• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Congress implored to denounce sexual-orientation therapy

apdst said:
Your evidence?
Click to expand...

Early techniques of conversion therapy used aversion... such as electro-shock to alter behaviors. Participants reported psychological trauma that is often associated with aversion therapy. As someone who worked with a psychiatrist who practiced this form of treatment... and was fired and de-licensed for doing so, I have seen firsthand how these techniques cause harm.

More recent studies show that around 50% of people who participate in conversion therapy had harmful effects, including severe depression and suicidality. Also, about 50% of people self-reported harmful effects of conversion therapy, including self-reports of anger, anxiety, confusion, depression, grief, guilt, hopelessness, deteriorated relationships with family, loss of social support, loss of faith, poor self-image, social isolation, intimacy difficulties, intrusive imagery, suicidal ideation, self-hatred, and sexual dysfunction. Also, conversion therapy has VERY high drop out rates, a good indicator in research of a treatment that is causing harm.

Further, practicing conversion therapy is a major no-no ethically and will get you de-licensed. Reason being, it is unethical to treat something that is NOT a disorder... and since homosexuality is not a disorder, herein lies the problem. Conversion therapy tends to stigmatize, adding guilt and shame to an individual.

The biggest problem here is the misunderstanding of the issue. If a client comes to a therapist, having some distress over being gay... or straight for that matter, one must first examine where this is coming from. It probably has zero to do with sexual orientation. This is a sexual disorder, a mood disorder, some other disorder, or some combination, NOT a problem with sexual orientation.

Now, I have no issue with conversion therapy being banned for minors. No one has the right to force a sexual orientation on anyone... including parents. I am involved in this exact situation, currently. The parents have no place to tell my minor client what he or she can be. On the other hand, I see no reason why an adult cannot choose to engage in this form of therapy... if they choose to. They do need to understand that they will be treated by an unlicensed therapist using a type of treatment that has been shown to be harmful, has show to be ineffective, and has been determined to be unethical. If they still want to engage in this treatment... I have no issue with them doing so.
 
Fiddytree said:
If we were to suppose that we could turn someone straight or gay through therapy, my question is why would you want to do that? If for no other reason than not liking homosexuality.
Click to expand...

If the kid wants to do it, let em. If they dont, then they wont. Why ban it if it aint forced? If said "therapy" is forced or not should be the only question. If its not, its none of our business. People who want to change change, those that dont wont. Much ado about nothing if you ask me. Wait........ you didnt. Oh well.
 
apdst said:
The message is coming from the government; that's what I disagree with.
Click to expand...

yes, sometimes the government has to step in to stop child abuse. It is a fact of life many parents abuse their children, and this is a case of abuse. Before you whine too much, this is not about the child's comfort at all. When a parent sends their child to force them to be straight it is about the fact the parents are uncomfortable. The child just is what it is, but the homophobic parents think that if they abuse the child enough the child will stop being gay. It doesn't work that way.

What ends up happening is that in an attempt to please the abusive parents and avoid pain and abuse the child will attempt to repress their feelings and begin to become hateful of their own natural and appropriate feelings of homosexuality. yes, i said it being gay is completely appropriate for gay people. You may wish it wasn't, and you may dislike that sort of thing, but it doesn't hurt you, and no one has ever guaranteed you would walk around this world and like everything you see. If people like you could accept and love your children then this sort of thing would not be necessary to keep you from doing massive harm to your own kids based on your bigotry and hate.

IMO people should be asked if they would send their kids to gay cure therapy and anyone who says yes should be immediately and permanently sterilized. Of course i will settle for it just becoming illegal for parents to do to their children. We cannot all get what we want.
 
apdst said:
Literally denying them the right? No. Issueing a government endorsed condemnation of that right? Yes, indeed.

There isn't a dime's worth of difference in my book.
Click to expand...

One is enforced and one isn't, thats a big difference. Unless you want to tell me that's there's no difference between the government wanting you to eat healthy and literally shoving broccoli down your throat
 
Einzige said:
"Sexual-orientation therapy" is quackery on a par with seltzer tonic.
Click to expand...

Once Obamacare kicks in, seltzer tonic is all they'll be able to afford to give you for that problem.
 
apdst said:
It's aimed at shutting down an opposing opinion.
Click to expand...

NO NO NO...apdst, I am one with an opposing opinion on gay marriage...but this is not aimed at shutting down an opposing opininion...its closing down laboratories who goal is to brainwash someone into saying they are not what they are.....surely you can see the difference....this law being passed does not make it illegal for to oppose anything....just not doctrinate people to suit your will
 
PirateMk1 said:
If the kid wants to do it, let em. If they dont, then they wont. Why ban it if it aint forced? If said "therapy" is forced or not should be the only question. If its not, its none of our business. People who want to change change, those that dont wont. Much ado about nothing if you ask me. Wait........ you didnt. Oh well.
Click to expand...

