LGBTQ+ Rights and America

From what I got from your post you were expressing a fear that you could end up being persecuted as a Christian and I was making the point that as you live in the US that is simply not likely to be happening any time soon. Now the suffering of Christians in other countries is (one would hope) obviously an important issue but your point seemed to be about the risk of it happening to you in the US. (Plus this thread is specifically about America, in case anyone’s forgotten that we are in the Gay Rights and America thread not the Homosexuality and Religion thread).

Edit: Here is the bit of your post that made me think you were talking about the position of Christians in the US. "From where I sit though, many of us are worried that people will show up and order us to either prove why we believe or else be outlawed."

edited 8th Oct '12 12:46:39 PM by Silasw

"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran

It's a doctor's place to say, if asked, whether something is medically harmful. However, that doesn't cover all the available ground, and doesn't settle whether it's legitimate—especially if the goals are extra-medical. History is replete with saints and ascetics who have subjected themselves to regimens that are incredibly harmful from any medical or psychological perspective ... but they believed themselves to be acting towards ends far more important than their "health" as the world would have defined it. In such cases, a doctor's medical opinion—however well founded—would have been impertinent and irrelevant. And depending on the subject's beliefs, that seems potentially true for the present case as well.

"She was the kind of dame they write similes about." —Pterodactyl Jones

I guess when my mother lashed out at me when I told her about my transgender girlfriend, she thought I was going to throw her in jail? All those kids who bullied gay kids to the point of suicide, they were just protecting themselves, right? And then when the government steps in, the religious groups throw their weight around and cry persecution so nothing is done. But what does that prove, I just have an irrational hatred of Christians.

No. I don't. I've actually met a few nice Christians who aren't anti-gay (more proof you don't know me or what I believe). I just have a really hard time believing that you are one of them.

edited 8th Oct '12 1:05:29 PM by Morgikit

All of them? Yeah that's not going to happen. An alarmingly high number being forced into such 'treatments' by families and local l communities, sadly that’s a very real possibility.

Edit: How are both sides getting carried away when it comes to the US (which is the topic as this is the Gay Rights in America thread)?

edited 8th Oct '12 1:00:39 PM by Silasw

"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran

I thought we established that orientation conversion as it exists now is the problem. The non-biased non-torture-based version we'd be willing to support is still in the concept stage.

Okay, I think that it's official. Everyone's talking past each other again.

"I don't know how I do it. I'm like the Mr. Bean of sex." -Drunkscriblerian

@Starship

We don't let people dyeing of cancer take treatments that have no proven value and could kill them, their not even an option. That's how medicine works: for something to be considered as an option for treatment is MUST be peer reviewed, tested, and approved.

Why should conversion therapy be any different?

edited 8th Oct '12 1:45:01 PM by LMage

"You are never taller then when standing up for yourself"

@Maxima: by a similar token to your arguments, I agree that yes, it'd be a terrible thing if christians weren't allowed to recruit ever. At the same time, just like conversion Therapy, I've seen the crazy damage christian conversions can be.

You ever seen someone convert from non-religious to a fundamentalist church? Usually they come out the end a raving, extremely pro-christianity sort who seems almost desperate to convince the world how christian they are. Curiously similar to the average conversion therapy victim.

what are you putting money on again? Either way I agree with you on there being people of any (or no) religion who would stand in the way of such horrors, however I don't believe the US is backwards enough to end up with a government that would do such a thing so I'm slightly unsure as to why we are having this conversation.

"denying sane, rational, people the right to undergo orientation conversion is equally as bad as forcing them to undergo it" ignoring the fact that I don't believe anyone in this thread is making this argument, how is it as bad? One is refusing to allow someone to subject them self to a highly dangerous procedure that is know to cause serious harm in many cases and the other is forcing them to suffer though exactly the same thing, is your right to kill yourself really as important as someone else's right not to be killed? (Honest question). Now I personally think that if the person is being been honest with (and understands what they are being told) and is of sound mind then yeah let them subject them self to it, but that's not the main opinion as it appears.

edited 8th Oct '12 3:00:11 PM by Silasw

"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran

This is the "Gay Rights and America" thread, not "Homosexuality and Religion" thread.

