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.

 Ouze wrote:
Not sure how we can discuss the ending of an odious practice without at least one person white knighting it.

I think the clost there is in this thread might be Lord of Deeds, who based on the fact he has a quote from Francis of Acissi in his sig, and is located in Texas (a fairly Christian state iirc), and only posted "" might be in favour of conversion "therapy".

That's only a maybe though.

We could always pretend everyone is actually posting the exact opposite of what they believe and debate that?

 Goliath wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Not sure how we can discuss the ending of an odious practice without at least one person white knighting it.

I think the clost there is in this thread might be Lord of Deeds, who based on the fact he has a quote from Francis of Acissi in his sig, and is located in Texas (a fairly Christian state iirc), and only posted "" might be in favour of conversion "therapy".
.

If there was clinical evidence that it worked and the person receiving said therapy was doing so because they actually wanted to for whatever reason I don't see what the problem would be. I suppose that puts me ever so slightly in the "might be in favor of" camp.

However, unless those two criteria are met this sort of thing annoys me on two levels: quack "therapy" and homophobia.

Quackomophobia?

 Ouze wrote:
In this thread, viewers, if you look carefully, you might see a glimpse of that most rare of creatures - a moderate Republican. Normally they are spooked by loud noises, but I think we can get a closer look - this specimen is from New Jersey, and so may have acclimatized to the noise of people. Hopefully we can try to get him into a breeding program, as we're concerned with his species dwindling numbers. It's a real shame, because these creatures once placed a vital role in a vibrant ecosystem.

This is a beautiful thing.

So far as separating the conversion therapy thing from talking about Chris Christie, is that possible? I think to do so we'd have to have at least one person claiming conversion therapy is OK, and that seems to have no bites. The closest is Manchu, who is mostly focused on the "yellow journalism" aspect of accurately reporting that the Catholic Church considers acting on homosexual impulses to be sinful? Not exactly... endorsing conversion therapy, there. Not sure how we can discuss the ending of an odious practice without at least one person white knighting it.

Fair point. A lot of times I've seen people complain 'how come we're always talking about the bad stuff done by US/UK/Australian governments, why don't we talk about the horrible stuff done by the governments of Russia etc'. And I've made the point you make above - there's no-one there to defend Russia etc, so there's no debate to be had.

Maybe we should just be glad that there is no-one here to defend gay conversion. I don't think that would have been the case a few years ago, where someone might at least have attempted an "I don't necessarily agree with it, but it's their right to do it" bit of nonsense. But now it looks like maybe the bottom really has collapsed out of homophobia. Hopefully, anyway.

Nah, they just haven't posted in this thread due to not noticing it/knowing exactly the reaction they'll get.

I think we need more gay conversion therapy. All of those people with repressed thoughts about whether Timmy likes Jimmy and Lisa likes Sarah. Who wouldn't want more gays in the world?
Oh was I arguing the wrong side of gay conversion therapy? Dangit!

 Ouze wrote:
The closest is Manchu, who is mostly focused on the "yellow journalism" aspect of accurately reporting that the Catholic Church considers acting on homosexual impulses to be sinful?

Your post connotes confusion. The anti-Catholic bias in the article does not stem from the accurate statement that homosexual acts are sinful according to Catholic tradition; rather the issue is saying that Chris Christie's belief that homosexuality itself is not a sin is inconsistent with his Catholic faith.

I see, a fair point.

 d-usa wrote:
Quackomophobia?

Is that the name for my condition?

Why the actions of gay conversion therapists, acupuncturists and homeopathists(to name a few) aren't considered fraud is completely beyond me.

 Manchu wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
The closest is Manchu, who is mostly focused on the "yellow journalism" aspect of accurately reporting that the Catholic Church considers acting on homosexual impulses to be sinful?

Your post connotes confusion. The anti-Catholic bias in the article does not stem from the accurate statement that homosexual acts are sinful according to Catholic tradition; rather the issue is saying that Chris Christie's belief that homosexuality itself is not a sin is inconsistent with his Catholic faith.

How is that an anti-Catholic bias?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Monster Rain wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Quackomophobia?

Is that the name for my condition?

Why the actions of gay conversion therapists, acupuncturists and homeopathists(to name a few) aren't considered fraud is completely beyond me.

