Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
JAHS

New conversion therapy bill gets OK from Church

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, pogi said:

I'd like to straighten you out. 

I'm already as straight as I am ever going to get.  I don't need to stop considering men to be sexually attractive because it is an objective truth that all of them, including me, are.  I'm just going to be choosing not to have sexual relations with any of them anymore.

Quote

You too. 

Always am.  It's nice to be pleasantly surprised when it happens, though.

Edited by Ahab
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I'm already as straight as I am ever going to get.  I don't need to stop considering men to be sexually attractive because it is an objective truth that all of them, including me, are.  I'm just going to be choosing not to have sexual relations with any of them anymore.

I'm not talking about your sexual orientation.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, pogi said:

I'm not talking about your sexual orientation.

I'm already walking the straight and narrow path now, too.  Just try harder to love me as I am now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Ahab said:

I was sexually oriented to both men and women when I was younger, and although I still consider men to be sexually attractive, or at least some of them, I no longer seek to have sexual relations with men.  Only women now for me, and even that is limited to only my wife.

You're one of the lucky ones to be attracted to both, therefore able to marry whom you feel the best to be married to, imagine if you weren't attracted.

Recently spoke with my BIL and he mentioned that he had a talk with his gay son long ago, who said he'd never been attracted to women, ever. So there you go. And my BIL serves as a 1st counselor in the bishopric, and even said he didn't want his son to be lonely.

While his son lived in the home they'd never know if they'd find their son alive because he'd attempted suicide. Now this son has a boyfriend and is very happy. He is brilliant and could have had many great jobs but eventually ended up teaching math. He's taught at a high school in Orem, and now at West High. IMO, a great place for him to be. I think he was wanted to be in a special government military job, can't remember, because he's so smart. He and his boyfriend and my SIL/BIL went to the Paris temple dedication, because that is where his dad served a mission. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Ahab said:

Just try harder to love me as I am now.

I love you Ahab.  I just don't always love your behavior, nor should I try. 

Edited by pogi
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

You're one of the lucky ones to be attracted to both, therefore able to marry whom you feel the best to be married to, imagine if you weren't attracted.

Recently spoke with my BIL and he mentioned that he had a talk with his gay son long ago, who said he'd never been attracted to women, ever. So there you go. And my BIL serves as a 1st counselor in the bishopric, and even said he didn't want his son to be lonely.

While his son lived in the home they'd never know if they'd find their son alive because he'd attempted suicide. Now this son has a boyfriend and is very happy. He is brilliant and could have had many great jobs but eventually ended up teaching math. He's taught at a high school in Orem, and now at West High. IMO, a great place for him to be. I think he was wanted to be in a special government military job, can't remember, because he's so smart. He and his boyfriend and my SIL/BIL went to the Paris temple dedication, because that is where his dad served a mission. 

Yes, that is the problem when men are not attracted to women.   The only ones left to be attracted to are men, since men are not women.  Although some men like to dress like women and act like women but that is another issue we don't need to get into right now.

I think it's sad when men are not attracted to women.  Women are such a wonderful "thing", sex or "kind of person" or whatever, and there is a lot to be liked about women, even though some men don't see any reason to feel an attraction.  I like to tell men about those things that I like about women while hoping maybe, someday, they will give it a shot and look a little deeper inside of themselves to see if they can see a good reason to be attracted to women.  I think there is a curve or something to it and it just seems to take some men longer to be atttracted to women than it takes for other men.  It makes sense to me that all people are not equally attracted to other people, or other kinds of people.  Some men seem to be attracted to all women, and some only to just a few, and then there are those who don't seem to be attracted to women at all so they have no choice but to be attracted to whoever or whatever is left.  

I think in time everyone will be attracted to both sexes, at least a little bit.  There are lots of good things to like about both kinds of people, both sexes, or whatever you call them.  We're supposed to love everybody and I think the closer we come to that point, actually loving everybody regardless of what their "sex" is, the more we should see about why and how we can be attracted to all kinds of people.

