Should Conversion Therapy Be Outlawed?

[Pandeeria]

Eating junk food is harmful. Smoking and drinking are harmful. There are plenty of practices that are harmful, and virtually all can be potentially harmful. That doesn't mean we should ban them.

You can decide what to do with your own body. But others can decide what to do with theirs.

what is banned isn't GETTING the therapy its OFFERING the therapy. just as you can ...eat as many peach pits as you want but *I* cant sell you laetrile in a scam cancer cure. scammers SHOULD be barred from offering "cures" that don't work.

I'm pretty sure a lot of conversion therapeutic businesses out there state somewhere in the fine print that it doesn't work, obviously using very vague, legal-like language instead of just saying "It doesn't work".

But yes, the ones that don't state it doesn't work should be brought to court for false advertisement and even fraud (since conversion therapy often has negative psychological effects, resulting in actual bodily harm).

[Morr]

Do you see any difference in trajectory, here?

You said there was an increase. That is quite blatantly a decrease. Either you're being intellectually dishonest, or you don't know how to read a graph.

C'mon, dude, at least read the whole conversation we've been having instead of butting in when you haven't read the article's commentary on the graph.

[Morr]

If you think sexual orientation is an immutable psychological fact, then why don't you think gender is as well?

Who said I didn't?

So you're a gender essentialist?

[LaVeyan Stirnerite Randroids]

Who said I didn't?

So you're a gender essentialist?

Not what it means. Try again.

[San Lumen]

what is banned isn't GETTING the therapy its OFFERING the therapy. just as you can ...eat as many peach pits as you want but *I* cant sell you laetrile in a scam cancer cure. scammers SHOULD be barred from offering "cures" that don't work.

I'm pretty sure a lot of conversion therapeutic businesses out there state somewhere in the fine print that it doesn't work, obviously using very vague, legal-like language instead of just saying "It doesn't work".

But yes, the ones that don't state it doesn't work should be brought to court for false advertisement and even fraud (since conversion therapy often has negative psychological effects, resulting in actual bodily harm).

but they don';t that's the problem and they would never agree to putting in such language which is why its better to just ban it outright

[Grenartia]

You said there was an increase. That is quite blatantly a decrease. Either you're being intellectually dishonest, or you don't know how to read a graph.

C'mon, dude, at least read the whole conversation we've been having instead of butting in when you haven't read the article's commentary on the graph.

I skimmed over it.

Who said I didn't?

So you're a gender essentialist?

I don't think you know what that phrase means.

No, I am not. I hold that gender identity is an innate part of who somebody is, much like sexual orientation. And while I would deny that gender is entirely immutable (after all, genderfluidity is a thing), I will also deny that it is something that can be consciously changed.

[Meryuma]

For children? Absolutely.

For mentally capable adults? No. Their choice.

Though I don't think modern conversion therapy really uses electric shocks or anything.

You'd be surprised.

[Morr]

C'mon, dude, at least read the whole conversation we've been having instead of butting in when you haven't read the article's commentary on the graph.

I skimmed over it.

So you're a gender essentialist?

I don't think you know what that phrase means.

No, I am not. I hold that gender identity is an innate part of who somebody is, much like sexual orientation. And while I would deny that gender is entirely immutable (after all, genderfluidity is a thing), I will also deny that it is something that can be consciously changed.

You can't consciously change a lot of preferences, but there is a wide chasm between that and psychological fact.

[Neutraligon]

I skimmed over it.



I don't think you know what that phrase means.

No, I am not. I hold that gender identity is an innate part of who somebody is, much like sexual orientation. And while I would deny that gender is entirely immutable (after all, genderfluidity is a thing), I will also deny that it is something that can be consciously changed.

You can't consciously change a lot of preferences, but there is a wide chasm between that and psychological fact.

What is a psychological fact?

[Lairendor]

I believe it should be banned. It has been proven not to work, and causes more harm than good.

[Morr]

You can't consciously change a lot of preferences, but there is a wide chasm between that and psychological fact.

What is a psychological fact?

In the natural science sense? Nothing.

[Neutraligon]

What is a psychological fact?

In the natural science sense? Nothing.

So you basically said "You can't consciously change a lot of preferences, but there is a wide chasm between that and __________" That sentence has no meaning.

[Morr]

In the natural science sense? Nothing.

So you basically said "You can't consciously change a lot of preferences, but there is a wide chasm between that and __________" That sentence has no meaning.

The sentence has meaning theoretically, just not practically. There can be neurological facts. And yes, that sentence has no meaning, so I think it is intellectually dishonest to employ it.

