Obama Calls For End To LGBT Conversion Therapy

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

Homosexuality is not defined as a mental illness

Not anymore it isn't... due to politics.

The rest of your response is just emotional pandering and jumbling of context to avoid the point that I'm making.

No, the rest of my response is the moral and ethical reasons for exactly why homosexuality between consenting adults is not wrong (nor illegal) whereas pedophilia is wrong and illegal. The legal and psychological community agree with me and have the same reasoning. Welcome to the modern world and welcome to basic ethics brah.

Trying to equate consenting sexual acts or attraction between adults with taking advantage of non-consenting or non-aware children (i.e. abuse) is idiotic. Fail.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: beezzer
Can someone show me a state or locality where this conversion therapy is mandatory and forced onto people? I don't think it should be forced onto anyone, but I'm having problems finding where it is forced.

I'm confused.

Parents force their children to attend these "conversion therapy" camps. That's where people are forced.

Ahhh, thank you. So the government is looking to interfere with how parents raise their children, because government knows better.

I understand now.

Take responsibility away from the parent and give it to the State, because the State knows better.

a reply to: beezzer

I think you've misunderstood, the state isnt looking to force children into these camps/therapies.
Parents are forcing their children into it. little more than child abuse really.
It should be a volunatry therapy that is only allowed for adults.

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
a reply to: beezzer

I think you've misunderstood, the state isnt looking to force children into these camps/therapies.
Parents are forcing their children into it. little more than child abuse really.
It should be a volunatry therapy that is only allowed for adults.

What right do we have to dictate to any parent how they raise their children?

You call it abuse.

Imagine government dictating that spankings are abuse and early bedtimes are abuse.

I'm just shocked by so many here who gladly bend over and allow the State to determine parenting roles and responsibilities.

So ... let's see ... if the parent thinks it appropriate to beat their child thrice daily with a dowel rod to "teach them humility" that is okay because they're "the parent" and they're just following their "religious beliefs?"

Or, if they lock kids in closets, attics, basements for hours and days without food and sometimes water, that's okay?

If government authorities step in to a situation to prevent clear and obvious abuse of children, that is simply more "interference"?

Wow, that's an interesting take on things.

/retch

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

Homosexuality is not defined as a mental illness

Not anymore it isn't... due to politics.

The rest of your response is just emotional pandering and jumbling of context to avoid the point that I'm making.

Horsepucks.

To you there is no difference between homosexuality and pedophilia.

To most of the rest of the world, there are clear differences between the two for scientific, ethical and moral reasons.

That's the bottom line.

You don't want to enforce your opinion onto others, do you?

Why are you trying to control others lives because of your own beliefs?

Are you anti-Freedom, against Liberty?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Hyperbole'.

I guess local authorities can't handle actual cases of abuse.

You glorify and praise government stepping in and making sweeping determinations on how a parent can and should raise their child(ren).


I get it. You'd rather have the State taking all the responsibility away from everyone.

I'm well aware of your distaste for individual freedom.

a reply to: beezzer

Because government stop abuse of people all the time.
It's illegal to rape someone.
it's illegal to have sex with children.
It's illegal to imprison someone.

So i dont think it's the govenrment interfering when they say you cant force your child to do something.

If i wanted to send my child to intensive therapy to convine them they are a dog. would that be OK?
Parents dont have the right to abuse their child, they are not property, even animals have laws to protect them against crulety so should children.
it's a little wrid you think children shouldnt be protected.

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: olaru12

Pedophilia is certainly a mental illness!

Then so is homosexuality. I honestly just don't understand why one is a "sexual orientation" and the other is a mental illness.

Either they're both orientations or they're both illnesses. The fact that they aren't classified as such just goes to show that the field of psychology is pseudoscience.

Political pressure can't change the decay rate of a radioactive isotope, but it can change who is considered mentally ill and who isn't, as demonstrated by the removal of homosexuality from the DSM.

One is being attracted to someone of the same gender. Two adults consenting to a relationship, regardless of gender, is not harmful to society.

The other is being attracted to children who are not developmentally, physically or emotionally capable of having a sexual relationship without being harmed. They are not cognizant enough to give consent. Also, an adult is in a position of authority over a child and so the child may feel coerced, therefor it is an abuse of power. Pedophilia may have a biological source but it is harmful to children and as such harmful to society.

This is why one is a mental illness and the other is not. Harm. Pedophilia inherently encompasses victimization of another while homosexuality does not.

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Gryphon66

Hyperbole'.

I guess local authorities can't handle actual cases of abuse.

