Hello Billy:

Anyone who practices reparative therapy is open for lawsuits and 
ethics/licensure violations.  It doesn't matter which of the five major 
psychotherapy groups one belongs too, all are subject to the same best practice 
and do no harm standards.  The DSM lists what conditions/behaviors are 
considered psychopathology, and thus amenable to medical treatment.  
Homosexuality is not considered a psychopathology (as you chronicled) and thus 
a practitioner cannot legitimately offer a treatment to "repair" it, even if a 
patient were to request such a treatment.

Pedaphelia, sado-masochism, and paraphelias are considered psychopathology and 
thus OK for treatment.  Homosexuality is not.  Given the waves of change in 
society today I don't see that trend ever reversing.

Having said that, I appreciate the courage you are displaying with respect to 
talking about this issue in real terms rather than PC niceties.  Sexuality is a 
very complicated area.  I do agree strongly with you that some of what is 
passing for normal sexual behavior today is psychopathological.  I've also seen 
devastating effects on relationships from normalization, and easy access to 
pornography.

Kevin


  Kevin :
  I cannot comment on family therapy since that is a profession about which
  my knowledge is close to non-existent. However, in terms of psychotherapy
  ( in any legitimate form ), it seems to me that homosexuals should receive
  therapy upon request. They certainly need it  --desperately.

  I would imagine that in family therapy the situation is very different. That 
is
  another world, and as I understand it, children may be included.

  But about homosexuality, there is an entire ( fairly large and well organized 
)
  group called NARTH, National Association for Research and Therapy
  of Homosexuality, which specifically deals with homosexual treatments
  that reverse the "orientation" of those with this pathology.

  The main problem with NARTH is that ,as a guess, about 1/4th are
  religious hard cases, like Jeffrey Satinover, MD. He sure knows the
  physiological side of the issue but cannot refrain in his writings from
  what I will uncharitably call "Bible thumping."

  The obvious majority in NARTH consists of non-religious or
  not-very-religious professionals, mostly psychoanalysts. I have
  some of their publications and they are all first rate.

  These are the kinds of people who ought to be reachable in terms
  of actually mobilizing for political action. Not easily, not at all,
  psychoanalysts, by their nature, usually  stay out of politics,
  but their wealth of knowledge on relevant issues is 
  extremely valuable.

  Billy

  -----------------------------------------------------------



  dated 11/13/2011  [email protected] writes:
    Hello Billy:

    I'm new to this forum and doing a lot of reading and catching up.  I may 
not have received the list of Amendments before.  I just finished reading the 
brief on Homosexuality.  Quite clear indeed.  

    The issue is heating up in Family Therapy right now because our ethical 
guidelines prohibit discriminating against any person who seeks therapy. Some 
religious MFT's believe they should not be required to treat a gay or lesbian 
client. As a libertarian-inspired therapist I believe no independent 
professional should be required to treat anyone against his will.  The American 
Psychological Association recently passed a pro-gay marriage ethical statement. 
 AAMFT remains neutral but the handwriting seems to be on the wall.

    By the way I did not tell anyone they should read my book.  I don't speak 
in those terms.  I'm pleased to have the opportunity to offer ideas for 
consideration and to read others' thoughts in an exchange of opinions.

    Kevin

      Kevin :
      What is my rationale ?  I would have thought that the Amendment spelled 
it all out.
      What part of the Amendment is unclear ?

      Or did you read it ?

      I guess not. We should read you book, and I have already read parts of it,
      but no need to read anyone else's writings ?  

      Anyway, the following, below,  is from the "truth Amendment," and makes 
      the point that, to re-use the Confucian adage, "a lie told 1000 times is 
easier 
      to believe than the truth told once."  For  pedophilia occurs at 
astronomical rates
      among homosexuals compared with heterosexuals regardless of pro-homosexual
      propaganda to the contrary. Best stats I know about put the number of
      boy rapes at between 40 % and 50 % as many as rapes of girls. That is,
      roughly 2 % of the population, male homosexuals, commit about 
      half as many sex crimes as 48 % of the population, male heterosexuals.
      The incidence level is close to 15 times that of heterosexuals,
      in any case a magnitude greater.

      Yes, not all male homosexuals are pedophiles, but no-one who is informed
      puts the figure are less than 20 % or 25 %.  What if one out of four or 
five
      heterosexual males raped young girls ? But since this is about
      young boys, well, who cares...  

      Until all hell breaks loose.

      I'd say that with this level of incidence it is fair enough to 
characterize
      homosexuality among males as linked to pedophilia. Not to even count
      the fact that the rate is probably higher and the related fact that
      pedophilia plays a major role in homosexual 'culture.'

      We have  --about this and about MANY other matters on the subject
      of homosexuality--  been lied to year in and year out by the media,
      by homosexuals or their supporters, and by dupes of homosexuals
      in business and government. Guess what ?  I will take my one truth any day
      before I believe even one of their 1000 lies.

      I am also dismayed beyond belief at the ineffectiveness and bad judgement
      of Evangelicals on this issue, who do oppose homosexuality but who seem
      to have willfully chosen the stupidest strategy available, who make
      little effort to become informed, and who in any case put this
      at or near the bottom on their list of priorities.

