Is "Conversion Therapy" Child Abuse?

[Salus Maior]

Conversion therapy does not work at all. However, it is still possible for you change your orientation, that is, if the you will it.

Conversion therapy is just sending electric shocks in someone's brain. It is useless and is abuse.

To be fair, the bible never says that being a homosexual person is a sin.

1 Corinthians 18-27....

Being born with homosexual feelings is not a sin. Doing homosexual acts is a sin. But this seems more like a subject for the CDT rather than here.

[Salus Maior]

And tell me kind sir why anyone would give to shits about what some old book says about sexuality.

You apparently do. Considering you angrily post in response to every reference to it.

That doesn't scream "I don't care" to me.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

And tell me kind sir why anyone would give to shits about what some old book says about sexuality.

You apparently do. Considering you angrily post in response to every reference to it.

That doesn't scream "I don't care" to me.

I'm trying to figure out how its at all relevant. I mean, there is no actual basis for the Bible having any authority that doesn't result in an endless cycle of circular reasoning.

[Central European Commonwealth]

And tell me kind sir why anyone would give to shits about what some old book says about sexuality.

You apparently do. Considering you angrily post in response to every reference to it.

That doesn't scream "I don't care" to me.

One can not give a shit personally about what some old book has to say about it, and still be angry about people using it to justify irrational hate, and them being taken more serious because the book happens to be called "Bible" instead of something else.

[Grenartia]

To be fair, the bible never says that being a homosexual person is a sin.

Neither does the Catholic/Orthodox Church. But homosexual acts are still sinful.

No, they're not. Any deity which says otherwise is evil and does not deserve worship.

[Salus Maior]

You apparently do. Considering you angrily post in response to every reference to it.

That doesn't scream "I don't care" to me.

I'm trying to figure out how its at all relevant. I mean, there is no actual basis for the Bible having any authority that doesn't result in an endless cycle of circular reasoning.

It's relevant because Christianity happens to be a big deal in the world as the world's currently leading religion population and culture-wise. So, it's going to pop up every now and then. Simple as that.

[Grenartia]

Conversion therapy does not work at all. However, it is still possible for you change your orientation, that is, if the you will it.

Conversion therapy is just sending electric shocks in someone's brain. It is useless and is abuse.

Actually, that's only "conversion" therapy in its most extreme form. However, even in its "milder" forms, its still abuse and torture.

[Central European Commonwealth]

I'm trying to figure out how its at all relevant. I mean, there is no actual basis for the Bible having any authority that doesn't result in an endless cycle of circular reasoning.

It's relevant because Christianity happens to be a big deal in the world as the world's currently leading religion population and culture-wise. So, it's going to pop up every now and then. Simple as that.

Generally, the more developed a country is, the less religious it is. The only two outliers are the United States and Poland, which are the only two countries in the world with very high human development where a majority is religious.

I would argue that Agnosticism/Atheism is the leading path culture-wise and among the world's cultural elite.

[Salus Maior]

Neither does the Catholic/Orthodox Church. But homosexual acts are still sinful.

No, they're not. Any deity which says otherwise is evil and does not deserve worship.

If that's what you want to believe, fine. That's your prerogative. But things like that don't change just because you say so. You can't just declare it and expect it to be so and have people who've actually studied the subject take it seriously.

That's all I'm going to say on the matter because frankly I've already debated the subject a lifetimes worth.

Anyway, more on the subject, yes. Conversion therapy is wrong.

[Salus Maior]

It's relevant because Christianity happens to be a big deal in the world as the world's currently leading religion population and culture-wise. So, it's going to pop up every now and then. Simple as that.

Generally, the more developed a country is, the less religious it is. The only two outliers are the United States and Poland, which are the only two countries in the world with very high human development where a majority is religious.

I would argue that Agnosticism/Atheism is the leading path culture-wise and among the world's cultural elite.

Either way, the religious side of things is still going to pop up in discussions regardless, and therefore people shouldn't be freaking out about it, being aggressive, and taking it as some kind of personal offense from the fact that religious people exist and there's a lot of them and they have a voice. That's the point I'm making.

