Reparative Therapy and Spiritual Healing (vs. Fraudulent Conversion and Coercion)

emilynghiem

Constitutionalist / Universalist
Jan 21, 2010
23,669
4,178
290
National Freedmen's Town District
'Gay conversion' therapists find safe haven in Israel

Just read this article that doesn't seem to distinguish the difference between the
* fraudulent, harmful COERCIVE and ABUSIVE malpractice of
"forced conversion" which doesn't work, isn't naturally, but extremely damaging
* natural, effective and voluntarily chosen SPIRITUAL HEALING that does allow for reparative therapy to work.

These are not the same thing. Because spiritual healing is NOT coercive at all.

These are as different as trying to compare "all homosexual people" with "sick pedophiles"

The existence of SICK ABUSIVE types does NOT mean ALL homosexual people or relations are that way. Similarly the existence of ABUSIVE malpractice does NOT make all therapy the fraudulent type!

Here is a description of the right type of healing therapy.
How To Defeat Homosexual Activists 101 A Real Education

It is interesting to me that the same healing process that allows people to come out as gay or transgender when they are at peace with themselves ALSO allows people to restore their natural heterosexual orientation if that is their true self.

The point is to forgive, let go and be healed of any unnatural conditions, fears or issues, so that people revert back to their natural selves. So this works whether someone comes out as gay or straight. Any abusive condition, unresolved conflict, or unnatural fear is removed, and what is left is how the person is naturally.

So nothing is forced, but it's the opposite: to completely open up and let people be their natural selves, and anything unnatural or negative in the way is removed.

The FALSE/MALPRACTICE types of "forced conversion" are clearly harmful,
because they involve using fear and guilt AGAINST people, if not physical abuse.

Anything coerced, or driven by guilt, fear or any negative emotion is NOT spiritual healing but the opposite, so that's why that causes worse damage.

These are not the same thing, but almost exact opposites.
 
gay people are gay.

there is no changing them.

there is only abusing them into a closet.


whats this?:dunno:

OJPX5Wiy.jpg
 
Someone that stole an ESPY from an athlete that actually deserved it.
 
gay people are gay.

there is no changing them.

there is only abusing them into a closet.

Dear jillian
yes and no.
nobody changes them. but THEY decide to come out as something else.
people may change just like those who "change" from being
married in heterosexual relations to "coming out gay."

NOBODY "FORCED" THEM TO CHANGE

They went through their own changes themselves, on their own timing and terms.
That's what happens when people who may have been in homosexual relations in the past go through changes and then have bisexual or heterosexual relations in the future.

WHO said people can only change one way?

If it can be understood people "changing" from heterosexual to homosexual relations, why not the other way from homosexual to heterosexual.

Example: CHIRLANE MCCRAY wife of NY Mayor De Blasio:
De Blasio’s wife Chirlane McCray talks about lesbian past

She previously wrote about her experiences "I am a lesbian"
and now she is happily married to the love of her life who is a white man. She is African American, and describes their relationship as very conventional!

What is wrong with that?

SHE decided, nobody MADE her. That's not how it works.
 
Last edited:
gay people are gay.

there is no changing them.

there is only abusing them into a closet.


That's false.

"A survey by the well known research team Bell, Weinberg and Hammersmith,12 published in 1981, also claimed that 2% of the heterosexual population said they had once been exclusively homosexual. Independently, Colorado researchers, Cameron et al.13 in 1985, reported an identical figure.

Both these studies also put the percentage of homosexuality in the population at 4%. In other words nearly half the homosexual sample moved significantly towards heterosexuality.

There is abundant documentation that people with SSA (same sex attraction) do move toward a heterosexual orientation, often with therapeutic assistance, but mostly without it. Some achieve great change, some less, but it is clear that sexual orientation is fluid, not fixed, so that it is impossible to argue it is genetically pre-determined. There is a good possibility that various degrees of change will happen with the right support, including therapy of various kinds. The problem in the present social climate may be finding such support."
http://www.mygenes.co.nz/PDFs/Ch12.pdf


Once again you prove what the finest President of the last 100 years said:
“It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.”
Ronald Reagan
 
Its been argued that most of us are actually born bisexual. ~shrug~

I'm bisexual, but in a happy and monogamous heterosexual marriage. I too have made choices; I chose to respect my husbands need for monogamy, I chose him over other women/men, etc. However, that does not mean I'm no longer bisexual - I still find both women and men attractive. Ya'll like to label me, and others in a similar position, as "gone straight" but that's just bullshit to support your religious bias, sorry.
 
Its been argued that most of us are actually born bisexual. ~shrug~

I'm bisexual, but in a happy and monogamous heterosexual marriage. I too have made choices; I chose to respect my husbands need for monogamy, I chose him over other women/men, etc. However, that does not mean I'm no longer bisexual - I still find both women and men attractive. Ya'll like to label me, and others in a similar position, as "gone straight" but that's just bullshit to support your religious bias, sorry.



As a man, my women finding other women attractive is kinda sexy actually...Just saying:)
 
Funny how that works isn't it though? I mean supposedly it's "wrong" and "against nature" but yet... Sexual inequality lol
 
Funny how that works isn't it though? I mean supposedly it's "wrong" and "against nature" but yet... Sexual inequality lol

RE: Sexual inequality
Who can deny that sexual bias and inequality exists
when reading stories in the media of
"female teachers caught having sex with underaged MALE students"

People tend to scoff at statutory rape when the genders are reversed,
depending on "how hot the teacher looks in the news photos or mug shots"
and even the students will boast among each other about scoring with the teacher.

When it comes to male teachers with young female students,
the difference in reaction and perception is the complete opposite.

Lately I've noticed more conscious attempts to hold the women teachers in equal contempt.
But for the comments about looks, motivation, etc.
I just don't see people making the same comments about men as they do about women.

I guess this is the opposite bias to
society looking on men being promiscuous as normal male behavior
while women being promiscuous is seen as loose or sleazy;
here, the men are automatically pegged as criminal pedophiles or rapists
while the women are seen as hot targets.

Ironic, isn't it, how these biases go both ways?
 
mmm yea I can see that to a point, though up here female teachers "taking advantage" of male students is absolutely not acceptable, but then again I'm told my state it stuck in the 50s heh

I think a lot of the general bias regarding males getting raped is because the act requires a bit more uhm... interest on their end than it does for a woman so it's kind of tough to ~cough~ dry fit ~cough~ in that situation; thus why Viagra sells so well (Though its true some guys get an erection from fear, but I don't think that is the norm.) So for most cases, it's presumed that the male was at least... somewhat willing. Now I'll admit that there's not really any way to prove that a woman was similarly "somewhat willing" - after all a bitch can have regrets or anger and change her mind.

I think ultimately it falls on a bit of throw back tradition in this country - that the man is responsible, women are weaker and need to be taken care of, etc. The law just hasn't out-grown that yet, kind of along the same lines of why it's so difficult for fathers to get custody of their children, and why child support is so quick to paint every father as a dead beat with every mother being an angel - regardless of what the truth is, and frankly, a good deal of the time, women are complete bitches... (Which is actually a big part of the reason I was okay with choosing to live my life with a man rather than a woman.)
 

Forum List

Back
Top