Chris Christie signs bill banning gay conversion therapy

[belian78]

That's how I initially read it, so now I'm back to square one.

Well now that I read the article, the part about going to the counselor is for another piece of legislation in regards to medical marijuana for children. They can't be prescribed it unless parent's jump through the 'necessary' hoops first. So this is an outright ban on the gay therapy, and you would be right to call this an authoritarian piece of legislation.

 

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Can minors in New Jersey still have their bodies mutilated and pumped up with hormones, so they can parade around lying to themselves that they're now the opposite gender?

 

[Antischism]

Well now that I read the article, the part about going to the counselor is for another piece of legislation in regards to medical marijuana for children. They can't be prescribed it unless parent's jump through the 'necessary' hoops first. So this is an outright ban on the gay therapy, and you would be right to call this an authoritarian piece of legislation.

Ah, alright. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[BamaAla]

That's how I initially read it, so now I'm back to square one.

How is that any different than any other prior restraint / demonstration? Want a gun? That's fine, just show cause and competence. Want to hold a rally? Of course, just come get a permit first. Want to marry your girlfriend? We'd love that, just come in for a blood test and have a mental professional clear you through pre-marriage counseling.

I don't see any real difference other than maybe the minor angle. Am I going to hear "for the kids" on RFP?

 

[The Free Hornet]

Anyone who agrees with this is an authoritarian. Lets see how many atheists are going to be consistent on this.

Atheism only requires that one lack a particular belief. Everything else is fair game.

As far as your boisterous comment, do you - or anyone else - have the TEXT for this bill. I can't seem to find it...
[edit: this bill text is in post #47 and another link further down in #53]

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bills/BillsByNumber.asp

Then maybe we can have an intelligent conversation. Maybe not you and me, but some of us here.

As to so-called "parental rights", I believe in individual rights of which the former is a possible subset.

I'd be curious if this is structured as 'cannot be forced' or 'is not allowed'....

 

[Antischism]

How is that any different than any other prior restraint / demonstration? Want a gun? That's fine, just show cause and competence. Want to hold a rally? Of course, just come get a permit first. Want to marry your girlfriend? We'd love that, just come in for a blood test and have a mental professional clear you through pre-marriage counseling.

I don't see any real difference other than maybe the minor angle. Am I going to hear "for the kids" on RFP?

Like I previously stated,

It's a violation of the rights of the person being forced into a potentially destructive form of therapy. I view "parental rights" in more of a Rothbardian/Anarchist view, where parents don't have any legal authority to force their children into such things. It's akin to child abuse.

 

[The Free Hornet]

Here it is:

ASSEMBLY WOMEN AND CHILDREN COMMITTEE



STATEMENT TO



ASSEMBLY, No. 3371



STATE OF NEW JERSEY



DATED: JUNE 13, 2013



The Assembly Women and Children Committee reports favorably

Assembly Bill No. 3371.

This bill prohibits counseling to change the sexual orientation of a minor.

Under the provisions of the bill, a person who is licensed to provide professional counseling, including, but not limited to, a psychiatrist, licensed practicing psychologist, certified social worker, licensed clinical social worker, licensed social worker, licensed marriage and family therapist, certified psychoanalyst, or a person who performs counseling as part of the person's professional training, is prohibited from engaging in sexual orientation change efforts with a person under 18 years of age.

The bill defines "sexual orientation change efforts" as the practice of seeking to change a person's sexual orientation, including, but not limited to, efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions, or to reduce or eliminate sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward a person of the same gender. The term, however, does not include counseling for a person seeking to transition from one gender to another, or counseling that: provides acceptance, support, and understanding of a person or facilitates a person's coping, social support, identity exploration and development, including sexual orientation-neutral interventions to prevent or address unlawful conduct or unsafe sexual practices; and does not seek to change sexual orientation.

This bill is identical to Senate Bill No. 2278 (1R) (Lesniak/Sweeney/Weinberg) which was released by the Senate Health, Human Services, and Senior Citizens Committee on March 18, 2013 and is currently pending before the Senate.

The long and short of it seems to be, an unlicensed product may be safer but I'm not sure about the legality of practicing unlicensed. If one was a licensed whatever, this looks like a potential minefield. How do you prove the 16 yo was gay and that one intended to convert instead of comfort. Are you helping them to cope or to suck fewer dicks?!?!?!?!

To my initial reading, this is just PC bullshit that would alter how services are advertised and framed and who may offer them. If I were a licensed counseler, it'd be tempting to just not want to deal with children and this issue. However I suspect so long as you don't advertise the forbidden service, one might be in the clear.