Dude, the mistake you're making is reading stuff into other people's responses to you that isn't there. We know you're not a member of the WBC. You shouldn't even care, because at this point, if we hadn't realized that, we'd never figure it out. More like "This privileged Christian doesn't seem to recognize what is torture and what isn't". Actually, we've seen you progress past this point back during the "true Christians" argument. The complaint at this point is that you're making equivalencies that are not valid. We're accusing you of being ignorant at this point, not hateful. Morgikit appears to be suspicious of your motives, but I don't know if she's followed your total development over this thread and a few others. And to be frank? A homosexual being initially suspicious of a Christian's motives is as expectable as a native being suspicious of a white guy's motives. Too much history there NOT to.

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.

I'm not actually sure how long I've followed the thread. I think I was at least reading the thread when Maxima had his big moral epiphany, if I wasn't already a member.

Maxima, I'd like to believe you're on our side. I really would. But when you come into a topic about a "therapy" that allegedly "cures" homosexuality that's just been banned, and you start standing up for it, medical evidence against it and common sense be damned, what the hell am I supposed to think?

I think what Maxima's trying to say boils down to not that conversion therapy (in its current state) is good, but rather that if someone wants to undergo conversion therapy of their own free will, they should have the option.

Which I don't agree with; just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Can someone try to "change" their orientation? Can someone commit suicide? Yes. But they shouldn't, and we've gone to great lengths to try and make sure they don't.

edited 8th Oct '12 6:04:25 PM by Robotnik

...Actually, from what I have seen, his objections are as follows: While the current conversion therapies are abusive, inhumane, and ineffective, it is possible that, in the future, a therapy to change your sexual orientation that works and doesn't do horrible things may become a reality, and, if it does, then people who want to go through that therapy should have the right to. However, the wording of that law would prevent that from happening, at least with minors.

And, you know what I kind of agree with him. If a viable orientation therapy comes along, the option should be there for people to take.

edited 8th Oct '12 6:04:28 PM by deathpigeon

Hasn't it been established no one would have a problem with that kind of conversion therapy?

A few of us do.

This subject isn't just beating a dead horse. It's steamrolling the remains.

"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur

I have a problem with the idea that orientation isn't fixed. I believe it's something that is fixed. Just figuring out what you are is the hard part.

So I'm fully against it overall.

Quest 64 thread

Agreed. Science should bear that out so that there will no longer be any need for conversion therapy of any kind.

edited 8th Oct '12 6:16:56 PM by Robotnik

It's fair for you to be suspicious, Morg. That's the nature of the situation.

Right now, there is no safe space for religious therapy targeting homosexuals in the United States. You can't legalize it without opening the door to these sadistic nutjobs. There is just too much hate enabling them right now. You can't fairly abandon affirmative action programs until the socioeconomic situation has changed such that minorities actually stand a fair shot at qualifying. You can't run Voter ID programs in states observed by the Voting Rights Act until you're positive that there aren't enough racists in government positions to unfairly oppress nonwhite voters. And you don't permit this bullshit therapy until the overwhelming majority of American Christians no longer see homosexuality as a problem to be fixed.

It may be "denying" gay people the "freedom" to "un-gay" themselves (and that's making some very generous assumptions about the efficacy of this "treatment"; I'm being generous with the scare quotes for a reason). But freedom that threatens a demographic is no freedom at all. You make the safe space first. Then you open the door. Not the other way around.

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.

If it is possible to change one's orientation, and someone develops a therapy to change it, what would be wrong with letting someone who wants to change his/her orientation?

edited 8th Oct '12 6:20:52 PM by deathpigeon

Because I do not believe it should be changed under any conditions. Or that there's a real reason to change what they truly are.

Likewise, there is a difference between helping a person figure out if they're truly gay/etc. and changing what they are. One is extremely helpful. The other is still lying to themselves. I'm against a dishonest(specifically that's the point) practice as is.

Quest 64 thread

That's a big "if". Conversion thereapy should exist only if science bears out that changing one's orientation is even possible. I don't know a whole lot about sexuality, but I don't think it is.

Ninja'd.

edited 8th Oct '12 6:25:01 PM by Robotnik

I don't think we should be using science to fix every little issue we have ourselves.

So I'm also against this.

@Taoist

"This is the "Gay Rights and America" thread, not "Homosexuality and Religion" thread."

My Religion is America!

Some day George Washington will rise from the dead to take the true believers to the enchanted land of Columbia

edited 8th Oct '12 6:28:59 PM by DeviantBraeburn

Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016

Misread the arrows. Sorry.

edited 8th Oct '12 6:27:48 PM by Robotnik