexual desires, being the end result.

I think all the Church asks for is honesty. Since the APA just rubber stamps every sexual deviation that comes through their door as OK, I no longer trust it to be an unbiased source of scientific information. I view it as: “So you like being a cross dresser or transgender person - stamp - then you’re fine.” No, I am not encouraging anyone to bother such people, I am simply pointing out that sex is at the core of all of it. And if you’re going to have bi-marriage and transgender marriage and start calling pedophiles “minor-attracted persons” then the APA has lost all credibility as a scientific body regarding human sexuality.

Straights are in an equal amount of trouble when they deviate from self-control and engage in sexual behavior outside of marriage.

Peace,
Ed

 

[CopticChristian]

That is irrelevant, just as you say the authority of the entire medical community on this issue is irrelevant because it is being usurped by partisan politics.

If Nicolosi’s book uses actual science, then it should be an easy task for you to lay out the only relevant information – his methodology.

What makes Nicolosi’s book any less of an undermining work?

Again, you simply assert it is a “piece of information” without justifying why we should consider it such. Your request that all read the book and your admonishment of those who do not wish to is subsequently wrong.

He made no such statement. See here:

This is entirely consistent with Church teaching.

This is a discussion about science. Scientific truth. My statement applied only to science, which should have been obvious given that we were discussing science. Nice try though.

Such an attempt may be harmful. It is not enough to say that there is suppression, you must demonstrate that the suppression is unjustified.

Possibly for change. And NARTH is not illegal, so there is hardly suppression.

Baelor,

I really do not like playing the Karpman’s triangle game.

My view of behavior is not as science, rather as observation, and inference looking to complete the picture of understanding. Nicolosi’s work is just a piece of the puzzle and to understand the puzzle it is necessary to understand his perspective. I just read he uses EMDR that I have experience with so it is interesting. I read all material before forming an opinion, however as I see those try to silence someone, that causes me more interest to investigate why and knowing what I know about the soothsayers of the APA, AMA, DSM and the like it is ever more interesting.

You say…

He made no such statement. See here:

Originally Posted by ringil
Who said that engaging in homosexual acts is not sinful- surely not I. I have said that an established sexual orientation with same-sex attraction emerging from childhood and/or adolescence cannot be converted into a heterosexual orientation.

Ok…

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=9821623#post9821623

post 83

We don’t live in a theocracy.

My personal preference is the “Civil Unions” become the standard of law and “marriage” the specific parlance of religious organizations.

I am very agains Gay Marriage but I really don’t care about “Civil Unions”. I do realize that the Church is also against Civil Union, however.

So, perhaps you have not read past statements.

Suggesting that something is harmful without sifting all the data and not reading the book means that you are basing your opinion on second hand information.

Ringil and many others have stated that the DSM is a statistical manual that changes based on extensive research and anyone that viewed the video to point out what those in the field say…it is not science, it is not statistical…it is opinion…and votes…based on politics and money…So, we are not dealing with science here…

Do you have a science background?

As a student in an Ivy league University and as a leader, what is your major?

 

[Baelor]

My view of behavior is not as science, rather as observation, and inference looking to complete the picture of understanding.

Conversation therapy necessary involves science. It is either scientifically possible or scientifically impossible.

Nicolosi’s work is just a piece of the puzzle and to understand the puzzle it is necessary to understand his perspective.

No, it is not. That is not sufficient justification for admitting his information. This is independent of whether the information is accurate. Again, to understand this issue, we need legitimate and scientific information.

Ok…

You said same-sex relationships. At no point did ringil say that same-sex relationships were morally permissible, which is what you claimed here:

You believe that Ringil’s admission that his view on Same sex relationships publically posted are consistent with Church teaching? Ok…

Not all same-sex relationships are civil unions, so your imprecision led you to inaccuracy. Please be clearer in the future so that I do not have to attempt to guess what you are saying.

Suggesting that something is harmful without sifting all the data and not reading the book means that you are basing your opinion on second hand information.

