Is being gay a sin according to your religion?

[Shadow Wolf]

However, these baptists see you heading towards hell, together with Kermit the Frog: http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=49703

Landover is a parody and satire. It isn't real. I'm actually kinda surprised it's even still around.

When I was in college I had the good fortune to take a Spanish literature class. We spent the entire quarter on the book Don Quixote. The poor Don went off his head, and in his mind he became a great knight champion for good, fighter for the oppressed. He saw a donkey as a powerful charger, his shabby little friend as knights equirrey, a prostitute as a great princess. He put a pot on his head as his knights helmet, and went forth to do battle.The problem was, he totally was confused about his enemy, didn';t grasp reality, but made it what he so strongly wanted it to be, in spite of the evidence other wise, He attacked windmills and fulling dams because he saw them as evil knights that he must destroy. I see a wonderful parallel with some posters on this thread.

I see a wonderful parallel between the story and you. You just don't grasp reality, you refuse to even acknowledge it when presented with evidence, but instead you resort to an ancient text that was written by people who tried to say that all human languages can be pin pointed to one place and one time.

 

[viole]

Landover is a parody and satire. It isn't real. I'm actually kinda surprised it's even still around.

I see a wonderful parallel between the story and you. You just don't grasp reality, you refuse to even acknowledge it when presented with evidence, but instead you resort to an ancient text that was written by people who tried to say that all human languages can be pin pointed to one place and one time.

Lol. I thought it was a kind of Poe. Which, like all poes, looked real.

Ciao

- viole

 

[sojourner]

If someone believed lefty's were the devil incarnate, and chose to avoid me, why should I care

If you had been ostracized, fired from employment, blamed for AIDS, barred from taking communion or being baptized, barred from marriage, and constantly told by society in general that you were less than human and going to hell, if you had heard politicians blame you for the degradation of the family, if you could not adopt or enter the ministry, if someone asserted loudly that the bible clearly said that left-handedness is an abomination, all because you were left-handed,


You'd care.

 

[shmogie]

Landover is a parody and satire. It isn't real. I'm actually kinda surprised it's even still around.

I see a wonderful parallel between the story and you. You just don't grasp reality, you refuse to even acknowledge it when presented with evidence, but instead you resort to an ancient text that was written by people who tried to say that all human languages can be pin pointed to one place and one time.

The evidence is far from conclusive, I suggest research it, all of it, not just what supports your views. And what difference does it make to you what ~I believe re that text ? Don't I have the right to believe whatever I choose OR are you demanding conformity to your views in a manner like Orwell clearly exposed ? Must you ensure that even my thoughts confirm your perspective ? I make no demands of you of any kind. You are tilting at windmills, and those that think and demand as you do are experiencing an impossible dream,

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes, really. When it next happens I can point it out if you wish. Though I'd prefer it if you just stopped talking down to everyone who doesn't share your belief system. As I've observed before, you are not a preacher and we are not your congregation.

Well we can agree that I'm not a preacher and you are not a member of a congregation...but I can't in good conscience cease expressing myself as I understand life in the context of the religious practice because you do not share my understanding...that is not talking down to you. If you mistakenly interpret it that way, why do you just not read what I have to say...ignore me..

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The evidence is far from conclusive, I suggest research it, all of it, not just what supports your views.

Apparently you missed the few times when I mentioned my education is in such things. I've read a ton of research about it.

Don't I have the right to believe whatever I choose OR are you demanding conformity to your views in a manner like Orwell clearly exposed ?

I've never suggested or implied otherwise.

I make no demands of you of any kind. You are tilting at windmills, and those that think and demand as you do are experiencing an impossible dream,

All I'm doing is pointing out that Jesus had no such restrictions as to whom he associated with, and pointing out that attitudes such as "I won't associate with them" leads to bigger problems. Also that you want to pretend science has no consensus about homosexuality, but plenty of us has offered links of evidence, whereas you haven't given us anything. You also erroneously believe there is no consensus, as there are some of us here who simply know better because it is our field of study.

