In Australia Vic Government trying to pass laws that criminalise preaching

[ken777]

So Reparative therapy and Ex-gay ministries etc. are not banned under this bill, just the coercive therapies such as aversion therapy? Could those ministries and therapists be subject to any form of investigation?

From the Explanatory Memorandum accompanying the Bill:

Subclause (3) sets out some examples of a change or suppression practice, which includes providing a psychiatry or psychotherapy consultation, treatment or therapy or any other similar consultation, treatment or therapy and religious practices such as prayer based practice, a deliverance practice or exorcisms. Another example provided is giving a person a referral for the purposes of a change or suppression practice to be directed against them. These examples are illustrative only and do not narrow the definition in subclause (1) which is intended to capture a broad range of conduct, including, informal practices, such as conversations with a community leader that encourage change or suppression of sexual orientation or gender identity, and more formal practices, such as behaviour change programs and residential camps.​

 

[Paidiske]

So Reparative therapy and Ex-gay ministries etc. are not banned under this bill, just the coercive therapies such as aversion therapy? Could those ministries and therapists be subject to any form of investigation?

Is reparative therapy not an attempt to change someone's sexual orientation? On a quick google they seem to be treated as interchangeable terms. In that case, yes, it would be banned.

I wonder why you are so keen to warp the clear meaning of "conversations ... that encourage change or suppression" in the Explanatory Memorandum.

I am not attempting to warp the meaning. I am attempting to clarify that it is change in sexual orientation or gender identity, not merely change in conviction, feelings, or behaviour, which is in view.

A conversation that doesn't try to change someone's sexual orientation is not conversion therapy, even if it is otherwise touching on matters of sexual conviction, feelings or behaviour.

 

[ken777]

I am not attempting to warp the meaning. I am attempting to clarify that it is change in sexual orientation or gender identity, not merely change in conviction, feelings, or behaviour, which is in view.

A conversation that doesn't try to change someone's sexual orientation is not conversion therapy, even if it is otherwise touching on matters of sexual conviction, feelings or behaviour.

It seems you have come up with your own peculiar understanding of "homosexual orientation" which is feelings of sexual attraction or desire for the same sex - so I can see why you have such difficulty understanding the Bill.

Any pastor who believes what Paul said in Ephesians 4:22-24 & Romans 1:26-27 would encourage a person to change or suppress their feelings of same sex attraction.

 

[ken777]

From the Explanatory Memorandum:

Subclause (3) substitutes a new definition of sexual orientation which means a person's emotional, affectional and sexual attraction to, or intimate or sexual relations with, persons of a different gender, or the same gender or more than one gender.​

 

[Paidiske]

It seems you have come up with your own peculiar understanding of "homosexual orientation" which is feelings of sexual attraction or desire for the same sex - so I can see why you have such difficulty understanding the Bill.

There are many people who would identify as straight, or live successfully and happily within straight marriages, who yet experience some degree of sexual attraction to the same sex. One would not typically describe such people has having a homosexual sexual orientation.

Similarly, one might be an unmarried person and work hard to manage one's feelings of sexual attraction and desire, in general.

I point this out to explain that sexual orientation change goes beyond desire or managing one's sexual attractions. Even what you've just quoted from the explanatory memorandum points to something deeper than sexual attraction when it points out the emotional and affectional aspect.

 

[coffee4u]

I think the church would do better to preach purity.

 

[ken777]

There are many people who would identify as straight, or live successfully and happily within straight marriages, who yet experience some degree of sexual attraction to the same sex. One would not typically describe such people has having a homosexual sexual orientation.

Similarly, one might be an unmarried person and work hard to manage one's feelings of sexual attraction and desire, in general.

I point this out to explain that sexual orientation change goes beyond desire or managing one's sexual attractions. Even what you've just quoted from the explanatory memorandum points to something deeper than sexual attraction when it points out the emotional and affectional aspect.

