Over at LifeSiteNews.com, one Greg Quinlan shares his predictably hysterical opinion.
The homosexual push for “equal marriage,” otherwise known as genderless marriage, can only lead to a ban on heterosexual rights.
And what rights would those be?
“parents in California are now prohibited from taking their children to see a therapist to resolve their child’s unwanted same-sex attractions.”
How terrible. Parents not allowed to spend huge sums on abusive “therapies” with a clinically-proven zero percent success rate in changing a person’s natural sexual orientation? Next you’ll be telling us it’s somehow wrong to raise your kids to be self-loathing hypocrites.
According to Quinlan, sound medical practice is actually a vast conspiracy to force kids to have homosexual impulses.
So for parents who discover that their son has been molested and is now sexually confused, their only option is to make an appointment with a gay affirming therapist because unlike heterosexual affirming therapy, gay affirming therapy has not been declared illegal in California even though such therapy has not been proven beneficial by the APA.
Yet a parent can take their son to a therapist to approve gender blocking hormones so that the child’s natural gender is stunted before he reaches puberty. In short, parents can attempt to change a child’s gender, but they can’t change their child’s sexual orientation unless it is to a homosexual identity.
You see, the only reason anyone ever feels same-sex attraction is because they were sexually molested. To be properly heterosexual, you have to be molested by someone of the opposite sex, apparently. Or something.
And apparently all licensed, practicing, legitimate therapists are part of a vast conspiracy to reprogram kids to fall in love differently. Even endocrinologists, who are trying to treat serious hormonal disorders in young children (ever meet an 8-year-old with PMS?) are really just conducting diabolical subversion of kids bodies in order to turn them into gays. Muahaha.
Earth to Quinlan: none of this feverish fantasy is true. Therapists have no reason to want heterosexual kids to become gay. Even if they did, trying to brainwash straight kids to be gay is just as ineffective as trying to turn gay kids straight. Falling in love is natural. Attraction is natural. It’s not something you choose to do, as though you could just flip some kind of mental switch and then never feel any attraction for the “wrong” people.
The problem with this so-called “heterosexual therapy” is that it uses principles of psychotherapy to create and reinforce an unhealthy psychological denial instead of helping the patient achieve honest self-acceptance. Quinlan himself provides us with a good example.
As a former homosexual, I understand the gays’ dread and absolute fear of heterosexuality. It goes beyond trying to normalize sodomy by calling it “marriage.” It’s about labeling others as “gay” as early as possible—witness the gay activist push into public schools—and then ensuring that they do not leave the group. As a homosexual, I was welcomed with open arms, especially when I joined the gay activist cause.
But when I decided to leave homosexuality after seeing hundreds of my friends and acquaintances die of AIDS, I was demonized and excoriated as an ex-gay traitor, which continues to this day.
Yeah, funny how people resent it more when the calls for bigotry and oppression come from former comrades, isn’t it? Perhaps if Quinlan looked up the definition of “traitor” he’d have a better understanding of why the term would be applied to someone who switches from helping his fellows resist oppression to seeking to harm his own group.
And notice how he misses the real problem here. His friends and acquaintances didn’t die because they fall in love differently. They died from a sexually-transmitted disease—a disease gays are more vulnerable to because they’re not allowed to marry and form lasting, legal, single-partner relationships. Gay marriage would be a huge advance in halting and preventing the spread of AIDS, but Quinlan opposes it, even though this is going to mean more gay men die.
If it were not for Quinlan’s irrational hostility towards same-sex attraction, he’d be able to recognize that AIDS is only one of many problems faced by homosexuals, and that the truly caring and useful response is to try and suppress the problems instead of trying to suppress the gays. His own “ex-gay” brainwashing has turned him into a prime example of why this so-called “therapy” does more harm than good.
It’s amazing how many friends he must have had, people he must have known. If somebody makes such an obviously idiotic statement, it shows that their point is far more important to them than anything real
Whoa! I’m going have to ask you to show some working here. People (of whatever sexual orientation) are perfectly capable of forming lasting monogamous relationships without actually getting married, and married people (of whatever sexual orientation) are perfectly capable of promiscuity. I really don’t see how you can sustain the claim that the legal status of people’s relationships, in and of itself, has any bearing on the transmission rates of sexually transmitted diseases. In fact, there’s a counter-argument – people who think they’re in a stable, monogamous relationship are less likely to practice safe sex, and plenty of people have only learned of their marriage partner’s infidelity by contracting otherwise inexplicable STDs.
Yes, married couples are generally more likely to stay together than non-married couples, but that’s a selection effect – people who are more likely to stay together are more likely to get married. The marriage license in itself has no magical power to make people stay together who otherwise wouldn’t, and it certainly offers no protection against either infidelity or STDs.