 

[Ingledsva]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

When I was in college I had the good fortune to take a Spanish literature class. We spent the entire quarter on the book Don Quixote. The poor Don went off his head, and in his mind he became a great knight champion for good, fighter for the oppressed. He saw a donkey as a powerful charger, his shabby little friend as knights equirrey, a prostitute as a great princess. He put a pot on his head as his knights helmet, and went forth to do battle.The problem was, he totally was confused about his enemy, didn';t grasp reality, but made it what he so strongly wanted it to be, in spite of the evidence other wise, He attacked windmills and fulling dams because he saw them as evil knights that he must destroy. I see a wonderful parallel with some posters on this thread. You have created an enemy because you need to have one, you have no respect for the enemy you have created, because in your minds he deserves none. You preach tolerance and acceptance, but like the poor Don, those outside your knightly code are evil, regardless of reality. And like Don Quixote, you tilt at windmills, believing to be what you have made them to be.
a wonderful play was written from the book, and its title applies so beautifully to you who want to bend and twist what is real, into your own alternate reality. You may charge enemies you have created, you may demand that the real evidence of reality be considered as it is in the realm of your minds, but like the title of the play, it is " The Impossible Dream"

And again we get BULL, and what you think about US - rather than you answering the questions.

*

 

[shmogie]

True. The moment you need to justify them is when they interfere with society, which might not care about them. Like when they are are used as the main argument to prevent gays from marrying.

If you are against gay marriages for personal reasons, there is not much we can do. Your opinion is as good as mine. Things like gays adopting children are not obvious. And I can somehow understand the concerns, even if I do not share them, of the average person.

But If you delegate the whole issue to what is very likely the figment of the imagination of some ancient people, then you should expect to be called out.

Ciao

- viole

Call out as much as you want, if it makes you feel better, I have been "called out" by some real masters of the craft, though not on this issue, I stand unbowed. I never said anything about gay marriages, but now I will since you brought it up. No doubt new fires will be lit, and will rage. I was against homosexual marriage, not because of my Biblical beliefs, but because I respect the language, and tradition. Marriage has always been defined as a union between a man and woman in the US. I know of no exception to this in all the countries that are represented in the Ancestry of American citizens. So to say marriage is now arbitrarily something else is more bastardization of the language. I did strongly support civil union, with all the rights, and responsibilities of marriage. Absolutely no difference. Thus the integrity of the language is maintained and all are protected. Of course, the matter is moot now since the Supremes weighed in. Legally I think they were wrong, because marriage is clearly a states rights issue according to the Constitution, and no where in the same document is marriage affirmed as a right. However, I don't expect them to consider my legal opinion.

And again we get BULL, and what you think about US - rather than you answering the questions.

*

And again we get BULL, and what you think about US - rather than you answering the questions.

*

Dear lady, you have posed no questions that I choose to answer. I try to avoid semi hysterical, crude people

 

[shmogie]

Apparently you missed the few times when I mentioned my education is in such things. I've read a ton of research about it.

I've never suggested or implied otherwise.

All I'm doing is pointing out that Jesus had no such restrictions as to whom he associated with, and pointing out that attitudes such as "I won't associate with them" leads to bigger problems. Also that you want to pretend science has no consensus about homosexuality, but plenty of us has offered links of evidence, whereas you haven't given us anything. You also erroneously believe there is no consensus, as there are some of us here who simply know better because it is our field of study.

I have directed you to the American psychological Association. Please read their statement on the matter. If you need more evidence, and cannot find it, I will direct you, although it is easy to find, if you look. Are you a psychologist, psychiatrist,physician or biologist ? If so, I am amazed you are so emphatic in your beliefs. If not, I prefer the balanced approach of professionals in the field, Jesus was very clear in telling his followers to present the Gospel to everyone, but if they choose not accept it, the Disciples were to move on. He made it clear that the reason for mingling with any and every person had a specific purpose, to convert them to Christianity, to share with them the good news of the Gospel, the forgiveness of sin, the concept of salvation. He didn't just hang out with the dregs of society to play darts with them or to drink beer with them. He accepted all people, but he required acceptance of him, those that did not, he left to continue seeking out people with whom to share his message. I have pointed out that there is no restriction on me re "associating" with homosexuals who are outside the faith. I have also said that I do not seek them out, nor have I known any that I wanted to associate with. Christ never closes the door to anyone, his Grace is always available to those who seek it

 

[Ingledsva]

