New Jersey to ban 'gay conversion therapy'

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ahtman**

Article

TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — Gov. Chris Christie plans to sign a bill Monday barring licensed therapists from trying to turn gay teenagers straight, making New Jersey the second state to ban so-called conversion therapy, along with California.

The bill passed both houses of the New Jersey Legislature with bipartisan support in June. Assemblyman Tim Eustace, who sponsored the bill and is openly gay, described the therapy as "an insidious form of child abuse."

In a signing note accompanying the bill that will be made public Monday, Christie said he believes people are born gay and that homosexuality is not a sin. That view is inconsistent with his Catholic faith, which teaches that homosexual acts are sins.

The Republican governor also said the health risks of trying to change a child's sexual orientation, as identified by the American Psychological Association, outweigh concerns over the government setting limits on parental choice.

"Government should tread carefully into this area," he said in the signing note, which was obtained by The Associated Press, "and I do so here reluctantly."

"However, I also believe that on the issues of medical treatment for children we must look to experts in the field to determine the relative risks and rewards," Christie said, citing a litany of potential ill effects of trying to change sexual orientation, including depression and suicide. "I believe that exposing children to these health risks without clear evidence of benefits that outweigh these serious risks is not appropriate."

**whembly**

Ahtman wrote:
Article

TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — Gov. Chris Christie plans to sign a bill Monday barring licensed therapists from trying to turn gay teenagers straight, making New Jersey the second state to ban so-called conversion therapy, along with California.

The bill passed both houses of the New Jersey Legislature with bipartisan support in June. Assemblyman Tim Eustace, who sponsored the bill and is openly gay, described the therapy as "an insidious form of child abuse."

In a signing note accompanying the bill that will be made public Monday, Christie said he believes people are born gay and that homosexuality is not a sin. That view is inconsistent with his Catholic faith, which teaches that homosexual acts are sins.

The Republican governor also said the health risks of trying to change a child's sexual orientation, as identified by the American Psychological Association, outweigh concerns over the government setting limits on parental choice.

"Government should tread carefully into this area," he said in the signing note, which was obtained by The Associated Press, "and I do so here reluctantly."

"However, I also believe that on the issues of medical treatment for children we must look to experts in the field to determine the relative risks and rewards," Christie said, citing a litany of potential ill effects of trying to change sexual orientation, including depression and suicide. "I believe that exposing children to these health risks without clear evidence of benefits that outweigh these serious risks is not appropriate."

erm... does the therapy entail being seduced by hooter / victoria secret girls? If so, I could be gay for a day.

But yeah, changing orientation to me sounds an awful like brainwashing...

**Polonius**

Man, he is really gearing up for 2016!

I'm not saying that in a completely cynical way, as I tend to respect all lot of his actions.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

whembly wrote:

erm... does the therapy entail being seduced by hooter / victoria secret girls? If so, I could be gay for a day.

But yeah, changing orientation to me sounds an awful like brainwashing...

by all accounts, that's basically what it is.

**Dreadclaw69**

Well done that man

**whembly**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Well done that man

That's one thing he's not ashamed of... is his pragmatism. It's just that he doesn't excite the none-establishment types much.

*shrugs* I like the guy well enough (other than his gun control policies). But, he's the governor for NJ for cripes sake... very, much along the same vein as Romney.

But yeah... good for him on this one.

**Ahtman**

whembly wrote:
But, he's the governor for NJ for cripes sake... very, much along the same vein as Romney.

If being governor is enough, then they are both the 'same vein' as Jesse Ventura.

**Manchu**

In a signing note accompanying the bill that will be made public Monday, Christie said he believes people are born gay and that homosexuality is not a sin. That view is inconsistent with his Catholic faith, which teaches that homosexual acts are sins.

Anti-Catholic yellow journalism in action.

**Polonius**

whembly wrote:
Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Well done that man

That's one thing he's not ashamed of... is his pragmatism. It's just that he doesn't excite the none-establishment types much.

*shrugs* I like the guy well enough (other than his gun control policies). But, he's the governor for NJ for cripes sake... very, much along the same vein as Romney.

But yeah... good for him on this one.

In my crazy moments, I think that he's planning on switching parties and running in 2016 as a fiscally conservative democrat.

he'll never make it out of the GOP primaries, especially if they decide after 2012 to double down on conservativsm.

**ironicsilence**

While I agree on the gearing up for 2016 comment I also agree that I approve of most things Gov Christie does. I'm also not sure he can survive the GOP primaries based on the nonsensical direction my poor party continues to head but I hope that he can fire up enough people with this non traditional approach and make it through

I completely support banning of gay conversion therapy. I would be awesome if we lived in a world where this kind of nonsense wasnt real. Shame I wont see that world im my life time

**whembly**

Polonius wrote:
whembly wrote:
Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Well done that man

That's one thing he's not ashamed of... is his pragmatism. It's just that he doesn't excite the none-establishment types much.

