There's too much ideology here. I think evidence is pretty good that changing orientation isn't possible, but changing behavior is. It's not easy, and may not last, but gays have certainly been able to remain celibate and even marry someone of the opposite sex. Not all of those situations end well (my cousin was involved in one), but it is possible.
It's also clear that a lot of attempts to change orientation have been abusive, particularly when the victim has no way out (i.e. they're minors).
I'd support banning attempts to change orientation or behavior without informed consent. By definition that means no minors. But I don't think governments have any business banning attempts to help a person change behavior with informed consent.
Attempts to change orientation could reasonably be called false advertising, but it's hard to separate attempts to change orientation from behavior. In fact the proposed California bill doesn't make that distinction. I think it's unconstitutional for that reason.
It's also clear that a lot of attempts to change orientation have been abusive, particularly when the victim has no way out (i.e. they're minors).
I'd support banning attempts to change orientation or behavior without informed consent. By definition that means no minors. But I don't think governments have any business banning attempts to help a person change behavior with informed consent.
Attempts to change orientation could reasonably be called false advertising, but it's hard to separate attempts to change orientation from behavior. In fact the proposed California bill doesn't make that distinction. I think it's unconstitutional for that reason.
Upvote
0