Call out as much as you want, if it makes you feel better, I have been "called out" by some real masters of the craft, though not on this issue, I stand unbowed. I never said anything about gay marriages, but now I will since you brought it up. No doubt new fires will be lit, and will rage. I was against homosexual marriage, not because of my Biblical beliefs, but because I respect the language, and tradition. Marriage has always been defined as a union between a man and woman in the US. I know of no exception to this in all the countries that are represented in the Ancestry of American citizens. So to say marriage is now arbitrarily something else is more bastardization of the language. I did strongly support civil union, with all the rights, and responsibilities of marriage. Absolutely no difference. Thus the integrity of the language is maintained and all are protected. Of course, the matter is moot now since the Supremes weighed in. Legally I think they were wrong, because marriage is clearly a states rights issue according to the Constitution, and no where in the same document is marriage affirmed as a right. However, I don't expect them to consider my legal opinion.


Dear lady, you have posed no questions that I choose to answer. I try to avoid semi hysterical, crude people

Very funny!

I've given the Greek or Hebrew, and legit history, and commentary.

You have given us nothing.

*

 

[Wynnie]

I am a Pagan, and UU. Both of these religions generally accept and ordain LGBT adherents. If it were otherwise, I would have to find different religions.

 

[shmogie]

Us, Us ? how many of you are there ?

Why do you think that statement is factually wrong? It's the most obvious thing in the world to me.

This is why I keep asking you when you consciously chose your sexual orientation. I'm trying to illuminate the obvious. Get it?

I doubt most people know (for sure) much about why homosexuals are homosexuals. My sexuality is totally consistent with my body type and my genetic makeup, I didn't choose to be born a male., The issue is not why most of the population are consistent with their gender.and genetic make up, the issue is why does someone born with the physical type and genetic makeup of a particular gender act sexually inconsistent with their gender. To clearly answer your question. No, I did not choose my sexuality I was born a male and my sexuality is that of a male

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I have directed you to the American psychological Association. Please read their statement on the matter.

I know the APA's position. They do not believe homosexuality is a disorder or a chosen sexual orientation, they have condemned reparative therapy and have strongly urged clinicians to not use at is causes further damage, and they hold the positions that people who are homosexual should be accepted as regular members of society and not discriminated against because discrimination leads to further problems.
AGAIN, you are treading into my field of study (next step is my masters degree). When you invoke the APA thinking their positions backup yours, I know, for a fact, without even having to look it up, that you are wrong.
http://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/orientation.aspx

Since 1975, the American Psychological Association has called on psychologists to take the lead in removing the stigma of mental illness that has long been associated with lesbian, gay and bisexual orientations. The discipline of psychology is concerned with the well-being of people and groups and therefore with threats to that well-being. The prejudice and discrimination that people who identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual regularly experience have been shown to have negative psychological effects. This pamphlet is designed to provide accurate information for those who want to better understand sexual orientation and the impact of prejudice and discrimination on those who identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual.
....
most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.

http://psc.dss.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/HTML/resolution97.html

The Council of Representatives of the American Psychological Association (APA) has passed a resolution affirming four basic principles with regard to treatments to alter sexual orientation, so-called conversion or reparative therapies.

These principles are:

• Homosexuality is not a mental disorder and the APA opposes all portrayals of lesbian, gay and bisexual people as mentally ill and in need of treatment due to their sexual orientation;

• Psychologists do not knowingly participate in or condone discriminatory practices with lesbian, gay and bisexual clients;

• Psychologists respect the rights of individuals, including lesbian, gay and bisexual clients to privacy, confidentiality, self-determination and autonomy;

• Psychologists obtain appropriate informed consent to therapy in their work with lesbian, gay and bisexual clients.

The resolution further states that the APA "urges all mental health professionals to take the lead in removing the stigma of mental illness that has long been associated with homosexual orientation."

Supporters of the resolution, which passed the APA Council overwhelmingly by a voice vote, believed that it was critical for the Association to make such a statement due to the questions of the ethics, efficacy and benefits of conversion therapy which are now being debated within the profession and within society as a whole.

"Our concern," stated Douglas Haldeman, Ph.D., President of APA's Society for the Psychological Study Of Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Issues, "is that a person, especially a young person, who enters into therapy to deal with issues of sexual orientation should be able to have the expectation that such therapy would take place in a professionally neutral environment absent of any societal bias. Additionally, therapists should be providing clients with accurate information about same-sex sexual orientation. This resolution reasserts the profession's commitment to those two principles."

