California May Ban "Gay Conversion" Therapy

[Zaras]

What if a society decided that being homosexual was not acting like a human being and therefore had to be illegal.

Then that society is full of backwards, intolerant shitheads and needs to be dragged into the 21st century post-haste.

We've been there already. LGBT people were persecuted from the Victorian era up until the start of gay liberation. This is not an argument.

And of course I know the toll of molestation, do not go there with me man.

If you would, you wouldn't be so bloody cavalier about legalising it.

Can you learn to have a sane controlled discussion and calm down?

Can you learn to actually argue instead of spewing bullshit about how homosexuality and incest are the same thing like a member of the Westboro Baptist Church, or Focus on the Family?

Homosexuality is legal, therefore Incest (without conception) should be legal.

The death penalty is legal, therefore murder should be legal!

See how stupid that is?

[Leepaidamba]

Although in principle there's nothing wrong with consensual sex between adult relatives in which pregnancy is avoided. I mean, right?

Hmmm? I am not so sure.

I have observed an avoidance of intercourse in higher primates involving siblings of offspring.

For example, I remember a Gorilla in a zoo who had the "urge" and was for a lack of better words having a mental conflict of initiating something with a sibling. Reach out and then pull back like something was wrong. It wasn't as if the female was going to attack him as her back was to him.

They eventually solved his problem by trading the sister and a couple daughters for new females......

As to humans? Well I am sure there are small percentages of people who think it's ok. Most however are grossed out by the thought. There is no way in hell I would even consider that with my sister.

If you don't start, you're not going to cause a problem obviously.

[Zaras]

I said liberals LIKE YOU referring to Zaras.

Once again, I am a democratic socialist. Not a liberal. Difference.

Incest causes harm to children. Therefore, it shouldn't be legal. Homosexuality doesn't. Therefore, it should be legal. There. Period. Done.

[Madredia]

Who says with incest they have to have kids? A dead body also won't have psychological issues so its like an inanimate object. I'm not a bigot, I'm just saying be consistent. A dildo can't consent therefore using it should be illegal? Thats basically what this dude is saying.

There is this principle that we must respect people even after they're dead, because their bodies actually belong to them in perpetuity. Otherwise we'd immediately require everyone to become an organ-donor without methods of opting out and we'd use any body not usable for transplantation for scientific purposes.

There is a difference between dead bodies and inanimate objects.

Exactly. So we have established that. Now we respect the human body based on tradition and do not take its organs even though people dying in hospitals could have used them, showing that many laws are based of tradition, and tearing tradition down as a whole wouldn't be so bad would it. At least many people think it wouldn't obviously since we're having this debate. One thing that constantly stands in my opinion, is that two consenting siblings having sex, is no different from homosexual sex. Period.

[Pravengria]

How. What. Why. Consent..

My view is this: We pretend that animals consent to things like using them for sports and food if we give them good lives overall. If they cannot consent to sex though, we are hypocritical. Thus, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to make bestiality illegal.

Me personally, I don't agree with Incest or Bestiality however, you can blame as much as people don't like the idea that most laws in nations was founded due to some kind of religious nonsense. For me personally, Incest is an IQ drain, and the possibility of greater birth-defects. As for bestiality, You can contract diseases[Which happens with human-human sexual intercourse {USE CONDOMS}], risk being hurt, and as well, just seems utterly disgusting. Not only that but people with certain sexual fetishes, could and probably lead to harm of the animal. I don't think they should be made legal, least not bestiality. If you believe in incest that's your choice, but I'd much rather not see children being born with birth-defects or animals succumbing to weird sexual deeds of people with fetishes etc. But yet again, I'm not here to change your mind, my opinions are to keep them illegal. As for the Topic this thread was made for regarding the 'Gay conversion' therapy. I think it should be adopted nationwide. Religious nuts drive me insane.

[The Black Forrest]

Bit of a stretch that. For one thing, an inanimate object can't have psychological issues afterwards.

Homosexuality is not the same as incest as there aren't issues of children and genetics abnormalities.

Who says with incest they have to have kids? A dead body also won't have psychological issues so its like an inanimate object. I'm not a bigot, I'm just saying be consistent. A dildo can't consent therefore using it should be illegal? Thats basically what this dude is saying.

Inanimate objects are not a good argument against what he said. There isn't a question of consistency.

A dead body isn't valid simply because people tend to want the remains respected. As such the question of informed consent comes into play as simply the dead can't give it.

[Pravengria]

What if a society decided that being homosexual was not acting like a human being and therefore had to be illegal.

Then that society is full of backwards, intolerant shitheads and needs to be dragged into the 21st century post-haste.

We've been there already. LGBT people were persecuted from the Victorian era up until the start of gay liberation. This is not an argument.

And of course I know the toll of molestation, do not go there with me man.

If you would, you wouldn't be so bloody cavalier about legalising it.

Can you learn to have a sane controlled discussion and calm down?