Men with men, though.  Can't have babies.  Women with women can't either.  We need one of each to be able to reproduce ourselves otherwise our relationships will end when we are dead.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, pogi said:

I love you Ahab.  I just don't always love your behavior, nor should I try. 

Oh, okay.  I feel the same way about your behavior sometimes too.  So at least we're even.  Carry on.  I hope you will have a wonderful day tomorrow with lots to be thankful for.

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Yes, that is the problem when men are not attracted to women.   The only ones left to be attracted to are men, since men are not women.  Although some men like to dress like women and act like women but that is another issue we don't need to get into right now.

I think it's sad when men are not attracted to women.  Women are such a wonderful "thing", sex or "kind of person" or whatever, and there is a lot to be liked about women, even though some men don't see any reason to feel an attraction.  I like to tell men about those things that I like about women while hoping maybe, someday, they will give it a shot and look a little deeper inside of themselves to see if they can see a good reason to be attracted to women.  I think there is a curve or something to it and it just seems to take some men longer to be atttracted to women than it takes for other men.  It makes sense to me that all people are not equally attracted to other people, or other kinds of people.  Some men seem to be attracted to all women, and some only to just a few, and then there are those who don't seem to be attracted to women at all so they have no choice but to be attracted to whoever or whatever is left.  

I think in time everyone will be attracted to both sexes, at least a little bit.  There are lots of good things to like about both kinds of people, both sexes, or whatever you call them.  We're supposed to love everybody and I think the closer we come to that point, actually loving everybody regardless of what their "sex" is, the more we should see about why and how we can be attracted to all kinds of people.

Men with men, though.  Can't have babies.  Women with women can't either.  We need one of each to be able to reproduce ourselves otherwise our relationships will end when we are dead.

Ahab, not to disagree, just to elongate on the conversation in the direction of the topic of creating. I think that men or women that marry the same sex could adopt the kids in foster care and give them a home. So it all works out in the end. And what percentage are like this? I think there will be plenty of heterosexual couples to create babies together. 

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Ahab, not to disagree, just to elongate on the conversation in the direction of the topic of creating. I think that men or women that marry the same sex could adopt the kids in foster care and give them a home. So it all works out in the end. And what percentage are like this? I think there will be plenty of heterosexual couples to create babies together. 

That only works when the real biological parents die or for some other reason can't or won't take care of their own children, but yes that is something same sex couples can do in this world which kind of comes close to reproducing themselves as their old children. Not the same thing, though, and I don't think that will be something that will go on beyond the veil.  Same sex couples are only until death do they part.  And people who don't want children in heaven will simply not have them.

Edited by Ahab

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, Ahab said:

Prepare to be disappointed.

I doubt it. More due to lack of opportunity then anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Ahab said:

Yes, that is the problem when men are not attracted to women.   The only ones left to be attracted to are men, since men are not women.  Although some men like to dress like women and act like women but that is another issue we don't need to get into right now.

I think it's sad when men are not attracted to women.  Women are such a wonderful "thing", sex or "kind of person" or whatever, and there is a lot to be liked about women, even though some men don't see any reason to feel an attraction.  I like to tell men about those things that I like about women while hoping maybe, someday, they will give it a shot and look a little deeper inside of themselves to see if they can see a good reason to be attracted to women.  I think there is a curve or something to it and it just seems to take some men longer to be atttracted to women than it takes for other men.  It makes sense to me that all people are not equally attracted to other people, or other kinds of people.  Some men seem to be attracted to all women, and some only to just a few, and then there are those who don't seem to be attracted to women at all so they have no choice but to be attracted to whoever or whatever is left.  

I think in time everyone will be attracted to both sexes, at least a little bit.  There are lots of good things to like about both kinds of people, both sexes, or whatever you call them.  We're supposed to love everybody and I think the closer we come to that point, actually loving everybody regardless of what their "sex" is, the more we should see about why and how we can be attracted to all kinds of people.

