Conversion therapy

[Quartermaine]

I do not know what the manuals are defining orientation and identity as now. They may or may not have changed. They do change a lot!

my references go back to the 1980's and no changes like you describe

 

[nolidad]

my references go back to the 1980's and no changes like you describe

I don't doubt it. They are scores of textbooks, manuals for all the varied fields of psychiatry and psychology that sexual activity and sexual identity are found in. As both of these and all psych studies are a very soft science- I know there is great divergence in the field.

But as for the laymen- the "experts" till only recently when they were a talking head in the media would define sexual preference as what gender you had sexual desire for.

Heck since gender identity hit mainstream- we went from 2 to 72 in very short order!

I keep it simple. If you look down and you have a dangly thing between your legs, you are a guy! If not you are a gal! Just like God said!

 

[Carl Emerson]

you can disagree with anything you want. you can disagree that bacteria and viruses cause illness and and insist that disease is the result of ghosts of long dead extra-terrestrials feeding off the life force of the living but if you pose as a doctor and use a vacuum cleaner to treat covid 19 then you will be stopped by the authorities.

Sounds just like China again...

Think this way or you will be arrested...

 

[Carl Emerson]

Sy Rogers refereed to himself as a "former homosexual" not as a heterosexual, he didn't change his orientation.

Wrong - he conquered the temptation to desire a sin.

In 1988, Rogers then 30, a married father, living in Florida, self-describing as a former homosexual and former transsexual, told a reporter for the Chicago Sun-Times that the ex-gay movement was not anti-gay, "If you want to stay gay, that's your business,... But the bottom line is, you have a choice to overcome it. You can change."[5] "The goal is God--not going straight. Straight people don't go to Heaven, redeemed people do."

 

[Paidiske]

The goal is God--not going straight. Straight people don't go to Heaven, redeemed people do.

That's a very good way of putting it. So our focus should not be on trying to make people straight (or cis-gendered).

 

[NBB]

That's a very good way of putting it. So our focus should not be on trying to make people straight (or cis-gendered).

But people usually act on their 'preferences' that where God may have an issue. Most of the time people want to have something, its just what it is.

 

[Paidiske]

But people usually act on their 'preferences' that where God may have an issue. Most of the time people want to have something, its just what it is.

That doesn't justify churches engaging in ineffective and harmful practices in an attempt to pre-empt what people might choose.

 

[Quartermaine]

I don't doubt it. They are scores of textbooks, manuals for all the varied fields of psychiatry and psychology that sexual activity and sexual identity are found in. As both of these and all psych studies are a very soft science- I know there is great divergence in the field.

But as for the laymen- the "experts" till only recently when they were a talking head in the media would define sexual preference as what gender you had sexual desire for.

Heck since gender identity hit mainstream- we went from 2 to 72 in very short order!

I keep it simple. If you look down and you have a dangly thing between your legs, you are a guy! If not you are a gal! Just like God said!

so it seems the answer to my question 'what textbooks still define orientation as the gender what prefers to have sex with?' is....I'm sure there are some somewhere.

 

[Quartermaine]

Sounds just like China again...

Think this way or you will be arrested...

What part of "you can disagree with anything you want" are you not understanding?

 

[Quartermaine]

Wrong - he conquered the temptation to desire a sin.

In 1988, Rogers then 30, a married father, living in Florida, self-describing as a former homosexual and former transsexual, told a reporter for the Chicago Sun-Times that the ex-gay movement was not anti-gay, "If you want to stay gay, that's your business,... But the bottom line is, you have a choice to overcome it. You can change."[5] "The goal is God--not going straight. Straight people don't go to Heaven, redeemed people do."

no change in orientation

 

[Carl Emerson]

That's a very good way of putting it. So our focus should not be on trying to make people straight (or cis-gendered).

While it is true that only God can do that, there should never be a law that forbids us from being God's loving agent.

How the church could welcome that I find astounding.

 

[Carl Emerson]

That doesn't justify churches engaging in ineffective and harmful practices in an attempt to pre-empt what people might choose.

