Sign in to follow this  
prisonchaplain

California Resolution 99 Anti-Religious Bigotry by government?

Recommended Posts

California's State Assembly very recently passed Resolution 99, which condemns any efforts at 'conversion therapy' for LGBT folk. The tone and thrust of the resolution targets religious leaders, accusing them/us of bigotry. In essence government is passing resolutions condemning faith communities for the morals we practice within our church/ward/synagogue/mosque walls. In a similar vein, one of our two major political parties declared by formal resolution that religious liberty has been used to promote bigotry and homophobia. I'm not so bothered when pundits, commentators, liberals and progressives talk this way. However, when government formalizing hatred of particular Christian views, and when political parties believe they will win by opposing First Amendment freedoms...well, I hope I'm right about the Rapture. :itwasntme:

See the actual bill:  http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov

Enter ACR99 in the Bill Number search engine.

Edited by prisonchaplain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

California's State Assembly very recently passed Resolution 99, which condemns any efforts at 'conversion therapy' for LGBT folk. The tone and thrust of the resolution targets religious leaders, accusing them/us of bigotry. In essence government is passing resolutions condemning faith communities for the morals we practice within our church/ward/synagogue/mosque walls. In a similar vein, one of our two major political parties declared by formal resolution that religious liberty has been used to promote bigotry and homophobia. I'm not so bothered when pundits, commentators, liberals and progressives talk this way. However, when government formalizing hatred of particular Christian views, and when political parties believe they will win by opposing First Amendment freedoms...well, I hope I'm right about the Rapture. :itwasntme:

See the actual bill:  http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov

Enter ACR99 in the Bill Number search engine.

Well, the Lord comes on his own time table...not ours.  I think many have hoped for his coming for many years, but no man knows the day or the hour.

I would imagine that it is still at least 3 years away (temple in Jerusalem needs to be built and two prophets preaching in the streets)...but other than that, I don't know.  I may meet the Lord before others if I die before the next coming of the Lord.  In that, even if the world becomes evil enough to persecute Christians, even if it is destroy them and kill us, we know as martyrs we would have the greater blessing than they if such were to happen to us and we held firm to the faith.

If nothing else, we'd get to see the Lord all that much sooner, even if it's not exactly in this life.

Edited by JohnsonJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

California's State Assembly very recently passed Resolution 99, which condemns any efforts at 'conversion therapy' for LGBT folk. The tone and thrust of the resolution targets religious leaders, accusing them/us of bigotry. In essence government is passing resolutions condemning faith communities for the morals we practice within our church/ward/synagogue/mosque walls. In a similar vein, one of our two major political parties declared by formal resolution that religious liberty has been used to promote bigotry and homophobia. I'm not so bothered when pundits, commentators, liberals and progressives talk this way. However, when government formalizing hatred of particular Christian views, and when political parties believe they will win by opposing First Amendment freedoms...well, I hope I'm right about the Rapture. :itwasntme:

See the actual bill:  http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov

Enter ACR99 in the Bill Number search engine.

Perhaps I just do not understand legalise - Maybe @Just_A_Guy can comment but the bill has no teeth beyond sending counselors (religious or otherwise) information that being LGBTQ is not a "stigma".  And stigma is not well defined in the legal sense.  This bill seams to me to be a big No-Op.  Religious individuals or anyone else concerned about gender confusion are already labeled bigots and homophobes.  So what is the big whoop? 

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big deal is that Caesar has officially declared us homophobic. Candidates will say what they will. Likewise with pundits. Now a state government has taken this official stance. It may have no teeth, but the canary in the mine is beginning to pass out, in my always humble opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, in a separate case, Chicago has prohibited Wheaton College students from passing out gospel literature and talking to people about religion at a public park. The city claims they are defending the First Amendment by restricting such activities to one section of the park out of 12. They claim evangelism is "soliciting." These kind of restrictions, if they spread, could effect LDS missionaries too.

 

Edited by prisonchaplain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is a genuine fear among the WHTEVR (since I never know what the latest acceptable term is) community that one day medical science will progress to a point where legitimate treatment options will be available for same-sex attraction and sexual identity issues.  This would undermine what seems to be an agenda of complete societal acceptance of their lifestyles, so they are doing all they can to build a Maginot Line now. Conversion therapy bans are part of that effort.

To be fair, the medical or psychological "conversion" therapy descriptions that I have read about do appear to be mostly quackery, but that does not mean future discoveries will not change the landscape. What should never be banned is the right of people to seek professional and private counseling in regards to these issues. Any such bans would infringe upon the freedoms of speech and religion IMHO.

The interesting thing to me is that once effective options become available, I think that most of those yelling the loudest now for "equality" will be the first in line for the cures, and I wouldn't blame them. And in all likelihood, we will be able to identify these issues very early in a person's life and parents will want to treat their children before any difficulties or manifestations arise. This may lead to another legislative battle at that time over the ethics of treatment, but I think that will be a battle won by the majority.