The APA Council of Representatives is the major legislative and policy-setting body of the organization. The American Psychological Association (APA), in Washington, DC, is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States and is the world's largest association of psychologists. APA's membership includes more than 151,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students. Through its divisions in 50 subfields of psychology and affiliations with 58 state, territorial and Canadian provincial associations, APA works to advance psychology as a science, as a profession and as a means of promoting human welfare.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

why does someone born with the physical type and genetic makeup of a particular gender act sexually inconsistent with their gender.

Except this "consistency" doesn't exist. There are simply way too many examples to the contrary.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/19/h...st-apologizes-for-study-on-gay-cure.html?_r=1

Now here [Dr. Spitzer] was at his computer, ready to recant a study he had done himself, a poorly conceived 2003 investigation that supported the use of so-called reparative therapy to “cure” homosexuality for people strongly motivated to change.
...
And he would later learn that a World Health Organization report, released on Thursday, calls the therapy “a serious threat to the health and well-being — even the lives — of affected people.”
Dr. Spitzer’s fingers jerked over the keys, unreliably, as if choking on the words. And then it was done: a short letter to be published this month, in the same journal where the original study appeared.
“I believe,” it concludes, “I owe the gay community an apology.”
...
In the late 1990s as today, the psychiatric establishment considered the therapy to be a nonstarter. Few therapists thought of homosexuality as a disorder.
...
Dr. Spitzer in no way implied in the study that being gay was a choice, or that it was possible for anyone who wanted to change to do so in therapy. But that didn’t stop socially conservative groups from citing the paper in support of just those points, according to Wayne Besen, executive director of Truth Wins Out, a nonprofit group that fights antigay bias.
...
But Dr. Spitzer could not control how his study was interpreted by everyone, and he could not erase the biggest scientific flaw of them all, roundly attacked in many of the commentaries: Simply asking people whether they have changed is no evidence at all of real change. People lie, to themselves and others. They continually change their stories, to suit their needs and moods.
...
And one day in March, Dr. Spitzer entertained a visitor. Gabriel Arana, a journalist at the magazine The American Prospect, interviewed Dr. Spitzer about the reparative therapy study. This was not just any interview; Mr. Arana went through reparative therapy himself as a teenager, and his therapist had recruited the young man for Dr. Spitzer’s study (Mr. Arana did not participate).

“I asked him about all his critics, and he just came out and said, ‘I think they’re largely correct,’ ” said Mr. Arana, who wrote about his own experience last month. Mr. Arana said that reparative therapy ultimately delayed his self-acceptance as a gay man and induced thoughts of suicide. “But at the time I was recruited for the Spitzer study, I was referred as a success story. I would have said I was making progress.”

 

[Shadow Wolf]

http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/therapeutic-response.pdf
(SOCE stands for sexual orientation change efforts)

