CONVERSION THERAPY: BANNED, BIASED OR ESSENTIAL

Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York just announced a series of measures intended to eliminate so-called conversion therapy:

• Mr. Cuomo’s plan relies on economic incentives meant to discourage conversion therapy’s use on young people. Insurers in New York, for instance, will now be prohibited from covering the cost of such therapy for anyone under 18.

• That action… would prohibit the use of Medicaid to pay for conversion therapy. Centers overseen by the State Office of Mental Health would also be barred from providing conversion therapy to minors, according to the governor’s office.

How does Cuomo justify prohibiting the free choice of both parents and their children from seeking counseling for their unwanted same-sex attraction? Cuomo charges:

• “We will not allow the misguided and the intolerant to punish L.G.B.T. young people for simply being who they are,” 

Are the parents and their adolescent-teenage children “misguided?” Does Cuomo think he knows what is best for them? The horrific consequences for this lifestyle are undeniable – highly elevated levels of suicide, mental illness, depression, STDs, domestic violence, shortened life, and substance abuse. Could any therapy incur worse results!

Cuomo claims that those who administer such treatment are “intolerant to punish L.G.B.T. young people for simply being who they are.” But how does Cuomo know that they are “intolerant” rather than compassionate. He doesn’t. Instead, he has employed the carefully honed rhetoric of manipulation – tarring the opposition as “intolerant” or just haters.

Besides, are these youth really gay or are they simply going through a period of identity confusion? They is a lot of evidence that sexual attraction is quite fluid, rather than settled, at these ages. Why try to lock them into a lifestyle that dooms them to a life of self-destruction! It would seem that, in light of the horrific consequences, that almost anything should be tried to channel the youth into more a salutary lifestyle.

If there have been some therapeutic interventions that have been found to be unproductive or harmful, then make their failures known and explore or promote other more promising forms of therapy.

Instead, our pundits have condemned all forms of conversion therapy. It would be like condemning all forms of bipolar therapy because of the failure of one particular intervention. The fact that Cuomo wants to ban all forms of conversion therapy demonstrates, not a concern for the youth, but an entrenched political agenda. Instead, he should fund other more hopeful ways to address this horribly self-destructive lifestyle.

Cuomo’s sexually indulgent approach is also the approach of the Feds:

• Valerie Jarrett, a senior adviser to the president, described its [conversion therapy] “potentially devastating effects on the lives of transgender as well as gay, lesbian, bisexual, and queer youth.”

Their approach is to damn anything that might have the promise of helping youth to avoid a life of despair.

Last year, the New York State Assembly labelled conversion therapy a form of “professional misconduct that could put medical licenses at risk.” But is it misconduct or is it professionally responsible to help youth overcome what they regard as a problem? There are many indications that such therapy can be effective:

• There are two major studies most often cited to support the potential benefits of reparation [conversion] therapy. One, originally published in book form in 2007, was conducted by Stanton Jones and Mark Yarhouse. A follow-up to the study, which appeared in the Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy in 2011, concluded not only that it was possible to change one’s homosexual orientation, but also that psychological harm was unlikely to result from the effort. (Salvo, Issue 22,34)

The Robert Spitzer study, published in 2003 in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, also offers promise:

• After studying efforts on 200 volunteers who had experienced predominantly homosexual attractions for many years before beginning therapy, Spitzer found that, for all subjects, “there was a marked reduction [of homosexual tendencies]…not only on the three measures of overt behavior and sexual orientation self-identification…but also on the seven variables assessing sexual orientation itself.” (34)

Had Cuomo and others, who want to ban all forms of supportive therapy for those who have chosen to resist same-sex attraction, merely publicized against those interventions associated with negative outcomes, they might be more credible. However, they are not taking the middle road. Nor are they asking for further research to identity interventions that offer the most promise. Instead, they seek to ban all forms of such therapy, thereby revealing their own intolerance and disregard for the struggles of these youth.

VP Joe Biden, “Bigots,” and Secularism

In 2012, leading the charge for the administration, Vice President, Joe Biden, came out in favor of SSM:

• "I am absolutely comfortable with the fact that men marrying men, women marrying women, and heterosexual men and women marrying one another are entitled to the same exact rights, all the civil rights, all the civil liberties."

However, without any apparent concern that his rhetoric might be inflammatory and polarizing, he now refers to those who oppose SSM as “bigots.” While addressing one of the nation's leading homosexual activist groups on Friday in the nation's capital, he assured them:

• "We're never going to be able to eliminate the bigots. They're a small percentage of the population."

Evidently, there is nothing reprehensible about wanting “to eliminate the bigots.” Biden talked as if this concern was totally understandable and even laudable. Instead, he reassured his audience that the bigots will become less of a nuisance:

• "But make one thing absolutely clear, folks, they are an incredibly smaller and smaller minority. This country is changing."

