In some seriously awesome news today, California Governor Jerry Brown signed legislation last night banning “reparative” therapy for minors. Groups like Human Rights Campaign have been lobbying the governor to sign the bill. He had until last night to either let it pass sans his signature of veto it. Fortunately, he chose to sign it!
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Brown stated, “This bill bans non-scientific ‘therapies’ that have driven young people to depression and suicide. These practices have no basis in science or medicine and they will now be relegated to the dustbin of quackery.”
Reparative, or “conversion,” therapy is based on the idea that being gay is a choice and that with enough “assistance,” young people can somehow “become” straight. I’m quite open minded about most people’s beliefs, but forcing kids to believe that they way they feel is somehow wrong and needs rehabilitation in the same way a drug addict might is pretty ludicrous. In fact, the American Psychological Association, the American Counseling Association and the American Psychiatric Association have all issued statements condemning the practice of attempting to change a person’s sexuality through these programs.
The techniques used go way beyond “questionable”; they’re outdated and cruel. According to the LA Times, “techniques discussed…include the use of shame, verbal abuse, exposure to pornography and even aversion training with electric shock and nausea-inducing drugs. Not only can these techniques cause significant harm, their stated goal — changing a gay kid into a straight kid — cannot be achieved.” Even if you make them wear pink and do household duties! Hyuck.
Forced “therapy” can lead to depression, self-loathing and even suicide, so I’m absolutely thrilled that this legislation was passed.
Lovelies, what do you think about the news about this bill?
[via Buzzfeed]
guest
Good job, California.
guest
Bring on the angry Christards/Jewtards/Muslimtards/etc. who are going to say banning such therapy is “against their religion.”
Alas, good job Cali.
guest
My sister came out back in 2008, way before it became “okay to be gay” (sorta) or shows like Glee to bring homosexuality into the public eye as thing people need not be afraid of. She was incredibly brave and unafraid of what anyone had to say about her sexuality, and she was lucky that most people in her life didn’t care. She was mostly afraid of coming out to our parents because she was scared of ending up in a therapy program like these (an irrational fear-we love her no matter what). “Scared-straight programs” run by churches and therapies like these have always terrified and upset her, and me, too! The idea of someone thinking my sister needs “fixing” disgusts me. Major points to California for taking a stand!
guest
Yayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!
orchid / 198 posts
What about those who want to come out of the homosexual lifestyle? Their seeking of help will now force them to become criminals or leave the state. Way to go, California…..
guest
@JandJinJapan@xanga - the therapy is only illegal for minors. if you grow up and still want to take part in that therapy you can.
guest
@JandJinJapan@xanga - You, sir, are precisely why the practice of religion is what needs to be criminalized, not homosexuality. And I don’t mean just Christianity, I mean *ALL* religion.
Religion is a mental illness and needs to be treated as such, with adherents being thrown into mental institutions and medicated for their very obvious mental illness. The sooner we become a purely atheistic society, the better.
orchid / 198 posts
secretbeerreporter@xanga - I guess you didn’t read my question, did you? As per your assertion that an “atheistic” government makes life better: Ancient Rome, more recent USSR, China, Viet-Nam, Cambodia, Laos, Cuba, and Nicaragua all think and thought the same, as well, and look at what has happened to those societies. We have nearly 100 million dead Russians to show how well-adjusted a society is when it’s government becomes “atheistic”, 2~3 million more Cambodians (of Pol-Pot’s [a great atheistic "thinker" himself] kiling fields), at least a million Cubans (not to mention those that have fled the regime of the Castros), and countless millions more Chinese to show the evidence of the “utopia” that “atheistic” government brings. Thanks for the History refresher….
orchid / 198 posts
I understand that, polkaxdotzz342@xanga - and thank you for making it clearer. I guess my next question would be, “What if minors choose to come out of the homosexual lifesyle? Would their seeking out of therapy to help them do so turn and criminalized them?”
guest
@JandJinJapan@xanga - 100 million more people on the face of the planet to add to the already way overpopulated earth? No thank you.
sunflower / 300 posts
@JandJinJapan@xanga - It won’t criminalize the kids, just the practitioners, in the same way that it’s illegal to use other proven harmful methods as a doctor. If they decide, as an adult, to go into therapy for their feelings, then that’s entirely up to them.