Still no one has specified in detail what those practices are and meantime genuine ministry will be banned.

Which churches, which practices - detail please.

 

[Carl Emerson]

What part of "you can disagree with anything you want" are you not understanding?

I am understanding only too well.

Believe what you want - no problem

Act on that belief and you will be arrested.

 

[Carl Emerson]

no change in orientation

Nonsense - transformed by the renewing of the mind - no longer Homosexual or trans. Happily hetro - married with children - fully integrated into the church as a healed individual.

Sounds like your God cant do this but mine can.

 

[Paidiske]

While it is true that only God can do that, there should never be a law that forbids us from being God's loving agent.

How the church could welcome that I find astounding.

Because lots of people claiming to be God's loving agents have been anything but.

Still no one has specified in detail what those practices are and meantime genuine ministry will be banned.

Which churches, which practices - detail please.

There have been numerous links provided through this thread. Government reports, journalistic reports, and google has the world at your fingertips. Read some accounts of those who've been through unsuccessful conversion therapy and it will become very clear why the law needs to step in.

Nothing that's being banned is deserving of the term "genuine ministry."

 

[Carl Emerson]

Because lots of people claiming to be God's loving agents have been anything but.

And that is reason to make it illegal to be one???

Hullo...

 

[Carl Emerson]

Because lots of people claiming to be God's loving agents have been anything but.



There have been numerous links provided through this thread. Government reports, journalistic reports, and google has the world at your fingertips. Read some accounts of those who've been through unsuccessful conversion therapy and it will become very clear why the law needs to step in.

Nothing that's being banned is deserving of the term "genuine ministry."

But the proposed law will ban 'genuine ministry'

 

[Paidiske]

And that is reason to make it illegal to be one???

Hullo...

No. Let me draw an analogy.

Suppose I decide that in order to convert people from their greed and materialism, I should go around burning mansions and expensive property.

A) It will not convert people from their greed and materialism.
B) I will do a great deal of harm, and put people in danger by doing so.

It does not matter how much I claim to be God's loving agent, it is right for the government to make arson illegal. And this is not a problem for us as the church, because such arson was never a true act on God's behalf!

But the proposed law will ban 'genuine ministry'

No. They won't. Conversion therapy is not genuine ministry. We can see this by its evil fruits.

 

[Carl Emerson]

No. Let me draw an analogy.

Suppose I decide that in order to convert people from their greed and materialism, I should go around burning mansions and expensive property.

A) It will not convert people from their greed and materialism.
B) I will do a great deal of harm, and put people in danger by doing so.

It does not matter how much I claim to be God's loving agent, it is right for the government to make arson illegal. And this is not a problem for us as the church, because such arson was never a true act on God's behalf!



No. They won't. Conversion therapy is not genuine ministry. We can see this by its evil fruits.

Wrong analogy - the analogy you propose applies to a sinful act. Lovingly supporting a brother or sister that wants to return to their birth gender is not a sin and no one is harmed.

On the second point I was referring to lovingly supporting a brother or a sister who wants to return to their birth gender. Making a law that will make this a crime should never get the support of the church.

I thought this would be obvious.

Can we let the reader decide now, as the conversation has become somewhat circular?

 

[Paidiske]

Wrong analogy - the analogy you propose applies to a sinful act. Lovingly supporting a brother or sister that wants to return to their birth gender is not a sin and no one is harmed.

On the second point I was referring to lovingly supporting a brother or a sister who wants to return to their birth gender. Making a law that will make this a crime should never get the support of the church.

I thought this would be obvious.

Can we let the reader decide now, as the conversation has become somewhat circular?

But you are making blatantly inaccurate statements.

The law is not proposing to ban "lovingly supporting a brother or sister that wants to return to their birth gender."

It is proposing to ban people trying to change someone's gender identity (or sexual orientation). That is not in any way the same thing. Moreover, given that such attempts have been shown to be both ineffective and harmful, it could very well be argued that conversion therapy is a sinful act.