You glorify and praise government stepping in and making sweeping determinations on how a parent can and should raise their child(ren).


I get it. You'd rather have the State taking all the responsibility away from everyone.

I'm well aware of your distaste for individual freedom.

Hyperbole? You mean gross and ridiculous exaggeration?

Why yes, your claim that the government would try to interfere in a parent setting a kid's bedtime is pretty silly, I'll admit.

You rave on about government interference in the most ludicrous of situations. Any reasonable action on the part of government is wrong no matter what the reason. Now you're justifying child abuse based on your own obsession with personal freedom. Your "personal freedom" does not extend past the surface of your skin.

You are not on an imaginary frontier somewhere hacking your daily life out of the wilderness.

You live in the modern world with the rest of us. Sometimes, incredibly to me, parents abuse their children.

Those parents have abandoned any "rights" they have to choose how to raise their children.

But, that's always your response ... speaking of ludicrous exaggerations ... any effort on the part of government, even to prevent the abuse of children, is some sort of cosmic abridgments of your sacred (and selfish) definition of "individual freedom."

Bunny, on this one, you're full of grass. Child abuse is wrong whatever category you want to place it in.

I'll use small words so everyone can understand.

Once you allow the State (government) to dictate parental responsibility, then you allow for ANY government to dictate parental responsibility.

It's all good and well that Obama is in office and wants to do all of this.

But what if Cruz or a religious nutter gets into the Whitehouse and starts dictating parental responsibility?

Then it'll be too effing late because ALL OF YOU MORONS HAVE ALREADY STATED THAT GOVERNMENT CAN DICTATE PARENTAL RESDPONSIBILITY!!!!

IDIOTS!

*SHAKES HEAD*

I don't know why I even bother anymore.

Spankings and Time Out don't drive otherwise healthy kids to suicide because the idea that liking someone with the same parts as you is sinful and unnatural is forced into their heads.

a reply to: beezzer

You glorify and praise government stepping in and making sweeping determinations on how a parent can and should raise their child(ren).

Are you the kind of person, who, if you see a parent abusing their child, you will just walk on b and not interfere, because parents own their children and have the right to treat them however they see fit?

a reply to: beezzer

So ... now, anyone who disagrees with your particular take on the world is an "idiot and a moron."

Well, thanks for showing your true elitist colors and finally taking off the egalitarian veil and the pretense that you believe in equality and freedom.

I don't know why you "try" either, honestly. You refuse to deal honestly with other posters here, you're the master of the loaded question, and then you stage silly little tantrums like this one.

I'm beginning to think that your idea of "personal freedom" is "The World According to Beezzer."

Because, frankly, anything else seems to set your hair on fire.

a reply to: beezzer

Preventing child abuse is not taking away parental responsibility, your argument it just weird.

a reply to: Gryphon66

What you myopic posters don't "get" is that all this government over-reach is eventually going to bite YOU in the ass!

If we ever get a religious nutter in the Whitehouse, it'll be you screeching about government overreach, but it'll be too late then.

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Gryphon66

What you myopic posters don't "get" is that all this government over-reach is eventually going to bite YOU in the ass!

If we ever get a religious nutter in the Whitehouse, it'll be you screeching about government overreach, but it'll be too late then.

It's a good thing there's this pesky little document called "The Constitution" preventing a "Religious Nutter" president from turning America into a theocracy.

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Gryphon66

What you myopic posters don't "get" is that all this government over-reach is eventually going to bite YOU in the ass!

If we ever get a religious nutter in the Whuitehouse, it'll be you screeching about government overreach, but it'll be too late then.

We've already had religious nutters in the White House and the Congress is full of them. We're still here.

Stopping the abuse of children is not government overreach.

Everything the government does is not "overreach," and more than that, by crying "Wolf" over every single solitary thing that you don't PERSONALLY like in your idealistic view of "The World According to Beezzer" ... diminishes the response when the Government IS REALLY overreaching, which as we all know, it often does.

Keeping gay kids from being tortured to the point of suicide is NOT government overreach, by any reasonable measure.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Gryphon66

What you myopic posters don't "get" is that all this government over-reach is eventually going to bite YOU in the ass!

If we ever get a religious nutter in the Whitehouse, it'll be you screeching about government overreach, but it'll be too late then.

It's a good thing there's this pesky little document called "The Constitution" preventing a "Religious Nutter" president from turning America into a theocracy.

Show me where in the Constitution that government can dictate to a parent how to raise their children.

a reply to: beezzer

I agree that the government shouldnt interfer with adults wanting this therapy, but children should not forced into something because of their parents beliefs.