I sound like a disciple of B. F. Skinner, but I don't want to leave people with that impression.
To me, Reparative Therapy is beautiful because it gets the person who is receptive, to the position where the mind can leapfrog all of the animal-level conditioning. Dr. Nicolosi just touches upon it at the end of his presentations by saying that one may self-affirm via knowing and self-applying the double-loop concept.
I think he doesn't go into it because so many people don't or won't latch onto it when it's just handed to them like the key that it is.
It's actually what I did for myself and came to that conclusion based upon my reading of scripture, believe it or not. I know it sounds strange, but I actually got that out of Jesus (faith through real knowledge) before hearing Dr. Nicolosi.
When I saw the same thing (the Gospel, part of it) in RT and when I could see the homosexual activists insisting that people can't change, that did it for me. I was all the more sure that the homosexual activists must not be allowed to get away with it because RT and positive reinforcement apply to other problems as well, which Dr. Nicolosi also affirmed.
I was watching a video lecture, and at a certain point, I said to myself, that (RT) can apply to any addiction. I don't remember how many more minutes into the lecture it was, but a woman, a psychologist I assume, asked whether RP could apply to other problems. Dr. Nicolosi then said that it sure can.
Most importantly though is that if people can't change homosexual behavior when it is very unlikely to be very genetically influenced, then they can't be changed regarding a whole host of behaviors. We know they can change about those other behaviors. I believe that homosexuality is a disease state that is psychological and sociological. I believe the disease is attempting to spread hedonism that gets worse and worse sociologically and then psychologically, spiraling around and down.
Depression, pathological lying, denial, suicide, HIV and AIDS, and all the other diseases thrive in that soil and nothing good takes root.
I see them doing everything they can to rationalize what they are doing and what is happening to them. It also appears that a number of them become rather sociopathic, fascistic, and consequently dangerous.
The longer we let it go on, the worse it will get.
It's like the boiling frog that doesn't notice the water is cooking it to death.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)