You have a fair point, but I would offer a counter-argument that, because homosexual relationships really aren’t socially acceptable yet, it makes it harder for someone who is homosexual to be honest when it comes to relationships. I think if gay marriage were to be legalized nationwide, this would help with these relationships becoming socially acceptable. (Though, I admit, with the way things are trending, homosexual relationships may become acceptable in the very near future regardless of the legal state of gay marriage.) Then if these relationships are more acceptable, gay people can be honest about their relationships.
I had a similar idea to Buzz Saw.
Imagine a gay man getting het-married and trying to pass. He might then go cruising from time to time and engage in unsafe sex. In a different cultural climate, the same guy might not feel the need to pass and either be monogamous (serially or not) or have sex with a few known men rather than the rotating selection of guys at a random hookup. You get the idea; there are a number of different scenarios you can imagine but it’d take some over time studies to see if the average amount of unprotected gay sex drops (and number of partners) over time with greater acceptance of gays (men in this example).
PFOX goes so far beyond just “ex-gay” “therapy” it’s ridiculous. They are are full-blown hate group that is against anything gay and any sorts of civil rights.
“Next you’ll be telling us it’s somehow wrong to raise your kids to be self-loathing hypocrites.”
This is why fundies oppose sects education.
“parents in California are now prohibited from taking their children to see a therapist to resolve their child’s unwanted same-sex attractions.”
It’s worse than THAT. They can’t stone the child to death as it says to in the Bible anymore either.
Acceptance and support for a fellow member of an oppressed group. How diabolical!
To paraphrase him…
“Sure, those gay people are nice to other gay people, but they really hate getting stabbed in the back! Isn’t that so hypocritical?! I mean, the NERVE!”
*head-desk*
Horrible, isn’t it?
The welcoming love, support, friendship, and that feeling of “I’m finally home”.
*shudders*
It almost makes me long for repression, denial, persecution and frenzied rants about “deviants” and “perverts”. Happy days!
Oh, wait…
I’m not sure why people are unhappy with the ban on “reparative therapy.” Just call it a homeopathic (a pun, get it?) treatment, and the law can’t/won’t do anything to stop them.
Most notably it only applies to real, licensed therapists. There are already countless religious nutbags masquerading as counselors and offering religion-based therapy who can continue to mess people as before.
Would you make homeopathic “reparative therapy” by recording short snippets of a session and mixing it with Handel’s Water Music?
No, no. It’s “Like cures Like” . You need something that mimics the symptoms to cure the disease.
The correct remedy would be Broadway show tunes diluted to 30C in “Water Music”.
And let us not forget that, worldwide, HIV/AIDS is overwhelmingly a heterosexual disease.
Aproximiately 10% of all people now with HIV are children aged 14 and younger; most of those are infants who got it from an infected mother either transvaginally during birth or as a result of nursing. Of the adults, slightly more than half are women, and HIV/AIDS has been the leading cause of death among women in their reproductive years since 2006. More than two-thirds of all cases of HIV are in sub-Saharan Africa: the United States has only about 1.4% of the planet’s HIV infections.
Not that frothing-at-the-mouth hate-mongers pay attention to facts or anything.
Yet we have missionaries in Africa condoning condom use and in this country we have religious nuts, many of whom may be funding those missions, blaming the homosexuals as the major source of AIDS, makes perfect sense if you’re a delusional lunatic.
I started scratching my head at the “genderless marriage” comment. What the hell is that supposed to mean? Even if two men marry, they are still men. Nobody is denying their gender or giving it up in any way. The gender roles in same-sex marriage are different than in hetero-marriage, but they still exist. What is the subtext of this idea supposed to be? I can’t figure it out.
I thought it referred to marriage documents no longer specifying “husband” and “wife” but rather “spouse” and “spouse”. But I could easily be missing a dog whistle.
I suspect “genderless marriage” means “I don’t know who goes on top”.
Or perhaps he has the idea that two guys take turns being the woman.
I think it’s that these guys tend to be very wrapped up in a husband leads, wife submits model of marriage. To them, a marriage consisting of two wives or two husbands couldn’t possibly work because WHO WOULD BE IN CHARGE?!?!?!!11 Probably also can’t concieve of an egalitarian hetero relationship.
Because we all know that for relationships to work, one party has to be constantly imposing their will on the other, or the world would end. Or something.
How the fuck could this even be possible? Idiot asshat lying machines.
Well duh, that isn’t a right anyway, even if it had the full weight of law behind it. That is a wrong.
My child has a problem with left-handedness which I need resolved.
Never mind these are frequently the same people who would deny things like schizophrenia and refuse to treat help affected family members get treatment (just get over it), or “treat” the disorder with prayer or exorcism.
Also, sodomy (in its various definitions) is and always has been normal. Then again, so is being in denial and living in fairyland. (But the latter can actually be treated psychologically if necessary, but some people just grow up and don’t need professional help.)
