• 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

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,937
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Another outright assault on our rights.

In the latest attack on therapies aimed at helping gay patients who want to become heterosexual, a congresswoman from California said Wednesday that she was introducing a resolution calling on Congress to denounce the practice.
Rep. Jackie Speier, a Democrat, is proposing the resolution as two lawsuits move through federal court challenging a new California law to ban minors from receiving “sexual-orientation change efforts” under any circumstance.

Congress implored to denounce sexual-orientation therapy - Washington Times
 
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

In his signing statement, Mr. Brown said the therapies “have no basis in science or medicine, and they will now be relegated to the dustbin of quackery.”
 
"Sexual-orientation therapy" is quackery on a par with seltzer tonic.
 
So wait, she's proposing a resolution that calls out this nonsense for what it is? Sorry, but that isn't an assault on your rights in any way, shape, or form. It's a statement.
 
Even if this is an "assault on your rights" (it isn't), how about the therapy's assault on the rights of kids not to be subjected to what is essentially dangerous brainwashing that is scientifically unsound? These kids are being subjected to mental and emotional torture based on the lies of people who want to strip them of their identities and force them to submit to their religious ideals, regardless of those of the kids.

No matter what rights you think are being infringed on here, far more rights are attacked by not doing this.
 
I think this is protecting minors from undue harm from parental figures and guardians. In essence, upholding their rights.
 
So does this resolution actually do anything?
 
I think this is protecting minors from undue harm from parental figures and guardians. In essence, upholding their rights.

That's exactly what it speaks to, the rights of minors not to be tortured by "therapists" who think they can "cure the gay".
 
Why not just call for a resolution and draw up laws that say all intolerance of homosexuality is punishable by death.. :)

Lets see, in my day we had corporal punishment, and they actually put red ink on your homework deliniating corrective measures. Seemed to work out great, I mean, yeah dipping suzies hair in ink meant the strap, and you had to make a calculated call on that one, but it was indeed your call. Kids were more in-line in those days, and then all of a sudden the PC crowd based off years of expert research told us all that we didn't need to hit the little bastages, but rather embrace them, coddle them, and tell them that everything was ok and that everyone was equal. No more red ink, no yelling shouting, no spanking, nothing to speak of, and our society in just a few decades is just peachy, kids are all fine, and nothing wrong with the attitudes and direction we are heading.

Love psychologists who claim to understand that which has no baseline measurement and then tell everyone that they have the answers. Truth is that there are homo's that went straight, plenty of them, and even the APA says the research has shown some potential for those who most express a real desire to change, but alas, we can't have queers all going straight on us now. :) Not everyone that is gay will go straight, and probably more will not than will, but there is a good deal of evidence that if the therapies are employed (like with most behavioral therapies) while prepubescent or before the age of 18, the chance of success increase exponentially as they do with all brainwashing techniques. And yes, it is a form of brainwashing, but so what, so is school, and the military.. :)

Tim-
 
Why not just call for a resolution and draw up laws that say all intolerance of homosexuality is punishable by death.. :)

Lets see, in my day we had corporal punishment, and they actually put red ink on your homework deliniating corrective measures. Seemed to work out great, I mean, yeah dipping suzies hair in ink meant the strap, and you had to make a calculated call on that one, but it was indeed your call. Kids were more in-line in those days, and then all of a sudden the PC crowd based off years of expert research told us all that we didn't need to hit the little bastages, but rather embrace them, coddle them, and tell them that everything was ok and that everyone was equal. No more red ink, no yelling shouting, no spanking, nothing to speak of, and our society in just a few decades is just peachy, kids are all fine, and nothing wrong with the attitudes and direction we are heading.

Love psychologists who claim to understand that which has no baseline measurement and then tell everyone that they have the answers. Truth is that there are homo's that went straight, plenty of them, and even the APA says the research has shown some potential for those who most express a real desire to change, but alas, we can't have queers all going straight on us now. :) Not everyone that is gay will go straight, and probably more will not than will, but there is a good deal of evidence that if the therapies are employed (like with most behavioral therapies) while prepubescent or before the age of 18, the chance of success increase exponentially as they do with all brainwashing techniques. And yes, it is a form of brainwashing, but so what, so is school, and the military.. :)

Tim-

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.
 
"Sexual-orientation therapy" is quackery on a par with seltzer tonic.

It's worse. Seltzer tonic never directly hurt anyone. This "therapy" does.
 
