Posted on 05/07/2015 10:39:47 AM PDT by wagglebee
WASHINGTON, D.C., May 6, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- By declining to hear a challenge to a lower-court decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has effectively solidified New Jersey's ban on "reparative therapy," or counseling designed to steer people away from their unwanted same-sex attractions. Republican Gov. Chris Christie signed the ban into law in August 2013.
The New Jersey ban applies only to minors. According to Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX), noncompliance by parents could result in the state taking their children away.
The Human Rights Campaign, a powerful lobby dedicated to redefining marriage and normalizing homosexuality, recently decried reparative therapy as "a range of dangerous and discredited practices" that can "lead to depression, anxiety, drug use, and suicide." In February 2014, activists in favor of normalizing homosexuality demanded that the United Nations classify reparative therapy as a form of torture. Such accusations depend on the assumption that same-sex attractions are innate, unchangeable, and irresistible, despite a lack of evidence to support this theory and an abundance of evidence to the contrary.
But while reparative therapy has been panned in the media and the courts, not all therapists condemn the practice. The Alliance for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity in conjunction with the NARTH Institute, for example, strongly advocated for Gov. Christie to veto New Jersey's ban in July 2013. In a statement released at that time, the group emphasized the ban's threat to personal freedom: "The freedom of a gay teen to choose a therapist that honors his or her goals and values is unchallenged. All citizens should expect equal treatment and protection from the law and lawmakers."
The therapists concluded: "The 'bumper sticker slogan' approach which so often characterizes media stories rarely improves the public's understanding of important psychological issues."
The NARTH Institute had joined two New Jersey therapists and the American Association of Christian Counselors in challenging New Jersey's reparative therapy ban, citing concerns about the state curtailing therapists' freedom of speech and religion.
Additionally, Mat Staver, the Liberty Counsel attorney who represented the New Jersey plaintiffs, claimed in a separate but related lawsuit that his client desired to repudiate his same-sex attractions. "Before states began passing legislation banning change therapy, the treatment was driven by the minor's desired outcome," Staver said. "Our client and his family were on the way to that desired outcome, until Governor Christie signed a law prohibiting further treatment. ... Governor Christie has no right coming into the therapy session of this young man and telling him what kind of counseling he can receive."
A federal judge dismissed the challengers' case in November 2013, deciding that "'counseling' is not entitled to special constitutional protection merely because it is primarily carried out through talk therapy."
Christie, who expressed reservations about interfering with "parents on raising their children," nonetheless signed the ban – "reluctantly," he claimed. Yet, Christie rationalized, "exposing children to ... health risks without clear evidence of benefits is not appropriate."
On the point of the state's involvement with how parents raise their children, the Alliance-NARTH statement stressed that "[a]ny society that grants the right to an adolescent to decide to terminate a pregnancy ... cannot rationally suggest that this same adolescent should not have the right to freely participate in conversational counseling to discuss sexuality." New Jersey currently has no parental notification or permission requirement for minors seeking an abortion.
Along with New Jersey, one other state has passed legislation to ban reparative therapy: California, under Democrat Gov. Jerry Brown, in October 2012. (The District of Columbia City Council passed its own ban in December of last year.) The Supreme Court refused in 2014 to hear the challenge to California's reparative therapy ban.
How many do you know for a fact actually tried such therapy. There are many personal accounts of successful treatment, and many more that weren't fully successful but with no ill effects.
But it’s a lesser evil. So I have been told.
The left teaches confusion. In the left’s view, there is no god and you are God simultaneously. As such, it is consistent for faith to sustain you in promoting abortion and anything else since faith can be whatever makes you feel good.
AKA Circular Logic.
ah, I’m wrong like three times a day. This might be number 2 :)
I knew three guys who were messed up and had gone through it. But they might have been messed up anyway.
Let’s not forget that they are not all evil. Some of them are in hell with an urge that is like nothing else and unfortunately, it is a sin and they know it.