[Lakeland]

For those who don't know conversion therapy is a pseudoscience to change one's sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual . The methods involve things like electric shock and other things. There are also several different forms like behavioral modification and reparative therapy. There is absolutely no proof that it works and is instead harmful. It has been outlawed in California, Oregon, Illinois, New Jersey and Washington DC. It should be outlawed nationwide as its harmful and abusive and doesn't work. Being gay isn't a choice and not something you can change. What do you all think?

I hear in Iraq they just throw them from rooftops. Curious as to which you think is worse.

http://heavy.com/news/2015/07/isis-isla ... ictures/1/

[Grenartia]

I skimmed over it.



I don't think you know what that phrase means.

No, I am not. I hold that gender identity is an innate part of who somebody is, much like sexual orientation. And while I would deny that gender is entirely immutable (after all, genderfluidity is a thing), I will also deny that it is something that can be consciously changed.

You can't consciously change a lot of preferences, but there is a wide chasm between that and psychological fact.

Lolwut. You're literally making no sense.

[Grenartia]

For those who don't know conversion therapy is a pseudoscience to change one's sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual . The methods involve things like electric shock and other things. There are also several different forms like behavioral modification and reparative therapy. There is absolutely no proof that it works and is instead harmful. It has been outlawed in California, Oregon, Illinois, New Jersey and Washington DC. It should be outlawed nationwide as its harmful and abusive and doesn't work. Being gay isn't a choice and not something you can change. What do you all think?

I hear in Iraq they just throw them from rooftops. Curious as to which you think is worse.

http://heavy.com/news/2015/07/isis-isla ... ictures/1/

False dichotomy. Its like asking somebody if they'd rather be electrocuted or shot.

[Neutraligon]

So you basically said "You can't consciously change a lot of preferences, but there is a wide chasm between that and __________" That sentence has no meaning.

The sentence has meaning theoretically, just not practically. There can be neurological facts. And yes, that sentence has no meaning, so I think it is intellectually dishonest to employ it.

Then why did you use it?

[Morr]

The sentence has meaning theoretically, just not practically. There can be neurological facts. And yes, that sentence has no meaning, so I think it is intellectually dishonest to employ it.

Then why did you use it?

Can an atheist use the term "God"?

[Neutraligon]

Then why did you use it?

Can an atheist use the term "God"?

Sure, but then the word god normally has an actual meaning. Phrases like oh god, or god damn it usually show surprise or frustration, You yourself said that it was intellectually dishonest to use that phrase. What does this have to do with you using a phrase your yourself admitted had no meaning.

[Morr]

Can an atheist use the term "God"?

Sure, but then the word god normally has an actual meaning. Phrases like oh god, or god damn it usually show surprise or frustration, You yourself said that it was intellectually dishonest to use that phrase. What does this have to do with you using a phrase your yourself admitted had no meaning.

Well it has a theoretical meaning, just not a practical one.

[Neutraligon]

Sure, but then the word god normally has an actual meaning. Phrases like oh god, or god damn it usually show surprise or frustration, You yourself said that it was intellectually dishonest to use that phrase. What does this have to do with you using a phrase your yourself admitted had no meaning.

Well it has a theoretical meaning, just not a practical one.

So what is the theoretical meaning? I asked what a psychological fact was. Also, how does a fact have theoretical meaning?

[Morr]

Well it has a theoretical meaning, just not a practical one.

So what is the theoretical meaning? I asked what a psychological fact was. Also, how does a fact have theoretical meaning?

The theoretical meaning is a psychological attribute that is directly observable.

I mean that, theoretically speaking, psychological facts could exist, but practically they don't because we can't observe psychology directly.

[Neutraligon]

So what is the theoretical meaning? I asked what a psychological fact was. Also, how does a fact have theoretical meaning?

The theoretical meaning is a psychological attribute that is directly observable.

I mean that, theoretically speaking, psychological facts could exist, but practically they don't because we can't observe psychology directly.

Using that definition your statement still makes no sense. It is just word salad.

[Grenartia]

The theoretical meaning is a psychological attribute that is directly observable.

I mean that, theoretically speaking, psychological facts could exist, but practically they don't because we can't observe psychology directly.

Using that definition your statement still makes no sense. It is just word salad.

I'm beginning to think we're dealing with a certain type of poster.

[Morr]

The theoretical meaning is a psychological attribute that is directly observable.

I mean that, theoretically speaking, psychological facts could exist, but practically they don't because we can't observe psychology directly.

Using that definition your statement still makes no sense. It is just word salad.

If we could observe psychology directly, then there could be psychological facts. In theory, neurology could progress so far that psychology becomes directly observable.