Should Conversion Therapy Be Outlawed?

[Grenartia]

1. Then we would have to outlaw holistic medicine as well.

2. It's not like the government is forcing people to undergo it.

1. Sure. Unless you can ensure people using that are giving informed consent, its inherently unjust.

2. And? You say that as if that's the only way it could possibly be unjust.

[Tevehas]

1. Sure. Unless you can ensure people using that are giving informed consent, its inherently unjust.

2. And? You say that as if that's the only way it could possibly be unjust.

Modern conversion therapy is a far cry from what it was in the 70's. It's illegal for things like electric shock and forcing you to eat pills that make you sick while watching gay stuff.

I admit I look pretty stupid saying this with nothing solid to back it up, but clearly there must be something in the brain that has to deal with homosexuality. I don't know if I'm right or wrong about it, but I do know that the rates of mental-illness such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depression. Some would claim that this is because of the environment that homosexuals are placed in, but that can't be true if these things aren't acquired from the environment.

[Grenartia]

1. Sure. Unless you can ensure people using that are giving informed consent, its inherently unjust.

2. And? You say that as if that's the only way it could possibly be unjust.

1. Modern conversion therapy is a far cry from what it was in the 70's. It's illegal for things like electric shock and forcing you to eat pills that make you sick while watching gay stuff.

2. I admit I look pretty stupid saying this with nothing solid to back it up, but clearly there must be something in the brain that has to deal with homosexuality. 3. I don't know if I'm right or wrong about it, but I do know that the rates of mental-illness such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depression. 4. Some would claim that this is because of the environment that homosexuals are placed in, but that can't be true if these things aren't acquired from the environment.

1. And? I can assure you, its still torture.

2. Yes. Its called the mind.

3. What about them? You literally accidentally words.

4. Do you have proof they're not acquired from the environment?

[Tevehas]

1. And? I can assure you, its still torture.

2. Yes. Its called the mind.

3. What about them? You literally accidentally words.

4. Do you have proof they're not acquired from the environment?

I'm only going off what the same people who are supporters of the LGBT movement say. If white, suburban kids can get depression, then clearly it's not acquired from the environment. Just like sexual orientation, the consensus is that it's the product of nature not nurture.

[Murovanka]

This is the criminalization of Christianity! Stopping Christians from imposing their beliefs on others is damaging their religious freedoms!

[Grenartia]

1. And? I can assure you, its still torture.

2. Yes. Its called the mind.

3. What about them? You literally accidentally words.

4. Do you have proof they're not acquired from the environment?

1. I'm only going off what the same people who are supporters of the LGBT movement say. 2. If white, suburban kids can get depression, then clearly it's not acquired from the environment. 3. Just like sexual orientation, the consensus is that it's the product of nature not nurture.

1. You literally left the sentence unfinished. I was only able to infer what you meant because I'd heard similar statements before.

2. What utter bullshit.

3. Actually, IIRC, the consensus is that both nature AND nurture play roles.

[Grenartia]

This is the criminalization of Christianity! Stopping Christians from imposing their beliefs on others is damaging their religious freedoms!

I have an appreciation for blunt satire.

[Narintia]

USA is a christian state. IF YOU DONT LIKE IT LEAVE WE WASP* BUILT AMERICA
*White Anglo-Saxon Protestant

[Tevehas]

1. I'm only going off what the same people who are supporters of the LGBT movement say. 2. If white, suburban kids can get depression, then clearly it's not acquired from the environment. 3. Just like sexual orientation, the consensus is that it's the product of nature not nurture.

1. You literally left the sentence unfinished. I was only able to infer what you meant because I'd heard similar statements before.

2. What utter bullshit.

3. Actually, IIRC, the consensus is that both nature AND nurture play roles.[/quote]

I have heard similar statements before. So you're telling me that Depression, chronic sadness and despair, is somehow the product of an environment where people never have to worry about food, water, and medical care? Then I guess I'm right about one thing for once.

But if something as serious as schizophrenia can develop (sans head injury) as a product partially of nurture, than can't the same thing be said of homosexuality?

[Grenartia]

USA is a christian state. IF YOU DONT LIKE IT LEAVE WE WASP* BUILT AMERICA
*White Anglo-Saxon Protestant

That has literally nothing to do with this topic. Everybody in this thread is dumber for having read that. I award you no points. May God have mercy on your soul.

[Occupied Deutschland]

'Nutreceutical' as a label would tend to disagree with this assessment. As would broad categories of 'alternative medicine' in general. The FDA does not, for instance, do anything to regulate acupuncture needles, 'aromatherapy' chemicals/scents, and a wealth of products peddled as cure-alls and various treatments or outright cures for diseases.


Yet many such instances of therapy are NOT regulated under the auspices of any medical watchdog. Hence why AA, NA, and the various other 'group therapy' or 'class' sessions for substance abuse, anger, or domestic abuse victims and others aren't covered under 'medical' concerns.
As well they shouldn't be. Because people are considerably more complex than the pills the FDA (rather poorly) evaluates.
Even then, if one wished to under your comparison to pharmaceuticals and such, gay conversion therapy is merely the equivalent of choosing 'alternative medicine' as a solution. Something which is allowed (despite its danger to individuals health).
Because people are given sovereignty over their own bodies, for better or worse.

Because they do not actual claim to cure anything. Oh and accupuncture needles are covered as devices. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatio ... ted_States

Huh, wasn't aware acupuncture needles were covered.
Regardless, I think if one watches the marketing involved in many nutritional supplements and, perhaps even worse, 'alternative medicine' schemes (naturopathy and homeopathy most egregiously) there is a decided undercurrent of promise and deceptive marketing designed to make people think it works.

