Please keep arguing against homosexuality. Just so I can point to your posts and show what this kind of thinking leads to.
I never mentioned homosexual rape. I simply stated "rape" as perhaps a reason the child would turn homosexual. Maybe it was a girl who was forced by a man or vice versa. or maybe the sessions would reveal physical abuse or a host of other things. So, I do not see the therapy as a bad thing. Heck, sometimes I want to go to therapy but I fear that I would be responsible for my therapist having a nervous breakdown.
I'm not saying if I would approve or disapprove but would surely understand the motivation. In this subforum I've posted stories about gay parents having their child cross dress. I've posted stories about gay parents having their child receive sex change hormones. It is natural for we as parents to want our children to be like us. Simply look at this sub-forum. The majority of posters are homosexual and thus support the cross dressing but are aghast at therapy to "cure" a child of homosexuality.
Wow, my thread is getting quite the attention! I was concerned about this issue because I submitted myself for some so-called "gay therapy" when I was a minor. If anyone was skeptical about the therapy, it was my parents. Needless to say, they did not force me into therapy, but I really wanted to go through with it myself and I got their permission to do so. I'm a Mormon and homosexuality really does not have much of a place in my Church. The Church does not have an official stance on whether people are born gay or whether environmental factors lead them to homosexuality. Although some leaders of the Church have expressed that they do not believe people are born gay, that is not official doctrine of the Church. They do teach, however, that homosexual behavior is sinful. All in all, if a Mormon experiences what is often termed as same-sex attraction, the Church is not very clear as to what they should do about it. They don't condone nor condemn therapy. So naturally, I wanted to be part of the social experiment that is gay therapy. Although I really don't like to call it therapy, that is what I will refer to it as. My therapy is a type of cognitive-behavioral therapy. I won't go into much detail beyond that, but I will say that it was definitely not as weird as I was expecting it to be. There was a video posted a few pages back of an example of some gay therapy. I just want to be clear that I have done nothing even remotely similar to that. I honestly can't see that type of therapy, whatever it was, working at all. I could be wrong. I feel like I have achieved success through my therapy, although not in the way many conservatives believe. I believe in prayer but I honestly don't believe "praying the gay away" in and of itself is a sufficient method. There are many things you could do to diminish same-sex attraction. The first step for me was pretty much accepting the fact that I felt homosexual feelings, and that I would probably never be able to completely rid myself of them. Diminish? Yes. Exterminate? No. My therapy has mostly focused on developing heterosexual attraction. I could tell everyone all about it but I don't really have time. I feel therapy has worked for me clearly and conclusively, and whatever anyone else says will not change my mind about it because I myself have experienced the change. As a matter of fact, when I was younger (I'm 23 now), the times that I felt most depressed and most lonely were when I started believing the messages from people who said I couldn't change and I had to be gay (whatever that actually means), and that anyone who claimed they had changed was putting on a charade. Those messages are stupid, IMO. But so are messages from people who say that those with homosexual feelings are disturbed, or screwed up, or abnormal. I would say that the messages coming from both sides of the aisle on homosexuality are extreme, and those of our society would greatly benefit by putting their own personal biases aside and actually focus on helping those who have homosexual feelings, whether they want to act on them or diminish them. You can blame whomever you want for the suicides of young people, but in the end, those who make homosexuality such a contentious argument are the ones who are guilty, no matter what side they are coming from. As for the California gay therapy ban, I am still on the fence about it. I feel like going in for therapy at such a young age had its detriments and its benefits. The largest benefit was probably that it helped me feel more hope and less depressed. I sometimes wonder that, had I not been going through therapy at certain times of my life, I may have committed suicide; however, I could have benefited from many types of therapy in that respect. It was just nice to be in therapy that was more focused on my specific situation. The largest detriment? I was very confused when I started therapy, and I was quite immature. Starting gay therapy in the middle of puberty may cause an even more insane amount of stress than the average pubescent already experiences. I turned out fine though. The thing about this gay therapy ban that bugs me the most is that it reflects the strong liberal agenda of California legislators. If I were to come to a conclusion, I would say California legislators may have done the right thing, but for the wrong reasons. And if I were to guess, it is their goal to ban gay therapy altogether. I am very opposed to that.
