Is Ban On Conversion Therapy A Ban on Free Speech?

[Zeitgeist]

Michigan just banned conversion therapy.  Canada and 22 US states have also done this.  What is the science against conversion therapy?  It seems that this move is purely an ideological one, because some people don’t like the therapy.

There definitely seems to be a heavy push to promote homosexuality in Western culture.  We know that the only way for homosexual couples to have kids is through artificial insemination, surrogacy, or adoption.  We also know that there are many heterosexual couples desperate to adopt.

We have to rely quite heavily on technology to perpetuate a population with a growing number of homosexual couples or increase immigration, given our country’s negative birth rate. Sperm counts are down significantly   Our environment is already full of toxins and chemicals that impact fertility and natural hormone production.

It raises important questions.  If so much unnatural intervention is necessary to maintain families under these conditions, why is conversion therapy considered by liberal governments to be a social evil?  If some therapists support such therapy, why is one side of the debate being silenced?  What is healthy for individuals and society?  

I won’t even get into the medical interventions and social agreements to lie that are necessary to maintain trans rights as human rights.

A number of social changes have been pushed through legislatures by committees and activists over the past several years, including revisions to our human rights legislation, that have implications for women’s rights, men’s rights, religious rights, free speech, science, and health. 

The ban on conversion therapy looks and feels like a ban on free speech on ideological grounds.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/michigan-bans-conversion-therapy-for-lgbt-children-aa98bbfc

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/justin-trudeaus-great-liberal-death-wish/wcm/baaab7c4-ef1a-4461-96ef-84d2416b5a6e/amp/

 

Edited July 29 by Zeitgeist

[CdnFox]

On 7/29/2023 at 7:55 AM, Zeitgeist said:

Michigan just banned conversion therapy.  Canada and 22 US states have also done this.  What is the science against conversion therapy?  It seems that this move is purely an ideological one, because some people don’t like the therapy.

There definitely seems to be a heavy push to promote homosexuality in Western culture.  We know that the only way for homosexual couples to have kids is through artificial insemination, surrogacy, or adoption.  We also know that there are many heterosexual couples desperate to adopt.

We have to rely quite heavily on technology to perpetuate a population with a growing number of homosexual couples or increase immigration, given our country’s negative birth rate. Sperm counts are down significantly   Our environment is already full of toxins and chemicals that impact fertility and natural hormone production.

It raises important questions.  If so much unnatural intervention is necessary to maintain families under these conditions, why is conversion therapy considered by liberal governments to be a social evil?  If some therapists support such therapy, why is one side of the debate being silenced?  What is healthy for individuals and society?  

I won’t even get into the medical interventions and social agreements to lie that are necessary to maintain trans rights as human rights.

A number of social changes have been pushed through legislatures by committees and activists over the past several years, including revisions to our human rights legislation, that have implications for women’s rights, men’s rights, religious rights, free speech, science, and health. 

The ban on conversion therapy looks and feels like a ban on free speech on ideological grounds.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/michigan-bans-conversion-therapy-for-lgbt-children-aa98bbfc

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/justin-trudeaus-great-liberal-death-wish/wcm/baaab7c4-ef1a-4461-96ef-84d2416b5a6e/amp/

 

Well - it's probably fair to say that it's based on ideology rather than science.  The proponents would likely suggest that people are 'bullied' into it and it's a form of 'brainwashing' or the like.  Honestly while i've never been a supporter of the idea of 'converison therapy'  -  i doubt it works any better than it would to make straight guys gay if the rolls were reversed and just leave the gays alone -  i do think that the 'ban' on it is grossly inappropriate, except perhaps for kids under the age of 18 or the like.

[Zeitgeist]

13 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Well - it's probably fair to say that it's based on ideology rather than science.  The proponents would likely suggest that people are 'bullied' into it and it's a form of 'brainwashing' or the like.  Honestly while i've never been a supporter of the idea of 'converison therapy'  -  i doubt it works any better than it would to make straight guys gay if the rolls were reversed and just leave the gays alone -  i do think that the 'ban' on it is grossly inappropriate, except perhaps for kids under the age of 18 or the like.

I think conversion therapy is just another way of looking at and approaching behaviour that isn’t in the normal range of behaviour.  Banning it is a ban on free speech based entirely on opinion.

[WestCanMan]

15 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I think conversion therapy is just another way of looking at and approaching behaviour that isn’t in the normal range of behaviour.  Banning it is a ban on free speech based entirely on opinion.

Little children who don't know any better are being subjected to false narratives about the possible outcomes and definite disadvantages of transitioning to the opposite gender. 

Is preaching conversion therapy any worse than that? 

