Delaware bans Conversion Therapy

[Telconi]

Yes, I'm aware of what they were talking about.

And it’s a slippery slope to go down and one im completely against

Okay, good for you.

[San Lumen]

And it’s a slippery slope to go down and one im completely against

Okay, good for you.

You don’t have a problem with a medical advancement to eliminate Homosexuality? What’s to stop a future right wing government from mandating it for all lgbt people?

[Telconi]

Okay, good for you.

You don’t have a problem with a medical advancement to eliminate Homosexuality? What’s to stop a future right wing government from mandating it for all lgbt people?

What's to stop a future tyrannical government of the Hefner family from mandating breast augmentations? No, I don't have a problem with the ability to modify your sexual orientation.

[Aurigna]

Science should be unrestrained.

What's to stop a future tyrannical government of the Hefner family from mandating breast augmentations? No, I don't have a problem with the ability to modify your sexual orientation.

I just saw Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom, so maybe that's why the character of Ian Malcolm is on my mind but...

"What is so great about discovery? It is a violent, penetrative act that scars what it explores. What you call discovery, I call the rape of the natural world."

Just food for thought.

[San Lumen]

You don’t have a problem with a medical advancement to eliminate Homosexuality? What’s to stop a future right wing government from mandating it for all lgbt people?

What's to stop a future tyrannical government of the Hefner family from mandating breast augmentations? No, I don't have a problem with the ability to modify your sexual orientation.

Why not?

[Telconi]

What's to stop a future tyrannical government of the Hefner family from mandating breast augmentations? No, I don't have a problem with the ability to modify your sexual orientation.

Why not?

Because I lack a problem with the concept.

[San Lumen]

Why not?

Because I lack a problem with the concept.

Why do you not have a problem with altering who someone is? What is to stop Brave New World?

[Des-Bal]

You don’t have a problem with a medical advancement to eliminate Homosexuality? What’s to stop a future right wing government from mandating it for all lgbt people?

What's to stop them from dyeing everyone's hair and skin? You've presented an argument against tyrannical governments not science.

[Telconi]

Because I lack a problem with the concept.

Why do you not have a problem with altering who someone is? What is to stop Brave New World?

I can't really explain a lack of a problem, I find nothing about the idea objectionable. I have no idea what that is.

[The New California Republic]

Who knows, maybe by the time it's possible society will be in a place where people will want to change orientation just to see what it's like. Maybe everyone would want to get reset to pansexual.

a souvenir t-shirt that reads "I went Gay for a Day™, and all I got was this sticking t-shirt!"

I think if someone decided to change their sexuality for a day then they would go out and get a hell of a lot more than that.

[Telconi]

a souvenir t-shirt that reads "I went Gay for a Day™, and all I got was this sticking t-shirt!"

I think if someone decided to change their sexuality for a day then they would go out and get a hell of a lot more than that.

Yes, but providing them that as part of a paid package would be illegal in 49 states and DC.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

I think if someone decided to change their sexuality for a day then they would go out and get a hell of a lot more than that.

Yes, but providing them that as part of a paid package would be illegal in 49 states and DC.

Let me guess. That 50th state is Louisiana. It's always Louisiana.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

You don’t have a problem with a medical advancement to eliminate Homosexuality? What’s to stop a future right wing government from mandating it for all lgbt people?

What's to stop them from dyeing everyone's hair and skin? You've presented an argument against tyrannical governments not science.

And here it is. If OPwants to present a good argument regarding why conversion therapy is harmful and thus, prohibiting for X or Y demographic is a good idea, it’s best to keep to the science involved. Not go on a tangent about “tyranny” in government or something similar, or use a book as an example of a situation that isn’t happening.

Stick to the science. What does psychiatry says about the subject? What does science states are the negative impacts? Present the argument in that light because, ultimately, that’s what matters. “Conversion therapy is harmful, here’s the evidence”, or “conversion therapy works, here’s the evidence”.

[Page]

Yes, but providing them that as part of a paid package would be illegal in 49 states and DC.

Let me guess. That 50th state is Louisiana. It's always Louisiana.

Don't be so hard on Louisiana, sometimes Mississippi is worse.