Uh…No. I never said that reparation therapy is harmful, nor did I say that I did not read the book. Nor would that make my opinion based on second-hand information any more than reading a book written by someone discussing others.

Ringil and many others have stated that the DSM is a statistical manual that changes based on extensive research and anyone that viewed the video to point out what those in the field say…it is not science, it is not statistical…it is opinion…and votes…based on politics and money…So, we are not dealing with science here…

I did not make any claim regarding the DSM.

 

[CopticChristian]

Conversation therapy necessary involves science. It is either scientifically possible or scientifically impossible.

No, it is not. That is not sufficient justification for admitting his information. This is independent of whether the information is accurate. Again, to understand this issue, we need legitimate and scientific information.

You said same-sex relationships. At no point did ringil say that same-sex relationships were morally permissible, which is what you claimed here:

Not all same-sex relationships are civil unions, so your imprecision led you to inaccuracy. Please be clearer in the future so that I do not have to attempt to guess what you are saying.

Uh…No. I never said that reparation therapy is harmful, nor did I say that I did not read the book. Nor would that make my opinion based on second-hand information any more than reading a book written by someone discussing others.

I did not make any claim regarding the DSM.

Baelor,

Do you have a science background? Does finance have much to do with this discussion?

What makes you believe that any of this stuff concerning behavior is science?

Your lack of understanding makes me sad.

I have little time and patience for this dialogue.

Do you have a point you want to make?

As you posted in a thread you started in the past…
**
Let us stay on topic.**

 

[Baelor]

What makes you believe that any of this stuff concerning behavior is science?

In this case, the scientific method applies.

Genetics, neuroscience, and to some extent psychology are all sciences. Furthermore, whether gays can be converted is a scientific issue that can be considered using the scientific method.

Science gives us the answer to this question; we may know be able to determine it yet, but that does not change the fundamental nature of conversion therapy and homosexuality.

Your lack of understanding makes me sad.

Do you have a point you want to make?

My points are in my posts, if you bothered to consider them.

Let us stay on topic.

In what way am I off topic?

 

[CopticChristian]

In this case, the scientific method applies.

Genetics, neuroscience, and to some extent psychology are all sciences. Furthermore, whether gays can be converted is a scientific issue that can be considered using the scientific method.

Science gives us the answer to this question; we may know be able to determine it yet, but that does not change the fundamental nature of conversion therapy and homosexuality.

My points are in my posts, if you bothered to consider them.

**
Let us stay on topic.**

In what way am I off topic?

Baelor,

Genetics all by itself has little to do with homosexuality.

Neuroscience. I suggest you spend some time on YouTube, watch the BBC Brain Story…

youtube.com/watch?v=fhjKMCY0UME

There are about 12 episodes…I had them catalogued…you look them up and then get back to me after you watch…

Outline your understanding of the use of a Scientific Method related to gay change. Take your time…

Research and provide me what behavior science is and the methods used in behavior science. After that get back to me.

Remmember the APA, AMA, Clinical Social Workers…all say Homosexuality is normal…so what sceintific study are you going to propose to study normal and what is the expected outcome…to cause normal to become abnormal?

 

[Baelor]

Genetics all by itself has little to do with homosexuality.

I never claimed it did, but genetics is still a scientific discipline. But someone such as yourself, who admits that we do not know for sure everything about homosexuality and that all options must be considered, genetics should not be ruled out. And, even if you think it irrelevant, many people believe it may be relevant in some way.

Neuroscience. I suggest you spend some time on YouTube, watch the BBC Brain Story…

I have, thank you. The field is well-named.

Outline your understanding of the use of a Scientific Method related to gay change.

I will follow a sixth-grade model for conversion therapy.

Question: Can gays become straight, i.e. be attracted to members of the opposite sex sexually and not members of the same sex, through conversion therapy?

Hypothesis/Prediction: Yes; homosexuality is consequently not an incontrovertible genetic state.

Test: Put a large number of individuals through conversion therapy such that a desired level of statistical significance can be guaranteed.

Considerations with the data:

1. Will a binary be used for sexual attraction?
2. What demographic diversity is relevant?
3. How will the control group function?
4. How will the end result of the conversion therapy be analyzed?