*shrugs* I like the guy well enough (other than his gun control policies). But, he's the governor for NJ for cripes sake... very, much along the same vein as Romney.

But yeah... good for him on this one.

In my crazy moments, I think that he's planning on switching parties and running in 2016 as a fiscally conservative democrat.

he'll never make it out of the GOP primaries, especially if they decide after 2012 to double down on conservativsm.

It's possible... if he campaigns as in outsider (as in, doesn't toe the company line)... it might work.

*shrugs* it's 2013, who knows what's going to be like in 2015?

Besides, Hillary is going to win.

**Dreadclaw69**

whembly wrote:
Besides, Hillary is going to win.

I'd like to see a Hilary v Condelezza race

**SoloFalcon1138**

What is sad is tbat this needed to be banned at all...

**Frazzled**

Polonius wrote:
whembly wrote:
Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Well done that man

That's one thing he's not ashamed of... is his pragmatism. It's just that he doesn't excite the none-establishment types much.

*shrugs* I like the guy well enough (other than his gun control policies). But, he's the governor for NJ for cripes sake... very, much along the same vein as Romney.

But yeah... good for him on this one.

In my crazy moments, I think that he's planning on switching parties and running in 2016 as a fiscally conservative democrat.

he'll never make it out of the GOP primaries, especially if they decide after 2012 to double down on conservativsm.

Thats not as crazy as you think it is.

**d-usa**

I truly think that the primary process is what caused the GOP to loose the White House and a few seats in both houses in 2012.

This is a great move that needed to happen even if he decides that he will retire tomorrow.

**Some_Call_Me_Tim?**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
whembly wrote:
Besides, Hillary is going to win.

I'd like to see a Hilary v Condelezza race

If Hillary Clinton runs and by some horrid fluke of fate ends up winning, I may just spend the years she's in office hiding in a cave. She's essentially a female Obama with a much more acidic edge. Still, at least she won't be as much of a let-down as the Big O. I'll know not to get my hopes up this time around!

~Tim?

**Dreadclaw69**

d-usa wrote:
I truly think that the primary process is what caused the GOP to loose the White House and a few seats in both houses in 2012.

You mean doing the Dem's job of tearing apart your own candidates during the primaries might have been a bad idea?

**d-usa**

Yeah, they were so busy pandering themselves and destroying each other for their "base" (who would vote for them anyway because they would still be voting against the Democrat) that they lost the swing vote.

I think he knows that, but the pundits haven't figured it out yet.

**Hordini**

Manchu wrote:
In a signing note accompanying the bill that will be made public Monday, Christie said he believes people are born gay and that homosexuality is not a sin. That view is inconsistent with his Catholic faith, which teaches that homosexual acts are sins.
Anti-Catholic yellow journalism in action.

Isn't it great when others talk about what someone's personal beliefs are supposed to be because that someone follows a certain religion? It leads to all sorts of wonderful moments like non-Muslims telling a Muslim what "real" Muslims believe and non-Christians telling Christians that they're not really Christian if they don't believe X, Y, or Z.

/sarcasm, in case anyone wasn't sure.

Edit: And it's nice how the article just threw that bit in there. Like, oh, he's Catholic, so of course he couldn't really do anything good for the LGBTQ community. He must just be doing it for political reasons, since it's inconsistent with his Catholic faith and everyone knows Catholics all believe and do all the same things, right?

**gorgon**

It's really hard to win when you have someone on the extreme flank of your own wing.

Santorum's going to be twice as strong this time around, just because his campaign won't be starting off as a joke this time. He'll have resources and support from the get-go, and that's HUGE. He'll never win because clearly the party wants to run someone electable like McCain and Romney. But he'll make things freakin' miserable for Christie. Santorum is a strong and smart campaigner...even if he's also a lot of other things.

I still say that Christie's Jersey/bully/Sopranos act won't play well everywhere in the country. Maybe it doesn't need to. Still, expect to see all those ugly incidents with him berating New Jerseyians in public to crop up in ads again and again. The guy has a temper and mouth that he doesn't control well, and I think some people are going to like him less once they see that. If I was running another campaign, I'd even try placing hecklers at his rallies and stops just to see if I could get something ugly out of him.

**ironicsilence**

i could see christie being successful with the bully aspect if he runs on some sort of clean up washington / the gop party. Kind of a more angry aggressive hope and change

**whembly**

ironicsilence wrote:
i could see christie being successful with the bully aspect if he runs on some sort of clean up washington / the gop party. Kind of a more angry aggressive hope and change

Christie is the perfect VP. Fits the "attack dawg" mode.