A principal goal of the available research on SOCE was
to demonstrate that SOCE consistently and reliably
produce changes in aspects of sexual orientation.
Overall, due to weaknesses in the scientific validity
of research on SOCE, the empirical research does not
provide a sound basis for making compelling causal
claims. A detailed analysis of these issues follows.
...
Our analysis of the methodology of SOCE reveals
substantial deficiencies. These deficiencies include
limitations in making causal claims due to threats
to internal validity (such as sample attrition, use
of retrospective pretests, lack of construct validity
including definition and assessment of sexual
orientation, and variability of study treatments and
outcome measures). Additional limitations with
recent research
include problems with
conclusion validity
(the ability to make
inferences from the
data) due to small
or skewed samples,
unreliable measures, and inappropriate selection
and performance of statistical tests. Due to these
limitations, the recent empirical literature provides
little basis for concluding whether SOCE has any effect
on sexual orientation. Any reading of the literature on
SOCE outcomes must take into account the limited
generalizability of the study samples to the population
of people who experience same-sex sexual attraction and
are distressed by it. Taking into account the weaknesses
and limitations of the evidence base, we next
summarize the results from research in which same-sex
sexual attraction and behavior have been treated.
...
No studies reported
effect size estimates or confidence intervals, and many
studies did not report all of the information that
would be required to compute effect sizes. As a result,
statistical significance and methodology are considered
in interpreting the importance of the findings. As the
report will show, the peer-refereed empirical research
on the outcomes of efforts to alter sexual orientation
provides little evidence of efficacy and some evidence of
harm.
...
We conclude that there is a dearth of scientifically
sound research on the safety of SOCE. Early and recent
research studies provide no clear indication of the
prevalence of harmful
outcomes among people
who have undergone
efforts to change their
sexual orientation
or the frequency of
occurrence of harm
because no study to date
of adequate scientific
rigor has been explicitly
designed to do so. Thus,
we cannot conclude how
likely it is that harm
will occur from SOCE.
However, studies from
both periods indicate
that attempts to change sexual orientation may cause
or exacerbate distress and poor mental health in some
individuals, including depression and suicidal thoughts.
The lack of rigorous research on the safety of SOCE
represents a serious concern, as do studies that report
perceptions of harm (cf. Lilienfeld, 2007).
...
The limited number of rigorous early studies and
complete lack of rigorous recent prospective research on
SOCE limits claims for the efficacy and safety of SOCE.
Within the early group of studies, there are a small
number of rigorous studies of SOCE, and those focus on
the use of aversive treatments. These studies show that
enduring change to an individual’s sexual orientation is
uncommon and that a very small minority of people in
these studies showed any credible evidence of reduced
same-sex sexual attraction,
though some show lessened
physiological arousal
to all sexual stimuli.
Compelling evidence of
decreased same-sex sexual
behavior and increased
attraction to and engagement in sexual behavior with
the other sex was rare. Few studies provided strong
evidence that any changes produced in laboratory
conditions translated to daily life. We found that
nonaversive and recent approaches to SOCE have not
been rigorously evaluated. Given the limited amount
of methodologically sound research, we cannot draw a
conclusion regarding whether recent forms of SOCE are
or are not effective.
We found that there was some evidence to indicate
that individuals experienced harm from SOCE. Early
studies do document iatrogenic effects of aversive
forms of SOCE. High dropout rates characterize early
aversive treatment studies and may be an indicator
that research participants experience these treatments
as harmful. Recent research reports indicate that there
are individuals who perceive they have been harmed
and others who perceive they have benefited from
nonaversive SOCE. Across studies, it is unclear what
specific individual characteristics and diagnostic criteria
would prospectively distinguish those individuals
who will later perceive that they have succeeded and
benefited from nonaversive SOCE from those who will
later perceive that they have failed or been harmed.
In the next chapter, we explore the literature on
individuals who seek to change their sexual orientation
to better understand their concerns.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/orientation.pdf

What role do prejudice and
discrimination play in the
lives of lesbian, gay, and
bisexual people?
Lesbian, gay, and bisexual people in the
United States encounter extensive prejudice,
discrimination, and violence because of their
sexual orientation. Intense prejudice against
lesbians, gay men, and bisexual people was
widespread throughout much of the 20th
century. Public opinion studies over the 1970s,
1980s, and 1990s routinely showed that, among
large segments of the public, lesbian, gay, and
bisexual people were the target of strongly
held negative attitudes. More recently, public
opinion has increasingly opposed sexual
orientation discrimination, but expressions of
hostility toward lesbians and gay men remain
common in contemporary American society.
Prejudice against bisexuals appears to exist at
comparable levels. In fact, bisexual individuals
may face discrimination from some lesbian and
gay people as well as from heterosexual people.
Sexual orientation discrimination takes many
forms. Severe antigay prejudice is reflected
in the high rate of harassment and violence
directed toward lesbian, gay, and bisexual
individuals in American society. Numerous
surveys indicate that verbal harassment
and abuse are nearly universal experiences
among lesbian, gay, and bisexual people.
Also, discrimination against lesbian, gay, and
bisexual people in employment and housing
appears to remain widespread.
The HIV/AIDS pandemic is another area in
which prejudice and discrimination against
lesbian, gay, and bisexual people have had
negative effects. Early in the pandemic, the
assumption that HIV/AIDS was a “gay
disease” contributed to the delay in addressing
the massive social upheaval that AIDS would
generate. Gay and bisexual men have been
disproportionately affected by this disease.
The association of HIV/AIDS with gay and
bisexual men and the inaccurate belief that
some people held that all gay and bisexual
men were infected served to further stigmatize
lesbian, gay, and bisexual people.