You brought up a point that I tried to bring up before. One problem that I think people on my side of the debate don't often acknowledge is that fact that element's of one's sexuality can be conflicting with other elements of your life, other important elements.... such as your mormon faith. I grew up mormon also, although i rejected the faith. While I disagree that homosexuality is sinful, this doesn't change the fact that you, as a gay youth such as you were, can experience depression and internal conflict reconciling multiple facets of your life. You have the right to a freedom of religion. In providing support to gay youth, it would be wrong and even counter-productive just to tell them to deal with it and not help them reconcile the conflicts that they face. It would be wrong to say that your sexual desires are more important than your religious convictions. At the same time, and while sensitivity to other concerns like religious convictions should be central, so too should be attempts to minimize the guilt that the individual feels. In my opinion, any therapy of this nature should FIRST reenforce the idea that you have options, and make clear that homosexuality is not a life-sentence to depression and unhappiness. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my perception of these therapies is that they automatically go in there and present heterosexuality as inherently superior, and do not present you with other options to help you cope with your homosexuality. To me, this sets you up automatically for feelings of guilt, and denies you the ability to make a fully informed decision about your options to cope as a homosexual. If an individual wants to go through such a therapy, they should do so fully informed and not entering it strictly out of a bias. It should be clear that your convictions to go through such a therapy is based purely on your religious convictions, and the goals of the therapy should be clear - for example, you state stated clearly that your therapy did not eliminate your homosexual attractions, it merely helps to suppress them. If this is what you require to reconcile with your religious faith, then so be it. But people that promote such therapy should be clear that this isn't just a fix that creates a heterosexual from a homosexual, rather it's a compromise that helps someone deal with their personal feelings that are conflicting with their religious faith. As you stated, conservatives who support this therapy often mis-characterize it as a cure for homosexuality, rather than a suppression of homosexuality. The primary goal is to reduce the sinful behavior. That all said, I wish you would go into more detail about the strategy and tactics in your therapy. I support the idea that a minor should be able to seek help from a therapist that doesn't push them in one direction or the other, but rather supports the child in their own self-guided explorations. The child should never be made to feel guilty for their homosexuality, should not be told that they have no choice but to be homosexual, nor be told that heterosexuality is the goal except to the extent that the minor explores that himself. The child should feel and explore for himself what his options are.
I suppose you could say my opinion on the form of such therapies came from the APA's guidelines. Here's the abstract: http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/therapeutic-response.pdf "The American Psychological Association Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation conducted a systematic review of the peer-reviewed journal literature on sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) and concluded that efforts to change sexual orientation are unlikely to be successful and involve some risk of harm, contrary to the claims of SOCE practitioners and advocates. Even though the research and clinical literature demonstrate that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality, regardless of sexual orientation identity, the task force concluded that the population that undergoes SOCE tends to have strongly conservative religious views that lead them to seek to change their sexual orientation. Thus, the appropriate application of affirmative therapeutic interventions for those who seek SOCE involves therapist acceptance, support, and understanding of clients and the facilitation of clients’ active coping, social support, and identity exploration and development, without imposing a specific sexual orientation identity outcome." Is it possible to provide support and promote one's own identity exploration and development without imposing a specific sexual orientation conversion? It is my opinion the the individual is best suited to perform the reconciliations, that that it is improper for the therapist to "impose a specific sexual orientation identity outcome". Such therapies are NOT specifically outlawed by the california legislation. This passage from the report basically mimics many sentiments both you and I shared: Anyway, it's an interesting read but I think I quoted enough. I think the APA is going in the right direction with the best way to handle these conflicts with individuals, particularly those who are conflicted with their conservative religious faiths. I think it's also important to understand that these supported therapeutic techniques are NOT outlawed in california, only overt attempts to push the individual in one direction or the other a priori.
^^^Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't exactly sure what the law prohibited. While I was initially skeptical of the law, now I tend to agree with the decision. I think the quotes you shared provide some interesting insight that all sides of the debate could benefit from. Thanks for posting them. I would like to share some details of my therapy but I'll have to set aside some time to be able to write about my observations and experiences. I've wanted to do that for a while but I haven't gotten around to it.
My only question to you would be: do you genuinely think, as a gay guy, this therapy has made you fancy women? I'm not being flippant, I really want to know. Half of the reason for this is because I cannot imagine, under any circumstances, any kind of therapy which would make me even consider fancying a guy. There's just nothing there for me. If however the therapy has taught you to suppress or deny your innate urges, then I can see that might have a benefit to people with strong religious convictions but I can also agree with the state of California that they should be adults before they make that independent choice. It should not be forced upon them.
Here's the relevant sections of the law. You can tell that it borrowed heavily from the APA's guidelines: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201120120SB1172 Support is allowed for individuals such as yourself to explore your identity and help cope. The therapist just can't push you one way or the other, the decision and self-guided exploration must be your own. In the APA's opinion, this has been the most effective strategy for promoting the wellbeing of individuals seeking therapy, while minimizing potentially harmful effects of guilt and failure if individuals do not perform as they were expected.