My uncle is eighty and never had sex!!!!!!!!!!! He told me he thinks of cutting it off sometimes to take the mental anguish away.
I told him it doesn’t work that way and he would still have urges.
Might will wait another 10 years and drop dead an get to heaven :)
Are you aware that the constitutionally powerful states had not only established the constitutionally humbled federal government, but had also drafted the federal Constitution to deliberately limit (cripple) the federal government’s powers, not vice versa as you seem to think?
Regarding your indefensible assertion about state’s rights, note that the congressional record shows that John Bingham, the main author of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, had substantiated states' rights on several occasions.
“The adoption of the proposed amendment will take from the States no rights [emphasis added] that belong to the States.” —John Bingham, Appendix to the Congressional Globe. (See bottom half of first column)
“No right [emphasis added] reserved by the Constitution to the States should be impaired…” —John Bingham, Appendix to the Congressional Globe. (See top half of 1st column)
“Do gentlemen say that by so legislating we would strike down the rights of the State [emphasis added]? God forbid. I believe our dual system of government essential to our national existance.” —John Bingham, Appendix to the Congressional Globe. (See bottom half of third column)
The left set about corrupting the concept of religion a long time ago but it wasn’t until the 80s that they really started ‘openly’ making headway. Oral Roberts/Swaggart/Bakker and that type twisted christianity into a knot and many people lost faith.
Human nature is that we want to believe there’s something more than ourselves. Leftism is all about the self, not the ‘for the children crap they talk about. So when the people returned to their faith, there were, as if by magic, thousands of leftist preachers waiting for them with all manner of new ‘Gospel’.
Since then more and more leftism has been embraced as ‘Godly’ and now the Pope is openly promoting communism and supporting Islam. The level of homosexuals in clergy of all denominations has always been high because they are predators.
Perfect storm.
Thanks for the link.
With all due respect familypop, please consider the following. Regarding the 17th Amendment, you and wagglebee are seemingly overlooking the following major problem concerning the federal government’s constitutionally limited powers.
You are either overlooking or ignoring that the corrupt federal Senate bas been wrongly overlooking that basically the only federal government service that the states have ever delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate, tax and spend for with respect to intrastate issues is the US Mail Service (1.8.7).
So why don’t you and wagglebee start working with state and federal lawmakers to propose amendments to the states, amendments which would actually give the feds the specific powers to do most of the vote-winning things that they’ve been doing in the last 100+ years without the constitutional authority to do so.
Look up the recent articles on the KGB guy and Liberation theology. Specifially RE catholicism and South America.
I was raised RC and left over the crap there. Me and God do fine without middlemen.
That’s the best reason for leaving New Jersey and other such legally perverse places.
Hysteria \Hys*te"ri*a\, n. [NL.: cf. F. hyst['e]rie. See
Hysteric.] (Med.)
A nervous affection, occurring almost exclusively in women,
in which the emotional and reflex excitability is
exaggerated, and the will power correspondingly diminished,
so that the patient loses control over the emotions, becomes
the victim of imaginary sensations, and often falls into
paroxism or fits.
[1913 Webster]
Note: The chief symptoms are convulsive, tossing movements of
the limbs and head, uncontrollable crying and laughing,
and a choking sensation as if a ball were lodged in the
throat. The affection presents the most varied
symptoms, often simulating those of the gravest
diseases, but generally curable by mental treatment
alone. Hysteric
Indeed.
Which KGB guy? Thanks for the info. I have about five topics I am looking forward to reading up on thanks to freepers sending me stuff to read :)
I kind of keep some of my religious beliefs close to my vest as I am still new and don’t want to offend.
I wholeheartedly believe you and God are doing great on your own.
I’m one who kind of needs some structure to help me along. It’s a weakness and always has been.
I would LOVE to be able to ask theological questions that I find fascinating but am afraid I will get clobbered if I do. Have a good one!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.