orchid / 198 posts
secretbeerreporter@xanga - I guess the fact that most of those 100M died horrendously torturous deaths for nothing more than expressing a dissenting opinion matters not a whit, but thank you for your reply anyway.
samescobar - Thank you for the clarification….
sunflower / 300 posts
@JandJinJapan@xanga - Whoops, just saw your newer question. I believe that this is just outlawing the practice of conversion therapy techniques, but I’m sure that minors will still be able to seek standard, legal therapy.
orchid / 198 posts
samescobar - Thank you again for this clarification….
daisy / 597 posts
I actually know of people who don’t want to be gay who are NOT religious…
So, I’m not sure religion has much to do with it.
Oh, and the world is NOT overpopulated. That is one of those little “lies lies” that everyone likes to tell to justify certain actions.
I live near hundreds of miles of un-occupied space, and there’s tons of it all over the globe.
guest
@JandJinJapan@xanga - Yeah, that’s what Christianity did for hundreds of years too, untold countless millions executed for that very thing by the Roman Catholic Church. Don’t act like your beloved religion is innocent on this. Hypocrite.
guest
@LKJSlain@xanga - Maybe because you religious people shit all over them and make them feel terrible about themselves, so they wish they weren’t gay so they didn’t have to put up with you people shitting all over them?
Makes perfect sense to me.
orchid / 198 posts
secretbeerreporter@xanga - Again, thanks for the History refresher. The Roman Catholic Institution also crusaded against Bible Believers in Europe and, in fact, did a pretty thorough job of wiping out the following: Vaudois/Waldenses of the French and Italian Alps in the 13th Century, the Hugeunots of Central and Northarn France in the 16th and 17th centuries, the Albigenses of the Eastern Italian/Croatian Alps of the 11th and 12th Centuries, the Lollards of England in the 14th Century, and attempted to crush the Moravians of Count Zinzendorf and the Hussites of the area of the Czech Republic in the 15th and 16th centuries, and attempted to annihilate the Mennonites of Northwestern Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries. The Roman Catholic Institute still has as in effect the Articles of the Council of Trent (1563) making it a crime against the “Holy” See to be a Protestant, under pain of torture and sentence of death by burning at the stake. The Roman Catholic Institute is no more Christian than Islam. Please understand the difference the next time you wish to charge Christians with a crime and use as evidence the actions of the Roman Catholic Institute? Thank you again for your reply….
guest
@JandJinJapan@xanga - Since when do you get to decide which faiths that claim Christian roots are or aren’t “Christian?” That’s the same thing that irritates me about people who claim that Mormons, for example, aren’t Christian (when they very clearly believe in and follow the teachings of Jesus Christ – and yes, I would know this because I was raised Mormon). Talk about arrogant.
Then again, the Judeo-Christian God is the epitome of arrogance and narcissism, so it naturally follows that you would be too.
orchid / 198 posts
secretbeerreporter@xanga - I don’t decide, actually; I let the actions be the evidence. The fact that the Roman Catholic Institution used weapons of warfare and torture devices to attempt to “convert” Bible believers and Jews in Europe, Muslims in the Middle East, and other non-Catholics in other parts of the world (namely Central and South America) be the glaring evidence that they weren’t Christian. Where did Jesus call for torture? Where did he call for burning alive those who chose to live in difference to his teachings? Where did Jesus call for weapons of warfare to be used against those who were living in unbelief? Mormons aren’t Christian because they add to the Bible. Again, this is something the Bible Teaches (see Deuteronomy 4 and Revelation 22). The Mormons also distort the truth of Jesus Christ and of God, again, something mentioned pretty heavily in the Bible, particularly in the New Testament. It isn’t Christians ourselves who decide; it is God who has already decided.
As far as God being narcissitic, I’d like to see some proof of that.
