The Briefing Room
General Category => National/Breaking News => Topic started by: EC on June 08, 2014, 09:15:40 am
-
May I say right now, before you dive in, my impulse here is not just NO, but HELL NO.
The Texas Republican Party has endorsed so-called "reparative therapy" for gays, under a new policy statement given final approval at its annual convention on Saturday.
The new anti-gay language was pushed through without debate at the Fort Worth conference as roughly 7,000 delegates ratified a party platform that tea party groups succeeded in pushing further to the right, including winning a harder line on immigration.
One influential tea party group called Texas Eagle Forum had urged the party to support psychological treatments that seek to turn gay people straight. It comes after Republican New Jersey governor Chris Christie last fall signed a law banning such therapies on minors, and California enacted a similar law.
The Fort Worth Convention Hall cheered when party leaders announced that Christie finished a distant 11th in a 2016 presidential straw poll.
But 'Rudy Oeftering, vice president of the gay conservative group Metroplex Republicans, said: "There's a very, very small group of people who want to keep the party in the past. We were here today to try to pull the party into the future.
"The only way the party can go into the future is to start listening to young people, to start listening to people who have gay family members."
Oeftering and allies had lined up to speak against the therapy language that had been added to the draft platform earlier this week. But they never got a chance to address delegates, because a parliamentary motion to approve the full platform was called first.
Under the new plank, the Texas Republican Party recognises "the legitimacy and efficacy of counseling, which offers reparative therapy and treatment for those patients seeking healing and wholeness from their homosexual lifestyle."
The American Psychological Association and other major health organisations have condemned such counselling, which generally try to change a person's sexual orientation or to lessen their interest in engaging in same-sex sexual activity. The groups say the practice should not be used on minors because of the danger of serious psychological harm.
Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/08/texas-republicans-vote-to-adopt-gay-conversion-policy
Now the reason why I say HELL NO? Homosexuality is not covered in the DSM V. A law which promotes treatment for a none-recognized mental illness can be warped in any way the State wishes. What is to stop California (for example) adopting a similar law stating that gun owners should be encouraged to seek conversion therapy? This is a stupid idea. It's not a slippery slope, it is a parabolic drop.
-
Now the reason why I say HELL NO? Homosexuality is not covered in the DSM V. A law which promotes treatment for a none-recognized mental illness can be warped in any way the State wishes. What is to stop California (for example) adopting a similar law stating that gun owners should be encouraged to seek conversion therapy? This is a stupid idea. It's not a slippery slope, it is a parabolic drop.
You mean like medical marijuana and sh*t like that? Seems platforms and laws have no meaning anymore anyway, so what hay, take it and run with it. It's trivial BS in the long run.
The left likes to say they want the government out of the bedroom, but in reality they don't. They just want it, like every other issue they have, THEIR way. I think it's stupid for the right to even get involved with it.
-
This is really bizarre. There is NO evidence that conversion therapy works; it never made sense to me (or to most people) that homosexuality is a choice, and there is zero evidence that it is. (EVIDENCE not anecdotal testimony)
Yet, the Texas GOP (under the influence of Cruz and Patrick) has taken a step backward on its platform.
Greg Abbott will never make reference to most of the platform, so, if its value is to make the extremists in the party feel good, it achieved its purpose.
As a practical policy document, however, it's pretty much worthless.
-
I would rather the government steer very clear of this and it sure as hell shouldn't be in a party platform. The last thing we need is any sort of government platform judging any sort of mental illness and trying to 'fix' people (outside the criminal justice system of course). This is an individual issue based on his or her (or some combination of that) faith and belief system, and his own desires.
We open the door to this, what other government sponsored 'repairative therapy' will we be subjected to?
-
Stupid.
-
The fact is that it hasn't been thoroughly tested enough to really say whether it can have any beneficial or detrimental effect. Most of the anecdotes against it come from those who were forced or pressured into it, and that will always cause resentment. Plus, there is the issue of con-artistry (the New Jersey "clinic" that ended up being a sham and ended up inspiring that state's ban on it being the prime example). As for the accusations of causing mental anguish, it's already well-established that there is a correlation between homosexuality and mental illness, destructive behavior, etc. and we as a society try not to let the latter go untreated.
What I read into this is that this is a direct response to California and New Jersey's recent moves to ban the practice. I see Eagle Forum (Phyllis Schlafly's organization) is behind it. If I were the GOP I probably wouldn't go so far as to endorse the practice, but I would probably try to resist any efforts to outlaw it in the absence of any real, tangible evidence that good-faith, voluntary efforts to steer people away from homosexuality actually CAUSE harm.