[Vassenor]

I'm trying to figure out how its at all relevant. I mean, there is no actual basis for the Bible having any authority that doesn't result in an endless cycle of circular reasoning.

It's relevant because Christianity happens to be a big deal in the world as the world's currently leading religion population and culture-wise. So, it's going to pop up every now and then. Simple as that.

As I have said before, my god is perfectly fine with homosexuality. Therefore I must ask you to respect my religious freedom and stop trying to force Christian morals onto me.

[The United Remnants of America]

Generally, the more developed a country is, the less religious it is. The only two outliers are the United States and Poland, which are the only two countries in the world with very high human development where a majority is religious.

I would argue that Agnosticism/Atheism is the leading path culture-wise and among the world's cultural elite.

Either way, the religious side of things is still going to pop up in discussions regardless, and therefore people shouldn't be freaking out about it, being aggressive, and taking it as some kind of personal offense from the fact that religious people exist and there's a lot of them and they have a voice. That's the point I'm making.

I don't think that's the issue, but as religious scientists generally set aside religious bias in order to study, policymakers and society should be gracious enough to set aside religious bias to determine what's actually best for children.

[Salus Maior]

As I have said before, my god is perfectly fine with homosexuality. Therefore I must ask you to respect my religious freedom and stop trying to force Christian morals onto me.

Maybe if you can point out when and where I was forcing you to accept Church doctrine I can apologize for it.

Except that'd take a while, because for one, I was not forcing anyone to accept anything, and second, I wouldn't and actually cannot force you to convert because we are on a bloody forum on the internet. How the hell would I even be able to do that?

Put me on "ignore" for all I care.

I don't think that's the issue, but as religious scientists generally set aside religious bias in order to study, policymakers and society should be gracious enough to set aside religious bias to determine what's actually best for children.

I wasn't even talking about the conversion camps or conversion in general. I was simply correcting someone on what the Catholic/Orthodox position on homosexuality was.

[Noraika]

As I have said before, my god is perfectly fine with homosexuality. Therefore I must ask you to respect my religious freedom and stop trying to force Christian morals onto me.

Maybe if you can point out when and where I was forcing you to accept Church doctrine I can apologize for it.

Except that'd take a while, because for one, I was not forcing anyone to accept anything, and second, I wouldn't and actually cannot force you to convert because we are on a bloody forum on the internet. How the hell would I even be able to do that?

Put me on "ignore" for all I care.

I don't think that's the issue, but as religious scientists generally set aside religious bias in order to study, policymakers and society should be gracious enough to set aside religious bias to determine what's actually best for children.

I wasn't even talking about the conversion camps or conversion in general. I was simply correcting someone on what the Catholic/Orthodox position on homosexuality was.

I would ask, out of curiosity, if a position of the Christian tenants is consistently proven again to be a natural and beneficial part of human existence, for decades, and that such sexuality should not be repressed, what is Christianity's response? Does it hold up on the old guard and not budge, or would it, for example, be willing eventually to rescind homosexuality as sinful?

My apologies if I'm not exactly clear, as I'm exhausted, but I'm certain you understand the general question I'm asking, yes?

[The United Remnants of America]

Maybe if you can point out when and where I was forcing you to accept Church doctrine I can apologize for it.

Except that'd take a while, because for one, I was not forcing anyone to accept anything, and second, I wouldn't and actually cannot force you to convert because we are on a bloody forum on the internet. How the hell would I even be able to do that?

Put me on "ignore" for all I care.



I wasn't even talking about the conversion camps or conversion in general. I was simply correcting someone on what the Catholic/Orthodox position on homosexuality was.

I would ask, out of curiosity, if a position of the Christian tenants is consistently proven again to be a natural and beneficial part of human existence, for decades, and that such sexuality should not be repressed, what is Christianity's response? Does it hold up on the old guard and not budge, or would it, for example, be willing eventually to rescind homosexuality as sinful?