Research and provide me what behavior science is and the methods used in behavior science. After that get back to me.

I am not discussing behavior science. I am discussing the application of the scientific method to what is essentially an experiment.

And please stop condescending to me. Trust me, it is not I who looks bad as a result.

all say Homosexuality is normal…

“Normal” is not specific enough for me.

 

[CopticChristian]

I never claimed it did, but genetics is still a scientific discipline. But someone such as yourself, who admits that we do not know for sure everything about homosexuality and that all options must be considered, genetics should not be ruled out. And, even if you think it irrelevant, many people believe it may be relevant in some way.

I have, thank you. The field is well-named.

I will follow a sixth-grade model for conversion therapy.

Question: Can gays become straight, i.e. be attracted to members of the opposite sex sexually and not members of the same sex, through conversion therapy?

Hypothesis/Prediction: Yes; homosexuality is consequently not an incontrovertible genetic state.
Test: Put a large number of individuals through conversion therapy such that a desired level of statistical significance can be guaranteed.

Considerations with the data:

1. Will a binary be used for sexual attraction?
2. What demographic diversity is relevant?
3. How will the control group function?
4. How will the end result of the conversion therapy be analyzed?

I am not discussing behavior science. I am discussing the application of the scientific method to what is essentially an experiment.

And please stop condescending to me. Trust me, it is not I who looks bad as a result.

“Normal” is not specific enough for me.

Baelor,

Your study is flawed with prejudice as to the genetic state of homosexuality that is not proven. Wrong…eehhhhh…try again…

 

[Baelor]

Your study is flawed with prejudice as to the genetic state of homosexuality that is not proven. Wrong…eehhhhh…try again…

It is actually fine, given that the conclusion as stated would indeed follow from the experiment and there is no “prejudice” at all since no assumptions are being made about the causes of homosexuality in my study, but you can omit the word “genetic” if you would like.

 

[CopticChristian]

It is actually fine, given that the conclusion as stated would indeed follow from the experiment and there is no “prejudice” at all since no assumptions are being made about the causes of homosexuality in my study, but you can omit the word “genetic” if you would like.

Baelor,

So who is going to do this study and how are you going to get recruits?

Hey…yeah…are you homosexual…well yeah…want to take part in an experiment…xcuse me…yeah we are going to do a study…you know, we want to get a bunch of people together and see what happens when we try to convert them…I don’t want to be converted…

Hey…you want to be converted, were putting together this study…

are you serious?

Here is what I think you might do…get hold of Nicolosi’s book and read this page…think about it…

The very man who was instrumental in removing homosexuality from the list of mental disorders—psychiatrist Robert Spitzer, a self-proclaimed athe¬ist—said that in homosexuality, “something’s not working.” If his own son were dealing with same-sex attraction, Dr. Spitzer added, he hoped he would explore change therapy.

Putting this same intuitive knowledge into blunt terminology, one of my clients asked, “How could I have been designed by the Creator for anal sex?” He scoffed at the American Psychological Association’s idea that homosexu¬ality is equivalent to heterosexuality. “Anal sex is damaging to the body,” he said. “It’s demeaning to a man’s dignity; it’s unhealthy. I couldn’t have been created for a same-sex relationship whose very design makes biological par¬enthood impossible.”

He laughed ironically. "So I was designed this way? Then I have been cre¬ated by an absurd god."

Many other men have told us, “I tried homosexuality, but I found out that it didn’t work.”

The fact is, the vast majority of clients who come to us have found same-sex attraction to be maladaptive in their lives. Their impetus for change comes from their deep conviction that underneath it all they really are hetero¬sexual men, and they seek a therapist who sees their inner potential. But, as George Orwell said, “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revo¬lutionary act.”