And once those options become available, I think we will look back on this era where we allowed fluid opinions and preferences to be weighed as heavily as biological facts, as a very strange one.

 

Edited by clwnuke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/21/2019 at 4:38 AM, clwnuke said:

I think there is a genuine fear among the WHTEVR (since I never know what the latest acceptable term is) community that one day medical science will progress to a point where legitimate treatment options will be available for same-sex attraction and sexual identity issues.  This would undermine what seems to be an agenda of complete societal acceptance of their lifestyles, so they are doing all they can to build a Maginot Line now. Conversion therapy bans are part of that effort.

To be fair, the medical or psychological "conversion" therapy descriptions that I have read about do appear to be mostly quackery, but that does not mean future discoveries will not change the landscape. What should never be banned is the right of people to seek professional and private counseling in regards to these issues. Any such bans would infringe upon the freedoms of speech and religion IMHO.

The interesting thing to me is that once effective options become available, I think that most of those yelling the loudest now for "equality" will be the first in line for the cures, and I wouldn't blame them. And in all likelihood, we will be able to identify these issues very early in a person's life and parents will want to treat their children before any difficulties or manifestations arise. This may lead to another legislative battle at that time over the ethics of treatment, but I think that will be a battle won by the majority.

And once those options become available, I think we will look back on this era where we allowed fluid opinions and preferences to be weighed as heavily as biological facts, as a very strange one.

 

There is an old joke that starts out: "How many psychologists does it take to change a light bulb?"   The answer is - "One, but the light bulb has to want to change."

Please forgive me if what follows sounds harsh - but your posts appears to be naive and full of what I believe are false assumptions.  The scientific definition of intelligence is the ability to learn and modify behavior.  As a species humans are considered a highly intelligent species.  Of course there are variations (bell curve) of individual intelligence within our human species but in general humans have the ability (programed) to learn and modify any cognitive behavior.   You mention a possible cure in the future.  The problem with what most think of in terms of a "cure" is that they think of something external to self that fixes (or cures) with minimal individual effort or commitment.  Human have the ability to override any cognitive inclination and replace it with whatever they would by the sheer power of intellectual reasoning and individual will.

In addition there has been a great deal of research in to changing individual behaviors beginning with Pavlov and Skinner and even the dark arts of "brainwashing" by Joseph Goebbels.   Two points I would make - #1. is that outside stimulus can be utilized to modify a person's behavior - but point #2 - regardless of how much any behavior is triggered or stimulated by outside stimulus - intelligent humans can modify "conditioned" (acquired or learned) responses.  There is scientific research into what is called the lowest cognitive level of learning - we can even talk about several other cognitive levels of learning.  Once a cognitive learning cycle has taken place we may call the learned or acquired behavior a habit.   However, if habitual behavior is also rewarded with various chemicals within an individual (either natural through the brain releasing endorphins or the external induction of chemicals - we call the resulting behavior an addiction.   But even in the face of such learned or dependent responses - a intelligent person can force an intelligent override and create a self determined response - outside of previously acquired responses.

The entire reason for the bill being given; is not because it is impossible for some LGBTQ person to be changed from such behaviors but rather; the bill is specific to an effort to legislate anyone from thinking that certain sexual behaviors are problematic for anyone.  But the legislation is awkward because it does not clearly define what is unacceptable sexual behavior or unacceptable influence over someone else's sexual behavior.  For example - the bill does not deal with someone that is LGBTQ trying to influence someone that is not LGBTQ from being talked into "trying" it - but it does try to influence anyone that is not LGBTQ from influencing someone that thinks they are LGBTQ from trying not to be LGBTQ.  The bill demonstrates that society is programed to deal unintelligently, irrationally and immorally with sexual behaviors.

 

The Traveler

Edited by Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gotta confess that I did not listen to the speech. However, I saw that the U.S. is committing $25 million to promoting religious liberty globally, so he and VP Pence get kudos from me for that. :-)

POTUS may be an answer to prayers, in that he may be part of pushing back God's judgment for a season. On behalf of my children and coming grandchildren, I'll take it. Without vigilance though, the season of reprieve may be short.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

I gotta confess that I did not listen to the speech. However, I saw that the U.S. is committing $25 million to promoting religious liberty globally, so he and VP Pence get kudos from me for that. 🙂

POTUS may be an answer to prayers, in that he may be part of pushing back God's judgment for a season. On behalf of my children and coming grandchildren, I'll take it. Without vigilance though, the season of reprieve may be short.

It was only 18 years ago that the United States of America came together in a (last?) display of patriotic unity. We actually said the Pledge of Allegience before a performance at the Seattle Opera—and what a hoot it was to see all these people dressed as for a gala looking around sheepishly and mumbling words that, truth be told, many of them probably didn't even remember. Ah, yes, the halcyon days of yore, when a horrific terrorist attack on US soil actually caused people to unite. If that sort of thing happens again, I don't believe there will be any sort of national unity, just finger-pointing and bitter accusations.

Edited by Vort

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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