What is the psychological
impact of prejudice and
discrimination?
Prejudice and discrimination have social and
personal impact. On the social level, prejudice
and discrimination against lesbian, gay, and
bisexual people are reflected in the everyday
stereotypes of members of these groups.
These stereotypes persist even though they
are not supported by evidence, and they are
often used to excuse unequal treatment of
lesbian, gay, and bisexual people. For example,
limitations on job opportunities, parenting,
and relationship recognition are often justified
by stereotypic assumptions about lesbian, gay,
and bisexual people.
On an individual level, such prejudice and
discrimination may also have negative
consequences, especially if lesbian, gay, and
bisexual people attempt to conceal or deny
their sexual orientation. Although many
lesbians and gay men learn to cope with the
social stigma against homosexuality, this
pattern of prejudice can have serious negative
effects on health and well-being. Individuals
and groups may have the impact of stigma
reduced or worsened by other characteristics,
such as race, ethnicity, religion, or disability.
Some lesbian, gay, and bisexual people may
face less of a stigma. For others, race, sex,
religion, disability, or other characteristics may
exacerbate the negative impact of prejudice
and discrimination.
The widespread prejudice, discrimination, and
violence to which lesbians and gay men are
often subjected are significant mental health
concerns. Sexual prejudice, sexual orientation
discrimination, and antigay violence are major
sources of stress for lesbian, gay, and bisexual
people. Although social support is crucial in coping
with stress, antigay attitudes and discrimination
may make it difficult for lesbian, gay, and bisexual
people to find such support.

What about therapy intended to
change sexual orientation from
gay to straight?
All major national mental health organizations
have officially expressed concerns about therapies
promoted to modify sexual orientation. To
date, there has been no scientifically adequate
research to show that therapy aimed at changing
sexual orientation (sometimes called reparative
or conversion therapy) is safe or effective.
Furthermore, it seems likely that the promotion
of change therapies reinforces stereotypes and
contributes to a negative climate for lesbian, gay,
and bisexual persons. This appears to be especially
likely for lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals who
grow up in more conservative religious settings.
Helpful responses of a therapist treating an
individual who is troubled about her or his same-
sex attractions include helping that person actively
cope with social prejudices against homosexuality,
successfully resolve issues associated with and
resulting from internal conflicts, and actively
lead a happy and satisfying life. Mental health
professional organizations call on their members
to respect a person’s (client’s) right to self-
determination; be sensitive to the client’s race,
culture, ethnicity, age, gender, gender identity,
sexual orientation, religion, socioeconomic status,
language, and disability status when working
with that client; and eliminate biases based on
these factors.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

http://www.livescience.com/50453-why-gay-conversion-therapy-harmful.html

In supporting the ban, the president may have science on his side.
"The overwhelming scientific evidence demonstrates that conversion therapy, especially when it is practiced on young people, is neither medically nor ethically appropriate and can cause substantial harm," Valerie Jarrett, a senior adviser to President Barack Obama, said in a statement.
Gay conversion therapy — which its supporters claim can change the orientation of gay, lesbian and transgender people — has a long track record of not working, according to a review of the scientific literature published by the American Psychological Association (APA).
What's more, research suggests the treatment can worsen feelings of self-hatred and anxiety, because it encourages people to fight or hate a sexual orientation that can't be changed.
The proposed national ban, known as Leelah's Law, was named after a transgender teen, Leelah Alcorn, who committed suicide in December 2014 after receiving treatment from therapists she said were biased and hostile toward her identity. Currently, licensed therapists cannot provide conversion therapy to minors in California, New Jersey or the District of Columbia, but the practice remains legal elsewhere in the country.
But is there scientific evidence to support a national ban on the practice?
Because being gay is not considered a mental disorder, most psychological organizations don't endorse treatments to change sexual orientation, which may be influenced by a person's genes. Research suggests that gay conversion therapy does not produce long-lasting sexual-orientation change in people who undergo it. In 2009, an American Psychological Association task force conducted a review of studies on gay conversion therapy between 1963 and 2007. They found that sexual-orientation change was uncommon; participants continued to be attracted to members of their own sex and not to those of the opposite sex.
...
But according to the APA, scientists don't agree on what causes someone to be gay. Some early studies hint that genetics or the regulation of certain genes may play a role in determining sexual orientation and, at the least, indicate that being gay is not a "choice," science suggests.