Is it ok to fill children with the idea that transgender people can procreate while at the same time bad to try to convince boys that it's evil to play the flute? (Movie "Bruno" reference lol) 

[Zeitgeist]

10 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Little children who don't know any better are being subjected to false narratives about the possible outcomes and definite disadvantages of transitioning to the opposite gender. 

Is preaching conversion therapy any worse than that? 

Is it ok to fill children with the idea that transgender people can procreate while at the same time bad to try to convince boys that it's evil to play the flute? (Movie "Bruno" reference lol) 

In a broader sense, “celebrating” Pride in publicly funded schools and organizations makes a broad statement about agreeing with multiple genders, sex changes, and sexual orientations.  Why must we as a society be forced to celebrate all this?  Why should we accept all of our children being force-fed this content?  It’s indoctrination of certain lifestyles and identities that many people either don’t support for ethical/religious grounds or simply aren’t sure they want to embrace.  It really does feel like an agenda, if not an attack on values/beliefs.  I think we’re seeing the consequences not only in how divided our society is becoming but also in the confusion and mental health struggles people are facing.  If you asked people what they want for their children and our society, I bet most would want biological gender and less radical lifestyle choices.  Nevertheless, we are being made to embrace the gamut.  I hope there are political consequences for the leaders who are pushing this.

[Nationalist]

8 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

In a broader sense, “celebrating” Pride in publicly funded schools and organizations makes a broad statement about agreeing with multiple genders, sex changes, and sexual orientations.  Why must we as a society be forced to celebrate all this?  Why should we accept all of our children being force-fed this content?  It’s indoctrination of certain lifestyles and identities that many people either don’t support for ethical/religious grounds or simply aren’t sure they want to embrace.  It really does feel like an agenda, if not an attack on values/beliefs.  I think we’re seeing the consequences not only in how divided our society is becoming but also in the confusion and mental health struggles people are facing.  If you asked people what they want for their children and our society, I bet most would want biological gender and less radical lifestyle choices.  Nevertheless, we are being made to embrace the gamut.  I hope there are political consequences for the leaders who are pushing this.

Conversion therapy is as bad as gender affirmation. Both are gross abuses of psychology and wind up producing very confused and depressed humans.

[Zeitgeist]

19 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Conversion therapy is as bad as gender affirmation. Both are gross abuses of psychology and wind up producing very confused and depressed humans.

A big difference is that conversation therapy is banned while gender affirmation is policy.

[Nationalist]

1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

A big difference is that conversation therapy is banned while gender affirmation is policy.

This is true, and when Polievre comes to power, he needs to address this decisively.

[WestCanMan]

11 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

In a broader sense, “celebrating” Pride in publicly funded schools and organizations makes a broad statement about agreeing with multiple genders, sex changes, and sexual orientations.  Why must we as a society be forced to celebrate all this?  

I don't see it that way, I see it as a way to help young kids drop the stigma against homosexuality.

We immerse children in religion by subjecting them to Christmas and Easter, etc, we immerse them in the glory of war with a lifetime of movies and cartoons, we immerse them in alcohol culture and drug culture, teach them racial division and how to riot, indoctrinate them with covid propaganda, etc, I don't think that a bit of exposure to homosexuality "as a natural, decent, respectable choice" is all bad. 

It probably goes on a bit too long - a week or even a couple of days would be plenty imo - and there are no doubt teachers who will get fascist about it (that's just human nature) but I don't think we should throw the baby out with the bathwater. 

Quote

Why should we accept all of our children being force-fed this content?  It’s indoctrination of certain lifestyles and identities that many people either don’t support for ethical/religious grounds or simply aren’t sure they want to embrace.  It really does feel like an agenda, if not an attack on values/beliefs.

It definitely goes too far right now, and the attack on "cisgender devils" and "white men" is way beyond the pale, but the pendulum always tends to swing a bit too far in the other direction, right? 

I think that people on the left and the right mostly agree that things got out of control. There are even gay people speaking out against it, especially with regards to interference in the parent-child decision making process. 

Quote

 I think we’re seeing the consequences not only in how divided our society is becoming

It's atrocious how divided we all are right now, and I hate that the people who are doing the dividing are being hailed as champions of unity.

Perfect example:

 

Quote

but also in the confusion and mental health struggles people are facing.  

I think that our mental health professionals and school guidance counsellors are on the wrong path now regarding corporal punishment and gender identity. 

Corporal punishment can be done right and wrong, but we're told that it's the worst thing that you could ever do. TBH age-appropriate corporal punishment is perfectly normal and healthy. A mother cat will swat a kitten or lightly nip them once and then it's over. Kittens instantly learn and change their behaviour accordingly.

The fact is that kids don't learn from long-winded lectures that turn into debates, but they know that they don't want a pat on the bum or a light slap on the wrist. It just has to be over at that point, berating them is what's bad for them. 