      And then they wonder why their children are raped.

      After all, everything else is more important, especially money.

      Besides, it would mean the necessity to have a backbone when
      the popular culture has been mostly won over to the homosexual viewpoint,
      and that is out of the question if you want to get ahead in life.

      Much better to put bank accounts first, waaay first.

      My view is that there is no alternative but to completely forget about
      Evangelicals on this issue, they are not about to do one damned thing
      that matters. I sincerely am disgusted at their failures in this area.
      Disgusted and angry.

      Billy

      ------------------------------------------------------------------

      Right to Truth

      Included in "outcome"  is the principle that consensus is no substitute
      for objective truth. That is,  even a "sea change" in opinion generally 
may mean
      nothing if conclusions were reached based on faulty "information," or on
      one or another form of dishonesty. This Amendment is intended to help make
      truthfulness normative in American society more than has often been the 
case in the past.
      by penalizing falsehoods. Showing indifference to public lying is 
dysfunctional
      to all of society.

      Honest errors shall be protected by law in all cases where those 
concerned can show
      that they have carried out serious research or investigation to seek to 
verify their
      contentions. 

      
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

      11/12/2011 3:57:17 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected] writes:
        Hi Billy:

        Your beliefs about homosexuality are new to me.  What is your 
rationale?  I have a psychological lens, having worked with many over the years 
in psychotherapy.

        Most people make a distinction between homosexuality and pedophelia.

        Kevin


          Here is the difficulty :
          In many cases "government intervention" IS government.

          In 1787 Madison advocated federal legislative powers that would have 
allowed
          the Congress to nullify laws passed in the states. Reason ?  Among 
other things
          because he wanted to see slavery abolished and did not think there 
was any
          other way to do so. Eventually the 14th Amendment did the job. That 
Amendment
          was a case of Government Intervention writ large.

          Similarly, child labor laws intervened in the market. It also is 
government intervention
          when Congress passes laws that limit pollution, establish safety 
regulations, or
          prohibit poll taxes. You can almost ask, "what isn't government 
intervention"
          when speaking of Acts of Congress. For that matter, most Executive 
Orders
          are also government interventions, as are most Supreme Court 
decisions.

          Thus we get a libertarian case against government intervention and 
the phrase
          is conveniently undefined. Or we get an argument about a government 
intervention
          that went bad, forgetting all opposite effects for the good. Yet all 
laws and
          Constitutional Amendments, or almost all , consist of interventions. 
Which
          the father of the Constitution himself, James Madison favored on 
principle.

          That is, as an Originalist, it is impossible for me to ignore the 
main author of
          the Constitution and his intentions, which, while hardly about 
everything, regardless
          favored government intervention as a Good.

          Something happens and a lot of people are upset. They demand that 
government
          should act, viz, intervene,

          This is November 12, 2011. There is one helluva scandal at Penn State 
University.
          It seems as if a football coach named Sandusky has been molesting and 
raping
          young boys. Joe Paterno was informed about this and did almost 
nothing about it
          and retained the services of Sandusky for 7 years after the first 
report came
          to his attention.

          What should government do ?  Nothing and simply let this play out in 
criminal court ?
          How about eliminating the problem ?  How about treating homosexuality 
for what it is,
          a mental illness deserving legal prohibition and mandatory treatment 
so that this
          dysfunctional behavior in brought under control ?

          My project, "A Radical Centrist Vision for the Future," consisting of 
100 suggested
          constitutional Amendments, includes several in the area of social 
values. The entire
          project was sent to everyone on this list, plus a good number of 
other people.
          The Amendments concerning social values are included in the following 
material, 
          featuring an Amendment to re-criminalize homosexuality . The argument 
is psychoanalytic, 
          and generally based on science and scholarly research findings. It is 
anything
          but an argument from tradition or religious authority.

          What actions that are less than this can possibly bring the 
criminality which is
          intrinsic to homosexuality to a halt ?  How many more Catholic Church 
type
          scandals do we need ? Now we have a big one in NCAA sports. Where
          will it go next ?

          But there are other social / values issues which also cry out for 
government
          intervention, such as child pornography and the need to enforce 
anti-Communist
          prohibitions in America.  

          Sure, there is a new consensus on issues such as homosexuality. So 
what ?
          The only question that matters is whether this consensus is for the 
good 
          or whether the whole rationale behind it is fallacious and has the 
effect of
          destroying our society. It is as obvious as anything gets that this 
new
          consensus is a consensus from hell and needs to be completely
          discredited. It is unpopular to make the effort ?  Yes it is. But it 
is 
          immoral in the extreme not to make the effort and seriously try to 
change 
          the consensus and to oppose everyone who now is in cahoots with it.

          Just how does anyone think that scandals like the Catholic Church
          and Penn State come about ?  These scandals happen all over
          the country every day, somewhere, at lesser scale  --in local schools,
          in the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, among Congressmen, and you name 
it--
          precisely because of the nature of homosexuality itself.

          It is time to become actually informed on the issue and do something 
about it.

          Billy

  -- 
  Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
  Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
  Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to