Because it usually is coerced.
 
apdst said:
Yeah, screw free speech. Right?

This is no different than a resolution denouncing gays for making their sexuality public.
Click to expand...

None of that has anything to do with free-speech. Nobody is saying you can't speak against or for something in this case.
 
apdst said:
Another outright assault on our rights.
Click to expand...

I don't think this belongs in the purview of a state legislature. If parents want to give their children "therapy" to change them from left-handedness, it's none of the state's business. To change them from being homosexual? Same difference. If a particular form of therapy is found to be abusive, then the parents and therapist should be brought up on appropriate charges.

And P.S. -- therapy helping gay patients who want to be hetero doesn't necessarily mean changing them.

State! Butt Out!
 
American said:
Once Obamacare kicks in, seltzer tonic is all they'll be able to afford to give you for that problem.
Click to expand...

How long have you had this unnatural fixation on Obama?
 
tererun said:
yes, sometimes the government has to step in to stop child abuse. It is a fact of life many parents abuse their children, and this is a case of abuse. Before you whine too much, this is not about the child's comfort at all. When a parent sends their child to force them to be straight it is about the fact the parents are uncomfortable. The child just is what it is, but the homophobic parents think that if they abuse the child enough the child will stop being gay. It doesn't work that way.

What ends up happening is that in an attempt to please the abusive parents and avoid pain and abuse the child will attempt to repress their feelings and begin to become hateful of their own natural and appropriate feelings of homosexuality. yes, i said it being gay is completely appropriate for gay people. You may wish it wasn't, and you may dislike that sort of thing, but it doesn't hurt you, and no one has ever guaranteed you would walk around this world and like everything you see. If people like you could accept and love your children then this sort of thing would not be necessary to keep you from doing massive harm to your own kids based on your bigotry and hate.

IMO people should be asked if they would send their kids to gay cure therapy and anyone who says yes should be immediately and permanently sterilized. Of course i will settle for it just becoming illegal for parents to do to their children. We cannot all get what we want.
Click to expand...

What makes it abuse?
 
I have many comments, but the first one is this "resolution" shows one of the horrible problems in American politics.

It has become completely irrelevant what politicians actually do, only what they say. They can do exactly the opposite of what they say. The only thing that matters are their words.

The "resolution" has no legal effect at all. It is merely political. It does NOTHING.

SO.... those who vote for it can go the Stonewalls asking their endorsement for the Democratic primary, pointing to this resolution...
WHEN IN FACT, they has supported a law doing NOTHING.
 
Overall, the growing number of politically correct, generically worded resolutions and laws all meant to stroke some political group, throwing people who aren't part of a political organization get thrown under the bus - to give bureacratic regulators ability to do whatever they want with vaguely worded administrative and professional review laws really sucks.

Real dedicated professionals in the medical field increasingly have to sometimes go underground to actual do their job - or just refuse to provide medical / psychiatric care.
 
joko104 said:
Real dedicated professionals in the medical field increasingly have to sometimes go underground to actual do their job - or just refuse to provide medical / psychiatric care.
Click to expand...

Fortunate for us, then, that those who practice 'sexual-orientation therapy" aren't "real" professionals. Your concern for them is duly noted, though.
 
lpast said:
NO NO NO...apdst, I am one with an opposing opinion on gay marriage...but this is not aimed at shutting down an opposing opininion...its closing down laboratories who goal is to brainwash someone into saying they are not what they are.....surely you can see the difference....this law being passed does not make it illegal for to oppose anything....just not doctrinate people to suit your will
Click to expand...

It's not a law, it's a resolution. If it were a law, it would be time to go to the cartrige box.
 
One of the most highly respected psychiatrists, now semi-retired, and personally who is openly bisexual, engaged in "sexual reorientation therapy" for a number of men who has experienced the same extreme violent abuse, sexual abuse and psychological abuse in their childhoods. What triggered her involvement was when a man murdered his lover he was living with by cutting off his genitals. The defense asked her to explore an "insanity" defense.

After some exploration, she opted out of participation with the criminal case, but in her explorations found that man's adult relationship history had exactly the same pattern over and over again. And when she found a couple other men of such childhoods, both also had exactly the same history, and she did find a few former mates of theirs. For all 3, they would rapidly enter into cohabitation relationships with older, financially secure and confident men. Those older men (not seniors) found the relationship to be unusually excellent. But that the younger man was possible too submissive and eager to please. But the relationship did not last long. For all 3 and in each relationship, at some point just prior to sex the young man would suddenly violently assault the older man, may or may not rob him, and leave not to be heard from again. All 3 were repeating this over and over and over.