It's actually really complicated.

Homeopathy is legal mostly because at this point it doesn'tmake any claims. As long as you only allude to magical healing properties, you can sell anything. Look at how vague the claims on a bottle are. It's not fraud because it's not really making an concreate promises.

Gay Conversion isn't fraud because the success or failure of a medical procedure or treament is never certain. As long as the provider doens't guaruntee anything (and no licensed medical provider will), all you're paying for is the attempt. And, belief it or not, but you can find a minority of psychotherapists that believe that homosexuality is a diagnosable condition and can be treated. You start getting into murky waters with regards to malpractice as long as you can show that you are providing bare minimum competency.

Accupuncture is the trickiest one of those, because it's not complete quackery. It's supported by evidence as being slightly effective. My health insurance will cover it, 100%, as long as its administered by an MD.

 Polonius wrote:


It's actually really complicated.

Homeopathy is legal mostly because at this point it doesn'tmake any claims. As long as you only allude to magical healing properties, you can sell anything. Look at how vague the claims on a bottle are. It's not fraud because it's not really making an concreate promises.

Gay Conversion isn't fraud because the success or failure of a medical procedure or treament is never certain. As long as the provider doens't guaruntee anything (and no licensed medical provider will), all you're paying for is the attempt. And, belief it or not, but you can find a minority of psychotherapists that believe that homosexuality is a diagnosable condition and can be treated. You start getting into murky waters with regards to malpractice as long as you can show that you are providing bare minimum competency.

Accupuncture is the trickiest one of those, because it's not complete quackery. It's supported by evidence as being slightly effective. My health insurance will cover it, 100%, as long as its administered by an MD.

That makes a lot of sense, actually. "These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. This product is not intended to treat, cure or prevent any disease" and all that.

I would say, in the case of acupuncture as well as chiropractic, that there is a spectrum of quackery. When used in conjunction with actual medical care I see less of a problem, it's when these "doctors" start telling clients that medicine is full of "toxins" and not to vaccinate their children that I get vexed wild.

There's an old joke:

"What do you call alternative medicine that has been shown to work?"

"Medicine"

Chripracty is an old tradition that survived the consolodation of medicine in the early 20th century, and now eats primarily from people that want a subsidized massage through insurance, people that cannot afford real medical care, and people milking a workers compensation claim. It's not complete quackery, but nothing they do can't be done by a PT or DO.

Why do they even need conversion therapy? After all, why don't they just choose to be straight?

 MrDwhitey wrote:
Why do they even need conversion therapy? After all, why don't they just choose to be straight?

Exactly, just like most (but probably not all) of us here chose to be straight. Did it take you long to figure out? I spent a lot of time wavering on the issue, it wasn't easy. I mean, aside from the misplaced anger and fear you get from some people, you have the issues with risk of poor reactions from friends and family, and all that stress bumps up ones odds of abusing drugs and alcohol significantly, along with an astronomically higher risk of attempted or successful suicide. Throw in being treated like a second class citizen in many countries, and outright vilified and hated in others. The inability to adopt in some countries, and even simple rights and privileges are either a tough fight to obtain (marriage, extended benefits) or outright impossible depending on where you are in the world.

I don't know how they do it. It was a struggle to choose to be part of the roughly 90%+ majority that make up our world, with the enhanced quality of life that entails, but I bravely made it all the same.

God speed, brave LGBT members, daring to choose to have what is likely to be a markedly harder if not outright crappier life! May the hate crimes and 'corrective rape' committed against you be infrequent.

:-D

Alternate response: "Can't tell if serious.."

Poe's Law is in effect.

I think for a lot of people sexuality isn't a choice but for some it can be like I read an article about a woman who chose to be lesbian as a form of protest against homophobia.

It was sarcasm Forar, I'm gay.

Awesome response though, I love it.

 MrDwhitey wrote:
It was sarcasm Forar, I'm gay.

Wololo wololo wololo.

Kidding...

Exactly, just like some (but probably not many) of us here chose to be Christian. I spent a lot of time wavering on the issue, it wasn't easy. I mean, aside from the misplaced anger and fear you get from some people, you have the issues with risk of poor reactions from friends and family, and all that stress bumps up ones odds of abusing drugs, alcohol, being violent, or self-destructive significantly. Throw in being treated like an imbecilic or second class citizen in many countries, and outright vilified and hated in others. The inability to live in some countries, and even simple rights and privileges are either a tough fight to obtain (right to own property, marriage, extended benefits) or outright impossible depending on where you are in the world.

I don't know how they do it. It was a struggle to choose to be part of the roughly 32% that make up our world, with the enhanced quality of life that it supposedly entails, but I bravely made it all the same.

God speed, brave Christian brothers and sisters, daring to choose to have what is likely to be a markedly harder if not outright crappier life! May the hate crimes and official persecution committed against you be infrequent.


I know many of you will reject the juxtaposition given here without much second thought. My point is that sometimes laws like these do more harm than good when they infringe on one groups rights ostensibly to protect another group.

 motyak wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:
It was sarcasm Forar, I'm gay.

Wololo wololo wololo.

Kidding...

Rogan?

Sigh, I really don't understand why where one person wishes to put their genitals can cause such uproar. Surely, if you don't like the idea of gay relationships, the answer is don't enter into one?

Iranna.

 Iranna wrote:
Sigh, I really don't understand why where one person wishes to put their genitals can cause such uproar.

So you have no issue whatsoever with where people want to put their genitals?

I will always remember the first time I saw naked breasts and decided "I will be straight".

 MrDwhitey wrote:
It was sarcasm Forar, I'm gay.

Awesome response though, I love it.

Thanks, I was really swinging for the fences on that one. There's a large LGBT community on another forum I'm a regular on, and reading various gay rights threads taught me a lot, even corrected some views I held that were patiently explained to be wrong.

They also showed me some of the depths to which people will sink in their hatred of things they don't understand, it was actually kind of fun to tap into that briefly.

 d-usa wrote:
I will always remember the first time I saw naked breasts and decided "I will be straight".

I don't remember that day, I do remember the day I saw another man's penis and said, "I do not want that anywhere near me."

 Lord of Deeds wrote:
I know many of you will reject the juxtaposition given here without much second thought. My point is that sometimes laws like these do more harm than good when they infringe on one groups rights ostensibly to protect another group.

Wait wait wait... I did not know that the genetic predisposition towards being Christian had been found!

:-D

Which is to say that they are utterly nothing alike. Religion may be taught at an early age and is a profound part of people's lives, but unlike sexual orientation, we are not born as a follower/member/adherent of *religious faith X*, and it's disingenuous to link them as even remotely similar.

 Lord of Deeds wrote:
Exactly, just like some (but probably not many) of us here chose to be Christian. I spent a lot of time wavering on the issue, it wasn't easy. I mean, aside from the misplaced anger and fear you get from some people, you have the issues with risk of poor reactions from friends and family, and all that stress bumps up ones odds of abusing drugs, alcohol, being violent, or self-destructive significantly. Throw in being treated like an imbecilic or second class citizen in many countries, and outright vilified and hated in others. The inability to live in some countries, and even simple rights and privileges are either a tough fight to obtain (right to own property, marriage, extended benefits) or outright impossible depending on where you are in the world.

I don't know how they do it. It was a struggle to choose to be part of the roughly 32% that make up our world, with the enhanced quality of life that it supposedly entails, but I bravely made it all the same.

God speed, brave Christian brothers and sisters, daring to choose to have what is likely to be a markedly harder if not outright crappier life! May the hate crimes and official persecution committed against you be infrequent.


I know many of you will reject the juxtaposition given here without much second thought. My point is that sometimes laws like these do more harm than good when they infringe on one groups rights ostensibly to protect another group.

What rights are being infringed on in this case? The rights of dodgy therapists to mess with peoples' heads in ways that cause serious issues?

 d-usa wrote:
I will always remember the first time I saw naked breasts and decided "I will be straight".

Plot twist: they were moobs.

 Lord of Deeds wrote:
I know many of you will reject the juxtaposition given here without much second thought. My point is that sometimes laws like these do more harm than good when they infringe on one groups rights ostensibly to protect another group.

I doubt it, I would rather have homosexuals be more free from harassment then have a bunch of witches be allowed to use religion (not saying all religious people are witches or that all religions harass gays I'm sure most religious folks are alright) as an excuse to harm them.