Men with men, though.  Can't have babies.  Women with women can't either.  We need one of each to be able to reproduce ourselves otherwise our relationships will end when we are dead.

Ah, one of your make everyone’s skin crawl posts.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/27/2019 at 1:45 PM, gopher said:

Has anyone been successfully converted from any kind of therapy that attempts to change sexual orientation?  Or is there a 100% failure rate in all attempts?

It really depends what sort of metric you are using to determine success. There really isn't an operational definition for sexual orientation. Are you talking attraction? Does a change from 5 to 4 or 4 to 3 on the Kinsey Scale count as change? Because we see that a lot, with and without therapy. I've even seen 6 to 3 or 4 to 2. From 6 to 0? Yeah not so much. But even if a youth wants to explore with their therapist whether it is possible to develop opposite sexual attractions- that will now be prohibited under the new rule. 

Behavior? There change becomes much more possible. From 6 (exclusively same-sex activity) to 0 (exclusively opposite-sex activity) is very realistic. But now, even that change in behavior cannot be addressed with a therapist.

Identity? People change how they see themselves all the time. From "gay" to "bisexual" to "mostly straight" to rejecting labels altogether. Now once any youth starts to see themselves as gay, they cannot explore other identities with a therapist. 

Unfortunately, all this nuance isn't considered under the rule. Attraction, behavior, and identity are lumped together. 

What is most disappointing to me is that now any youth who genuinely wants to explore change in any way (or worse parents who insist on some form of change) will not be able to explore those ideas with a trained therapist under legal and ethical obligation to do not harm.  Instead, their only option will be unlicensed "life-coaches" or ecclesiastical leaders.  Don't get me wrong, I think virtually every Bishop in the church means well. I just think far too many are likely to do more damage if they are the only available source of support. 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/30/2019 at 8:38 PM, kllindley said:

It really depends what sort of metric you are using to determine success. There really isn't an operational definition for sexual orientation. Are you talking attraction? Does a change from 5 to 4 or 4 to 3 on the Kinsey Scale count as change? Because we see that a lot, with and without therapy. I've even seen 6 to 3 or 4 to 2. From 6 to 0? Yeah not so much. But even if a youth wants to explore with their therapist whether it is possible to develop opposite sexual attractions- that will now be prohibited under the new rule. 

Behavior? There change becomes much more possible. From 6 (exclusively same-sex activity) to 0 (exclusively opposite-sex activity) is very realistic. But now, even that change in behavior cannot be addressed with a therapist.

Identity? People change how they see themselves all the time. From "gay" to "bisexual" to "mostly straight" to rejecting labels altogether. Now once any youth starts to see themselves as gay, they cannot explore other identities with a therapist. 

Unfortunately, all this nuance isn't considered under the rule. Attraction, behavior, and identity are lumped together. 

What is most disappointing to me is that now any youth who genuinely wants to explore change in any way (or worse parents who insist on some form of change) will not be able to explore those ideas with a trained therapist under legal and ethical obligation to do not harm.  Instead, their only option will be unlicensed "life-coaches" or ecclesiastical leaders.  Don't get me wrong, I think virtually every Bishop in the church means well. I just think far too many are likely to do more damage if they are the only available source of support. 

 

These changes do occur but I think it is unlikely these shifts comes from the therapist directly “helping” the client cultivate feelings. More often I suspect it comes from sorting out their life in general or just from life changing them and the shifts just come. I doubt this rule will prove a hindrance.

In any case I am glad a rule was agreed on and kids in Utah cannot be involuntarily sent for treatment and that adults will no longer be bamboozled with treatment that has not worked outside of weird edge cases where normal therapy would have achieved the same or better results.

Edited by The Nehor

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

These changes do occur but I think it is unlikely these shifts comes from the therapist directly “helping” the client cultivate feelings. More often I suspect it comes from sorting out their life in general or just from life changing them and the shifts just come. I doubt this rule will prove a hindrance.

In any case I am glad a rule was agreed on and kids in Utah cannot be involuntarily sent for treatment and that adults will no longer be bamboozled with treatment that has not worked outside of weird edge cases where normal therapy would have achieved the same or better results.