My apologies if I'm not exactly clear, as I'm exhausted, but I'm certain you understand the general question I'm asking, yes?

Super Pope said it's okay to be gay.

That should answer your question.

[Salus Maior]

I would ask, out of curiosity, if a position of the Christian tenants is consistently proven again to be a natural and beneficial part of human existence, for decades, and that such sexuality should not be repressed, what is Christianity's response? Does it hold up on the old guard and not budge, or would it, for example, be willing eventually to rescind homosexuality as sinful?

My apologies if I'm not exactly clear, as I'm exhausted, but I'm certain you understand the general question I'm asking, yes?

Likewise, I'm also exhausted in a similar state.

I don't really have an answer for you. Guess it's more or less of a "wait and see". But I doubt it would change. And I am certain of it not changing in our lifetime.

[Salus Maior]

Super Pope said it's okay to be gay.

That should answer your question.

Meaning Francis? Because what he said was that people are not sinful for being born homosexual or for loving someone of their same gender. But the act of homosexual sex remains a sin.

[The United Remnants of America]

Super Pope said it's okay to be gay.

That should answer your question.

Meaning Francis? Because what he said was that people are not sinful for being born homosexual or for loving someone of their same gender. But the act of homosexual sex remains a sin.

Hey, baby steps. Final confirmation that the status of being homosexual is alright is already much further than the previous unspoken stance of the Church. Super Pope is best pope.

[Noraika]

I would ask, out of curiosity, if a position of the Christian tenants is consistently proven again to be a natural and beneficial part of human existence, for decades, and that such sexuality should not be repressed, what is Christianity's response? Does it hold up on the old guard and not budge, or would it, for example, be willing eventually to rescind homosexuality as sinful?

My apologies if I'm not exactly clear, as I'm exhausted, but I'm certain you understand the general question I'm asking, yes?

Likewise, I'm also exhausted in a similar state.

I don't really have an answer for you. Guess it's more or less of a "wait and see". But I doubt it would change. And I am certain of it not changing in our lifetime.

That is most certainly disappointing. While well intentioned, I do believe this will harm Christianity in the long-run, in terms of its viability to the general public, even more-so that it already has fallen out of favour, and may lead to perpetuation of the use of such views by more...enthusiastic followers, to discriminate and harass LGB+ and Transgender people. I fear it will be bad in many, many ways, for many people in society, if Christianity does not adapt to the times when decades of confirmation require it, and public opinion has swayed dramatically, but I digress.

[Salus Maior]

Meaning Francis? Because what he said was that people are not sinful for being born homosexual or for loving someone of their same gender. But the act of homosexual sex remains a sin.

Hey, baby steps. Final confirmation that the status of being homosexual is alright is already much further than the previous unspoken stance of the Church. Super Pope is best pope.

To be honest, that's not really a change. That's essentially been the Church policy since the beginning.

After all, homosexual individuals have been in communion in the Church probably ever since the first churches popped up.

[The United Remnants of America]

Hey, baby steps. Final confirmation that the status of being homosexual is alright is already much further than the previous unspoken stance of the Church. Super Pope is best pope.

To be honest, that's not really a change. That's essentially been the Church policy since the beginning.

After all, homosexual individuals have been in communion in the Church probably ever since the first churches popped up.

Yes, that's true, but it's never been... Verbalized, I guess would be the best word.

[American Imperial State]

Conversion therapy should be mandatory and free for school aged children. Like healthcare should be.

[Conserative Morality]

Conversion therapy should be mandatory and free for school aged children. Like healthcare should be.

School-aged children are automatically assumed to be gay until converted otherwise.

I'm surprisingly okay with this ridiculous implication.

[Vassenor]

Conversion therapy should be mandatory and free for school aged children.

Why?

[Salus Maior]

Conversion therapy should be mandatory and free for school aged children. Like healthcare should be.

No thank you. I'd rather not have my children subjected to shock therapy and mentally and physically brutalized for no reason.