• 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

Redress said:
The government is not in this case denying any one the right to say anything. Nice try, but fail.
Click to expand...

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.
 
upsideguy said:
You are correct.... matters of fraud are really more of the domain of state AG's or the FTC than congress.
Click to expand...

If that were true, Al Gore would have been in prison years ago, along with the warmers and carbon credit peddlers.
 
apdst said:
This isn't, "practicing medicine". It's therapy. Is voo-doo illegal? It's not; is it?
Click to expand...

Some forms of therapy, if they aren't illegal, ought to be. This includes e.g. so-called 'regression therapy' that lead to the Satanic panic of the 1980s and 1990s and dozens of false convictions. Pseudoscience ought not be protected by law.
 
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...

It is not doing that either. All it is doing is calling on congress to denounce a proven ineffective, failed, harmful treatment. No one's rights are being trampled on.
 
Redress said:
It is not doing that either. All it is doing is calling on congress to denounce a proven ineffective, failed, harmful treatment. No one's rights are being trampled on.
Click to expand...

Care to show us where congress has passed similar resolutions?

Also, show us how this therapy has been proven to be ineffective, failed and harmful.
 
Einzige said:
Some forms of therapy, if they aren't illegal, ought to be. This includes e.g. so-called 'regression therapy' that lead to the Satanic panic of the 1980s and 1990s and dozens of false convictions. Pseudoscience ought not be protected by law.
Click to expand...

You could kiss global warming research good buy, if that were the case.
 
apdst said:
Care to show us where congress has passed similar resolutions?

Also, show us how this therapy has been proven to be ineffective, failed and harmful.
Click to expand...

Why are you moving the goalposts? You claimed rights where being infringed, can you show where that has happened?
 
Redress said:
Why are you moving the goalposts? You claimed rights where being infringed, can you show where that has happened?
Click to expand...

I'm not moving anything. I'm asking you to provide supporting evidence for the statements of fact that you've made.
 
apdst said:
You could kiss global warming research good buy, if that were the case.
Click to expand...

Err, no. Global warming research, whether global warming is a real phenomenon or not, isn't medical research; it doesn't have the potential to immediately effect someone's physical wellbeing in the way that medical therapy does.

Regression therapy, for example, which is based on largely discredited psychoanalytic theories about the operations of the unconscious mind, is therapeutic, and ought to be subject to Federal prohibition (there still being a role for government involvement with medicene under any legitimate system of government). The same goes with "sexual orientation therapy" quackery.
 
Einzige said:
Err, no. Global warming research, whether global warming is a real phenomenon or not, isn't medical research; it doesn't have the potential to immediately effect someone's physical wellbeing in the way that medical therapy does.

Regression therapy, for example, which is based on largely discredited psychoanalytic theories about the operations of the unconscious mind, is therapeutic, and ought to be subject to Federal prohibition (there still being a role for government involvement with medicene under any legitimate system of government). The same goes with "sexual orientation therapy" quackery.
Click to expand...

If the government regulated metal therapy--which isn't "medicine"--psychiatry and psychology wouldn't exist. Hell, we would still be lobotomizing people.

What's next? Witch hunts?
 
apdst said:
If the government regulated metal therapy--which isn't "medicine"--psychiatry and psychology wouldn't exist. Hell, we would still be lobotomizing people.

What's next? Witch hunts?
Click to expand...

Psychiatry is a significantly more valid discipline than psychology, to the point that psychologists aren't authorized to dispense medication without holding a degree in psychiatry. A lot of psychology probably shouldn't exist.
 
Einzige said:
Psychiatry is a significantly more valid discipline than psychology, to the point that psychologists aren't authorized to dispense medication without holding a degree in psychiatry.
Click to expand...

Maybe we should outlaw marriage counselers and hypnotists, too?
 
apdst said:
Maybe we should outlaw marriage counselers and hypnotists, too?
Click to expand...

There's no need. They're both already regulated.

And well so, at least in the case of hypnotists. Consider the existence of false memory syndrome, which lead to the convictions of dozens of innocents in the late 1980s and early 1990s as Satanic pedophilic racists. These notions were implanted in their minds by hypnotists.
 