-
These people don't live in the real world. Has the Texas GOP been taken over by Bible-thumping fundies?
-
These people don't live in the real world. Has the Texas GOP been taken over by Bible-thumping fundies?
In certain GOP ranks, it is not far from "mainstream." Remember House Tea Party Caucus leader's husband, reportedly does conversion for his shrink business.
This position is a huge liability for the GOP, considering the entire country, notwithstanding Texas Republicans.
-
Stupid, stupid people.
-
This is really bizarre. There is NO evidence that conversion therapy works; it never made sense to me (or to most people) that homosexuality is a choice, and there is zero evidence that it is. (EVIDENCE not anecdotal testimony)
Yet, the Texas GOP (under the influence of Cruz and Patrick) has taken a step backward on its platform.
Greg Abbott will never make reference to most of the platform, so, if its value is to make the extremists in the party feel good, it achieved its purpose.
As a practical policy document, however, it's pretty much worthless.
As a policy document, its worth lies in its usefulness to any Democrat running against any Republican anywhere in the US. And to them, this is worth a lot.
-
Outrageous. The GOP was supposed to be the party of individual freedom and individual rights. Whether or not someone is gay or straight or whatever any of the combinations are is not a political issue. Doing something like this is acknowledging that gov't has the right to tell us how to live, and all we're discussing is what the rules should be.
Doesn't anyone remember the Constitution???? :shrug:
-
Stupid, stupid people.
You didn't include enough "stupid" - should be "stupid x infinity".
-
I would rather the government steer very clear of this and it sure as hell shouldn't be in a party platform. The last thing we need is any sort of government platform judging any sort of mental illness and trying to 'fix' people (outside the criminal justice system of course). This is an individual issue based on his or her (or some combination of that) faith and belief system, and his own desires.
We open the door to this, what other government sponsored 'repairative therapy' will we be subjected to?
Outrageous. The GOP was supposed to be the party of individual freedom and individual rights. Whether or not someone is gay or straight or whatever any of the combinations are is not a political issue. Doing something like this is acknowledging that gov't has the right to tell us how to live, and all we're discussing is what the rules should be.
Doesn't anyone remember the Constitution???? :shrug:
thank you
-
Outrageous. The GOP was supposed to be the party of individual freedom and individual rights. Whether or not someone is gay or straight or whatever any of the combinations are is not a political issue. Doing something like this is acknowledging that gov't has the right to tell us how to live, and all we're discussing is what the rules should be.
Doesn't anyone remember the Constitution???? :shrug:
They are all big government statists.
Whether they are left wing, secular, entitlement big government statists, or right wing, religionist, moralist big government statists, they are all statists.
The leftists extremists spend their time and energy trying to use the force of government to force people into doing things they don't want to do, while the right wing extremists spend their time and energy trying to use the force of government to stop people from doing things they want to do.
-
I love how Texas makes liberals and RINOs (but that's redundant) heads explode.
-
I love how Texas makes liberals and RINOs (but that's redundant) heads explode.
Is there a swastika on those overalls that we can't see?
Your idea of how government should involve itself with homosexuality is a lot closer with the Islamofascist and Nazi ideas on homosexuality than mine.
I suggest that the harmful ideology is yours, not mine.
-
I love how Texas makes liberals and RINOs (but that's redundant) heads explode.
since you want to meddle in other peoples' private lives, you have no ground for complaining when other people - Obama/Democrats/liberals - want to meddle around in, and tell you how to live, yours.
-
One influential tea party group called Texas Eagle Forum
If this group has its roots in Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum, it predates the tea party movement by many years and, therefore, cannot accurately be called a tea party group (influential or otherwise). Facts do matter.
Having said that, this was an inappropriate and unnecessary topic for the GOP platform discussion, in my opinion (as one who has participated in state party platform meetings).
-
They are all big government statists.
Whether they are left wing, secular, entitlement big government statists, or right wing, religionist, moralist big government statists, they are all statists.
The leftists extremists spend their time and energy trying to use the force of government to force people into doing things they don't want to do, while the right wing extremists spend their time and energy trying to use the force of government to stop people from doing things they want to do.
So where does that leave people who like the idea of individual freedom?
-
So where does that leave people who like the idea of individual freedom?
Stuck in the middle, like always.
-
Stuck in the middle, like always.
RINOs, huh? :whistle:
-
RINOs, huh? :whistle:
screwed.