What appeared different in the murder case, was that the older man (in his 40s) had been an Army Ranger and was a black belt - so put up a powerful defense. When a knife came into that fight, the point of attack of the younger man was not the older man's heart, throat etc, but specifically the older man's genitalia.

And the number of such men of the identical past as those 3 was likely over 100, all very violent time bombs for others, and obviously needing help themselves. One decided to "experiment" with one of them (and asked me to assist, why I am familiar). I was hesitant but after some terms negotiations agreed. There were specific reasons she had searched me out to ask to assist her. A few other specialists in sexual issues involved as her consultants. I'll jump past all that and I soon opted out of any further involvement. The "experiment" was video taped and also watched live by hidden camera. She and other professionals were visible shaken by how instantly her patient completely shifted to become violent and by how violent and skillfully violent he became. I was not surprised, predicted that would happen, but also knew I could deal with it - to restrain him until he calmed - without hurting that guy - who was about my age.

They also were surprised with what I was saying to calm him. Words that seemed to make little sense or to be irrelevant. I knew what I was dealing with at that level. They only knew what they thought they knew academically maybe.

Her ultimate conclusion was that these men were not gay. They believed they were gay. They knew they could use being gay beneficially too and that they were skilled at being gay. They were, subconsciously, highly manipulative of themselves to then be manipulative of the older men. And all went excellent until the younger man subconsciously came to identify the man as an abuser BUT also recognized that he was physically more powerful than that older man - unlike in his youth - so struck out at the abuser violently. What clearly was assault against the older man to others was acting in self defense to the younger man. That was her opinion of it. And there were over 100 young men of various ages out there most - but not all - likely of the identical explosively violent psychology.

Would "therapy" to address her opinion of those men actually were not gay be considered "gay corrective therapy?" As for how the law is written in California, yes, or at least a huge risk of it in relation to a professional's license. Since she was on of the early pioneers who refused to consider being gay an mental illness, she is of a nature to not give a damn what the current concensus of her profession or law is. But few would dare proceed against such laws nor be willing to engage in high-risk and overall questionable counseling and therapy.

I'm not such a professional and the above ^ is just how I understood it. Like I said, while she continued to communicate with me about this, I wanted nothing further to do with it. I didn't want to and I have my own life to live.

If such anti-gay therapy laws outlawed specific practices in detail (like NORMAL laws do), rather than totally vague please-the-gay-political-organizations language - such as no electro-shock therapy, no isolation therapy, no ridicule by others etc - then I could support it.

But 1 sentence laws that say "no gay conversion therapy' or "no gender reorientation therapy" - as the actual law - with 5,000 words of preamble political/social correctness language written by some gay activist organization isn't accept to me. It is to declare that the agenda-of-the-moment of such organizations is everything, only they exist, and exactly everyone else can go to hell, with only a foolish professional willing to risk their license to the whims of a political-correctness administrative review board concerning a law that really commands "do nothing that the gay political community might not like."
 
Last edited:
a351 said:
What rights would those be? Medicinal or Psychotherapeutic practices that have no demonstable benefits in addition to demonstrably negative side effects (i.e. drastically increased suicide rates and mental trauma), have no place in mainstream society, especially when dealing with minors.

Also, really enjoyed this quote from Gov. Brown
Click to expand...

Are you claiming psychotherapy has no benefit to society?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/didier-jambart-man-became-gay-1463143
 
Bronson said:
Are you claiming psychotherapy has no benefit to society?
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone can broadly claim psychotherapy has no benefit to society in general. However, there are some psychotherapy methods that do indeed cause negative side-effects with minors.
 
Fiddytree said:
Because it usually is coerced.
Click to expand...

Well there is that, but how do you go about proving if that existed or not? Like I said, give the kid full knowledge and let them decide.
 
Hicup said:
Why not just call for a resolution and draw up laws that say all intolerance of homosexuality is punishable by death.. :)
Click to expand...

Because unlike conservatives and radical muslims, we do not have that caveman mentality.
 
apdst said:
Another outright assault on our rights.
Click to expand...

Huh? Well I guess you have the right to take arsenic too.

I do take rat poison every night, warfarin.
For demonstrable therapeutic reasons.
 
apdst said:
Literally denying them the right? No. Issueing a government endorsed condemnation of that right? Yes, indeed.

There isn't a dime's worth of difference in my book.
Click to expand...

why dont you do that crap in your church. Pray away that s---
 
Redress said:
How long have you had this unnatural fixation on Obama?
Click to expand...

Actually think there are many man who have this so called "fixation", therefore it is very natural.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom