Wednesday, August 21, 2013

The gay wehrmacht advances

Incredible:
New Jersey bans gay conversion therapy
(Reuters) - New Jersey Republican Governor Chris Christie on Monday signed into law a measure to prevent therapists from counseling gay and lesbian youths to change their sexual orientation, making his the second U.S. state to ban so-called conversion therapy.

So it is now illegal-- illegal-- for a therapist in New Jersey to help a kid who is beset with unwanted homosexual urges.

This is obvious: such therapy is of enormous value, and is the concern only of the therapist, the patient, and the patient's family. Junk science claims that such therapy is "dangerous" notwithstanding, avoiding a homosexual orientation and lifestyle is literally life-saving. There are few things more dangerous and more likely to blight and shorten a young man's life than active homosexuality.

The gay fascists are in high gear. They make no pretenses. You will conform and endorse their degenerate lifestyle, or you will be prosecuted. This is just the beginning. 

28 comments:

  1. So I suppose Exodus International, the Christian group that promoted and preformed gay conversion therapy for 38 years and recently apologized for the harm they caused, was co-opted by the vast homosexual conspiracy. Or was it demons?

    While I understand why hateful Christian and Muslim bigots would like to see homosexual children dragged through the wringer of child abuse that is conversion therapy, Christy did the right thing, even if it means he’ll have a much more difficult time winning over the bigots of the Republican base should he run for President.

    -KW

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Therapy for kids who don't want homosexual urges or lifestyle is a matter between the kid, his parents, and the therapist. The police have no legitimate role.

      Why should killing your baby be "a private matter between a woman and her doctor", but treating a kid with unwanted homosexual urges is a matter for the police and the courts?

      Delete
  2. Of course, parents shouldn't be prevented from choosing to give their children safe, effective treatment. If a parent wants to treat a child for infantile colic by cervical spine manipulation administered by a competent well trained chiropractor, then that's the parent's right. If parents want to treat a child's bacterial meningitis with a homeopathic remedy, which has absolutely no side effects, then that's their right. Provided that its prescribed by a qualified homeopath.

    Similarly, parents shouldn't be prevented from having their children undergo conversion therapy of sexual preference from a competent qualified therapist. Provided it's been shown to be effective and safe.

    Or has it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. bach:

      Yea. Therapy for a kid with unwanted homosexual desires is analogous to giving the kid meningitis and paralysis.

      This law has nothing whatsoever to do with "safety". Homosexual conduct (male) is radically unsafe-- perhaps the most unsafe lifestyle a person can have.

      This is about imposing the gay agenda on Christians (who are the only people resisting it) by force. This is fascism.

      Delete
    2. Christians aren’t alone in this fight Doctor, your Muslim allies are right there with you.

      -KW

      Delete
  3. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyAugust 21, 2013 at 8:20 AM

    Doc: "such therapy is of enormous value"

    Well, Egnor, I viscerally disagreed with you here, but I didn't want my own views about the efficacy of talk therapy in general to color my thinking about this issue.

    So I began with the American Psychological Association's Task Force Report on "Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation" (.pdf here).

    I always like to begin with the "who wrote this" question, and if you look at the individuals on the task force they are a collection of educational psychologists doing "counseling", gay activists (including the Chair of the Task Force), and the psychiatrist who serves on the Workgroup on Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders for the now fully-discredited DSM-5.

    Not exactly All-Stars material. It was clearly a rigged jury.

    Needless to say, they found that "efforts to change sexual orientation are unlikely to be successful". That's not too surprising for talk therapy, since so very little of it works. In fact, Christie would probably be doing the good people of NJ a favor by outlawing talk therapy altogether with possible exceptions for some specific interventions that seem to work some of the time (e.g., behavior therapy for phobias).

    On the other hand, and like most talk therapy, SOCE doesn't seem to do any harm. Nevertheless, a stellar team like this one had to find some harm. So here's how they did it...

    Realize that it's almost unthinkable that a psychologist could get a paper showing efficacy for SOCE published in a refereed journal these days. It's just not politically possible. And the Task Force says as much about the extant research: "These studies were all conducted in the period from 1969 to 1978..." In the late Sixties and early Seventies, there was some puttering around with "Clockwork Orange" types of aversion therapy. Those approaches have been fully discredited for ethical reasons, if not for efficacy.

    And I really must note here that some of the "harm" found in the aversion studies was because patients dropped out of the programs. If participant dropouts were generally believed to denote "harm" in clinical research, I doubt there would be very many clinical interventions found to be beneficial.

    Nevertheless, it's a Progressive dogma to never let the facts interfere with a good narrative.

