It is important to remember, when reading this story, that Republican Presidential candidates agree with this enforcement of LGBT dogma. We are facing a real revolution–not just a sexual revolution but an overturning of freedom with a regime that uses force to ensure ideological conformity.
And just like ISIS conquering territory, the civil war is waged city by city.
Thus, the headline: “Cincinnati to consider ban on reparative therapy for LGBT youth.”
City Council Member Chris Seelbach said Thursday that at Monday’s meeting of the council’s law and public safety committee, he will propose an ordinance that would impose a $200-a-day fine on a therapist or counselor practicing the therapy that aims to “change” lesbians, gay men, bisexuals or transgender people from their sexual orientation or gender identity.
“I feel very confident that I have the votes” for passage out of committee Monday, Seelbach said. The full council would then take up the ordinance Wednesday, and Seelbach expressed confidence in winning there as well.
Passage apparently would make Cincinnati the first major U.S. city to ban reparative or conversion therapy. The Movement Advancement Project, an LGBT organization in Denver that tracks legislation nationwide on reparative therapy, has no record of a city passing an ordinance that would ban the practice.
The alleged reason for this piece of tyranny was a suicide of a teen who claimed in a note that he was “transgender” but his parents considered him delusional and tried to get him help.
Well, why stop there? When is anorexia or bulimia going to become a civil right? When are girls who want to cut themselves with razors going to get the protection of the law from superstitious, bigoted parents who try to get them to stop?
Notice the headline lies about the ordinance. It doesn’t single out “youth” for protection. It bans any adult from seeking help with unwanted sexual desires. It is a ban of free speech. If the person doesn’t want the sexual desires because he thinks God has prohibited those actions, then the law also forbids the religious freedom acknowledged in the Bill of Rights. Cincinatti is aiming a double-barreled shotgun at the First Amendment.
By the way, there a plenty of secular reasons why a person would seek therapy for homosexual attraction and gender delusions. As the lesbian and atheist Camille Paglia has said,
If a gay man wants to marry and sire children, why should he be harassed by gay activists accusing him of “self-hatred”? He is more mature than they are, for he knows that woman’s power cannot be ignored. If counseling can allow a gay man to respond sexually to women, it should be encouraged and applauded, not strafed by gay artillery fire of reverse moralism.
Why wouldn’t a person want to have their own biological child with the other biological parent. And why wouldn’t a person want to avoid surgical pretense. A rational person who has incompatible sexual temptations and gender confusion can decide that those things are an obstruction to his or her overarching values. But Cincinnati is denying such people the freedom to get help.
The entire idea that one is forever fixed as a homosexual or transgender is a superstition, not science. As Mack Stetson wrote in response to the story of one of many Christians who used to be homosexual but is now obedient to Christ:
Even though I don’t think it matters that much, I’m not sure why people find it implausible. Even if one defies science and believes that some people have a “gay gene” or whatever, who is to say that everyone who participates in the behavior does so for that reason? In fact, nothing has ever been found that is only present in homosexuals or only present in heterosexuals to explain why they choose different sexual practices. It seems obvious to me that if someone gets groomed at the right age by the use of pornography and perhaps drugs or alcohol, that a homosexual seduction might indeed change his or her path. Also, even liberal pro-homosexuals admit that people change their sexual practices. (Part of the problem is that when a person changes from heterosexual to homosexual, it is always considered “coming out” as if he or she has always been “gay” and are just now revealing it. I understand this terminology for people who were doing homosexual acts in secret, but the term is used for other situations. In that case “being gay” is a bit like the transgender urban legend of “being the opposite sex” on the “inside” and not “identifying” with the sex that you really are.
Pray for people in Cincinnati and be vigilant in your own city.