Alternative medicines are regulated though not as strictly as those claiming to actually cure things.
For instance dietary supplements like the one you mentioned are classified as food and thus not as heavily regulated as long as they do not claim to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent disease. It is however regulated.

Sure, but homeopathy often rather directly claims to cure things and yet remains decidedly less regulated than other drugs (to be fair, this is a specific problem with US regulations in regards to homeopathic medicine vis-a-vis the FDA, but I digress). There do remain some regulations, of course. But then, 'gay conversion therapy' is covered by some regulations as well.

That is not the claim made by those who do conversion therapy. They claim to cure homosexuality and thus would fall under the more heavy regulations. In the US in order to be perform therapy you are required to have a license as controlled by the individual state. http://counsellingresource.com/lib/ther ... licensure/

I honestly haven't heard or seen any advertisements or claims by gay conversion believers, so I'd imagine they get away with any claims they do make under the same or similar auspices as anyone else gets away with marketing or advertising 'cures' for things (hypnotherapy oft claims to cure smoking, for instance).
And a mental health license is not required to perform all 'therapy', as many 'therapies' quite simply don't qualify as related to mental health in the US. Hypnotherapy varies by state, but per Wiki Washington is the only one to regulate it. Other 'behavioral therapy' models also remain very unregulated, such as those related to 'teambuilding' or, perhaps more famously and applicable to 'gay conversion camps', those 'self-help' groups out there (Alcoholics Anonymous and other such programs aren't headed up by or lead by mental health professionals, for instance)

Thus if they claim to be doing therapy they must be licensed in the state. If they claim to be curing or treating something, they are covered by the FDA. Which now makes me wonder exactly what they are claiming that they can bypass these laws.

Likely either that they aren't 'guaranteed' to work in some manner (making no solid claim about 'curing' homosexuality but being 'group self-help' or 'coping' organizations instead, similar to how AA markets itself or how snake-oil like homeopathy sells itself).

[Grenartia]

I have heard similar statements before. 1. So you're telling me that Depression, chronic sadness and despair, is somehow the product of an environment where people never have to worry about food, water, and medical care? Then I guess I'm right about one thing for once.

2. But if something as serious as schizophrenia can develop (sans head injury) as a product partially of nurture, 3. than can't the same thing be said of homosexuality?

1. A lot of times, yes, due to chemical imbalance in the brain. However, that isn't to rule out environmental causes.

2. I think you're making the mistake of assuming that all mental illness is either strictly nature or nurture (or both). Basically, you're treating sulfuric acid the same as you would water, simply because they're both liquids.

3. I'd only say in as much as seeing a person of the same gender, and finding them sexually attractive, constitutes nurture in this context.

[Ugatoo]

3. I'd only say in as much as seeing a person of the same gender, and finding them sexually attractive, constitutes nurture in this context.

This sounds alarmingly close the "homosexuality is a choice".

[Socialist Tera]

It's a form of torture, it should be.

[San Lumen]

It's a form of torture, it should be.

Yes it is. I really don't understand any of the arguments against banning it.

[Tevehas]

look lads
they're turning on each other

[Councilmembers]

Forced conversion therapy -- especially on minors, should be banned completely. If a consenting adult wants to do it however, you can't restrict a free individual.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

1. Then we would have to outlaw holistic medicine as well.

2. It's not like the government is forcing people to undergo it.

1. Sure. Unless you can ensure people using that are giving informed consent, its inherently unjust.

2. And? You say that as if that's the only way it could possibly be unjust.

1. If someone signs something saying they've given informed consent, they've given informed consent.

2. Something being stupid or unjust doesn't mean a person shouldn't be able to partake in it, assuming it only affects themselves.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

It's a form of torture, it should be.

If a consenting adult is into that shit, it's not my business to stop them.

[Grenartia]

3. I'd only say in as much as seeing a person of the same gender, and finding them sexually attractive, constitutes nurture in this context.

This sounds alarmingly close the "homosexuality is a choice".

Hardly.

[Grenartia]

It's a form of torture, it should be.

If a consenting adult is into that shit, it's not my business to stop them.

Given that its as bad for you as radioactive snakeoil, extra precautions need to be in place to make sure the consent is informed and uncoerced.

[Grenartia]

1. Sure. Unless you can ensure people using that are giving informed consent, its inherently unjust.

2. And? You say that as if that's the only way it could possibly be unjust.

1. If someone signs something saying they've given informed consent, they've given informed consent.

2. Something being stupid or unjust doesn't mean a person shouldn't be able to partake in it, assuming it only affects themselves.

1. I can think of more than one instance where that would be an incorrect assumption.

2. Only true on the condition that the person has given informed, uncoerced consent.

[The Black Forrest]

Wasn't snake oil practices outlawed?

[Grenartia]

Wasn't snake oil practices outlawed?

Exactly.

[Salandriagado]

One thing I wonder is whether or not those quack scientists ever had to go through their own therapy? If not, then that could be a suitable punishment for them practicing it, although in the opposite direction, so "Straight Conversion Therapy".

It's still some form of regulation. As I have stated numerous bloody times, if they are of sound mind and are an adult, then let them have straight or gay conversion therapy or whatever they want.

... providing they're not being tricked into it. Which they are. Maybe not banning it outright for adults, but how about adding mandatory warnings as to its problems into their publicity/etc.? That's not banning anything, just allowing consumers to make more informed choices.