[Intolerant in NJ]

To actually declare religious faith wrong was probably beyond Freud’s power...I'm really thinking of Freud's influence at a much deeper level than merely his teachings about formal religion - he essentially taught (or at least is perceived as having taught) that individual morality and conscience was nor only wrong, but hurtful - that's the only excuse most of mankind, only a few steps above the law of the jungle much of the time anyway, needed - religion, formal morality, common sense, all those things which are supposed to help us as individuals rise above our base instincts, can be rationalized away when we have the excuse that to try to inhibit and sublimate our impulses likely will lead to terrible things like neurosis and even worse psychosis - this was the essential rationalization for the whole rapid deterioration of behavior and decline of morality we saw in the sixties - the churches did a lousy job of trying to hold up against the onslaught, but then so did a lot of authority figures from Dr. Spock to many of our politicians.....

[HiTech RedNeck]

If morality and conscience actually went away there would be no reason to want psychological healing. Why not rather celebrate having gone crazy? I think he actually was against shallow uses of these things. The church has given him more gratuitous catcalls than it has looked to its own knitting... and that is my story and I’m stickin’ to it.

[HiTech RedNeck]

I’d also like to point out that the founder of NARTH (go look it up) was a Freudian psychoanalyst, Dr. Charles Socarides. The church should have been taking this bull by the horns. It didn’t.