I think women look great with their cloths on, it's when they start taking them off that I start going "eh, well that's... interesting. I wonder what happens when you poke it". I honestly don't know how you can train me to like a woman in a sexual way either... but if your goal is simply to live by your church's standards, you don't really need to have a sexual attraction. A viagra should be sufficient to do the business you need to do. In my opinion, this person will struggle later on in life, but it's better to let them try and offer them support than to tell them they're bound to fail and are thus going to hell (or the Terrestrial Kingdom as a mormon might say). I would support that minors can go through self-guided exploration where the therapist remains neutral and supportive, but I agree that overt attempts to push you one way or the other are best left to adulthood.
As Viagra was raised, they should make it a crime to sell Viagra to homosexuals. In fact, if Viagra, Zestra or other sexual enhancement products for men and women were no longer sold then that's fine with me. Once a woman hits menopause it's best for sex to end. Sex is mainly supposed to be about a woman pleasuring a man and viceversa incidental. It's best for a marriage after a # of years of marriage to become sexless or if sex is to happen, then the man should look for younger women (those 18 to 35 years old) to have sex with. Sex must be penis/vaginal sex only. Impotence is good for homosexuals as it ends their sex lives, so it's best for gays and lesbians to celibate until cure is found for gayism/lesbianism and abolish sex changes.
you'd be surprised I don't support gay marriage any more than I believe the govt has any business in hetero marriage instead of pitching our encampments and waging battle with each other a simple test should be done how do any of these rules apply to a single man or woman regardless of what they do? Is SS treated exactly the same across the board? What about real estate laws etc If the answer is no, then we allowed the govt to become too large and convoluted. it's not a gay thing or an incest thing or a straight thing. It's the govt is too darn big thing and your group eats at the liberal trough. Big govt folks need you to focus on their BS instead of seeing that they are too big. For a few "compassionate words" the outspoken gay leaders will throw right in with big govt people instead of focusing on the root problem. I do not want a straight or a gay Dr to operate on my loved ones; I want the BEST Dr to operate on them. The answer is right in front of your nose and liberals aren't going to help you get there. At worst, you should be a Libertarian, not a liberal.
Unsure what JeffLV, JeffSF and Sec meant but here's my best answer to them. Truth about sex is that a woman's best years when it comes to doing it with her is when she is 18 to 35 years old. Once a woman turns 40 & from there onwards her beauty fades and once menopause hits, she isn't usually pretty to do. Sure there are pretty 40 something women but all things =, a woman who is 20 something is going to be prettier than a woman who is 40 something. Sterilisation surgeries should be made a crime because it's chopping. If people don't want kids then birth control such as the pill, condoms and Rhythm are good enough. If unwanted pregnancy happens then abort especially if it's predicted an unborn baby will be gay or worse a transexual. American Indians have higher homosexuality rates as Squaws often smoke marijuana during pregnancy which damages fetus and Fetal Alcohol Syndrome is higher amongst American Indians. American Indians anyhow are more likely to do crimes including child molestation. But again, homosexuality and worse transexuality are inferior. There are more things which happen which can reduce a man's interest in a woman in life vs. which increases a man's interest. If a woman has suffered cancer, then she is often not pretty enough to do anymore if she has had radiation and chemotherapy as she has been totalled sexually. It's like if you have a 2011 VW Jetta which gets totalled in a wreck, then you either take the bus, walk or buy a new car. So with sex, if a man's wife has suffered cancer then it's best for the man to either become celibate or do what Presidential Candidate Newt Gingrich did. With former Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi if indeed the allegations are true that he paid women prostitutes to have sex with him then he did the right thing as long as the women are 18 or older. My guess is that once PM Silvio Berlusconi's wife hit menopause @ 50 he stopped having sex with her and with his wife hitting menopause, it's again like a car such as a 1971 Dodge Dart which has given it's 100,000 miles and can't do anymore miles.