**ironicsilence**

whembly wrote:
ironicsilence wrote:
i could see christie being successful with the bully aspect if he runs on some sort of clean up washington / the gop party. Kind of a more angry aggressive hope and change

Christie is the perfect VP. Fits the "attack dawg" mode.

I'd agree with that but i'm not sure there is anyone in the GOP party right now that Christie could safely be a VP for. All the super early contenders for the nomination likely have a lot of differing views from Christie. Having a VP that goes off the script on overall political stances is never a good idea....looking at you Palin

**Ahtman**

whembly wrote:
Christie is the perfect VP. Fits the "attack dawg" mode.

He is a terrible VP if you don't want the bottom of the ticket to be more liked and well known then the top of it.

**gorgon**

The issue is his public behavior toward *constituents*, not other elected officials. It plays in the Northeast, but I have my doubts about areas of the country more interested in politeness and civility.

Americans like Presidential candidates who seem...Presidential. He might keep his mouth shut and work hard to change his image between now and 2016. But Presidential races have a way of exposing you for what you are. I'm not sure that people outside the region understand what a controversial figure he was even in NJ right up until he got the boost from the hurricane.

He's also not as moderate as the hugs with Obama would seem to indicate.

**whembly**

Ahtman wrote:
whembly wrote:
Christie is the perfect VP. Fits the "attack dawg" mode.

He is a terrible VP if you don't want the bottom of the ticket to be more liked and well known then the top of it.

More liked? It's very polarizing within the Republican constituents. He'll never make it out of the primary.

But, after the primary, he has value as a VP because he brings in the NE Republicans.

Susan Martinez/Cristie would be good...

Or...

Scott Walker/Cristie.

Edit: what gorgon says...

**ironicsilence**

a zebra cant change his stripes....I dont see Christie being anymore then what he is now. I dont expect the public view of the GOP party to improve any over the next few years so could see him getting support if he picks up the break the norm banner and runs with it, but not sure how that would play with the GOP base.

**xole**

Hordini wrote:
Manchu wrote:
In a signing note accompanying the bill that will be made public Monday, Christie said he believes people are born gay and that homosexuality is not a sin. That view is inconsistent with his Catholic faith, which teaches that homosexual acts are sins.
Anti-Catholic yellow journalism in action.

Isn't it great when others talk about what someone's personal beliefs are supposed to be because that someone follows a certain religion? It leads to all sorts of wonderful moments like non-Muslims telling a Muslim what "real" Muslims believe and non-Christians telling Christians that they're not really Christian if they don't believe X, Y, or Z.

/sarcasm, in case anyone wasn't sure.

Edit: And it's nice how the article just threw that bit in there. Like, oh, he's Catholic, so of course he couldn't really do anything good for the LGBTQ community. He must just be doing it for political reasons, since it's inconsistent with his Catholic faith and everyone knows Catholics all believe and do all the same things, right?

When I went to Catholic school, we were taught that being gay isn't a sin, only homosexual acts are*. So this isn't even directly against his Catholic beliefs(assuming he follows this doctrine, and assuming he hasn't chosen to fulfill all the requirements to make a moral decision of his own). Which I think is what Manchu is getting at.

*Not a whole lot better, but at least they aren't forcing people to be someone they aren't.

**ironicsilence**

from what I know of the catholic faith, xole has it right, being gay isnt a sin, however making gay whoppie is a sin. So in the eyes of a catholic god, everything is cool as long as there is no penetration

**Polonius**

To be fair though, any sex that's not for baby making between a married couple is a sin.

So while hooking up with a drag queen on fire island is a sin, so is married sex with a condom.

And, well, since they're both sins anyway....

**Polonius**

ironicsilence wrote:
a zebra cant change his stripes....I dont see Christie being anymore then what he is now. I dont expect the public view of the GOP party to improve any over the next few years so could see him getting support if he picks up the break the norm banner and runs with it, but not sure how that would play with the GOP base.

He'd poll well with independents, which is great, until you reliaze that independents don't (or often can't) vote in primaries.

Conservative Republicans don't trust him, and Democrats might like him, but not enough to elect a republican, which means a GOP budget, right leaning SCOTUS justices, and in general all the partisan conflict that will make it hard for liberals and/or democrats to vote for him.

If he gets the GOP nomination though (which he almost certainly won't), he'd be achingly hard to stop. A lot of normally solid blue states would be in play (New Jersy, PA, Michigan, Wisconsin) while traditonal battleground states would take to him (florida and Ohio).