My partner’s been reading over my shoulder, and she’s just said:
“I’m only 35 and I’m still shaking at the memory of being told that my left-handedness was “evil”.
I was only four, it was my first week at school, and I was being smacked on the back of my hand every time I pulled it out from under my bum.
Luckily my mother wasn’t going to stand for that shit. I’m not sure what she said to the teacher, the nightmare catholic fiend, but I was never forced to sit on that hand again. Thank fuck Mrs N didn’t know I was a future gay!”
Gah! I find it odd in the extreme where the Left Hand of Evil has persisted, and where it has not. I know people in their seventies who didn’t have to put up with that crap, but their friends at different schools did.
If I had to deal with that, I’d be shaking with rage, too. Actually, I wonder if I would have made it through school at all, given my tendency to snap after submitting to some bullshit or other for too long.
I personally know people in their early 30’s in Canada who were physically abused by nuns when trying to write with their left hands.
Artor: I believe the idea there is ‘gender-independent marriage’, i.e., the marriage contract between persons and the state does not take gender into account, violating the ‘one man, one woman’ demands of these idiots. Genderless is the marriage, not the people. (Unless they see themselves that way – the whole gender binary thing is wrong and irrelevant, too.)
Quinlan isn’t “ex-gay”. He’s still gay — he’s ex-same-gender-sexual-relations (maybe; see Ted Haggard, et al).
You can change your sexual attractiveness preferences about as easily as you can change your eye color. Oh sure, you can put different colored contact lenses on, but the eye color is still there.
Quinlan is gay as gay can be. Except he’s not happy about it. A non-gay gay, if you will.
Your comment just reminded me of something I read yesterday. Recently, Evan Rachel Wood, an actress who had identified as bi-sexual, married a man. Someone asked her if she was still bi-sexual and she answered: “Yes, I’m just not single.”
I just listened to a German comedian who talked about his gay “marriage” (or the shoddy excuse we have in Germany)
They love to threaten heterosexual marriage. They lurk in the bushes of public parks on a Saturday night and shout at heterosexual couples “we’re going to get you!”
Heterosexual divorce by force! Rawrrrr!
Jeez, if he doesn’t see any difference between same-sex muff-diving/cock-sucking and marriage I’d hate to have attended the same weddings as him.
I’ve been her. I would not want any kid to go through that, it was fucking hell. I tried to kill myself because I was literally losing my mind.
No eight year old should be suddenly launched into the body and mind of a woman, and everything that brings with it.
Paediatric endocrinologists can save children, not only from the mental pain, but from the social problems that come from looking double their age in a world where pubescent girls are fair game.
I don’t think he was talking about that kind of treatment. More likely, he was talking about hormone suppression treatments for transgender adolescents. Still paranoid as fuck, but different.
from the post:
To fundies it’s all the same thing. Planned Parenthood = “abortion mills”, hormone blocking for kids = ebil conspiracy to turn out legions of LGBT drones.
I’ve had online run-ins with people who deny the very existence of precocious puberty. When I tried pointing out sources to them, they switched tack to “If it DOES exist, it’s Gawd’s will!”
Many endocrinologists specialise in gynaecology or reproductive endocrinology too. Again, certain people cannot comprehend why a pre-teen girl would need those services. It’s probably not a huge stretch of my imagination to wonder how many children might only have the choice of seeing. one at their local Planned Parenthood, and ended up being targeted by pro-liars.
It’s an even smaller stretch to bet myself that at. least one endocrinologists has been targeted in the same way that “abortion doctors” (is gynaecologist so hard to say?) are. Step 1, locate endo’s office, 2, note the number of young clients, and 3, tell all your church buddies that there’s a huge trade in “sex changes” for children.
Also, the therapy is identical, whether you’re treating PP, or delaying the development of secondary sexual characteristics until a child can decide whether to transition or not. The outcome’s the same too, happier child with decreased suicidality. Win/win.
I comprehend, but completely fail to understand, how some people think that rights are some kind of limited and scarce resource, rather like petroleum, and that to extend rights to some they must be withdrawn from others.
The only “right” being curtailed is the right to bigotry, the right to treat others as if they were less than human and the right to impose one person’s narrow definition of morality on others.
But that’s the most important one!
Zero-sum gamers ruin all sorts of things for everyone. Rights, economies, you name it.
Parents, and especially fundie parents, have been known to believe they do have the right to impose their definition of morality on their kids. Fundie parents often have a worse problem – they think they somehow have the “right” to not have their children even be exposed to any definition of morality but their own.
While it’s not unreasonable for parents to provide moral guidance to their kids, they still do not have the right to abuse them. And “ex-gay” therapy for teens is abuse, plain and simple. Fundie parents disagree. They’re wrong.