The APA report also revealed some evidence that gay conversion therapies increased the risk of negative outcomes, including loss of sexual feeling, anxiety, depression and suicidal feelings. In early aversive-therapy techniques, many people dropped out of treatment, the report found. High dropout rates can be an indication that many people found the treatment too harmful to continue.

According to the APA review, people who underwent modern talk-based gay conversion therapy also reported being harmed by it.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

https://www.splcenter.org/issues/lgbt-rights/conversion-therapy

Conversion therapy – sometimes known as “reparative” or “sexual reorientation” therapy – is a dangerous practice that purports to change a person’s sexual orientation, literally “converting” them from gay to straight.

This practice – which can include violent role play, reenactment of past abuses, and exercises involving nudity and intimate touching – has been discredited by virtually all major American medical, psychiatric, psychological and professional counseling organizations.

When the disturbing details are exposed to the light of day, it’s clear that this practice based on junk science is worse that snake oil: Not only does it not work, it’s harmful to LGBT people and their families. People who have undergone conversion therapy have reported increased anxiety, depression, and in some cases, suicidal ideation. It can also strain family relationships, because practitioners frequently blame a parent for their child’s sexual orientation.
...
In June 2015, a jury in our first-of-its-kind lawsuit in New Jersey found that an organization known as JONAH had committed consumer fraud – that offering services it claimed could change clients from gay to straight was fraudulent and unconscionable.

In a landmark pre-trial ruling in that case, a judge excluded several leading conversion therapy proponents from testifying as defense witnesses because their opinions were based on the false premise that homosexuality is a disorder. In a blistering opinion that garnered international media attention, New Jersey Superior Court Judge Peter F. Bariso Jr. wrote that “the theory that homosexuality is a disorder is not novel but – like the notion that the earth is flat and the sun revolves around it – instead is outdated and refuted.”

The American Psychological Association also has expressed concern that the positions espoused by some of the leading advocates of conversion therapy, such as the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), “create an environment in which prejudice and discrimination can flourish.”

 

[Shadow Wolf]

http://tech.mit.edu/V119/N11/col2.11c.html

Had Desert Stream Ministries bothered to involve itself in the community it’s trying to change, it would have seen that homosexuals, like heterosexuals, are fully capable of establishing long-lasting and fulfilling relationships. In fact, the prayer/therapy groups which come from Desert Stream do not even have licensed psychologists present and are not alternatives to the “conversion” discussed. Their approach is worth noting because, the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Psychological Association (APA), the American Association of Pediatrics (AAP), and every other major scientific and medical group has come out in opposition to so-called “reparative” and “conversion” therapies.

The APA’s statement stressed that “reparative therapy” is not benign and that it often has deleterious effects. According to the statement, “The potential risks of ‘reparative therapy’ are great, including depression, anxiety and self-destructive behavior, since therapist alignment with societal prejudices against homosexuality may reinforce self-hatred already experienced by the patient. Many patients... were inaccurately told that homosexuals are lonely, unhappy individuals who never achieve acceptance or satisfaction. The possibility that the person might achieve happiness and satisfying interpersonal relationships as a gay man or lesbian is not presented, nor are alternative approaches to dealing with the effects of societal stigmatization discussed... the APA opposes any treatment, such as ‘reparative’ or ‘conversion’ therapy which is based on the assumption that homosexuality per se is a mental disorder or based on a prior assumption that the patient should change his/her sexual orientation.”
...
These “ex-gay” groups prey on those of us who haven’t come to understand that being gay does not have to mean living in a place of hurt and loneliness. Gay men and lesbians live full, complete, and healthy lives. Justin Chin, a reporter for The Progressive who went undercover into an “ex-gay conversion” program sums up his experience: “Ultimately, the difference between gays and ex-gays is like the difference between cheese and cheddar. The ex-gays try to drown their homosexuality in Bible verses, marriage, family, and their own new subcultural niche, but their homosexuality remains... Everything in their lives revolves around homosexuality and avoiding it... It’s disturbing to realize that these groups know that the best they can do is suppress a person’s sexual orientation, and yet they hold out an entire industry catered to ‘curing’ homosexuality.”