Einzige said:
There's no need. They're both already regulated.

And well so, at least in the case of hypnotists. Consider the existence of false memory system, which lead to the convictions of dozens of innocents in the late 1980s and early 1990s as Satanic pedophilic racists. These notions were implanted in their minds by hypnotists.
Click to expand...

But not denounced by congressional decree? Yes?
 
apdst said:
But not denounced by congressional decree? Yes?
Click to expand...

No. And I think they ought to be, together with orientation therapy and other harmful quackeries.
 
Einzige said:
No. And I think they ought to be, together with orientation therapy and other harmful quackeries.
Click to expand...

So, government condemnation of anything that you don't agree with? That's awesome!
 
apdst said:
So, government condemnation of anything that you don't agree with? That's awesome!
Click to expand...

Government condemnation of anything that purports to be a medical science that does not meet the Hippocratic oath - "first do no harm". Neither regression therapy nor orientation therapy (nor any other number of psychoanalytically-derived programmes - Scientology's Dianetics, orgone therapy, etc.) meet that standard. All are worthy of condemnation.

If a therapeutic regiment does not have verifiable benefits, and can be shown to be actively harmful to a significant number of patients, it is not medicinal. And it should not be allowed to masquerade as medicene.
 
apdst said:
So, government condemnation of anything that you don't agree with? That's awesome!
Click to expand...

Look up HRES1715 or HR600 and you'll see how much credence these resolutions really have. You are making a mountain out of a salt flat.
 
Einzige said:
Government condemnation of anything that purports to be a medical science that does not meet the Hippocratic oath - "first do no harm". Neither regression therapy nor orientation therapy (nor any other number of psychoanalytically-derived programmes - Scientology's Dianetics, orgone therapy, etc.) meet that standard. All are worthy of condemnation.

If a therapeutic regiment does not have verifiable benefits, and can be shown to be actively harmful to a significant number of patients, it is not medicinal. And it should not be allowed to masquerade as medicene.
Click to expand...

Why aren't they receiving the same condemnation as sexual orientation therapy?
 
apdst said:
Why aren't they receiving the same condemnation as sexual orientation therapy?
Click to expand...

I don't know, but they should, particularly regression therapy for its role in the fundamentalist-driven witch hunts of the 1980s. I'd be fine with a resolution issuing a blanket condemnation of Freudian-inspired theories which have been used for purposes of social control.
 
Einzige said:
I don't know, but they should, particularly regression therapy for its role in the fundamentalist-driven witch hunts of the 1980s. I'd be fine with a resolution issuing a blanket condemnation of Freudian-inspired theories which have been used for purposes of social control.
Click to expand...

That said, Scientology's practices probably won't ever be subject to a Federal condemnation, as they are protected under the First Amendment despite the fact that they were marketed as a self-help programme originally in the 1950s and that they owe far more to Freud and Wilhelm Reich than to any religious teaching.
 
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...

Parents don't have the right to harm their children.

That's what these therapies do.

End of story.

You don't actually understand how rights work.

Which is evident when you said a boycott was the same as silencing free speech.

And how the USO cancelling a show with Ted Nugent was also the same as silencing free speech.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Parents don't have the right to harm their children.

That's what these therapies do.

End of story.
Click to expand...

Your evidence?

You don't actually understand how rights work.

Which is evident when you said a boycott was the same as silencing free speech.

And how the USO cancelling a show with Ted Nugent was also the same as silencing free speech.
Click to expand...

I'm not from Canada...I know exactly how rights work.
 
apdst said:
Yeah, screw free speech. Right?

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

This doesn't have a thing to do with free speech. You may not agree with the message, but this is nothing more than a statement. There have been other stories recently where legislatures did more than make statements, but that is is not the case here.
 
RepublicanMcDuc said:
This doesn't have a thing to do with free speech. You may not agree with the message, but this is nothing more than a statement. There have been other stories recently where legislatures did more than make statements, but that is is not the case here.
Click to expand...

The message is coming from the government; that's what I disagree with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom