CA - California bans "gay cure" therapy

[Anti Federalist]

Regardless of what you think about the efficacy of this, I have a huge problem with the state determining, based on rapidly shifting cultural norms, what therapy has value and which does not.



California bans "gay cure" therapy

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57523211/california-bans-gay-cure-therapy/

SACRAMENTO, Calif. California will become the first state to ban a controversial form of psychotherapy aimed at making gay teenagers straight.

Gov. Jerry Brown announced Sunday that he had signed SB1172 by Democratic Senator Ted Lieu of Torrance. Lieu says the law will prevent children from being psychologically abused.

Effective Jan. 1, the state will prohibit what is known as reparative or conversion therapy for minors.

Brown says the therapies "have no basis in science or medicine and they will now be relegated to the dustbin of quackery."

Gay rights groups say the practice is dangerous because it can put youth at higher risk of depression and suicide.

Conservative religious groups and some Republicans argue that banning conversion therapy would hinder parents' right to provide psychological care for children experiencing gender confusion.

 

[tod evans]

California can do whatever it damn-well pleases once they quit funding their existence with federal tax dollars.

 

[BlackTerrel]

Government is basically legislating religion and what is "normal" here. Of course the majority of Californians voted against gay marriage and said it was not normal - but who cares what they think?

 

[tttppp]

Regardless of what you think about the efficacy of this, I have a huge problem with the state determining, based on rapidly shifting cultural norms, what therapy has value and which does not.



California bans "gay cure" therapy

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57523211/california-bans-gay-cure-therapy/

SACRAMENTO, Calif. California will become the first state to ban a controversial form of psychotherapy aimed at making gay teenagers straight.

Gov. Jerry Brown announced Sunday that he had signed SB1172 by Democratic Senator Ted Lieu of Torrance. Lieu says the law will prevent children from being psychologically abused.

Effective Jan. 1, the state will prohibit what is known as reparative or conversion therapy for minors.

Brown says the therapies "have no basis in science or medicine and they will now be relegated to the dustbin of quackery."

Gay rights groups say the practice is dangerous because it can put youth at higher risk of depression and suicide.

Conservative religious groups and some Republicans argue that banning conversion therapy would hinder parents' right to provide psychological care for children experiencing gender confusion.

If they are going to do that, they might as well ban psychiatry in general.

 

[tttppp]

Regardless of what you think about the efficacy of this, I have a huge problem with the state determining, based on rapidly shifting cultural norms, what therapy has value and which does not.



California bans "gay cure" therapy

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57523211/california-bans-gay-cure-therapy/

SACRAMENTO, Calif. California will become the first state to ban a controversial form of psychotherapy aimed at making gay teenagers straight.

Gov. Jerry Brown announced Sunday that he had signed SB1172 by Democratic Senator Ted Lieu of Torrance. Lieu says the law will prevent children from being psychologically abused.

Effective Jan. 1, the state will prohibit what is known as reparative or conversion therapy for minors.

Brown says the therapies "have no basis in science or medicine and they will now be relegated to the dustbin of quackery."

Gay rights groups say the practice is dangerous because it can put youth at higher risk of depression and suicide.

Conservative religious groups and some Republicans argue that banning conversion therapy would hinder parents' right to provide psychological care for children experiencing gender confusion.

If they are going to do that, they might as well ban psychiatry in general.

 

[oyarde]

Caly , the statist of the statists.

 

[Mundane]

Government is basically legislating religion and what is "normal" here. Of course the majority of Californians voted against gay marriage and said it was not normal - but who cares what they think?

Im not sure that the general public is able to decide what is psychologically normal. Homosexuality hasn't been considered abnormal in psychiatry/psychology in USA since 1973 when it was removed as a mental illness in the DSM.

 

[sparebulb]

Who wants to join me and Michelle Bachmann and Pray the California Away?

 

[phill4paul]

California...

 

[dannno]

So do we have a warrant out for Marcus yet?

 

[jkr]

they banned pussy?
...thats worse than the banning the big gulp in bloomyork...

 

[Smart3]

Government is basically legislating religion and what is "normal" here. Of course the majority of Californians voted against gay marriage and said it was not normal - but who cares what they think?

This has nothing to do with religion, this has to do with torture. Homosexuality can not be "cured" and any attempt by parents of gay children to "cure" their child's homosexuality constitutes a gross violation of that child's rights. Government exists to protect our rights, and thus has done the CORRECT thing here - for once.

Also, this is completely unrelated to marriage equality and the unconstitutional Prop 8 vote. Also, voting in favor of Prop 8 does not in any way mean that a person believes homosexuality is a mental illness. Many gay-friendly people voted in favor of Prop 8 because they falsely believe domestic partnerships/civil unions are enough. Many of these people have been converted, and if the vote were held today, the people would support equality.

 

[BlackTerrel]

This has nothing to do with religion, this has to do with torture. Homosexuality can not be "cured" and any attempt by parents of gay children to "cure" their child's homosexuality constitutes a gross violation of that child's rights. Government exists to protect our rights, and thus has done the CORRECT thing here - for once.

What about people with foot fetishes, or "furries", or people who are sexually attracted to their cars? Is that all completely natural and should be accepted as normal?

Look we should never legislate away sexual perversion, and anyone who hates someone because they have a sexual perversion is probably fucked up themselves.

But we also shouldn't legislate to the rest of us that this is normal or natural. It's not.

Also, this is completely unrelated to marriage equality and the unconstitutional Prop 8 vote. Also, voting in favor of Prop 8 does not in any way mean that a person believes homosexuality is a mental illness. Many gay-friendly people voted in favor of Prop 8 because they falsely believe domestic partnerships/civil unions are enough. Many of these people have been converted, and if the vote were held today, the people would support equality.

Why do some people think the constitution just happens to back up everything I believe in. Prop 8 is unconstitutional? Really? Really?

No one seriously believes that the people who wrote the Constitution ever imagined it would be used in any way to support gay marriage.

 

[tttppp]

This has nothing to do with religion, this has to do with torture. Homosexuality can not be "cured" and any attempt by parents of gay children to "cure" their child's homosexuality constitutes a gross violation of that child's rights. Government exists to protect our rights, and thus has done the CORRECT thing here - for once.

Also, this is completely unrelated to marriage equality and the unconstitutional Prop 8 vote. Also, voting in favor of Prop 8 does not in any way mean that a person believes homosexuality is a mental illness. Many gay-friendly people voted in favor of Prop 8 because they falsely believe domestic partnerships/civil unions are enough. Many of these people have been converted, and if the vote were held today, the people would support equality.

Why not let the private sector determine which services are bs and which aren't? I think this service is bs, but generally government doesn't know what is legit and what isn't and if they get in the habit of making those decisions, they are going to ban a bunch of good things too.

 

[sdsubball23]

does anyone know what form of homosexual therapy are they referring to? Is it all types of homosexual therapy or just a specific type?

 

[Smart3]

What about people with foot fetishes, or "furries", or people who are sexually attracted to their cars? Is that all completely natural and should be accepted as normal?

Look we should never legislate away sexual perversion, and anyone who hates someone because they have a sexual perversion is probably fucked up themselves.

But we also shouldn't legislate to the rest of us that this is normal or natural. It's not.

How do we define what is natural and/or normal? People who have certain fetishes are still straight or gay according to their biology. Sexual attraction to non-human objects is not on the same level as attraction to another human being, who happens to be the same gender as you.

There's nothing inherently perverse or deviant about homosexuality, perhaps those words could be used in respect to furries, but it is nonetheless bigoted.

Also, this legislation in no infringes on the rights of bigots to hate gays or to believe homosexuality can be cured, but these people will have to wait til 18 to impose their will on their victims.

Why do some people think the constitution just happens to back up everything I believe in. Prop 8 is unconstitutional? Really? Really?

No one seriously believes that the people who wrote the Constitution ever imagined it would be used in any way to support gay marriage.

Proposition 8 is unconstitutional under both the California and United States Constitutions. Prohibiting gays from marrying is no different than states prohibiting interfaith or interracial marriages. No one has to believe in interfaith, interracial or gay marriages if they don't want to. Personally, the thought of a Jew marrying a Hindu disgusts me, and I don't particularly like ethnic mixing. However, my personal opinions shouldn't determine the law of the land.

I have no doubt the authors of the Constitution if brought back for 5 days would almost universally support marriage equality after hearing the arguments. So why should any Constitutionalist oppose marriage equality? It's anti-American to do so.

Why not let the private sector determine which services are bs and which aren't? I think this service is bs, but generally government doesn't know what is legit and what isn't and if they get in the habit of making those decisions, they are going to ban a bunch of good things too.

That's a rather out-of-touch response. This legislation protects the individual rights of children. It's probably the most Libertarian piece of legislation passed so far in the CA Legislature this session.

I can't think of anything remotely similar to this type of "therapy", so you don't have to worry about good things being banned in the future.

does anyone know what form of homosexual therapy are they referring to? Is it all types of homosexual therapy or just a specific type?

Most likely the "form" that Exodus International uses. I don't think they send shocks to the guy's genitals anymore.

 

[tttppp]

How do we define what is natural and/or normal? People who have certain fetishes are still straight or gay according to their biology. Sexual attraction to non-human objects is not on the same level as attraction to another human being, who happens to be the same gender as you.

There's nothing inherently perverse or deviant about homosexuality, perhaps those words could be used in respect to furries, but it is nonetheless bigoted.

Also, this legislation in no infringes on the rights of bigots to hate gays or to believe homosexuality can be cured, but these people will have to wait til 18 to impose their will on their victims.



Proposition 8 is unconstitutional under both the California and United States Constitutions. Prohibiting gays from marrying is no different than states prohibiting interfaith or interracial marriages. No one has to believe in interfaith, interracial or gay marriages if they don't want to. Personally, the thought of a Jew marrying a Hindu disgusts me, and I don't particularly like ethnic mixing. However, my personal opinions shouldn't determine the law of the land.

I have no doubt the authors of the Constitution if brought back for 5 days would almost universally support marriage equality after hearing the arguments. So why should any Constitutionalist oppose marriage equality? It's anti-American to do so.


That's a rather out-of-touch response. This legislation protects the individual rights of children. It's probably the most Libertarian piece of legislation passed so far in the CA Legislature this session.

I can't think of anything remotely similar to this type of "therapy", so you don't have to worry about good things being banned in the future.


Most likely the "form" that Exodus International uses. I don't think they send shocks to the guy's genitals anymore.

Perhaps you missed the part where I said that I believe this service is bs. That's not the point. I can think of several good ideas I've had that other people thought were stupid. If the government makes it a habit of doing this, good businesses WILL get banned. As I pointed out earlier, you can just as easily ban all of psychiatry based on this reasoning. A large part of western medicine can be banned as well. Additionally, this would require way more spending on enforcement and regulation to do these things. This is very unlibertarian.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

I'm all for a ban... on any theft-based funding of "gay cure" clinics.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Regardless of what you think about the efficacy of this, I have a huge problem with the state determining, based on rapidly shifting cultural norms, what therapy has value and which does not.

As as non-government solution, wouldn't it be great of there was a group of wise doctors and scientists who could evaluate and make recommendations on treatments, an organization like the AMA or APA? Unfortunately, that too would be political, but at least it would not be government.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

...