Denying that feelings are an intrinsic part of sexual orientation is absurd. The EM statement "conversations ... that encourage change or suppression" will certainly capture any comments that encourage overcoming feelings of homosexual attraction & emotional dependency. .

 

[Paidiske]

Denying that feelings are an intrinsic part of sexual orientation is absurd.

I'm not denying that. But I am saying they are only a part, and not the whole sum, of sexual orientation.

The EM statement "conversations ... that encourage change or suppression" will certainly capture any comments that encourage overcoming feelings of sexual attraction.

I guess it depends what you mean by "overcome." If you mean the person, in effect, becoming straight, then it probably would. If you mean the person living a faithful Christian life despite any feelings that may arise, then it probably wouldn't.

 

[dms1972]

Is reparative therapy not an attempt to change someone's sexual orientation? On a quick google they seem to be treated as interchangeable terms. In that case, yes, it would be banned.

That information sounds incorrect. There are some anti-psychology polemics, some from fundamentalist christians online (as well as a fair bit of misinformation and ignorance) and some of these wrongly lump Reparative in with conversion therapies. Some other criticisms of it have some of the tell-tale characteristics of conspiracy theories.

Reparative Therapy is in the best tradition of the insight orientated psychotherapies - and builds on a body of already established psychological wisdom (including Adler, Ovesey, Bowlby, Moberly) in regard to issues surrounding shame and attachment loss.

It is a little bit more optimistic rather than the 19th century psychoanalytic theories about the possiblility that as a corollary of psychotherapy some clients may experience changes in what they thought to be their sexual orientation. But its not a 'conversion therapy' to the unprejudiced observer, its in the exploratory and insight orientated tradition of psychotherapy, not in the behaviourist camp. How someone finally understands themselves is up to them.

What about supportive Ex-Gay ministries, and Sexual Addiction counselling?

 

[ken777]

I'm not denying that. But I am saying they are only a part, and not the whole sum, of sexual orientation.

In previous posts you were distinguishing between feelings & orientation - so some progress has been made.

I guess it depends what you mean by "overcome." If you mean the person, in effect, becoming straight, then it probably would. If you mean the person living a faithful Christian life despite any feelings that may arise, then it probably wouldn't.

'Overcome' can mean anything from reversal to control of homosexual feelings - which is the Biblical perspective.
Living a faithful Christian life means being able to access everything God has promised in His Word. Helping anyone who chooses that goal means honestly & directly addressing all their problems & concerns. And in doing so, the law will be triggered with a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.

 

[Paidiske]

That information sounds incorrect. There are some anti-psychology polemics, some from fundamentalist christians online (as well as a fair bit of misinformation and ignorance) and some of these wrongly lump Reparative in with conversion therapies.

Other criticisms of it have some of the tell-tale characteristics of conspiracy theories. Reparative Therapy is in the best tradition of the insight orientated psychotherapies - and builds on a body of already established psychological wisdom (including Adler, Ovesey, Bowlby, Moberly) in regard to issues surrounding shame and attachment loss.

It is more optimistic rather than pessimistic about the possiblility that as a corrolary of psychotherapy some clients may experience changes in what they thought to be their sexual orientation. But its not a 'conversion therapy' to the unprejudiced observer, its in the exploratory and insight orientated tradition of psychotherapy, not in the behaviourist camp.

What about supportive Ex-Gay ministries, and Sexual Addiction counselling?

Well, given that just about everything I could find in a quick search treated reparative and conversion therapies as interchangeable terms, there might be some misunderstanding possible if, for example, one advertised reparative therapy.

Sexual addiction counselling does not have change of sexual orientation as its aim, so it should be fine. I would guess that ex-gay ministries are likely to be judged on exactly what they do, and the aim of those activities.

The litmus test is this: are you trying to change someone's sexual orientation? If the answer is yes, it'll be illegal under this law. If the answer is no, then it won't.

 

[Paidiske]

In previous posts you were distinguishing between feelings & orientation - so some progress has been made.