Can you learn to actually argue instead of spewing bullshit about how homosexuality and incest are the same thing like a member of the Westboro Baptist Church, or Focus on the Family?

Homosexuality is legal, therefore Incest (without conception) should be legal.

The death penalty is legal, therefore murder should be legal!

See how stupid that is?

Me personally, I don't believe in the death penalty, I believe more in torture and psychological destruction of a prisoner who's committed crimes that'd require a death penalty sentence. Much more effective, degrade their mental state and let them suffer in a cell.

[Mavorpen]

Exactly. So we have established that. Now we respect the human body based on tradition and do not take its organs even though people dying in hospitals could have used them, showing that many laws are based of tradition, and tearing tradition down as a whole wouldn't be so bad would it. At least many people think it wouldn't obviously since we're having this debate. One thing that constantly stands in my opinion, is that two consenting siblings having sex, is no different from homosexual sex. Period.

No. Respect of the human body has hardly been tradition. Throughout history, we have only respected those closest to us, and have only protected those closest and less different than us. Only recently have we extended our circle of compassion to all human beings. Laws are not based on tradition, they are based upon what works now. Laws are constantly changing. In America, the Founding Fathers knew this. Hence why the Constitution is fairly malleable and can be changed. You are wrong.

[Madredia]

I said liberals LIKE YOU referring to Zaras.

Once again, I am a democratic socialist. Not a liberal. Difference.

Incest causes harm to children. Therefore, it shouldn't be legal. Homosexuality doesn't. Therefore, it should be legal. There. Period. Done.

Oh really, because if a 35 year old and his sister have sex thats harming children right? And by liberal I'm not referring to political labels (I don't really like political labels) I'm referring to your apparent social and moral views. Lets not even use the word liberal anymore because it has to many different connotations attached to it. I'm not an economic liberal, but I do believe in personal freedoms. It gets confusing.

[Zaras]

Me personally, I don't believe in the death penalty, I believe more in torture and psychological destruction of a prisoner who's committed crimes that'd require a death penalty sentence. Much more effective, degrade their mental state and let them suffer in a cell.

The existence of countries that still use the death penalty make that argument more relevant.

Plus, uh, ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Your suggestion breaks it.

[Zaras]

Oh really, because if a 35 year old and his sister have sex thats harming children right?

Outlier. A majority of incest cases aren't that.

[Reploid Productions]

Just a reminder, guys, let's mind mindful of the rules, particularly the bits about trolling and flaming, as I've noticed the thread temperature starting to rise. Let's also keep the thread on topic, because I've seen several partial thread derails about bestiality, pedophilia, incest and necrophilia. Which has all of zilch to do with the subject of California's proposed ban on allowing parents to force minors to be subjected to so-called "gay conversion" therapy.


~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

[Sidhae]

You know, it's kind of amusing how seriously people tend to take this kind of trivialities. Seems like the political circles are full of sexually-frustrated sociopaths with a pathological urge to regulate how their fellow citizens use their genitals, one way or another, and they seem to have enough like-minded folk among the masses as well.

I find there are plenty of more important things that could use some regulation than whether it's appropriate or not to try and cure sexual deviants, so I neither condemn nor applaud California's decision, just pity them for failing to address more important issues. But then again, knowing their leftie liberal ways, it's rather unsurprising.

[Paulmania]

Just another reason why I hate California aside from its lack of seasons.

Lemme get this straight. People voluntarily go to these camps. They do not like being gay. Because the service is rather stupid, it must be banned, even though people do want to become heterosexual (and think they are, whatever).

I have an idea. People voluntarily buy hybrid cars, which are supposed to make the environment better. Batteries, however, pollute the environment. Let's ban hybrid cars, yeah.

Don't agree with me? Y U HATE ENVIROMMENT?

What is banned is forcing minors to attend these snake oil camps, which are endorsed by no credible medical institution and have no documented success at working.

Christ, mate. Learn to read an article before you start spewing.

Parents technically force their kids into everything.

[Khanastan]

I support this wholeheartedly.

[Leepaidamba]

There is this principle that we must respect people even after they're dead, because their bodies actually belong to them in perpetuity. Otherwise we'd immediately require everyone to become an organ-donor without methods of opting out and we'd use any body not usable for transplantation for scientific purposes.

There is a difference between dead bodies and inanimate objects.

Exactly. So we have established that. Now we respect the human body based on tradition and do not take its organs even though people dying in hospitals could have used them, showing that many laws are based of tradition, and tearing tradition down as a whole wouldn't be so bad would it. At least many people think it wouldn't obviously since we're having this debate. One thing that constantly stands in my opinion, is that two consenting siblings having sex, is no different from homosexual sex. Period.

No, we respect the human body because it's not ours. People are allowed to decide what happens to their bodies after they've stopped using it. Even if you consider that tradition, it's not a tradition in need of being changed.

And perhaps two siblings having consensual sex isn't any different from two men or women having sex, but does that not just as well demonstrate my point that so long as pregnancy is avoided incest is perfectly fine?