    So the Task Force decided to use these antique studies to conclude the following: "There are no scientifically rigorous studies of recent SOCE that would enable us to make a definitive statement about whether recent SOCE is safe or harmful and for whom." (from the Conclusion).

    But they warn in the Abstract that modern treatments "involve some risk of harm, contrary to the claims of SOCE practitioners and advocates."

    I wonder if anybody proofed the Report.

    As Egnor very correctly notes: "The gay fascists are in high gear." The ghost of Lysenko must be roaring with laughter.




    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Adm:

      I share some of your skepticism about "talk therapy". But it can be effective, and it has helped many people with various problems they face in life.

      I know people who have been helped to move away from a homosexual lifestyle to a heterosexual one by therapy.

      Homosexuality is a mental disorder and a sin, and therapy for it is legitimate and laudable. Certain techniques (aversion therapy) have been discredited, rightly, but counseling is appropriate and can be quite effective.

      Delete
    2. ADM:

      And I point out that the gay fascists wouldn't have any problem with conversion therapy if it didn't work.

      Delete
    3. Egnor: "Homosexuality is a mental disorder and a sin, and therapy for it is legitimate and laudable."

      I did not know you were a psychiatrist.

      Hoo

      Delete
    4. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyAugust 21, 2013 at 8:42 AM

      Hooter...

      Whatever Egnor may know or not know about psychiatry, I'll wager it's more than you know.

      Delete
    5. Michael,

      Actually, the Californian association representing counsellors engaging in conversion therapy reckoned that its success rate was around 30%, similar to that of the success rate of curing cigarette addiction.

      Not exactly a ringing endorsement of it. I wouldn't exactly exclude 'if it didn't work'.

      I personally am a little uncomfortable about singling out counselling for prohibition, when similar (or even worse) treatments go unchallenged. Such as chiropractic therapy, homeopathy, naturopathy, acupuncture, etc, etc. the list is endless. Homeopathy is even protected by an act of Congress from having its formulations examined by the ADA.

      I think your assessment of conversion therapy is over optimistic. The main objection, from my reading, is on its adverse effects. By destroying feelings of self esteem in vulnerable adolescents.

      Delete
    6. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyAugust 21, 2013 at 8:55 AM

      backield: "I personally am a little uncomfortable about singling out counselling for prohibition..."

      Why single it out?

      Is there a benefit to taking a treatment in which not one single molecule of the active ingredient is still present(homeopathy)?

      Orgone "treatments" are were outlawed because they were scams.

      Either allow it all or weed out the bullshit. I'm actually in favor of the former (why should I care if some moron wants to pay $100 for distilled water?), but the latter works as long as the decision is made on the basis of data.

      Delete
    7. Hey old fart,

      I'm not the right stick to measure Egnor's expertise in psychiatry. The question is whether he is a qualified psychiatrist to make pronouncements on what is and what is not mental disorder. He is not qualified.

      Hoo

      Delete
    8. Geogie,

      'Why single it out?'

      Exactly. Either all ineffective and potentially therapies (such as spinal manipulation for infantile colic or astha and homeopathy) should be prohibited. Or none of them should.

      I favour the first course. Therapies should be proven to be safe and effective before they're allowed. Egnor's anecdote of seeing successful conversions of sexual preference doesn't mean much.

      Delete
    9. "Therapies should be proven to be safe and effective before they're allowed."

      What a stupid thing to say. Are you sure you're a doctor, bach?

      Surprisingly little in medicine is "proven" to be effective. In pediatric neurosurgery, randomized prospective controlled studies that "prove" the effectiveness of operations/treatments are rare. Most of our research falls far short of "proof". And even when statistically rigorous studies are done, they are often difficult to replicate. The last thing doctors and patients need is some asshole government clock-puncher telling them what medical treatment is "allowed".

      Most of medicine is judgement and experience and sometimes even intuition, based on very incomplete evidence.

      Just like everything else.

      Delete
    10. For conservatives the bar for success is low. Back in the closet will do.
      The entire notion of conversion “therapy” is absurd. To accept that it is effective Egnor would have to admit that there is a chance he could be talked out of his attraction to women and manipulated into wanting gay sex. Perhaps Egnor could be talked into being gay, after all the Catholic Church is full of gay men running away from their sexuality, but for me I can’t imagine having my sexuality converted through “therapy” could be anything other than a horrific experience.

      -KW

      Delete
    11. If gay orientation were a normal variant, it would not be so highly associated with an enormous spectrum of pathologies-- substantially increased incidence of depression, suicide, drug abuse, alcoholism, STD's, violence, etc.

      And the argument "society makes them that way" doesn't work. The same pathologies are seen in societies like Holland in which gay orientation is quite widely accepted.

      Stop denying reality. Gay lifestyle is pathological in many obvious objective ways, and gay orientation is a mental illness. And gay acts are sinful.

      Delete
    12. Could you choose to be sexually attracted to men? Do you think a therapist could make you attracted to men?

      -KW

      Delete
    13. Happens in prison all the time.

      Sexual attraction is an extraordinarily complex dynamic, and is influenced by any number of things.

      If people want to voluntarily enter into therapy to explore and change their sexual orientation, what business is it of yours?

      Delete
    14. Megnor,

      Could you change your moniker? It's confusing allowing you to be confused with Egnor.

      And yes, I insist that all therapies should be proven to be safe and effective. And that applies to standard medical treatment too. Why not? Just because therapies have become part of accepted medical practice, it doesn't mean that they shouldn't be examined and verified.

      Delete
  4. Egnor claims:

    And the argument "society makes them that way" doesn't work. The same pathologies are seen in societies like Holland in which gay orientation is quite widely accepted.

    Since you're a pathological liar-for-Jeebus, I am going to assume you made that up. Show us the studies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Troi:

      http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2010/10/21/just-what-is-behind-these-suicides/

      "A simple way to test [the theory that homophobia causes the mental disorders seen in homosexuals] is to look at places where homosexuality is very much accepted, such as in nations like Holland, or cities like San Francisco. One would expect less suicide and other mental health problems amongst homosexuals in these places. But that is not the case. There is as much if not more suicide and related problems in these localities. So homophobia cannot be to blame.

      As one commentator puts it, “Studies done in the Netherlands and New Zealand, for example, where there is generally high tolerance of sexual ‘diversity,’ found the same high rates of psychological difficulties as those done elsewhere.” A number of international studies have borne this out."



      Delete
    2. That link doesn't give any references to the alleged "Studies done in the Netherlands and New Zealand", so I will regard these claims as hearsay at best.

      Anyway, the risks associated with being a male homosexual are blown way of out of proportion by religious bigots - claims like a life expectancy of 43 years are not uncommon. I would be surprised if nowadays the life expectancy of a male homosexual in Holland were much lower than that of a random Dutch man.

      Delete
  5. 'The gay fascists are in high gear. They make no pretenses. You will conform and endorse their degenerate lifestyle, or you will be prosecuted. This is just the beginning.'

    Yes to all that.

    However, to develop your analogy; the Fascists (well, they were Nazis NOT fascists but never mind that for now) advanced very rapidly. They needed to celebrate and glorify what appeared to be 'victories'.
    They appeared to be in possession of vast areas of 'occupied territory'. They loved marches and were very very 'proud' of themselves.

    Yet when they met opposition they collapsed.
    The 'occupied territories' turned out never to have been fully controlled.

    The fascists relied heavily on propaganda; most importantly the 'submit to the New Order, you are alone, we are the future' type stuff.

    I am a teacher. In Britain the march of organised perversion is loud and ugly.

    In school?

    Reality reigns.
    Ten years ago I thought;'Oh dear. I will never allow for the promotion of this stuff in my classroom, There goes my career..'
    Well, ten years on and the reality is that WE remain in such a silent majority that propaganda,lies and marches are all that we really face 99% of the time.

    New Jersey demonstrates how afraid 'they' are of reality.

    The future does not belong to them.

    Turn off enemy radio (all TV & MSM news).

    Look at the facts and remain positive.

    The future belongs to Him.

    John Richardson

    ReplyDelete
  6. Replies
    1. I followed the link you kindly provided.
      This is cut 'n pasted from the article.....

      '"A commercial business cannot solicit customers from the general public to buy its services as a photographer for hire and then claim that taking those photographs is a form of its own autonomous expressive activity," the ACLU argued on its website.

      According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 85 percent of Americans support the right of the photographer to say no.

      "Suppose a Christian wedding photographer has deeply held religious beliefs opposing same-sex marriage," the poll question asked. "If asked to work a same-sex wedding ceremony, should that wedding photographer have the right to say no?"

      Yeah.
      So, 85% of Americans fall into your 'loser' category.
      Interesting.

      John Richardson

      Delete
  7. If I were the photographer, all the photos would be 'touched' in some way or another. A bit out of focus. Lamps growing out of heads. Odd filter effects. Overexposures. Underexposures. You could maybe force me to hold a camera. But do a good job?

    If I told you I didn't want the assignment and objected vehemently to being required to participate in the 'event' in any manner at all, then you would be pretty stupid to insist that I do it anyway. Find somebody who wants to please you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah but David, as you know; this has nothing to do with photography.
      The homosexuals involved hate other people's dignity, freedom and sanity.
      So they attack it using the law.
      They do not care who photographs them.

      John R.

      Delete