googlef87758e9b6df9bec.html A Sure Word: Liberals Aren't Pro-Choice About Being Gay

Monday, October 1, 2012

Liberals Aren't Pro-Choice About Being Gay

In a pledge to continue defending Planned Parenthood, President Obama made the following remarks:

For you, and for most Americans, protecting women's health is a mission that stands above politics. And yet, over the past year, you've had to stand up to politicians who want to deny millions of women the care they rely on, and inject themselves into decisions that are best made between a woman and her doctor.

In this brief paragraph, Obama has repeated a talking point I've already heard a thousand times – namely, that abortion is a private matter between a woman and her doctor. I'm sure you've heard that too. Liberals are all about individual rights and leave-the-government-out-of-it when it comes to a topic like abortion. But when you're talking about something like being gay, liberals suddenly aren't pro-choice anymore. In that case, politicians are happy to interject themselves and liberals welcome the intrusion. California just passed a ban on gay conversion therapy for minors.

Now, I know what liberals are saying. They're saying that homosexuality is not a “disorder” and so gay teens don't need to be converted. They're saying that gay teens need to be protected from uptight parents who are forcing them to see counselors in order to “cure” them of their gayness. They're saying that we need a law to protect these young people from forced into a “straight jacket” by a homophobic society (that's a pun). In that light, a law like this almost has a certain appeal. Never mind that their previous pleadings were for lawmakers to say out of practicing medicine; in this case, they need lawmakers to protect them from sinister doctors and parents!

These arguments have a hollow ring to them, however, when you stop to consider that this is an outright and absolute ban on “conversion” counseling. It doesn't matter what the parents want. Neither does the doctor's opinion matter. Not even the “gay” child has a choice anymore. The practice is banned! So, if a boy who was sexually abused when he was 8 starts having gay feelings when he hits puberty, he is not allowed to seek counseling if the objective is to rid him of the gay feelings!

Consider too that we are talking about minors. When we're talking about statutory rape laws, we start with an assumption that underage teens lack the maturity to make certain decisions or give their consent to have sex. Kids at puberty are vulnerable and impressionable. If they are confused and are struggling with emerging, sexual feelings, why do the gay activists insists we should trust these kids to make adults decisions about their orientation?

Once again we see liberals victimizing individual liberties in pursuit of their political agenda. In this case, they're victimizing the most vulnerable in our society – children. When it comes to abortion, liberals consider themselves “pro-choice” but that's a lie because they don't give the babies a choice. In the matter of gay rights, neither the kids nor parents are given a choice. After little Johnny was abused by an uncle, he seeks help because he doesn't like the sexual feelings he now has toward men. The bleeding heart response is, “You're gay, Johnny, you can't change it. You'd better learn to live with it!”

Oh, yeah. That's real compassionate!


freebobafett said...

1. Conversion therapy is psychological abuse, it works upon no one and it has worked upon no one (the originator of this technique, who was also its first "success" story, died recently and he retracted all statements and claims regarding the efficacy of the treatment as he admitted that he died as he lived his entire life - gay).

2. No one can be "cured" of their gay because one's sexual orientation is not a disease. I say this even in the case of child molesters. Now, obviously child molestation is a crime, and those who molest children have issues that likely only God truly understands, but the recidivism rate of child molesters is 100%.

The sexual orientation you are (if not at birth, then at the time you begin puberty), even in the cases of the most shocking orientation conceivable, is the sexual orientation you're going to die as.

Since homosexuality hurts no one except, in your belief, except the homosexual, homosexuality, again, by your belief, is between God and the homosexual...who can still obtain God's grace, even after a life of open and notorious homosexuality, so what the hell do you care, anyway? (and seriously, God was pissed at Sodom and Gammorah because the angels were not treated with customary Jewish hospitality...the fact that anal sex was mentioned was simple to show the chaos of the situation...not to call out anything inherently evil about anal sex...the other spots where homosexuality is called out are textually strange, and I do not think they were part of the original text, but added after the fact by the HRCC, though I have no direct evidence of this).

3. Life begins at conception, from a purely scientific perspective, but so does life begin the moment a seed in the ground begins to sprout. The chances of that life becoming a human one are not 100%, and are really not even 50%, even before abortion is taken into account.

Christians believe that the life being destroyed is always a human life, and non-Christians believe that the life is equivalent to a plant, or at most, a tadpole.

Not all tadpoles become frogs and not all embryos become babies, even by God's will.

Given that, and given that every other medical procedure is considered sacredly private in this country, so should the procedure known as abortion be.

People who are pro-choice believe that same damn thing in both cases - leave me the fuck alone unless someone is trying to hurt me, government. At that point, please interfere and stop that person from hurting me. Otherwise, please refer to the prior, "leave me the fuck alone and stay out of my goddam business."

As it turns out, that's exactly what the framers of the Constitution intended as well.