Thank you for your reply….
guest
@JandJinJapan@xanga - Well, assuming for a moment that, consistent to your belief, that Jesus is God in the flesh, let’s take a look at the Old Testament (which, you’re going to say “no longer applies,” even though Jesus said he came not to abolish it), where it says you must:
*Stone to death those who work on the Sabbath (Ex. 31:15)
*Anyone who would not seek the LORD, God of Israel, is to be put to death (2 Chron 15:12-13)
*Attack a town and destroy all its inhabitants should they have been led astray and worship false gods (Deut 13:13-19)
*Stone your son/daughter/wife who entices you to serve other gods to death (Deut 13:7-12)
*Anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD is to be put to death (Lev. 24:16)
*Adulterers are to be put to death (Lev. 20:10) as are homosexuals (Lev. 20:13)
*Rebellious teenagers should be stoned as well (Deut. 21)
Now, I already know your BS excuse for this, and I already addressed it, so I don’t buy it for a second. And yes, your “God” is a complete and total narcissist. If he wasn’t he wouldn’t be so damn obsessed by how much people worship him, praise him, and kiss his ass. It’s obvious that he is obsessed with it, and only those who kiss his ass the most get into heaven. Therefore your “God” is a narcissist. http://www.sebastyne.net/spirituality-and-religion/god-has-a-narcissistic-personality-disorder/
orchid / 198 posts
secretbeerreporter@xanga - In God’s eyes, it all does apply, actually. This is his sentence for the crime of sin, and sin is something God takes very seriously. And in all of this, you are forgetting or denying that Jesus came and paid that death penalty that is written in the Old Testament. You see, that’s what his dying on the cross was all about: lifting that sentence of death, Fulfilling of the Law (Matthew 5.17~20), and taking hold of the judgment and execution of sentence that he had previously given the Israelites in the Five Books of the Law. And not only thus, but also being given the right to judge people, which he will do (see Revelation 20). As such, it is not up to us, followers of Jesus Christ, to carry out the sentence of death because (1.) it’s already been paid, and (2.) that’s what Christ Jesus will be doing when the end of time and Day of Judgment come upon us. Now you can blame Christians and God for such rules, but now that you know the truth, accusing Christians and believers of such seems pretty foolish, doesn’t it? We don’t do any of the things you listed above because Christ has stated that he is the one who will judge, and when he does so, it will be righteous judgment…
And, yes, what a narcissist Jesus was: taking a towel and washing peoples’ feet (John 13). Serving his disciples food and beverage at the Last Supper. Allowing Roman Soldiers to beat him and jeer him mercilessly. Giving himself over the the Sanhedrin and Jewish Ruling Council with not so much as a word in his own defense. Taking upon himself the sentence of death and a verdict of guilt he didn’t deserve. Taking three nails into his hands and feet, and taking the jeering and ridicule of the masses and Pharisees while hanging naked upon a cross. And finally, Taking the turning away of his Heavenly Father because he willingly took our sins and our sorrows. Yes, my, how narcisstic of Jesus. And all he asks in return is that we obey him? Isn’t that also what just about every other authority figure that has ever lived and ever will live has asked? My, how narcissitic (a pretty silly accusation, in light of the facts, don’t you think?)…
guest
Alas, aside from Jesus-Freak baldy up there (who is more than welcome to make an ass out of himself here too, if he wants), I’m throwing down the gauntlet: name me any one secular reason against homosexuality. Just one. Guess what? There ain’t one!
*Homosexuality is perfectly natural, and is observed in thousands of other species, not just human beings. Sorry, but humans are animals, and contrary to what we like to think about ourselves, we are no better or more advanced really than any other animal species. Alas, you want to talk about what’s totally unnatural to human beings? Try monogamy. Humans are naturally polyamorous, yet monogamy seems to be the “gold standard.” So if you’re going to argue against homosexuality on the grounds its unnatural, you can’t turn a blind eye to monogamy either, and you have to admit that polyamorous people such as myself are people living a truly natural lifestyle.
*Breeding isn’t really that important. Are we really that narcissistic as a species to think that we’re important or that our existence on the planet is important? Truth be told, this world would probably be better off if we all just died off and went extinct (we serve absolutely no ecological, biological, or other purpose, and our existence is merely superfluous, and in all honesty, harmful to the planet). And, by extension, if that’s what your argument rests on, then infertile people as well as those individuals and couples (such as myself) who have chosen not to have children should not be allowed marriage rights as well, and/or should be treated as defective. Are you ready to make that claim?
*STD transmission can be prevented between gay people the same as between straight people: by some sort of barrier protection. However, since the risk of unwanted pregnancy is zero, most gay people don’t use protection, hence the high STD rate. So that’s a weak argument at best, yet again.