I disagree based on both personal and professional experience.  

I'm grateful that I was able to explore changes in my behavior with a therapist before this rule became effective. 

Or are you only responding to the attraction aspect?

Edited by kllindley
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

I think it is unlikely these shifts comes from the therapist directly “helping” the client cultivate feelings.

I know several people who believe therapy was instrumental to them having healthy OSA marriages even though previously they saw themselves as SSA or primarily SSA.  And from the way they describe the therapy experience, I believe them. 

Edited by Calm
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
46 minutes ago, Calm said:

I know several people who believe therapy was instrumental to them having healthy OSA marriages even though previously they saw themselves as SSA or primarily SSA.  And from the way they describe the therapy experience, I believe them. 

It was for me!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/30/2019 at 6:38 PM, kllindley said:

It really depends what sort of metric you are using to determine success. There really isn't an operational definition for sexual orientation. Are you talking attraction? Does a change from 5 to 4 or 4 to 3 on the Kinsey Scale count as change? Because we see that a lot, with and without therapy. I've even seen 6 to 3 or 4 to 2. From 6 to 0? Yeah not so much. But even if a youth wants to explore with their therapist whether it is possible to develop opposite sexual attractions- that will now be prohibited under the new rule. 

Behavior? There change becomes much more possible. From 6 (exclusively same-sex activity) to 0 (exclusively opposite-sex activity) is very realistic. But now, even that change in behavior cannot be addressed with a therapist.

Identity? People change how they see themselves all the time. From "gay" to "bisexual" to "mostly straight" to rejecting labels altogether. Now once any youth starts to see themselves as gay, they cannot explore other identities with a therapist. 

Unfortunately, all this nuance isn't considered under the rule. Attraction, behavior, and identity are lumped together. 

What is most disappointing to me is that now any youth who genuinely wants to explore change in any way (or worse parents who insist on some form of change) will not be able to explore those ideas with a trained therapist under legal and ethical obligation to do not harm.  Instead, their only option will be unlicensed "life-coaches" or ecclesiastical leaders.  Don't get me wrong, I think virtually every Bishop in the church means well. I just think far too many are likely to do more damage if they are the only available source of support. 

 

It all depends on what those bishops, or any other unlicensed counselors, tell those who listen to them, and I think the best thing they can do is give those who listen to them the best information to work with as they think about how they should act and feel.

The knowledge/information they impart is what determines if they are people who should or should not be listened to for their counsel.  A "license" from the State is just a piece of paper and it doesn't say squat about whether the "therapist" is worth listening to.

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/27/2019 at 1:54 PM, Ahab said:

I was sexually oriented to both men and women when I was younger, and although I still consider men to be sexually attractive, or at least some of them, I no longer seek to have sexual relations with men.  Only women now for me, and even that is limited to only my wife.

This is very interesting.  How did you come to this change / control of self?

If this is too personal, I understand.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Durangout said:

This is very interesting.  How did you come to this change / control of self?

If this is too personal, I understand.

First I came to realize that one way was good and the other was not good, even though I had some pleasure in doing what was not good.  Same sex sexual relations being the bad thing, or thing I came to realize was not good.

Then it was a matter of making a choice to stop doing what was not good, even though I got some pleasure from doing it, and to do only what was good regarding sexual relations.

Pretty basic stuff, intellectually speaking, and not to hard to change / control myself when I realized one way was good and that it would be good for me to stop doing what was bad even though I got some pleasure from doing what was bad.

Now that I've only been doing it the good way for many years, and getting pleasure from doing it only the good way, I don't really have much of a desire to do it in a bad way ever again, even though I can still remember what it was like when I did it both ways.

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/28/2019 at 11:01 AM, The Nehor said:

Ah, one of your make everyone’s skin crawl posts.

Speak for yourself. My skin didn't crawl while reading it. It seemed to a very nuanced view of things, and very idiosyncratic.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...