Feelings and orientation are not the same thing. That does need to be clear.

'Overcome' can mean anything from reversal to control of homosexual feelings - which is the Biblical perspective.
Living a faithful Christian life means being able to access everything God has promised in His Word. Helping anyone who chooses that goal means honestly & directly addressing all their problems & concerns. And in doing so, the law will be triggered with a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.

As long as you're not trying to make them straight, or cis-gendered, you won't fall foul of this law. And honestly addressing all their problems and concerns means being honest that we have no effective means of creating that change.

 

[ken777]

I think the church would do better to preach purity.

I like your comment but people with problems need someone to talk to.

 

[ken777]

Feelings and orientation are not the same thing. That does need to be clear.



As long as you're not trying to make them straight, or cis-gendered, you won't fall foul of this law. And honestly addressing all their problems and concerns means being honest that we have no effective means of creating that change.

You were separating feelings & orientation - which is wrong. For some there is also emotional attachment, but not for all, as is made clear in the definition posted.

Honestly addressing concerns means exploring all the person's issues which may include considering the options of change & suppression from a Biblical perspective. If the person wants to go in that direction, a genuine Christian counselor would provide support & encouragement no matter what the law says.

 

[Paidiske]

You were separating feelings & orientation - which is wrong. For some there is also emotional attachment, but not for all, as is made clear in the definition posted.

I am saying that feelings of sexual attraction, on their own, do not define one's orientation.

Honestly addressing concerns means exploring all the person's issues which may include considering the options of change & suppression from a Biblical perspective. If the person wants to go in that direction, a genuine Christian counselor would provide support & encouragement no matter what the law says.

No, if someone wants to change their sexual orientation, a genuine Christian counsellor would be honest that there is no therapeutic approach which will be effective for that. Not send people on a wild-goose-chase of an emotional rollercoaster.

That sort of unethical practice is exactly why the law is needed.

 

[ken777]

I am saying that feelings of sexual attraction, on their own, do not define one's orientation.

That is wrong too, because they can in some cases. Don't adopt a one size fits all approach.

No, if someone wants to change their sexual orientation, a genuine Christian counsellor would be honest that there is no therapeutic approach which will be effective for that. Not send people on a wild-goose-chase of an emotional rollercoaster.

That sort of unethical practice is exactly why the law is needed.

While some work from a legal-psychological perspective, I was referring to a genuine Christian counsellor coming from Biblical perspective - someone who believes God is in control and can do all things.

 

[Paidiske]

Don't adopt a one size fits all approach.

Oh, the burning irony.

While some work from a legal-psychological perspective, I was referring to a genuine Christian counsellor coming from Biblical perspective - someone who believes God is in control and can do all things.

God is and can. We are not and cannot. We need to be honest about that.

 

[ken777]

Oh, the burning irony.

Oh, the thumping hypocrisy!
All through this thread, those you've debated allow that people should be able to access the help they want whether gay affirming or traditional Biblical faith - it is your position that people should not have this freedom.

God is and can. We are not and cannot. We need to be honest about that.

Well that is a move in the right direction at least.
Reversal to control of sexual feelings was the approach I referred to earlier - a genuine Christian counselor does not impose their own bias.

 

[coffee4u]

I like your comment but people with problems need someone to talk to.

They certainly do, and if they have searched out someone to talk to I would assume it to be a private conversation. But the only one who can change people is the Holy Spirit.

 

[Paidiske]

All through this thread, those you've debated allow that people should be able to access the help they want whether gay affirming or traditional Biblical faith - it is your position that people should not have this freedom.

No, that is not my position. My position is that help has to be real help; not a pretence at help, offering the impossible through harmful methods.

Reversal to control of sexual feelings was the approach I referred to earlier - a genuine Christian counselor does not impose their own bias.

It's one thing to want to control one's sexual feelings. It's another thing to want to change one's sexual orientation. I'm not sure if that's what you mean by "reversal" of one's feelings, but if so, we have no method of achieving that.