Not an Easy Road

Like all authentic commitments to self-improvement, efforts to change will make for a very challenging task. Change cannot be motivated primarily by social or religious guilt. Rather, the man must find his strength from a pro-tound and abiding commitment from within. Success in treatment can only come from an intrinsic motivation,

Nicolosi honestly says…this book is not about “what works” but about “what might work”…I find the criticism of an attempt to help suffering people ill founded…

 

[Baelor]

So who is going to do this study and how are you going to get recruits?

Hey…yeah…are you homosexual…well yeah…want to take part in an experiment…xcuse me…yeah we are going to do a study…you know, we want to get a bunch of people together and see what happens when we try to convert them…I don’t want to be converted…

Hey…you want to be converted, were putting together this study…

are you serious?

You asked the following:

CopticChristian:

Outline your understanding of the use of a Scientific Method related to gay change

I provided a model that follows the scientific method. You did not impose constraints of viability or practicality, and so your concerns are irrelevant. Had they been important enough to merit a response, you should have mentioned them to me when asking.

And although my model may not be able to be implemented perfectly, it can be approximated, which it has been, although seemingly too imperfectly for analysis.

 

[CopticChristian]

You asked the following:

I provided a model that follows the scientific method. You did not impose constraints of viability or practicality, and so your concerns are irrelevant. Had they been important enough to merit a response, you should have mentioned them to me when asking.

And although my model may not be able to be implemented perfectly, it can be approximated, which it has been, although seemingly too imperfectly for analysis.

Baelor,

You, I do not believe, understand what it is you propose. Paper science.

Read through what Nicolosi says a few times and ask yourself…how do I help people that want help?

 

[Baelor]

Nicolosi honestly says…this book is not about “what works” but about “what might work”…I find the criticism of an attempt to help suffering people ill founded…

That is an absurd line of thought, and I think you know it. I hardly find it ill-founded to condemn the chopping off of a hand because of a hangnail, or the provision of orange juice to a cancer patient in the hope that the tumor will disappear. There is a difference between condemning action and condemning motive.

Considering the text itself:
BS:

He laughed ironically. “So I was designed this way? Then I have been cre¬ated by an absurd god.”

This is not theologically sound. Persons with defects are born every day.

Their impetus for change comes from their deep conviction that underneath it all they really are hetero¬sexual men

Unproven.

Change cannot be motivated primarily by social or religious guilt

Change is not proven or guaranteed.

Success in treatment can only come from an intrinsic motivation

Success is not necessarily going to come at all.

In other words, the book operates on unfounded bases – much like the psychological associations.

 

[Baelor]

You, I do not believe, understand what it is you propose. Paper science.

If you did not want paper science, you should have been more specific in your request. I did what you asked. If you do not like that fact that I succeeded when you thought I would fail, get over it.

Read through what Nicolosi says a few times and ask yourself…how do I help people that want help?

By being able to provide them with help through certainty. The possibility of change is uncertain. I would not tell someone they should not get help, but I would not tell them that change will necessarily happen. Why? Because I do not know, and I do not understand homosexuality scientifically.

 

[CopticChristian]

If you did not want paper science, you should have been more specific in your request. I did what you asked. If you do not like that fact that I succeeded when you thought I would fail, get over it.

By being able to provide them with help through certainty. The possibility of change is uncertain. I would not tell someone they should not get help, but I would not tell them that change will necessarily happen. Why? Because I do not know, and I do not understand homosexuality scientifically.

Baelor,

Ok, I will get over it, over it, over it…check out this site below for a design for a study for behavior…

clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01389297

My friend there is no certainty in behavior. If there were then we would open a book and say, Ok…you have this problem, you need to do this…behavior is difficult to change unless you have one thing…look at the last paragraph from Nicolosi’s book…

Like all authentic commitments to self-improvement, efforts to change will make for a very challenging task. Change cannot be motivated primarily by social or religious guilt. Rather, the man must find his strength from a pro-tound and abiding commitment from within. Success in treatment can only come from an intrinsic motivation,

I cannot recall how many times I post this…no change until there is motivation for change…and the key to finding motivation in my opinion comes from asking why?

