I did not know this were legal, but apparently it still is...

https://www.change.org/petitions/gov...QBb_EhTBuvlkkp

I was under the false impression that this thing dubbed "conversion therapy" has long been outlawed. It attempts to guilt non-straight people for being the way they are and to turn them straight. I did not realize it is legal in the US, but apparently outside of California, it is.

The link is to a petition supporting outlawing this thing in NJ.

Homosexuality was only removed from the DSM due to political rather than scientific reasons.

I was never under the impression that this was illegal and I don't believe it should be even though I firmly believe that it is ineffective. For example, acupuncture is still legal even though it's ineffective. Efforts should be made to educate people, but going around making things illegal is not the solution. Look how great it worked with recreational drugs.

I disagree because the target population is underage. So they are being taken advantage of and should be protected. Also, acupuncture is just a waste of money. "Failing" at getting better from acupuncture does not mean that a patient is somehow bad and should feel guilty. Cf. failing at the "conversion" offered to you as the only way to redeem yourself.

Nobody forces them to go into this treatment, they go there based on there own decisions.

they are too young to give meaningful consent to sex, which is why we have statutory rape concept throughout the country

so you are saying that they are too young to give meaningful consent to sex (with the possible caveat: too young to consent to sex with an older partner and what exactly is older differs by state) but mature enough to give meaningful consent to a "therapy" that aims to change their sexual orientation?

does it make much sense?

So by your definition we should ban sex education in schools then untill the person is old enough to consent to sex.

any time you take away something like that it's screwing with the amendments. I may not like what somebody else has to say, but at least I know I have the right to say something back.

that is a good point

again, all fine with people who are of age

unfortunately people who are of age can be as mentally susceptible or more so than those who are not. You could also bring up a whole slew of other things like. circumcision. As soon as you take away a parents right to parent, a persons right to speak, etc. you get into so many little instances it's impossible to come up with a solution. There are always things that qualify as abuse, neglect, bad parenting period, and there are so many different things to sue for. Somebody who has been mentally traumatized by that sort of thing can get retribution and help later on in life. I'm not saying it was ok it happened, but that you can't stop someone from bullying, you can only work against it. America is all about people being able to be people. How are these underage kids getting into this sort of therapy anyway? did they ask their parents to put them through it? How would you feel if you were told your decision to put your child through your religions education should be outlawed because there are studies it is mentally damaging? I hope you see my point and the reason it's not illegal.

I do see your point, but there is a difference between therapy and religious education. religious education is not subject to government's oversight, because we have the separation of church and state. therapy is very much subject to government's oversight:

therapists need to obtain and maintain their licenses. They need education, they need hours, they need to pass the exams, they need continuing education credits post licensure. There are ethics. They are all regulated on the state level because there are boards that regulate them, just as the Medical Boards regulate MD's. The boards are state agencies -- in other words, governmental bodies. There are certain things therapists are not allowed to do. So it would make sense to regulate them further - plus, since there are both APA positions that state that homosexuality is no disease, and the positions date back to the 1970s, what exactly are the "therapists" treating?

Say, if I were a psychic or a faith healer or a circus clown and offered to convert gays into straight people, I should be allowed to do that. But not as a therapist. Because psychics, faith healers, and circus clowns are not regulated occupations.

I lean towards your belief Hamster and don't think underage people should be coerced to receive this treatment. If a persons struggling being gay, they should explore this is therapy but I don't believe anyone can be turned straight, anymore than a straight person turning gay. Why aren't there clinics advocating straights turning gay and would this be fine? I happen to think there's value in acupuncture but that's not the topic here.

I have heard of value to acupuncture as well and have considered it for insomnia, but the cost/benefit analysis did not make it worth it (I was told that I would need many sessions, so, time+money+uncertain results).

Brilliant on doing the reverse (the bold part).