It seems that if those who oppose SSM weren’t becoming “an incredibly smaller and smaller minority,” a move to “eliminate” us might be an option.

We can no longer think about our administration, not as long as they hate and want to remove us; not as long as they are using inflammatory rhetoric against our well-being. And removing us from any positions of influence is clearly a part of their agenda.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo had railed against those who had taken a stance against SSM:

• “Who are they? Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that’s who they are and if they are the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.” 

A decorated Navy chaplain, Lt. Commander Wes Modder, has been removed of his duties because he was targeted in a private counseling session and asked his views of sexuality. He offered his denominational stance on homosexuality and was brought up on charges.

Atlanta, Georgia Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran was fired because of a book he wrote reflecting his anti-SSM views. The mayor defends his move claiming that the chief cannot impartially manage his department.

Why cannot we bring the same accusation against Joe Biden! The fire chief has demonstrated no animus towards gays. However, Biden reduces half of this nation to the status of “bigots”- think “maggots.” Nor is there any indication that the chief had wanted to demote or penalize any gays. However, this is clearly the intention of the VP in labeling us “bigots.” We have been made fair-game. He has placed a target on our backs and a gun in the hands of the violent.

The secularism of our Founding Fathers bears little resemblance to the “secular” intolerance of today. The historian, Edwin Scott Gaustad, quotes perhaps our most secular Father to this effect:

• “Almighty God hath made the mind free.” It follows therefrom that mankind should do all that it can to keep minds unshackled and un-coerced. Let us consider, Jefferson noted, that if an all wise and powerful God restrained himself from coercing either the bodies or the minds of men and women, how utterly absurd it must be for “fallible and uninspired men” to arrogate to themselves the right to exercise “dominion over the faith of others…Be it enacted,” therefore, “that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever.” One will suffer in no way for his or her religious opinions; on the contrary, all persons “shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion.” And whatever their opinions, this will in no way affect their citizenship or their rights. (A Religious History of America, 119).

The Founding Fathers understood that if we are to live together, we must be civil with one another – not a very profound insight. However, todays secularists believe that they can build the good society by eliminating the “bigots.” Evidently, they are the “good guys,” but good guys have always left a litter of mangled bodies in their wake.

Gov. Cuomo: Intolerance Wearing Robes of Leadership

Are we viewing the creation of a dictatorship? During a WCNY radio interview with Susan Arbetter on “The Capitol Pressroom,” New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo railed:

• “Who are they? Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that’s who they are and if they are the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.”

Cuomo also urged the “extreme” conservatives to “figure out if your extreme conservative philosophy can survive in this state, and the answer is no.”

What are “New Yorkers?” Evidently, Cuomo doesn’t recognize those of us who are opposed to abortion, same-sex marriage or weapon control as “New Yorkers.” I guess that only those who share his views are New Yorkers. And, naively, we had thought that he represented all the residents of our state!

Would he then recognize us as Americans? Of course, if we are not New Yorkers – and we are therefore stateless – then we can make no claim to be Americans either! Are we now illegal aliens, liable to deportation merely because we don’t share his political agenda?

I wonder if we could still retain our New York residency if we believe in gun control but not SSM and abortion? But then there is also the question of pedophilia, smoking in public places and adultery! Here’s what I am getting at – I wish that the governor would lay it out on-the-line. How many of his opinions must we sign-off on in order to retain our New York citizenship? And if we can’t pass the test, will Cuomo pay to have us resettled elsewhere?

I doubt he is prepared to do this – not with the New York economy the way it is. Perhaps if we officially become “illegal aliens,” we will be treated a lot better. However, it seems that our governor would deny us even this status – his words are far harsher towards us!

If we are not New Yorkers after living here for all of our lives, what are we? It seems that this is not the way this country had always been. My governor wants to deny me the freedom to express my views. He claims that we “have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.” However, he had sworn to uphold the Constitution, and the Constitution upholds our rights to vote and to express ourselves, even if our opinions aren’t popular with the governor. Is he seeking dictatorial control?

Ironically, the views that he opposes do not advocate the violent overthrow of the government, the murder of the infirmed and elderly, or even the denial of any constitutionally guaranteed rights. Instead, he finds offensive beliefs that had previously been held by all Americans, even all American presidents. Even Barack Obama had affirmed traditional marriage, and yet Cuomo is not trying to deny him citizenship. Nor is he demanding that Bill and Hilary forfeit their New York citizenship because of their advocacy of DOMA!

Perhaps, instead, it is governor Cuomo who should be stripped of his citizenship for not upholding the very principles he had sworn to uphold. Rather, it is necessary for all of us to find ways to live together despite our differences. This is what it had once meant to be an American.