There is no assault on rights concerning this issue. What a shock, certain conservatives are playing the victim.
 
Another outright assault on our rights.


I dont see this as an assault...I think its aimed at protecting gays from people with an agenda...brainwashing and forcing them into something they may not want.
If your gay or you think you are and you want to change...you need to do that yourself...no one can do that for you
 
All I can think is this:

It might be a negative to decide for someone ELSE that they need to be in it (like a parent with a minor making the choice)

But some people don't WANT to be gay - ergo - if it helps them somehow (I can't imagine being in the situation at all) but if they need it / want it / find benefit in it then they should be able to choose to go.

It's choice.

I believe that people should be encouraged to accept what they are - but people get therapy and surgery to correct what hey don't like if it's that big of an issue to them.

I don't see the benefit in banning it - I just see a benefit in restricting whether or not parents can force their children to go (etc)
 
All I can think is this:

It might be a negative to decide for someone ELSE that they need to be in it (like a parent with a minor making the choice)

which seems to be what the bill actually does.
But some people don't WANT to be gay - ergo - if it helps them somehow (I can't imagine being in the situation at all) but if they need it / want it / find benefit in it then they should be able to choose to go.

Once they are of age of consent they can participate in any quackery and BS they chose. However, before then we do protect children. They do not have full rights, and they are not in control of themselves. Oh, and it doesn't help anyone. that has been proven time and time again. All it is would be abusing a person until they give up and pretend to be straight. That is not medicine that is attempted brain washing and torture. If i kept punchinmg you in the face until you agreed with me eventually you would learn to agree with me. that doesn't make me right, or mean you really believe what you say.

There is no cure for the gay.
It's choice.

yes, consenting adults have a choice to go for the abuse. No one is stopping that.
I believe that people should be encouraged to accept what they are - but people get therapy and surgery to correct what hey don't like if it's that big of an issue to them.

I don't see the benefit in banning it - I just see a benefit in restricting whether or not parents can force their children to go (etc)

Well, that is what they are doing. However, we also do ban certain treatments for babysitter reasons. if i cannot take cocaine to get rid of my headache because the religious right likes to babysit then perhaps they should not be able to use a treatment that has been shown to drastically increase suicide, psychosis, and cause damage to the person with no actual proof it ever worked at all. At least cocaine takes away pain and works in that manner. Pray and abuse away the gay doesn't work. However, if we want to treat adults like adults and allow them to make their own choices in regards to themselves (which means ending the drug war, fight against gay marriage, religious BS, and letting people be themselves) then I don't see any problem with those programs being offered. until then I am all for banning this pointless and dangerous treatment. If we are going to have the babysitter then perhaps we should all get to babysit.
 
Thanks - that clears it up, then :)
 
It's a sense of the congress resolution, there is nothing they are not allowed to say. I agree that these therapies are pseudoscienitifc claptrap, but I wonder if this Congresswoman might not have more important work that she should be focusing her efforts on.
 
So wait, she's proposing a resolution that calls out this nonsense for what it is? Sorry, but that isn't an assault on your rights in any way, shape, or form. It's a statement.

Yeah, screw free speech. Right?

This is no different than a resolution denouncing gays for making their sexuality public.
 
Even if this is an "assault on your rights" (it isn't), how about the therapy's assault on the rights of kids not to be subjected to what is essentially dangerous brainwashing that is scientifically unsound? These kids are being subjected to mental and emotional torture based on the lies of people who want to strip them of their identities and force them to submit to their religious ideals, regardless of those of the kids.

No matter what rights you think are being infringed on here, far more rights are attacked by not doing this.

It's an assault on free speech, parental rights and the rights of persons who would voluntarily seek out such treatment.

No different than banning gay marriage, in my opinion.

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean that you have the authority to make it illegal, or issue a congressional denouncement of such practices.
 
Yeah, screw free speech. Right?

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

The government is not in this case denying any one the right to say anything. Nice try, but fail.
 
I dont see this as an assault...I think its aimed at protecting gays from people with an agenda...brainwashing and forcing them into something they may not want.
If your gay or you think you are and you want to change...you need to do that yourself...no one can do that for you

It's aimed at shutting down an opposing opinion.
 
You don't have the right to practice false medicine especially when it harms the patient.

This isn't, "practicing medicine". It's therapy. Is voo-doo illegal? It's not; is it?
 
Back
Top Bottom