You're wrong about basically everything, and I'd be happy to go bible verse for bible verse with you to demonstrate it if you'd like.

RKBentley said...


First off, I moderate my comments in an effort to screen out offensive language. You left 3 comments which, at first glance, seemed fairly civil so I published them. I was a little taken back when I noticed the crude remarks at the end of this post. I was tempted to delete the comment and write a summary of your points to which I could reply. Given the context of the offensive remarks and seeing as how I've already published them, I'm going to let it stand for the moment. I reserve the right to delete it should the mood strike me. Be warned, though, that similar comments in the future will be summarily deleted.

To your arguments, I noticed that you've used some of the very responses I said liberals would use (not that you're necessarily a liberal – I haven't decided yet). Nevertheless, I believe you've missed a key point of my post. Lawmakers have BANNED the practice. There is no more choice. The decision to seek such counseling or if such a conversion is possible is not left up to the families, the doctors, or the teens involved. Legislators have decided, “once gay; always gay.” They have moved the debate from the medical realm to the political one.

You haven't said it outright but you have strongly suggested that sexual orientation is hard wired into the person and that it either exists from birth or emerges at puberty. Is that your medical opinion? Don't doctors have any say about the truth of that? I guess not because these lawmakers have ceased all medical debate. Conversion is NOT allowed!!

Is it also your lay-medical opinion that orientation is absolutely hard-wired? Are there never any circumstances – such as sexual abuse or emotional abandonment – that might play a role in the myriad of sexual confusion a teen might experience when entering puberty? You seem to say that a doctor is welcome to counsel the victim about the traumatic experience but is FORBIDDEN from concluding that the event had a role in the victim's gay feelings.

Liberals do not care AT ALL about personal liberty. They are perfectly happy with using the law to enforce a liberal agenda.

Thanks for your comments – except for the cursing.

God bless!!


Anonymous said...

There are many video testimonies on youtube made by former homosexuals who believe that through the power and love of Jesus Christ they were delivered, or "cured" if you will, from this sin. This is evidence that homosexuality is a mental disorder that can be cured, contrary to the Liberal viewpoint that it is genetic, "you're born this way".

It's amazing the intolerance liberals show to any idea that sets itself against their cherished belief. They become so intolerant they shut down all debate and discussion on the topic, and slander people with their scare tactic buzz words like "homophobe", "Racist".

Gods love for all is the ultimate "conversion therapy" for all sin.

Php 4:13 I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.

RKBentley said...

Thanks for visiting and for your comment.

You're right on all points, of course. In this post I focused more on the government intrusion into medicine rathern than the possibility of converting a gay person. Certainly there are numerous examples of former gays who now have normal relationships so we know it can be done at least sometimes. These liberals want to end all medical debate and declare politically that gayness is permanent.

You've struck on another point too. In this debate, liberals want to ascribe the mental disorder to their political opponents by claiming their view is a "phobia".

Please keep visiting. God bless!


Carvin said...

The thing I'm surprised at is that you even wrote 'a ban on the practice for minors' when later you say it is an absolute, total ban. It is not. It is a ban for minors. Mostly because they don't get to choose. If people want to abuse themselves by getting conversion therapy as an adult, that's fine. You can also hire someone to whip you for an hour. Adults are weird. The fact remains that every credible group has defined it as unsuccessful and harmful. The success rate is so low it is statistically insignificant. Some last a few years pretending to be straight. And the crazy thing is, most studies find that orientation CAN change in life, but nothing shows it can be controlled.

It doesn't help that these camps don't understand the nature of sex and gender in the very basics. They use debunked myths about homosexuality as the basis of therapy. This is unacceptable.

Let us remember that many LGBT youth have to fight hating themselves so much that suicide seems right. Conversion therapy says to LGBT youth 'You're right, you are messed up and disgusting. If you don't get things right, no one, not even God will love you.' I've seen enough on these camps to know.

Again, maybe- just maybe-, I'd allow it if the kid wanted it. But these camps never got the child's consent. This is clear cut abuse; shameful and disgusting.

Homophobia is more of a disease than a mental illness. It requires exposure to contract it.

RKBentley said...


So if a parent wanted to have an abortion, then you're pro-choice. If a parent wants to send his child to a counselor because the kid thinks he might be gay, you don't want the parent to have that choice. Who is really deciding what's best for the child?

We all know it's not really about choice with liberals.

God bless!!


Carvin said...

We all know that pro-life isn't about saving lives. It's about controlling people. If 'pro-life' cared about fetal life, they'd work on greater contraceptive access and comprehensive sexual education. They'd improve minimum wage to eliminate poverty, which is a major reason why women choose an abortion. They'd improve healthcare for the poor so women can take care of their pregnancies, as well as their children.

But hey, we all know pro-life isn't about life. And that's not even considering how constantly pro-life gets associated with the death penalty and war.

But, this isn't about that. I just figured if you are going to make claims about pro-choice I'd make some more definitive ones about 'pro-life'.


