Political Coverage By the Media in Our Country - PART TWO

[packrat]

Here's a little piece she wrote whining about a court reecognising that gay people are actually normal, and demanding protection for gay conversion therapy providers. She goes on to demand that gay conversion therapy be given freedom from legal prosecution because religion.

http://www.wnd.com/2016/02/sexual-orien ... er-attack/

Because of course she does.

Maybe we should stop torturing children, instead?

[veebass]

^^
You still haven't said where your quote came from. It doesn't appear in the article you linked as I read it. Where is it from? Were trying to give the impression that it came from The Examiner?

I was expressing my opinion of what the ALP policy platform says. I do not consider it poorly worded.
The ALP policy is clearly talking about a "therapy" that the ALP believes (rightly or wrongly) to be harmful. Whether we agree on the harmfulness of the "therapy" is not the issue. I believe it is from what I have seen it do to people I know.
Your unattributed quote is talking about parents being in trouble for encouraging a five year old to stick with their biological gender. I don't see parental influence to be the target of the policy. I think it is clear that the "therapy" is the target. I see parental influence as different to engaging a therapist. Parents influence their children all the time, the issue the policy seeks to address if they engage the "therapy".

Your unattributed quotes sensationally claims that (and I quote)

Parents with a gender-confused 5-year-old would be in danger of breaking the law if they encouraged their child to stick with their biological sex.

This is false when you consider the material I took the trouble to provide.

Labor policy is not saying that at all. It is saying that, if the parents of this hypothetical 5 year old engaged a quack (couldn't help it) to conduct "therapy" of the type under discussion on their child, that could be viewed as child abuse under the policy and I agree. To conduct a child to harmful "therapy" is child abuse IMO.

Who would subject a 5 year old to gay conversion therapy?

[noplanb]

Quote is from a longer version of the article - sorry I thought it was covered in The Examiner.
Full(er) article here:
https://www.acl.org.au/new_legislation_creates_concerns
Perhaps the full article was submitted to The Examiner, then edited down.
===

I don't see parental influence to be the target

I can't see how it is not?: "harms, when suffered within the family, as domestic violence against the child"
'suffered within the family' and 'domestic' are very specific terms - who within a family, and domestically, is could (possibly) be guilty of this, if it isn't the parents (or brothers, sisters, aunts etc) ?
If, however, it means "parents conducting 'therapy' " - then it could be used to cover actions such as denying access to certain clothing/materials/information/internet sites, and indeed praying for the child in their presence. The wording is fraught with difficulties and open to abuse.
===

...5 year old to gay conversion therapy?

To put it in context, would a parent deny treatment for a child with anorexia? Same intensity of belief, same desire to suicide if they can't achieve what they want, same in that there is no evidence of genetic cause, same in that there is most likely a range of concomitant factors for that condition (it does not deny that there in fact may be a genetic predisposition to be more at risk - but 'at risk' is not the same as 'born that way') For anorexia, we would judge it abuse to withhold treatment.
I would think it is only detractors who use the term 'conversion' - it makes it sound all black-and-white - it is really medical professional intervention, and where sought, ministers of religion need to be on board with counselling/assisting etc, just as they would be for other impacting conditions.

[veebass]

One Nation has put a neo nazi, who was convicted of his part in a gun attack on the home of an ANC rep, ahead of Labor in Longman. He was also convicted of insurance fraud- that obviously involved no lies, because as we know Pauline hates Bill because he is a liar.

You can't make this stuff up.

https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/que ... af9f72242f

[packrat]

They seem pretty aligned politically.

[veebass]

Quote is from a longer version of the article - sorry I thought it was covered in The Examiner.
Full(er) article here:
https://www.acl.org.au/new_legislation_creates_concerns
Perhaps the full article was submitted to The Examiner, then edited down.
===

I don't see parental influence to be the target

I can't see how it is not?: "harms, when suffered within the family, as domestic violence against the child"
'suffered within the family' and 'domestic' are very specific terms - who within a family, and domestically, is could (possibly) be guilty of this, if it isn't the parents (or brothers, sisters, aunts etc) ?
If, however, it means "parents conducting 'therapy' " - then it could be used to cover actions such as denying access to certain clothing/materials/information/internet sites, and indeed praying for the child in their presence. The wording is fraught with difficulties and open to abuse.
===

...5 year old to gay conversion therapy?

To put it in context, would a parent deny treatment for a child with anorexia? Same intensity of belief, same desire to suicide if they can't achieve what they want, same in that there is no evidence of genetic cause, same in that there is most likely a range of concomitant factors for that condition (it does not deny that there in fact may be a genetic predisposition to be more at risk - but 'at risk' is not the same as 'born that way') For anorexia, we would judge it abuse to withhold treatment.
I would think it is only detractors who use the term 'conversion' - it makes it sound all black-and-white - it is really medical professional intervention, and where sought, ministers of religion need to be on board with counselling/assisting etc, just as they would be for other impacting conditions.

