• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Chris Christie Signs Bill Banning Gay 'Conversion' Therapy

shrubnose

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
19,463
Reaction score
8,731
Location
Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie on Monday signed a Bill that bans therapists from providing a service to minors that aims to change their sexual orientation.

Generally I don't believe that government has any business getting in the middle of something like this, but I see the quacks and far right religious nuts who push garbage like this for what they are - a threat to the health of young people.

Here's the Yahoo article: http://news.yahoo.com/chris-christie-signs-bill-banning-'gay-conversion-therapy'--163725130.html




"Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~Robert Green Ingersoll




"Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves." ~ Ronald Reagan
 

avery45

Member
Joined
May 17, 2011
Messages
203
Reaction score
38
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Ok please someone answer with documentation. Is there a gay gene? Because I don't know.
 

joko104

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
61,041
Reaction score
21,575
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
There are many long threads on this topic.

Anyway, it's time for Democrats to again post that Christie should be the Republican nominee as the only chance Republicans have.
 

avery45

Member
Joined
May 17, 2011
Messages
203
Reaction score
38
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
There are many long threads on this topic.

Anyway, it's time for Democrats to again post that Christie should be the Republican nominee as the only chance Republicans have.
Ok, point me to one. I'm always hearing about the gay gene but haven't seen a study. Just curious.
 

soot

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2013
Messages
4,308
Reaction score
2,530
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Anyway, it's time for Democrats to again post that Christie should be the Republican nominee as the only chance Republicans have.
While the Republicans argue that an executive who respects the will of the people and the legislature of his jurisdiction rather than obstinantly clinging to personal idiology is a charlatan and a fraud.

I don't support Christie because he's a Republican or because he's a Democrat.

I support him because he's an effective, practical, pragmatic leader.

That, collectively, is a quality that's in short supply anywhere in Washington, or among the many also-rans who aspired to the White House over the course of the past 20 years.

But leave it to idiologues to let let idiology get in the way of common sense and the will of the collective, by whose consent the just powers of those who would govern are derived.
 

ThePlayDrive

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Messages
19,610
Reaction score
7,647
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Good on him. I hope this starts a pattern for other Republicans.
 

Gipper

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
25,120
Reaction score
7,658
Location
Theoretical Physics Lab
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I don't mind its ban, because I think that it has great potential to do harm - some of which is not fully understood and readily accepted yet.
 

Lutherf

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
38,125
Reaction score
45,073
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
One more reason that Christie should simply change his party affiliation.

Crap like this is just another lesion on the brain of the Republican party.
 

Fiddytree

Neocon Elitist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
29,756
Reaction score
17,164
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
There are many long threads on this topic.

Anyway, it's time for Democrats to again post that Christie should be the Republican nominee as the only chance Republicans have.
I would support Christie first, Rubio second, and would actually vote for him without a second guess.

OP: good news.
 

Goshin

The Hammer of Chaos
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,510
Reaction score
50,092
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I find it hard to see how banning a presumably voluntary course of therapy, even if it is somewhat controversial, is within the proper bounds of governmental authority.
 

Tucker Case

Matthew 16:3
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
45,603
Reaction score
22,539
Location
Everywhere and nowhere
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I find it hard to see how banning a presumably voluntary course of therapy, even if it is somewhat controversial, is within the proper bounds of governmental authority.
Often times children are placed into such programs by their parents. The ban is on such "therapies" (a gross distortion of that word, BTW) being administered to minors, I believe.
 

Slyfox696

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 8, 2013
Messages
11,201
Reaction score
7,380
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I find it hard to see how banning a presumably voluntary course of therapy, even if it is somewhat controversial, is within the proper bounds of governmental authority.
I would guess if it can be demonstrated as being harmful to the mental health of the children, it would be within the bounds of government to protect the child.
Anyway, it's time for Democrats to again post that Christie should be the Republican nominee as the only chance Republicans have.
There's a lot of truth to it.
 
Last edited:

brothern

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
3,774
Reaction score
2,624
Location
Chicago, IL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I find it hard to see how banning a presumably voluntary course of therapy, even if it is somewhat controversial, is within the proper bounds of governmental authority.
The law is only in respect to minors. The equivalent, I guess, would be to ask if you find it hard to justify banning 'faith healing' through government authority, e.g. treating a child's early-onset diabetes with prayer?