Regarding gender fluidity, it's like the cause of the day: there's no higher calling for a school guidance counsellor than rushing a child into gender transitioning.

"Have you ever played with a Barbie Johnny? OMG, you should start wearing panties instead of briefs!"

Quote

If you asked people what they want for their children and our society, I bet most would want biological gender and less radical lifestyle choices.  

Yup. 

As a society we're not teaching kids about reality, they only get the pie in the sky version of transitioning and homosexuality right now. 

My wife has a younger cousin who's a lesbian/pansexual right now but she's also trying to have a long-term relationship with a woman. Even my son, 13, notices that she's a bit abusive to her partner just by having boundaries for each of them which aren't reciprocal. The relationship is doomed to fail but she's oblivious right now. What can you say to young people though? Everything that's LGBTQ is morally superior in 2023, right? Us cisgender devils need to stfu...

Quote

Nevertheless, we are being made to embrace the gamut.  I hope there are political consequences for the leaders who are pushing this.

Trudeau will get his pension and I'm sure he's lined up for some kind of role at the UN after he's done selling out our country. 

[impartialobserver]

Context is key when evaluating this. The existence of text, books, videos that support conversion therapy would fall under the umbrella of first amendment. Now the actual service where you meet with someone and they give some sort of treatment.. that is not under the umbrella of free speech. Conversion therapy is notoriously difficult to quantify as to how successful it is. People lie and this is a topic that they often either lie or are confused about often. 

Edited August 1 by impartialobserver

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

I don't see it that way, I see it as a way to help young kids drop the stigma against homosexuality.

Yeah but does it?

Honestly - right now it feels like there's more anti gay sentiment out there, not less.  I've always been pretty strongly 'pro gay rights' and even I'm getting fed up these days with the nonsense.

I think whenever you single out one group and give them special attention and treatment, you CREATE division.  I don't think that's a viable way to heal it.

[WestCanMan]

7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Yeah but does it?

Honestly - right now it feels like there's more anti gay sentiment out there, not less.  I've always been pretty strongly 'pro gay rights' and even I'm getting fed up these days with the nonsense.

I think whenever you single out one group and give them special attention and treatment, you CREATE division.  I don't think that's a viable way to heal it.

IMO acceptance of homosexuality is way up from when I was a kid. 

It's just getting weird now, where being straight suddenly means "evil", and homosexuality is somehow proof of one's moral superiority & sagacity. 

Is that the division that you're talking about? 

Edited August 1 by WestCanMan

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, impartialobserver said:

Context is key when evaluating this. The existence of text, books, videos that support conversion therapy would fall under the umbrella of conversion therapy. Now the actual service where you meet with someone and they give some sort of treatment.. that is not under the umbrella of free speech. Conversion therapy is notoriously difficult to quantify as to how successful it is. People lie and this is a topic that they often either lie or are confused about often. 

You are the only person on this thread whose post appears, likely because I blocked the others.

I think the existence of the books and videos fall under free speech.  The service would fall under free speech, but with limits.  Professional Associations would limit what advice you're allowed to give and retain your credentials.  And there are likely other legal restrictions on what you can advise upon...

It's better to think of this as a body of information that professionals see as "quackery" so to speak.  Any institutional frameworks designed to restrict or government the dissemination of information would likely be identical to those designed to deal with "quackery".

People can debate whether conversion therapy is quackery or not.  In Canada it was unanimously decided by parliament that it WAS

 

Quote

Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Carleton)

Conservative

Yea

 

[impartialobserver]

15 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

You are the only person on this thread whose post appears, likely because I blocked the others.

I think the existence of the books and videos fall under free speech.  The service would fall under free speech, but with limits.  Professional Associations would limit what advice you're allowed to give and retain your credentials.  And there are likely other legal restrictions on what you can advise upon...

It's better to think of this as a body of information that professionals see as "quackery" so to speak.  Any institutional frameworks designed to restrict or government the dissemination of information would likely be identical to those designed to deal with "quackery".

People can debate whether conversion therapy is quackery or not.  In Canada it was unanimously decided by parliament that it WAS

 

 

So in short.. we agree that someone making a youtube video about conversion therapy is free speech and so allowed. Now, going to a licensed health practitioner.. that is where it is not so clear. 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

A big difference is that conversation therapy is banned while gender affirmation is policy.

And that right there spreads division. IF two sides disagree with each other fundimentally and you say to one side "you have a right to your views and you should be welcome even if others disagree",  and then say to the other side "your views will not be tolerated and you're scum for having them, and we won't include you because we disagree",  then you set the stage for a war.