Why do you want to change? and when you find the reason that makes the most sense, and it is a reason that the client supplies, because I have no idea what motivates anyone, I do know what motivates me…but when you can identify and help someone get to the reason that change can occur then it will occur…

Reid Hesters program starts it’s module with Motivation…Stanton Peele has Motivation as the 3rd module and here Nicolosi says the same thing…

Motivation…

This is the medicine for change. How do you find the motivation?, how do you understand the motivation? how do you create the motivation?, how do you guide someone to motivation?

Any interview with someone wanting to change should be spent finding that motivation befor any effort to help someone move along the path to change…otherwise it is just advice…

any study that will succeed needs to have motivation as its catalyst for change or nothing happens…Ok…

 

[CopticChristian]

If you did not want paper science, you should have been more specific in your request. I did what you asked. If you do not like that fact that I succeeded when you thought I would fail, get over it.

By being able to provide them with help through certainty. The possibility of change is uncertain. I would not tell someone they should not get help, but I would not tell them that change will necessarily happen. Why? Because I do not know, and I do not understand homosexuality scientifically.

Baelor,

Save your energy…What you should know is that I see that there may be many ways of helping people and that when you combine them then there may be more effectiveness…

I have found cases of cure for homosexuality in the hypnotherapy literature that date to 1958…and I previously mentioned Bandler…author of Frogs into Princes…

In this particular case, his conscious mind was, to put it as nicely as I can, inane. His unconscious resources, however, were incredibly intelligent. So I said “What I want to know from you, since you know much more about him than I do, is what change is it that he needs to make in his behavior?”
The response I got was “He’s a homosexual.”
“What change does he need to make?”
“He needs to change it, because it’s all based on a mistake.”
“What mistake?”
He had lived as a homosexual for about twenty-five years.
His unconscious resources said “You must not let his conscious mind know about this mistake, because knowing that would destroy him.” And I agreed with that. There was no need for him to know that he had goofed in all of his relationships for twenty-five years. The only important thing was that he make a change, because he wanted to get married. But he couldn’t marry a woman because he knew that he was a homosexual. His unconscious mind would not allow him in any way to become conscious of the fact that he had made this mistake, because i: would have made his whole life a mistake and that knowledge would have utterly destroyed him. It wanted him to have the illusion that he grew out of it and grew into new behavior.

So I arranged with his unconscious mind to have him blossom as a heterosexual person and to make the changes as a result of a spiritual experience. His unconscious mind agreed that that was the best way to go about it.

Here is a summary from an article on Hypnotherapy cure for homosexuality dating to 1958

Summary
The origin of homosexuality and other deviations from the normal seems to originate in very early child¬hood experiences. Cases are given, some relating to treatment 30 years back, and others more recent, which indicate that when these causes are discovered and the experiences revived the patient is able to adjust himself to them in a way he was unable to do as an infant, and is thereby cured. This process of cure is a long one, and cannot be considered a practical answer to the wide¬spread incidence of homosexuality. Probably the main benefit in analysing these cases and the discovery of their causes is that we may find the means to prevent •them.

So change can occur, does occur, requires motivation and a facilitator…perhaps understanding Nicolosi’s approach, Bandlers apporoach and hypnotherapy combined may be the wave of the future…since the goal is to serve and help…

 

[Baelor]

My friend there is no certainty in behavior.

I never made any claim about behavior, and I am not interested in behavior, only in mental state. Homosexuality is not behavior, it is a mental state.

I cannot recall how many times I post this…no change until there is motivation for change…and the key to finding motivation in my opinion comes from asking why?

Yes. Why am I homosexual? The answer may involve something that is impossible to change.

This is the medicine for change.

Only possible change.

any study that will succeed needs to have motivation as its catalyst for change or nothing happens…Ok…

Presumably volunteers who enter a conversion therapy program want to or are open to change. Surveys are always voluntary

Here is a summary from an article on Hypnotherapy cure for homosexuality dating to 1958

So change can occur, does occur, requires motivation and a facilitator…perhaps understanding Nicolosi’s approach, Bandlers apporoach and hypnotherapy combined may be the wave of the future…since the goal is to serve and help…

Neither source is scientific.