Something copied and pasted from Peter J. LaBarbera's Americans for Truth site where the truth is told of sex abuse especially homosexual rape being major cause of homosexuality. The post below was written by gays and lesbians who aren't happy about being homo: G.A.G.A. Gays Against the Gay Agenda We are a group of gay men and women who want to join the fight against the gay political agenda because we know the truth. Here are a few of our stories. Names have been changed for our safety: From Abe: I was sexually molested by a neighbor when I was young. I was in counseling for years but as a teen started having gay relationships with other boys. I always said I was born gay but deep down inside I knew that my experiences as a boy were the cause. I still live a gay lifestyle but I know it’s wrong. It’s like a drug. You know it’s wrong, but you keep doing it. From Adam: My Little League baseball coach molested me when I was 5. I blocked it out of my memory for years but it came rushing back to me one day in my twenties when I was in a car wreck. The trauma somehow pushed it back into my conscious memory. I am gay and always thought it was in my genes, but now I realize differently. I have considered going to counseling but it’s probably too late for me. It’s not too late for me to warn others though. From Allan: My mother was a prostitute and drug addict. She had sex with other men in front of us kids all the time. Some of the men took advantage of us after taking advantage of her. I have been a part of the gay community since age 14 but I know I was not born this way. From Anna: I was a foster child. I was molested many times by 3 different foster fathers. I chose to be lesbian because I do not feel comfortable with men in sexual situations. From Amos: I was in love with a beautiful girl in high school. We started dating. I wanted to have sex. She did not. One night, with some high school friends, I got drunk. I think someone put something in my drink because I passed out. When I woke up, my best friend was giving me oral sex. It scared me because it felt wrong but felt good at the same time. The sex part felt good, but the fact that he was a guy felt wrong. I pushed him away and got dressed. I stomped out of the house. But one night at another party, I was drunk and he showed up. Next thing I knew I was in his car with him and not refusing his advances. I live a gay lifestyle now but I know that if that had never happened, I would probably be married with kids and living a normal life. I would be happy. I am not happy in this lifestyle. I don’t know how to explain why I don’t leave it but I am not happy. From Andrew: I had no friends in high school. Some other students started being really nice to me. I felt like I finally had friends. They gave me a lot of attention and made me feel like I was part of something. It felt great. They were all part of the Gay Straight Alliance (GSA). They invited me to go with them. At first, I was there as a straight guy to give support to gays and fight against bullying (I had been through my fair share). But then we started socializing outside school. One day, at a party, I was high on drugs, and next thing I knew there was an orgy, and I was lured into it. Afterward, I felt sick. I skipped school for a week but then my parents found out. When I got back to school my friends were really nice and acted as if nothing had happened. It was surreal. Long story short, I ended up in a lot of gay relationships over the years but I know that if I had not had that first relationship, I would not be gay today. What’s weird is I can’t just switch back to the me I was before. I don’t know why but I know I was not born gay. I tell all younger friends to stay away from drugs and alcohol because you do things you normally would not do when you are under the influence and you are sometimes too weak to say no to things you know are wrong. From Alice: My college roommate lured me into a gay relationship. The sex can feel good but you just know there’s something wrong. I definitely was not born gay. It is our hope that many gays will stand up and tell the truth by forming small community groups to fight against the gay political agenda. Let your friends call you a traitor. You know better. We mustn’t have a central leader or that leader will be bullied into backing down. Like the Tea Party, we will be leaderless but powerful. We must help young people avoid what we fell into. Join with your straight fiends and make a difference. Save the date: 12-12-12 @ 12:00 On December 12, 2012, at 12 midnight, straight people and gay people who are against the gay political agenda, must walk outside with a candle, lighter, or flashlight and raise it in the air to show our solidarity. Let it shine upward into the sky. If you live in a cold climate, dress warmly. Stay for at least 30 minutes and let shine your courage, your determination, your knowledge that gay people are mostly victims, and we know we are being used to further an agenda.
Seems more like a matter of choice than a matter of necessity to me. If a woman over 40, even an ugly woman over 40, wants to have sex and a man will have sex with her, then why not? She might have a harder time finding a willing partner, but that's not the same as saying she SHOULDN'T have sex, or that a man SHOULDN'T have sex with her. There's no reason an older couple like Sec, wrinkled, decrepit and possibly suffering from impotency and menopausal (sorry sec) SHOULDN'T have sex, although they might be unwilling or unable. But assuming they're willing and able, why not? You often sound like 7 of 9 to me from star trek. Humans experience, desire and enjoy many things that might not be said to have a purpose. Eating a donut doesn't have a purpose. Dipping your hamburger that you should not be eating into a milkshake you should not be eating doesn't have a purpose (sorry sec). We are human, and many things we do strictly based on our human nature and desires, not based on some objective analysis of an arbitrarily determined purpose. What purpose is worth promoting to the exclusion of all others, and why must it be to the exclusion?
Oddly I find your positions on each of these issues right in line with my liberalism. Personally I think the solution to the whole "Gay" marriage issue is to remove marriage from the government functions completely, make it a legal union or contract and let marriage be a religious ceremony.
Often these things boil down to a difference in terminology, and a difference in perspective of what's practical, as opposed to a difference in principle.
our viewpoints might be similar however they are far from being liberal. A liberal perspective desires the govt to be involved while a conservative and libertarian viewpoint wants them out of our lives as much as possible. We should be treated as individuals, period, end of story. If we want to jointly own anything then draft a contract. SS really ticks me off because a widow/widower can get the benefits of the deceased but a single person who dies at say, 60 years of age, has all that money put into the system simply disappear.
I'm sick of that sh__. Bottom line: Sometimes, it takes the POWER of government, to ensure that laws/agreements are honored. I can accept that sometimes government isn't needed; but surely, sometimes it is. So, I admit that I'm a proud LIBERAL. Yeah... bring on GOVERNMENT where/when it's needed.