 

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, impartialobserver said:

So in short.. we agree that someone making a youtube video about conversion therapy is free speech and so allowed. Now, going to a licensed health practitioner.. that is where it is not so clear. 

Well they're free to make the video but not free to be part of a group that would disassociate from them based on their free speech.

[WestCanMan]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Conversion therapy is as bad as gender affirmation. Both are gross abuses of psychology and wind up producing very confused and depressed humans.

TBH, conversion therapy and gender affirmation are probably both the best course of action in a certain percent of cases.

If I was going to make a generalization I'd say that two key problems with conversion therapy are

• 1) it is unrealistic in the vast majority of instances, because homosexuality isn't something that you can teach/wish away, and
• 2) a lot of unwilling participants are likely subjected to it, in which case it can cause them a lot of mental duress.

The main problems with gender affirmation are: 

• 1) the success of gender reassignment is highly overstated in all forms of mass communication (infertility, sexual dysfunction, physical pain, and ending up with a body that is neither really here nor there are all huge problems of transitioning which its advocates tend to completely gloss over) 
• 2) counsellors and therapists are vastly overstepping their authority over other people's children to the point where there will eventually be physical violence
• 3) they're targeting children who are far too young to understand the massive, irreversible consequences of the decisions that they're making.

From one side of their mouths leftards are saying that university students can't be held responsible for student debt because they lack the capacity to understand how much of a financial burden they're taking on, out of the other side of their mouths they're saying that grade 3 students have the wisdom and foresight to understand all of the challenges, risks, and shortcomings that come along with transitioning from the road to becoming an actual mommy to becoming a pseudo-daddy in a halfway male body. Leftards are always saying stupid things, seemingly in an attempt to out-idjit each other, but this crap might top the list. 

 

Final thought: as far as conversion therapy is concerned, are leftards just genetic garbage who are only capable of typing moderately coherent, vapid platitudes in an internet forum, or are they fully capable humans who could one day become conservatives if they get their heads out of their asses? A friend wants to know. 

[Zeitgeist]

6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

You are the only person on this thread whose post appears, likely because I blocked the others.

I think the existence of the books and videos fall under free speech.  The service would fall under free speech, but with limits.  Professional Associations would limit what advice you're allowed to give and retain your credentials.  And there are likely other legal restrictions on what you can advise upon...

It's better to think of this as a body of information that professionals see as "quackery" so to speak.  Any institutional frameworks designed to restrict or government the dissemination of information would likely be identical to those designed to deal with "quackery".

People can debate whether conversion therapy is quackery or not.  In Canada it was unanimously decided by parliament that it WAS

 

 

The same thing happened in Parliament with calling residential schools genocide.  Parliament has become permanently hard left because for several years it has seemed safer politically to say leftist things, but now their attempt to bow further forward has cracked their spines.  Many leaders are saying things that people don’t in reality believe or want, and only now, finally, is the public starting to question.  It’s tentative though.  One only has to look as far as the Freedom Convoy to see where wrong-think can get you.

[CdnFox]

10 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

You are the only person on this thread whose post appears, likely because I blocked the others

Michael is a bit of a coward - blocs everyone that doesn't go for his nonsense rather than having to debate honestly

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Michael is a bit of a coward - blocs everyone that doesn't go for his nonsense rather than having to debate honestly

He gives an eternal pass to governments

[Moonlight Graham]

Small sample size, but of the 8 or so homosexuals II've known well enough personally, 100% of them have had damaged relationships with the parent of their same sex.  Both gay and lesbians.  Like they didn't get that love from the parent enough growing up so still seek it out.

Females with damaged relationships with their fathers seem to often be promiscuous and/or have low esteem and often not healthy romantic relationships with men.  I have no real observations with males with damaged relationships with their mother. 

I don't have an issue with people being gay, that's who they are.  Maybe some need therapy rather than "conversion" therapy.

[impartialobserver]

14 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Small sample size, but of the 8 or so homosexuals II've known well enough personally, 100% of them have had damaged relationships with the parent of their same sex.  Both gay and lesbians.  Like they didn't get that love from the parent enough growing up so still seek it out.

Females with damaged relationships with their fathers seem to often be promiscuous and/or have low esteem and often not healthy romantic relationships with men.  I have no real observations with males with damaged relationships with their mother. 

I don't have an issue with people being gay, that's who they are.  Maybe some need therapy rather than "conversion" therapy.

Small sample size but of those that I have met and got to know well enough... 0% have the stereotypical damaged relationship with parents, abuse, neglect, etc. All came from stable, middle income backgrounds and have experimented with both ends of it (purely same sex, hetero). 

Also, I agree that conversion therapy is both pointless in most cases and quackery. One of my best friends is an almost lifelong lesbian. She does not have the butch lesbian look at all...