Fuller article on the ACL website.
The Examiner chose to edit out the bit I have argued is false and sensational- funny that.

I can easily see how parental influence is different to parents subjecting their children to quackery. I do not see it as medical intervention. Labor is seeking to correct this with this part of the policy which I have already posted;

Current laws regulating false and misleading conduct in trade or commerce, or professional misconduct in
the health professions, are inadequate to deal with perpetrators who can evade health regulation by not
being registered, and evade consumer protection laws by claiming to be conducting religious activities.

Equating conversion therapy to treatment for anorexia......................................I do not see being gay or bi or trans etc as a disease or condition to be treated.

We differ on all this.

[noplanb]

edit out the bit

I'll see if I can get a ref for you. Meanwhile, here is a case in Canada, where a Christian couple was refused adoption.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/ ... -1.4391853

subjecting their children to quackery

I don't have a problem with that, as I had already said. So engaging a qualified child psychologist, or qualified child counsellor, to assist with deterring trans tendencies in their child is ok? Or would there be pressure to begin classifying this as 'professional misconduct'? - It is splitting the medical community world-wide.

I don't see anorexia or LGB as a disease either.

[noplanb]

not what any rational person would call evidence

Thats funny - they are quotes taken from the American Psychological Association. Perhaps they are not rational either?

treating the underlying mental illness

Yes, lets not discuss rationally, forensically, nor scientifically, lets just say opposing views are held by insane people?

"I enjoy talking to you. Your mind appeals to me. It resembles my own mind except that you happen to be insane"
O'Brien to Winston in '1984' - George Orwell

[veebass]

subjecting their children to quackery

I don't have a problem with that, as I had already said. So engaging a qualified child psychologist, or qualified child counsellor, to assist with deterring trans tendencies in their child is ok? Or would there be pressure to begin classifying this as 'professional misconduct'? - It is splitting the medical community world-wide.

I was explaining the ALP policy to you. It is clearly seeking to remove quackery and address regulatory holes being exploited by people who are unregistered and therefore apparently unregulated.

Medical people are supposed to practice from a scientific basis. It will split them if some abandon science.

[packrat]

not what any rational person would call evidence

Thats funny - they are quotes taken from the American Psychological Association. Perhaps they are not rational either?

They are out of context snippets wrapped in unsupported conclusions by someone who is on public record as calling for gay conversion therapy to be complewy above the law. This is pretty typical of the religious position.

treating the underlying mental illness

Yes, lets not discuss rationally, forensically, nor scientifically, lets just say opposing views are held by insane people?

"I enjoy talking to you. Your mind appeals to me. It resembles my own mind except that you happen to be insane"
O'Brien to Winston in '1984' - George Orwell

I consider the torture of children to be insane and I consider those people who defend it to be dangerous criminals who have no place in society.

That this continues under the banner of religious freedom just indicates that banner cannot continue to be tolerated.

[noplanb]

out of context snippets wrapped in unsupported conclusions

You would need to show this to be credible.

torture...

“In light of the many uncertainties and unknowns, it would be appropriate to describe the use of puberty-blocking treatments in children for gender dysphoria as experimental.”
https://www.thenewatlantis.com/docLib/2 ... McHugh.pdf

PS:
Dr. Lawrence Mayer, professor of statistics and biostatistics at Arizona State University is a self-described liberal citizen who supports LGBQT rights, and Dr. Paul McHugh was the psychiatrist-in-chief at John Hopkins from 1975 to 2001. Among the many significant findings is that both doctors concur that neither sexual orientation nor gender identity is innate or immutable (no one is born gay or transgender, and both are fluid). Additionally, both doctors find no evidence to support encouraging children to identify as transgender.

[noplanb]

if some abandon science

Which science? I can see scientific papers funded by organisations in support of LGB (eg Funded by Gender Identity Research & Education Society, the King’s Fund & the BCC Trans Group); and those funded by conservative organisations.
Science is, and should be, predicated on internal truth, able to be (always) discussed; and not based on some external mechanism such as 'we have more numbers', 'the science is in', and 'that is the law' (now).

Incidentally, I tip my hat to the GIRE group - they produced a meta-study that effectively states the mechanism for sexual-differentiation (gender-identity) in the brain remains unknown, and might include external and environmental factors. No firm conclusion for genetics there at all, but no mention of epigenetic effects either (this is where the brain alters brain structure in relation to the body/nervous system (internal) environment, eg stress, trauma, etc.

[packrat]

Isn't it odd that rather than being published in a real journal, this is published in a self avodlwedly social conservative religious "journal".

I'd suggest you watch your sources more carefully, but that's self evidently off the table.

[ozrider]

[packrat]

I saw it move!