[Madredia]

What if a society decided that being homosexual was not acting like a human being and therefore had to be illegal.

Then that society is full of backwards, intolerant shitheads and needs to be dragged into the 21st century post-haste.

We've been there already. LGBT people were persecuted from the Victorian era up until the start of gay liberation. This is not an argument.

And of course I know the toll of molestation, do not go there with me man.

If you would, you wouldn't be so bloody cavalier about legalising it.

Can you learn to have a sane controlled discussion and calm down?

Can you learn to actually argue instead of spewing bullshit about how homosexuality and incest are the same thing like a member of the Westboro Baptist Church, or Focus on the Family?

My God its difficult to find people whho can just sit and converse without cursing so much. Who are you to decide what society's views should be?

Homosexuality is legal, therefore Incest (without conception) should be legal.

The death penalty is legal, therefore murder should be legal!

See how stupid that is?

My God its difficult to find people whho can just sit and converse without cursing so much. Who are you to decide what society's views should be? No that is not stupid you're looking at it the wrong way. Murder is ILLEGAL therefore the Death Penalty should be illegal. And besides, the Death Penalty is government sanctioned murder.

[Ovisterra]

You know, it's kind of amusing how seriously people tend to take this kind of trivialities. Seems like the political circles are full of sexually-frustrated sociopaths with a pathological urge to regulate how their fellow citizens use their genitals, one way or another, and they seem to have enough like-minded folk among the masses as well.

I find there are plenty of more important things that could use some regulation than whether it's appropriate or not to try and cure sexual deviants, so I neither condemn nor applaud California's decision, just pity them for failing to address more important issues. But then again, knowing their leftie liberal ways, it's rather unsurprising.

I'm often disappointed when some people on NS generalise sweepingly, but knowing their conservative ways, it's hardly surprising.

[Pravengria]

Me personally, I don't believe in the death penalty, I believe more in torture and psychological destruction of a prisoner who's committed crimes that'd require a death penalty sentence. Much more effective, degrade their mental state and let them suffer in a cell.

The existence of countries that still use the death penalty make that argument more relevant.

Plus, uh, ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Your suggestion breaks it.

Well, I think giving one the death penalty is way too light of a punishment. And I know my suggestion breaks it, I only think what I suggested should be used for those who'd be given the death penalty. Anyways this is off topic.

[Leepaidamba]

Once again, I am a democratic socialist. Not a liberal. Difference.

Incest causes harm to children. Therefore, it shouldn't be legal. Homosexuality doesn't. Therefore, it should be legal. There. Period. Done.

Oh really, because if a 35 year old and his sister have sex thats harming children right? And by liberal I'm not referring to political labels (I don't really like political labels) I'm referring to your apparent social and moral views. Lets not even use the word liberal anymore because it has to many different connotations attached to it. I'm not an economic liberal, but I do believe in personal freedoms. It gets confusing.

How then could you possibly advocate for the criminalization of homosexuality, even if as an alternative to a perceived inconsistency.

[Israslovakahzerbajan]

What is banned is forcing minors to attend these snake oil camps, which are endorsed by no credible medical institution and have no documented success at working.

Christ, mate. Learn to read an article before you start spewing.

Parents technically force their kids into everything.

Parents are the respective legal guardians of minors. They can do whatever they please to children as long as they don't disrupt their integrity as human beings.

[The Black Forrest]

Just a reminder, guys, let's mind mindful of the rules, particularly the bits about trolling and flaming, as I've noticed the thread temperature starting to rise. Let's also keep the thread on topic, because I've seen several partial thread derails about bestiality, pedophilia, incest and necrophilia. Which has all of zilch to do with the subject of California's proposed ban on allowing parents to force minors to be subjected to so-called "gay conversion" therapy.

(Image)
~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

Yes your modliness.

*submissive bow*

[Madredia]

Anyway I'm back to the main topic, even if these camps don't work people should be allowed to attend. Its not like they're getting govt. funding. If almost everyone who went to fat camp came back still fat would you shut it down? Or better yet, why not first take all those weight loss products that don't work off the market. Or actually you know what, just go ahead and ban tarot card readings and crystal balls while you're at it.

[Swith Witherward]

I really don't care what they do in the privacy of their church (if people are gullible enough to believe their teaching, that's their fault) but their religious teaching has no place in the secular world.

[Genivaria]

Once again, I am a democratic socialist. Not a liberal. Difference.

Incest causes harm to children. Therefore, it shouldn't be legal. Homosexuality doesn't. Therefore, it should be legal. There. Period. Done.

Oh really, because if a 35 year old and his sister have sex thats harming children right? And by liberal I'm not referring to political labels (I don't really like political labels) I'm referring to your apparent social and moral views. Lets not even use the word liberal anymore because it has to many different connotations attached to it. I'm not an economic liberal, but I do believe in personal freedoms. It gets confusing.

No you don't. You believe in making things that harm noone illegal. You believe in restricting the rights of a minority.