Edit: Hahaha, that was a 3 poster pile on.
 

CLAX1911

Supreme knower of all
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
Messages
46,299
Reaction score
9,251
Location
Houston, in the great state of Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie on Monday signed a Bill that bans therapists from providing a service to minors that aims to change their sexual orientation.

Generally I don't believe that government has any business getting in the middle of something like this, but I see the quacks and far right religious nuts who push garbage like this for what they are - a threat to the health of young people.

Here's the Yahoo article: http://news.yahoo.com/chris-christie-signs-bill-banning-'gay-conversion-therapy'--163725130.html




"Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~Robert Green Ingersoll




"Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves." ~ Ronald Reagan
The government actually has the right to ban therapies that are promising something and delivering something else. Its called fraud. It never has been legal.

I Can't sell a medicine that I claim cures cancer if it is not effective, its called a scam.
 

a351

#NeverTrump
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
6,902
Reaction score
4,825
Location
Space Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I find it hard to see how banning a presumably voluntary course of therapy, even if it is somewhat controversial, is within the proper bounds of governmental authority.
Even if the children participated voluntarily, the state should seek to discourage and prevent demonstrably harmful practices from being administered, especially in the case of minors. Parental rights should not extend past the bounds of reason and in this case, mental and physical health.
 

soot

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2013
Messages
4,308
Reaction score
2,530
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I find it hard to see how banning a presumably voluntary course of therapy, even if it is somewhat controversial, is within the proper bounds of governmental authority.
For the same reason people can't voluntarially feed their children to bears.

The harm that will likely result is greater than whatever benefit those volunteering their children for such "treatment" can legitimately establish might be derived.

If it could be empirically established that, despite the inherant dangers in feeding children to bears or subjecting them to pseudo-scientific religious conversion therapy, there was some great benefit that likely would result I think proponents of either treatment would have a leg to stand on.

Until then I think it's fair that the government step in and say, "You know what, trying to get an old woman to float isn't a reasonable method of determining whether or not she's a witch".
 

a351

#NeverTrump
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
6,902
Reaction score
4,825
Location
Space Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
One more reason that Christie should simply change his party affiliation.

Crap like this is just another lesion on the brain of the Republican party.
A much larger lesion on the Republican party is the fact that this is largely viewed as a party line issue, rather than a matter of medical ethics and common decency.
 

Lutherf

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
38,125
Reaction score
45,073
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
A much larger lesion on the Republican party is the fact that this is largely viewed as a party line issue, rather than a matter of medical ethics and common decency.
Yeah. Abortion kills people but we have to subsidize that while this might actually help someone so we have to ban it.:roll:
 

a351

#NeverTrump
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
6,902
Reaction score
4,825
Location
Space Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Yeah. Abortion kills people but we have to subsidize that while this might actually help someone so we have to ban it.:roll:
Abortion tangent aside, your idea of "help" isn't universally held or appreciated for that matter, and has been shown to do a great bit of harm to the folks you're trying to "fix."
 

shrubnose

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
19,463
Reaction score
8,731
Location
Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Ok please someone answer with documentation.
Is there a gay gene?
Because I don't know.



I don't believe that there is a gay gene, but I've seen some gay jeans (As in "Don we now our gay apparel Troll the ancient Christmas carol fa la la la la, la la la.")
 

avery45

Member
Joined
May 17, 2011
Messages
203
Reaction score
38
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
What if it is genetic. Someone who is gay gets genetically tested and finds out they are not actually gay?
 

Roland Deschain

New member
Joined
Jul 16, 2013
Messages
13
Reaction score
2
The government actually has the right to ban therapies that are promising something and delivering something else. Its called fraud. It never has been legal.

I Can't sell a medicine that I claim cures cancer if it is not effective, its called a scam.

Well... unless you pay off the right people anyway.
 

Lutherf

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
38,125
Reaction score
45,073
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Abortion tangent aside, your idea of "help" isn't universally held or appreciated for that matter, and has been shown to do a great bit of harm to the folks you're trying to "fix."
Of course.

I really don't have a problem with the government protecting the gay agenda or the anti-life agenda but to have them do so at the expense of the Christian morals agenda is utterly one sided and contrary to everything that the Constitution was created to prevent.
 
Top Bottom