Well, I think that pretty much destroys any argument not involving religion, and as I’ve very clearly shown, none of those arguments are really arguments, but barely-veiled excuses with, interestingly enough, religious roots anyway.
guest
@JandJinJapan@xanga - He’s still a narcissist because he demands that you worship him, kiss his ass, and praise him, and if you don’t he’ll punish you for eternity, and if you dare to try to get out of your relationship with him by merely questioning you, he threatens you with those hellfires. Sounds like something an abusive boyfriend would do, now doesn’t it?
Wow, that was awfully nice of God to commit suicide on behalf of all of humanity (which, since Jesus is God in the flesh, is exactly what the crucifixion story is: a tale of suicide), except for that God being an eternal being can’t really die, so he never really died, so he never really committed suicide. Wow, what a mind-fuck that is! Even more evidence that God is a narcissist: he manipulates the minds of his followers. Again, mind manipulation is characteristic of narcissists, and even more generally sociopaths. So God is obviously a sociopath as well, which is also true in seeing how he delights in the destruction and eternal suffering of those who don’t believe in him, in the light of the 100% lack of hardcore, scientific evidence he even exists to begin with.
daisy / 597 posts
@secretbeerreporter@xanga - Nope. Never have.
I’m a theater person. I have been around gays most of my life.
And I said I know OF, not necessarily that I “knew personally.”
You sound really upset at people who believe in Jesus. That’s interesting to me. Hmmm.
guest
@LKJSlain@xanga - Sure, because in my mind nobody with more than a 3rd grade education can possibly be of sound mind yet believe in something that’s so obviously nothing more than a children’s fairy tale, and especially when there is absolutely not one shred of hardcore, tangible, scientific evidence any of that is true anyway.
Clarification: I’ve been an atheist since I was 10, despite growing up in a very religious home. I was brought up Mormon, and out of curiosity dabbled in mainstream Christianity for a short time. I still don’t buy into that garbage.
daisy / 597 posts
@secretbeerreporter@xanga - Well, no one’s asking you to.
I believe that the way to find is to seek. ^_^ If you’re content where you’re at, then someone like ME would certainly not change your mind whatsoever.
I always tell people when I meet them where I stand and that if they WANT to talk about it, then we can… but I don’t believe that I can force my religion on anyone.
So, if you’re cool where you’re at, nothing I can do about that.
guest
@LKJSlain@xanga - Apparently you do feel as though you can, otherwise you wouldn’t support religion-based legislation such as anti-gay laws and anti-choice laws that have absolutely no secular grounding whatsoever.
That’s a large part of why it gets my goat. The other part is, as mentioned, you have to be a total mental midget and/or mentally sick/delusional to believe in religion. Religion is nothing more than a mental illness in my mind, and I view it no differently than I view bipolar, schizophrenia, or any other mental illness.
daisy / 597 posts
@secretbeerreporter@xanga - Who said I DID support them? LOL
OH and let me clarify… people don’t always do things because they want to affect others or make an impression on OTHERS (I’m not necessarily referring to this law) They do them because they believe it’s what God wants them to do.
And most people who believe in God, believe that their support is obedience.
guest
@LKJSlain@xanga - I’ve seen your comments around here, like on the Chick-Fil-A posts and shit. You’ve also admitted it to me in private conversation. Yes, I have several other Xanga names I formerly went by, as almost everyone here knows. It appears as though you don’t, so I’ll leave you to figure out who I am. I’ll give you a hint, though, to help you: you can find me manipulating a special machine’s large rudder attached to the empennage of said machine for the purpose of yawing it back and forth.
daisy / 597 posts
@secretbeerreporter@xanga - I really don’t care who you are… I knew that you were someone else and that’s fine.
I’m not interested in playing guessing games with you. Most people I know have multiple xanga accounts.
I support freedom of SPEECH, I do not support the use of the above said techniques on minors to try and change sexuality… that’s silly. HAHA. I don’t believe that Jesus would support such a thing either.
I also support a person if they have decided that they do not want to be gay and want to seek to change that. Do I believe it’ll help? Who knows? Only they do.