That said, the danger could be targeting a provider with a mole and hidden mic and entrapping someone into violation.

Bad bill regardless.

 

[juleswin]

How is that any different than any other prior restraint / demonstration? Want a gun? That's fine, just show cause and competence. Want to hold a rally? Of course, just come get a permit first. Want to marry your girlfriend? We'd love that, just come in for a blood test and have a mental professional clear you through pre-marriage counseling.

I don't see any real difference other than maybe the minor angle. Am I going to hear "for the kids" on RFP?

I think this time one can get away with saying its for the kids. This is not a case where adults are told to do or not do something because it indirectly affects the kids somehow. This is actually something done to kids. So yes, I am proud to "say think about the kids"

 

[BamaAla]

Here it is:




The long and short of it seems to be, an unlicensed product may be safer but I'm not sure about the legality of practicing unlicensed. If one was a licensed whatever, this looks like a potential minefield. How do you prove the 16 yo was gay and that one intended to convert instead of comfort. Are you helping them to cope or to suck fewer dicks?!?!?!?!

To my initial reading, this is just PC bullshit that would alter how services are advertised and framed and who may offer them. If I were a licensed counseler, it'd be tempting to just not want to deal with children and this issue. However I suspect so long as you don't advertise the forbidden service, one might be in the clear.

That said, the danger could be targeting a provider with a mole and hidden mic and entrapping someone into violation.

Bad bill regardless.

The state has the licensure, they ban licensed professionals from performing the forbidden therapy, make it a felony to practice any therapy without their license. They got rid of the therapy wholesale.

I'm not a fan of gay conversion therapy, but this is a bad bill.

 

[jmdrake]

Instead, parents must have a letter of support from a psychiatrist, as well as a pediatrician, and a doctor registered in the program.

It seems to me that what this stops is parents from forcing their kids to undergo the "therapy," which I believe is straight up quackery. Parents shouldn't be allowed to force any child into such a heavily discredited practice.

Let me see if I understand you. You're endorsing a law that requires parents to get a letter from a psychologist who has to be licensed by the same state you claim to be against in order to help their children get therapy that these children may actually want? And you have the nerve to call yourself a libertarian?

 

[TonySutton]

So this bill also protects heterosexual children from receiving therapy that might turn them gay, right?

 

[Antischism]

Let me see if I understand you. You're endorsing a law that requires parents to get a letter from a psychologist who has to be licensed by the same state you claim to be against in order to help their children get therapy that these children may actually want? And you have the nerve to call yourself a libertarian?

I misread/misunderstood the bill. I further clarified in the following posts. I guess I should edit that post to avoid confusion.

 

[TonySutton]

Btw, here is the text

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2012/Bills/A3500/3371_I1.HTM

 

[RickyJ]

So this bill also protects heterosexual children from receiving therapy that might turn them gay, right?

Without heterosexual conversion therapy there would not be hardly any gays so it is safe to say that will not be happening or the Log Cabin Republicans will throw a hissy fit.

 

[anaconda]

Are they still not allowed to seek this out if it's by their own will? If that's not the case, then I will back down from my position and disagree with Christie. I'm under the impression that it simply prohibits parents from forcing their children into it.

But parental coercion of minors is largely legal, no? What if a dad makes his kid play little league against his will? I consider this abusive but I doubt it's illegal.

 

[anaconda]

I'm wondering if Witch Doctors are licensed in N.J.

 

[69360]

So is therapy to convert straight people to homosexual illegal in NJ as well?

 

[Smart3]

I support a ban before the age of 12, between 12 and 18 with parental consent and after 18 fully legal.

In return for this approach, ALL organizations performing this therapy must specify that it does not work and is not supported by modern science.

Any child who attempts suicide as a result of this therapy should be removed by CPS.

Is that tolerant enough for you people?

 

[Sola_Fide]

I support a ban before the age of 12, between 12 and 18 with parental consent and after 18 fully legal.

In return for this approach, ALL organizations performing this therapy must specify that it does not work and is not supported by modern science.

Any child who attempts suicide as a result of this therapy should be removed by CPS.

Is that tolerant enough for you people?

You are an authoritarian, sadly.

I've said I don't know how many times on this forum that atheists cannot be consistent for liberty. Further proof right here.

 

[Smart3]

You are an authoritarian, sadly.

I've said I don't know how many times on this forum that atheists cannot be consistent for liberty. Further proof right here.

I didn't call for life imprisonment if the kid succeeds in killing himself/herself. I am in a good mood.