[Des-Bal]

And here it is. If OPwants to present a good argument regarding why conversion therapy is harmful and thus, prohibiting for X or Y demographic is a good idea, it’s best to keep to the science involved. Not go on a tangent about “tyranny” in government or something similar, or use a book as an example of a situation that isn’t happening.

Stick to the science. What does psychiatry says about the subject? What does science states are the negative impacts? Present the argument in that light because, ultimately, that’s what matters. “Conversion therapy is harmful, here’s the evidence”, or “conversion therapy works, here’s the evidence”.

Chiropractors cause permanent back injuries, ear candling will rupture your ear drums, and electromagnetic therapies can start fires in your home. What these camps are doing shitty alternative medicine and provided it eventually becomes possible to change a person's sexual orientation carrying out that practice should be perfectly fine.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

And here it is. If OPwants to present a good argument regarding why conversion therapy is harmful and thus, prohibiting for X or Y demographic is a good idea, it’s best to keep to the science involved. Not go on a tangent about “tyranny” in government or something similar, or use a book as an example of a situation that isn’t happening.

Stick to the science. What does psychiatry says about the subject? What does science states are the negative impacts? Present the argument in that light because, ultimately, that’s what matters. “Conversion therapy is harmful, here’s the evidence”, or “conversion therapy works, here’s the evidence”.

Chiropractors cause permanent back injuries, ear candling will rupture your ear drums, and electromagnetic therapies can start fires in your home. What these camps are doing shitty alternative medicine and provided it eventually becomes possible to change a person's sexual orientation carrying out that practice should be perfectly fine.

Yes, I am aware. I don’t think conversion therapy does anything good. The science is clear on the subject. It’s harmful, medically has no effect and the psychological damage it produces is well documented. As for changing a person’s sexual orientation, even if the science wear able to, I’d only agree it done for adults. Not minors who can’t freely consent to it.

[Des-Bal]

Yes, I am aware. I don’t think conversion therapy does anything good. The science is clear on the subject. It’s harmful, medically has no effect and the psychological damage it produces is well documented. As for changing a person’s sexual orientation, even if the science wear able to, I’d only agree it done for adults. Not minors who can’t freely consent to it.

I don't see why it should be any different from anything else of similar risk and difficulty.

[Ifreann]

People do plenty of thing's other people don't think they should... Why do you need to approve of other people's decisions. I mean, people Chang ether hair color, or their skin color, or how big their boobs are, or what shape their noses are, or various other things already.

They were talking about scientific modification. A very slippery slope we should not be going down

I have no idea what "scientific modification" is supposed to mean, so no, I wasn't talking about that.

[San Lumen]

They were talking about scientific modification. A very slippery slope we should not be going down

I have no idea what "scientific modification" is supposed to mean, so no, I wasn't talking about that.

I meant some sort of genetic modification to eliminate homosexuality

[Geneviev]

I have no idea what "scientific modification" is supposed to mean, so no, I wasn't talking about that.

I meant some sort of genetic modification to eliminate homosexuality

Since it isn't entirely genetic, there could be no genetic modification to eliminate homosexuality.

[San Lumen]

I meant some sort of genetic modification to eliminate homosexuality

Since it isn't entirely genetic, there could be no genetic modification to eliminate homosexuality.

Its exact cause remains unknown.

[Geneviev]

Since it isn't entirely genetic, there could be no genetic modification to eliminate homosexuality.

Its exact cause remains unknown.

That is true. But it is not purely genetics, so no genetic modification could eliminate it.

[Ifreann]

I have no idea what "scientific modification" is supposed to mean, so no, I wasn't talking about that.

I meant some sort of genetic modification to eliminate homosexuality

Obviously that isn't possible, since homosexuality isn't...

I meant some sort of genetic modification to eliminate homosexuality

Since it isn't entirely genetic, there could be no genetic modification to eliminate homosexuality.

...yes, that, what she said.

[San Lumen]

Its exact cause remains unknown.

That is true. But it is not purely genetics, so no genetic modification could eliminate it.

Genetics might be factor but no route cause has been found. All that is known is its not a choice. If genetic modification can't eliminate it why do some people talk about it being possible one day?

[Ifreann]

That is true. But it is not purely genetics, so no genetic modification could eliminate it.

Genetics might be factor but no route cause has been found. All that is known is its not a choice. If genetic modification can't eliminate it why do some people talk about it being possible one day?

No one suggested genetic modification.