Pro-choice is about the law. No one but the sociopathic 'like' abortions. But in a country where pregnant women are treated poorly (among other things, they are much more likely to be a victim of homicide), have few rights, are publicly shamed and get no support in their time of need (and certainly not after their pregnancy), there will be women who seek and obtain abortions. Law or no law. Brazil has a far higher abortion rate than we do, and it is illegal for almost all reasons. Pro-choice is just an attempt to make sure those abortions are safe; it should be known that abortion groups like Planned Parenthood work to prevent abortions in the first place. A Planned Parenthood clinic usually lowers the abortion rate of the city.

Pro-choice is merely looking out for mothers who have to make difficult decisions by being as humane as possible; that and allowing qualified doctors do what they need to do. This doesn't really compare to letting parents abuse their children for long periods, stunting their sexual, emotional and mental growth, at the hands of incompetent pseudo-doctors using debunked and failing measures to try and 'cure' that which is not a disease, nor harmful.

I will say that this did bring about an interesting discussion with my wife. I did try to defend your point here as best I could, and I admit it's a novel defense. The two things are just too different, though. And that's without considering the question of if a unique life begins at conception.

RKBentley said...


You know I wasn't primarily talking about abortion. I'm talking about the hypocrisy of liberals.

When parents want to abort their children, liberals are "pro-choice." When parents want to have their gay kids see a counselor, liberals aren't pro-choice. Abortion = acceptable = choice. Gay therapy = unacceptable = no choice.

Parents aren't allowed a choice on matters that liberals don't think they should have a choice in like gay conversion therapy or school vouchers.

It's never really about choice. It's about the liberal agenda and control.

Carvin said...

You are missing the greater point.

You can't stop the choice by making it illegal. That's the core basis of the pro-choice belief: not to judge and penalize someone who makes that hard choice, and further so, eliminate the need of that choice through education, contraception and advocating for greater healthcare and programs for poor mothers. Pro-choice is just a name, anyway. It's really more 'pro letting women live their lives free from the burdens placed on them by men without shaming them and risking their safety'. Pro-Choice is about the elimination of a legal response for the inevitable. If, and that's a big if, the embryo, zygote or fetus is indeed a life, it isn't part of the equation. Law or no law, it will be destroyed. The consideration of if abortion should be illegal is one of if we will punish poor and abused women or not.

Oddly enough, there is inevitability in these camps too. If legal or illegal, these kids will remain just as gay. There is a difference in if it is legal or not in the amount of torture gay children go through. When illegal it is shown that few children will be secretly shoved into interment camps, while when legal, many more will be. So the consideration of if these torture camps should be legal or not is do we want more children to be suicidal and hate God (both far more common than 'conversion', and much longer lasting).

But, I can see the confusion.

RKBentley said...


You said, “You can't stop the choice by making it illegal.”

But that's exactly what liberals try to do. They have made gay conversion therapy for kids illegal. They have sued and ended school vouchers in several cities. In matters like abortion, they want to keep the woman's “right” to an abortion legal. In other areas, they want to use the force of law to take away a parent's right to make decisions for their kids.

Liberals aren't “pro-choice.” If they were, they'd all be libertarian. They're about thinking they know what's best for others and forcing the others to comply.

God bless!!


Carvin said...

You missed the point. When I said that you can not stop the choice I was indicating the choice women make for an abortion. I'm not saying the two things are equal: they aren't. You can stop torture by making it illegal. You can't make desperation illegal. When we talk about abortion, we are talking about the choice of a) be a burden on our underfunded social welfare system, b) work so hard that you become a terrible parent, resenting your child when not ignoring it, raising a child without a chance to do right, putting the burden on our underfunded and horrifically biased justice system or c) have an abortion. None of those choices are good, and even when illegal option c is easy to rationalize as better. When it comes to 'ex-gay' torture camps, there are many options. a) Send your kid to a camp that will have them resent you, reject your religion and cause long term psychological and emotional harm, b) re-evaluate your belief system to see God as not a spiteful bigot c) just let your kid do what they want and trust God to do what is needed d) express and communicate your beliefs to your child like an adult e) see a psychiatrist yourself in hopes of identifying why you thought torturing your child was a good idea. The list goes on. Child torture does not need to be legal.

But, fine, I'll play your game a bit. Hypothetically, as a parent, I feel that a child that doesn't behave should have ritual scars carved in their body. They are painful well after they have been carved, they leave permanent scars, and sometimes they get infected but the child isn't allowed to clean the wound. Should I be allowed to do this? It's my choice, after all. I think it's in the best interest, and even if experts don't agree, who are they to tell me what is best?

This shouldn't be that hard to tell. We are talking about two very different things. In addition, people should have some choice in some things (especially things that are barely choices) and some choices should not be allowed. And things are of course always more complex than 'choice is good' and 'choice is bad'.