Quite frankly, I believe that sometimes those things CAN change, because I’ve seen people change their beliefs about sexuality… now days they call it… what is it? They run around saying, “Don’t label me, I’m human…” Which is fine. In my mind it’s just a way of saying “undecided…” so whatever. That’s cool.
But I’ve literally seen people on facebook and otherwise go from straight, to bi, to gay, to three years later being totally straight again. So, something is at least a LITTLE shiftable. *shrug*
guest
@LKJSlain@xanga - Well, whatever. You’re against government offering tax benefits, insurance benefits, etc. to gay couples (as you have admitted to me in private conversation), yet you still support them doing so for straight couples, which is indeed rooted in religion. You can’t bench-press your way out of that hole you already dug yourself into.
I am a sexual deviant, so to speak. I’m straight, but I’m not monogamous (I find the concept of monogamy totally asinine, and I don’t believe in love either really, so that defeats the purpose for me). Of course I’m going to have more sympathy for other sexual deviants. Then again, I wouldn’t seek to put it past you to say you want premarital sex banned (which, then, I’l be booked on 56 counts for each one of the sexual partners I’ve had), because I’ve heard religious people state that view as well.
Lastly, we do know not that human sexuality is more fluid than static, and can indeed shift, but that we can’t consciously shift our sexuality. It’s more of a subconscious response to environmental stimuli, among other things.
daisy / 597 posts
@secretbeerreporter@xanga - I have never once said that I’m against tax benefits going to gay couples. I might have said that it was a tricky issue, but I believe that homosexuals should have certain rights when they’re with their partners.
You are either mistaking me for someone else, or you misunderstood me. Knowing that my views have not changed in years, you probably misunderstood me.
guest
@LKJSlain@xanga - I may have misunderstood, but saying it’s a “tricky issue” makes me sick to my stomach nonetheless. Why shouldn’t they have tax benefits? Because they are childless by nature? Heh, thanks for reiterating why I don’t support tax credits for having children. Gotta love government-sanctioned breeding. *eyeroll*
guest
Forced… interesting I think they stopped forcing anyone into these treatment about 50 years ago. Yep I say ban these voluntary therapies. its just pure blasphemy, how dare anyone try anything that the American Psychological Association does not want. We all know their approved therapies and drugs all work so very well
daisy / 597 posts
@secretbeerreporter@xanga - Actually, it’s the opposite. It might be a tricky issue because one may HAVE a child or another. Same with couples who might have a child, break up, and then re-marry, and then one parent dies… who inherits? The new parent? Or the child? I’m sorry, I’m referring more to land ownership and possessions now. XD My apologies.
Regardless. I don’t see tax benefits as being tricky merely for gays, but sometimes for lots of situations.
If two people have decided to live their lives together as “lovers” (and have done so for a period of time depending on what state their in, California for instance does not HAVE a common law marriage ordeal, but I would be in support of something like it) then I don’t see why they can’t sign agreements for certain things, no.
guest
@LKJSlain@xanga - Well, fair enough I guess. I just don’t think it’s fair that they don’t have access to the 1200+ rights that legally married couples have that singles (and I use the term single in the legal sense) do not. I would support abolishment of government sanctioned marriage so long as it puts everyone on a level playing field in regards to tax benefits, insurance benefits, etc.
sunflower / 300 posts
@trunthepaige@xanga - Not government forced; parental force. Some supporters believe it to be similar to drug rehabilitation and thereby think it’s okay to make the decision for them.
http://gaycopt.blogspot.com/2012/08/forced-ex-gay-therapy.htmlhttp://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/prop-8-witness-ryan-kendall-testifies-before-california-assembly-on-conversion-therapy/news/2012/06/26/42221http://interstateq.com/archives/40/http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2010/02/02/afa-favors-forced-reparative-t/
daisy / 597 posts
@secretbeerreporter@xanga - See, that’s my thing.
I’ve said repeatedly that really? I wish the government would just GET OUT of marriage altogether. I think that would solve a LOT of this non-sense and “What we CALL it” and… blech… honestly the whole thing just makes my head spin.
If two people want to commit and have a ceremony, I suppose they should be allowed to do that how they want. Should their be laws like, “You can’t have sex with a child or animals?” yes… but, otherwise? O_o
guest
@LKJSlain@xanga - Why does it have to stop at two people? As long as all parties are consenting adults? I guess the whole thing boils down to why does it seem to concern so many of your kind what consenting adults do? I don’t get it.
guest
Why can’t we for once just think “I’m okay and you’re okay.”? Just the way we are? No trying to change us to make each person the way that someone else with more (percieved) power decides? I say end this madness. Do not react and the power they once had disolves. Live your life and try to make the best out of it.
guest
The truth is these therapies work on many and they are voluntary.
guest
@samescobar - Oh I see sort of like the sex change mutilations being done on 7 year olds now. But that is legal and approved of. Yay
guest
Good job Cali. I have no issues with voluntary therapy. Forced- not so much.
guest
@trunthepaige@xanga - I actually know several people personally who were forced into it by their parents. They were told if they didn’t go and if they didn’t “change” they would be kicked out and their parents would no longer support them. If that’s not being forced, then what is?
guest
@trunthepaige@xanga - You know, I knew some who were forced by parents to seek counseling. That was many years ago, and it was the parents who should have been forced into therapy not the kid. The irony is this law won’t stop parents, they’ll simply send the kid out of state to some kind of camp, or some other set up. I’ve never met anyone who was forced to do anything, who really changed.
People who really want change will find their way to doing that. What is truly sad is what affords the most change for any relationally broken person is found in relationship, but those seeking change find that is rare. The Church should be the safest place for change, but it is the least safe place.
guest
@Such_are_you@xanga - Thing like this forced is a bad idea a very bad idea. But to ban a minor who wants the help. That is an entire different subject and its noticed that they think of hormone treatments to stop puberty until after 18 so they can give a child a sex change operation is all well and good.
guest
@Saridactyl@xanga - and you think bad parents who would force something like this on a child are going to change due to this law? Right now parents in cal are helping their little 7 year olds undergo sex change therapy. That for some reason that is legal. But this is not. Actually I am not in favor of forced therapy only voluntary and never anything involving surgery and hormones other than dealing with the delusional.
guest
@Such_are_you@xanga - The church is a sad mess on this subject I trust is in general about as much as I trust th governments actions here
guest
@trunthepaige@xanga - I’m not looking for an argument, I’m just explaining to you that people do get forced into this sort of neglect. You said that didn’t happen.
guest
@Saridactyl@xanga - It is very rare and could be banned without banning voluntary treatment. And the fact that sex change therapy is still being done on children not teenagers does that not sound off to you?
guest
@trunthepaige@xanga - I’ve been aware of the intent of such laws for decades. And, like I said, those who want the help to change will find what they want. The law has very little real power, and none over those who want to change. The real problem is that 43 years after Stonewall Christians offer no place, no help, no relationship for those searching. Law or no law, the problem is: Change is, for most anyway, an unsustainable pursuit. You can only go so far without supporting relationships. The cure may exist, but when the cure is locked away what difference does it make?
Heck, make the California law a federal law, it won’t make any difference. Those who have the cure won’t give the cure. The law is irrelevant and unneeded, the cure is withheld, so there’s little danger of change.
guest
hahaha I LOVE your picture choices! <3 that movie!
guest
@Such_are_you@xanga - Okay sad but true. We ostracize, we shame, we don’t love enough and we certainly do not cure
guest
@secretbeerreporter@xanga - @JandJinJapan@xanga - please take your religion argument some place else
orchid / 198 posts
Im_Amelia@xanga - and we have to do what you tell us to because…………………………………?
guest
I was very happy to hear this and hope other states take the iniative and implement similar laws into place. This ‘therapy’ does nothing but harm and even those who claim to have been ‘cured’ still admit to battling sexual urges/desires for members of the same sex all throughout their adult lives which 9/10 ends in them falling into temptation and/or cheating if they are in a heterosexual relationship. Studies have shown that adolescents who identify as anything but straight tend to fair better emotionally, psychologically, and physically when they are accepted as they are without any force trying to ‘cure’ them of something some people deem to be deviant behavior. At the end of the day being gay, lesbian, bisexual, pansexual, asexual, and the like affects no one but the individual and people need to start letting others live their lives as they see fit as long as it doesn’t affect anyone else in some harmful way.
Some people are gay. Get over it.